Which brand new (or nearly new) car has the least class
Discussion
foliedouce said:
You maybe right, but those pictures are a bad example, no car 'keeping up with the joneses' on those new build estates.
I concur with you though, I don't get the car snobbery badge bit, I currently have an Audi S5 in the stable, not bought for the badge, but leased (which in PH terms makes me even more classless!) because it was less than £375 per month inc VAT and at the time I thought it might be a 'fun' drive. It's actually one of the most boring cars I've 'owned'. I certainly won't be getting an Audi again.
I agree.....Audi are more guilty than most for brand dilution.....and consequently the vast majority of their cars are increasingly dull and soporific to drive and in reality offer no more 'desirabilty' and drivability than Ford and Vauxhall etc and yet punters are happy being shafted at their jumped up prices because they are under the delusion they are buying a so called 'premium brand' I concur with you though, I don't get the car snobbery badge bit, I currently have an Audi S5 in the stable, not bought for the badge, but leased (which in PH terms makes me even more classless!) because it was less than £375 per month inc VAT and at the time I thought it might be a 'fun' drive. It's actually one of the most boring cars I've 'owned'. I certainly won't be getting an Audi again.
which unfortunately for them disappeared long ago....
:
av185 said:
I agree.....Audi are more guilty than most for brand dilution.....and consequently the vast majority of their cars are increasingly dull and soporific to drive and in reality offer no more 'desirabilty' and drivability than Ford and Vauxhall etc and yet punters are happy being shafted at their jumped up prices because they are under the delusion they are buying a so called 'premium brand' which unfortunately for them disappeared long ago....:
Utter b which unfortunately for them disappeared long ago....:
ks: The reason Audis / BMWs etc are so much more popular these days than Ford / Vauxhall etc is because they are cheaper to own. The lower depreciation means that in general lease / contract hire costs are cheaper for the germans and if buying privately the retained value of the BMW/Audi will mean that the ownership cost is less.
It's nothing to do with "being shafted" or being deluded about what they are buying.
wibblebrain said:
av185 said:
I agree.....Audi are more guilty than most for brand dilution.....and consequently the vast majority of their cars are increasingly dull and soporific to drive and in reality offer no more 'desirabilty' and drivability than Ford and Vauxhall etc and yet punters are happy being shafted at their jumped up prices because they are under the delusion they are buying a so called 'premium brand' which unfortunately for them disappeared long ago....:
Utter b which unfortunately for them disappeared long ago....:ks: The reason Audis / BMWs etc are so much more popular these days than Ford / Vauxhall etc is because they are cheaper to own. The lower depreciation means that in general lease / contract hire costs are cheaper for the germans and if buying privately the retained value of the BMW/Audi will mean that the ownership cost is less.
It's nothing to do with "being shafted" or being deluded about what they are buying.
But your point, to use your terminology, is bolloc
s for second handband the self funding private punter who considers the two year old Aldi at say £12k v the same age Insignia at say £9k.......
Are new cars actually that classy anyway ? very nice but I think a car needs to be older and rarer to really have much "class" about it.
Most don't say connoisseur, just that whoever is in it chose it off a company list or went in a dealers with the right amount of money, some exceptions, usually low volume niche marques, but though a new RR is a wonderful, good looking, state of the art, handsome vehicle it doesn't shout class. There are some very wealthy chaps in this area of Cheshire who are known criminals who drive them, there are loads of WAGs who drive them so it doesn't reek of class to me, just a very nice, posh car.
not sure why everyone thinks leather is the height of class, maybe in some older cars but most new Audis and the like seem to have four Staples black executive leatherette office chairs drafted in, nice, smart, hard wearing but a MK2 Jag has the class thing, but perhaps didnt in its day quite the same, the Krays used to use them and they weren't classy at all.
Perhaps things need to mature a bit, to earn their class ?
Most don't say connoisseur, just that whoever is in it chose it off a company list or went in a dealers with the right amount of money, some exceptions, usually low volume niche marques, but though a new RR is a wonderful, good looking, state of the art, handsome vehicle it doesn't shout class. There are some very wealthy chaps in this area of Cheshire who are known criminals who drive them, there are loads of WAGs who drive them so it doesn't reek of class to me, just a very nice, posh car.
not sure why everyone thinks leather is the height of class, maybe in some older cars but most new Audis and the like seem to have four Staples black executive leatherette office chairs drafted in, nice, smart, hard wearing but a MK2 Jag has the class thing, but perhaps didnt in its day quite the same, the Krays used to use them and they weren't classy at all.
Perhaps things need to mature a bit, to earn their class ?
av185 said:
Clearly because of the residuals they are cheaper new on a lease or c hire basis.......
But your point, to use your terminology, is bollocs for second handband the self funding private punter who considers the two year old Aldi at say £12k v the same age Insignia at say £9k.......
I don't agree. The Audi will probably retain more value when it comes time to change again and so the ownership cost will be less. But your point, to use your terminology, is bolloc
s for second handband the self funding private punter who considers the two year old Aldi at say £12k v the same age Insignia at say £9k.......I guess it does depend, however, on how long the car is kept for.
As it happens I don't have any issues with Vauxhalls, having owned some good ones myself over the years. However they have all had maintenance and repair bills that were in addition to servicing costs.
In 8 years and 130,000 miles of owning 4 different second hand BMWs (typically bought at 3 years old) I have not had to pay for any repairs at all. I have only had to pay for servicing. In all that time I've lost about £11k total in depreciation.
I don't believe I could have run any comparable Ford/Vauxhall for less money than that.
swerni said:
Shurv said:
Anything with a diesel engine. Any gentleman's car should only have a petrol engine, preferably a great big one.
well you failed miserably then didn't you 
The spoiler on later 7th-gen Celica GT models was way too big for a FWD car and it totally ruined the lines of the coupe IMO -
Similarly, the factory-fit spoilers on the back of Citroen C1s, Pug 107s and Toyota Aygos have no right to be there except for comedy effect. They look like a tacky add-on!
Similarly, the factory-fit spoilers on the back of Citroen C1s, Pug 107s and Toyota Aygos have no right to be there except for comedy effect. They look like a tacky add-on!
wibblebrain said:
av185 said:
Clearly because of the residuals they are cheaper new on a lease or c hire basis.......
But your point, to use your terminology, is bollocs for second handband the self funding private punter who considers the two year old Aldi at say £12k v the same age Insignia at say £9k.......
I don't agree. The Audi will probably retain more value when it comes time to change again and so the ownership cost will be less. But your point, to use your terminology, is bolloc
s for second handband the self funding private punter who considers the two year old Aldi at say £12k v the same age Insignia at say £9k.......I guess it does depend, however, on how long the car is kept for.
As it happens I don't have any issues with Vauxhalls, having owned some good ones myself over the years. However they have all had maintenance and repair bills that were in addition to servicing costs.
In 8 years and 130,000 miles of owning 4 different second hand BMWs (typically bought at 3 years old) I have not had to pay for any repairs at all. I have only had to pay for servicing. In all that time I've lost about £11k total in depreciation.
I don't believe I could have run any comparable Ford/Vauxhall for less money than that.
Despite your experiences of reliability, don t kid yourself that both BMW and Audi are any better reliability wise either.....a perceived 'aspirational' or dare I say it, 'classy'
but increasingly ubiquitous brand does not necessarily equate to lower running costs although at least at the wheel of most BMWs, the driver will be compensated to a degree by a more driver focused car......
Greg_D said:
What car defines the polar opposite of 'a gentleman's conveyance'
What car would you least like to pull up in outside claridges or a smart hotel
What car would only be brought by some sort of grunting troglodyte handy with the finance forms
Going back to the OP, I think we need to get over our hatred of white diesel S-line Audis and the like. No, they don't have class but for every one of us there will be 1000 people who think that they are the epitome of class and will snap them up in 3 years time when they come off their PCP/lease. They will at least be an enjoyable ownership proposition for those that buy them and no doubt they will buy something similar again next time. They may be dull but are they actually bad cars?What car would you least like to pull up in outside claridges or a smart hotel
What car would only be brought by some sort of grunting troglodyte handy with the finance forms
I think the ultimate "least class" car has to either plummet in value when it leaves the forecourt or put the buyer into massive negative equity straight away, be untouchable on the used car market, cause the salesperson to piss themselves laughing as soon as the new owner has driven away and actually not be very good either to boot. The owner needs to regret their purchase very quickly and have to pretend for the next 3-4 years that they love their new acquisition.
I refer you back to my first post and the Peugeot/Renault/Citroen/Ford/Vauxhall Coupe Cabriolet. Slower, less economical, less practical and worse to drive than the ordinary but worthy models that they are based on. Bought for their looks but in fact they all look awful roof up or down and will undoubtably leak like a sieve when it rains and then break expensively leaving you half up, half down. You don't even have a "premium" badge to compensate! Seems like a good idea in the showroom but instantly regrettable. I'll add this Nissan to that list too.
I'll also nominate the original new Beetle (don't like to condemn the new one as it does look a bit better and is probably quite good to drive). So much less "cool" than the MINI or Fiat 500 and although a very attractive woman might be able to pull it off, even Jason Statham isn't man enough to make it "work". Most of them have the 2.0 8v petrol engine too and a mk4 Golf GTi with this engine was without question the worst car that I ever owned. This car has that same awful engine but without any of the advantages of the Golf.
Perhaps these are all a bit too old to qualify but EVEN Amercians are embarassed to drive these.
PT Cruiser
or even worse!
Chrysler Crossfire
Dodge Nitro
Perhaps I'm completely wide of the mark but I would much rather turn up to Claridges in an Audi (even a white S-line diesel) than ever have to drive one of these!
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 3rd September 20:26
white_goodman said:
Going back to the OP, I think we need to get over our hatred of white diesel S-line Audis and the like. No, they don't have class but for every one of us there will be 1000 people who think that they are the epitome of class and will snap them up in 3 years time when they come off their PCP/lease. They will at least be an enjoyable ownership proposition for those that buy them and no doubt they will buy something similar again next time. They may be dull but are they actually bad cars?
I think the ultimate "least class" car has to either plummet in value when it leaves the forecourt or put the buyer into massive negative equity straight away, be untouchable on the used car market, cause the salesperson to piss themselves laughing as soon as the new owner has driven away and actually not be very good either to boot. The owner needs to regret their purchase very quickly and have to pretend for the next 3-4 years that they love their new acquisition.
I refer you make to my first post and the Peugeot/Renault/Citroen/Ford/Vauxhall Coupe Cabriolet. Slower, less economical, less practical and worse to drive than the worthy models that they are based on. Bought for their looks but in fact they all look awful roof up or down and will undoubtably leak like a sieve when it rains and then break expensively leaving you half up, half down. You don't even have a "premium" badge to compensate! Seems like a good idea in the showroom but instantly regrettable. I'll add this Nissan to that list too.
I'll also nominate the original new Beetle (don't like to condemn the new one as it does look a bit better and is probably quite good to drive). So much less "cool" than the MINI or Fiat 500 and although a very attractive woman might be able to pull it off, even Jason Statham isn't man enough to make it "work". Most of them have the 2.0 8v petrol engine too and a mk4 Golf GTi with this engine was without question the worst car that I ever owned. This car has that awful engine but without any of the advantages of the Golf.
Perhaps these are all a bit too old to qualify but EVEN Amercians are embarassed to drive these.
PT Cruiser
or even worse!
Chrysler Crossfire
Dodge Nitro
Perhaps I'm completely wide of the mark but I would much rather turn up to Claridges in an Audi (even a white S-line diesel) than ever have to drive one of these!
wow, you pulled out a load of munters there!I think the ultimate "least class" car has to either plummet in value when it leaves the forecourt or put the buyer into massive negative equity straight away, be untouchable on the used car market, cause the salesperson to piss themselves laughing as soon as the new owner has driven away and actually not be very good either to boot. The owner needs to regret their purchase very quickly and have to pretend for the next 3-4 years that they love their new acquisition.
I refer you make to my first post and the Peugeot/Renault/Citroen/Ford/Vauxhall Coupe Cabriolet. Slower, less economical, less practical and worse to drive than the worthy models that they are based on. Bought for their looks but in fact they all look awful roof up or down and will undoubtably leak like a sieve when it rains and then break expensively leaving you half up, half down. You don't even have a "premium" badge to compensate! Seems like a good idea in the showroom but instantly regrettable. I'll add this Nissan to that list too.
I'll also nominate the original new Beetle (don't like to condemn the new one as it does look a bit better and is probably quite good to drive). So much less "cool" than the MINI or Fiat 500 and although a very attractive woman might be able to pull it off, even Jason Statham isn't man enough to make it "work". Most of them have the 2.0 8v petrol engine too and a mk4 Golf GTi with this engine was without question the worst car that I ever owned. This car has that awful engine but without any of the advantages of the Golf.
Perhaps these are all a bit too old to qualify but EVEN Amercians are embarassed to drive these.
PT Cruiser
or even worse!
Chrysler Crossfire
Dodge Nitro
Perhaps I'm completely wide of the mark but I would much rather turn up to Claridges in an Audi (even a white S-line diesel) than ever have to drive one of these!
i would almost take the diesel s-line...........no i can't do i.
i'll have the soft top pt cruiser.
rather an ugly fun girl, than a manly dull one.
For least classy car is when people choose a base model of any brand
Why buy a 64 plate base model when you could save £500 and get a higher spec on a 63 plate for example
When I see the average bmw I think 320d /520 with few options nice but
just blend in
Worst class brand for me is Toyota overall on their range
Why buy a 64 plate base model when you could save £500 and get a higher spec on a 63 plate for example
When I see the average bmw I think 320d /520 with few options nice but
just blend in
Worst class brand for me is Toyota overall on their range
I have yet to see anyone with the label on the outside of their clothing driving an Audi, nor have I ever seen an Audi, even a white A1, covered in stickers advertising an estate agency. Therefore, contrary to popular opinion, they are quite classy; the wooden spoon goes to the Smart.
Justin Case said:
I have yet to see anyone with the label on the outside of their clothing driving an Audi, nor have I ever seen an Audi, even a white A1, covered in stickers advertising an estate agency. Therefore, contrary to popular opinion, they are quite classy; the wooden spoon goes to the Smart.
Disclaimer: I own a smart car.I don't think a smart car says much about anyone at all. If anything, they're the opposite. Ownership of them seems to cross over far more different groups than most. From posh, old money , to scum like me
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff