What is the most overrated car manufacturer?
Discussion
RobM77 said:
The NSX is one of my favourite cars of all time. I've owned a mk1 MR2 and a Celica Carlos Sainz and loved the both. I was referring to BMW 1/3 series rivals though for people who love driving and prioritise handling.There is little to compare to the crazy timing of VTEC. Whilst the NSX made noise the B18 just howled.
john banks said:
I would want more weight over the driven wheels which they have addressed with x drive. I'd also like longer travel suspension for road comfort and bumpy road handling. Multi piston front calipers, rear LSD, addressed on some models. The combination of all on the one model appears rare on a BMW, hence why I have bought two Audis with air suspension and quattro, they address my concerns with BMW and do not appear to understeer on the road.
Audis will tick the comfort box. Horrible, horrible, horrible as driver's cars.I am pretty sure that about 80% of the people who say they want or need an LSD have no idea how it would affect handling; almost none of these people would actually benefit from having one. Manufacturers know this and add useless LSDs to road cars so that pub bores and Top Gear presenters can go on about how such and such a car now has one.
yonex said:
RobM77 said:
The NSX is one of my favourite cars of all time. I've owned a mk1 MR2 and a Celica Carlos Sainz and loved the both. I was referring to BMW 1/3 series rivals though for people who love driving and prioritise handling.There is little to compare to the crazy timing of VTEC. Whilst the NSX made noise the B18 just howled.
If I was to put together my ideal car then the engine and gearbox would definitely be by Honda (that's something: why do Honda have such great gearchanges and no other manufacturer can get close? Surely it's just a simple linkage?!). I'd have the ride, handling and steering by Lotus (I've no idea how they do what they do - the latest Exige V6 is just incredible) and the seats and brakes by Porsche. The badge would of course be blank to keep the PH snobs at bay 
Nowadays I think it is Honda. They are not so much resting on their laurels as building an entire spa complex and cloning Rapunzel to sleep on them.
Even a return to F1 isn't going to do much
NSX was super awesome. Classic hot-ish Civics pretty damn good. S2K was where to "overrated" rot set in. Not bad just not as good as they thought.
Even a return to F1 isn't going to do much
NSX was super awesome. Classic hot-ish Civics pretty damn good. S2K was where to "overrated" rot set in. Not bad just not as good as they thought.
RobM77 said:
john banks said:
RobM77 said:
I suppose it's satisfying to say that and it makes you feel knowledgeable, but what would you do to a BMW to give it more substance? They've already got jolly close to 50:50 weight distribution, world beating engines, rear drive, good setups etc. They're certainly not 'The Ultimate Driving Machine', but what more do you want out of a family car? Serious question that - what more do you want? I guess they could be better built, but they're really not too bad. The steering feel could be better, but what modern ePAS cars have better feel? I find your statement confusing and to be honest rather illogical, or did you just say it to try and sound clever?...
I would want more weight over the driven wheels which they have addressed with x drive. I'd also like longer travel suspension for road comfort and bumpy road handling. Multi piston front calipers, rear LSD, addressed on some models. The combination of all on the one model appears rare on a BMW, hence why I have bought two Audis with air suspension and quattro, they address my concerns with BMW and do not appear to understeer on the road.I would counter what you say though by saying that the weight acts down over the rear wheels when you accelerate, so provided you can actually accelerate and aren't on wet mud or snow, I think 50:50 with FE/RWD works very well, at least with <300bhp. I've certainly never wanted any more traction in any of the BMWs I've owned, except perhaps in the more powerful ones in the wet in tight turns, but that's a fairly unusual circumstance and I must admit I enjoy that sort of thing. My Lotuses have/had superb traction, but it's too much really and they don't have the inherent harmony and balance than a FE/FWD car has like a Caterham, Merc or BMW (other factors contribute towards me preferring them though).
The suspension though, yes, I agree with you on that one. They're pretty good on standard 16s/17s, but could definitely be better.
I must admit though with regard to Audis I do find both FWD and 4WD models understeer far too much for my tastes, and the suspension in non RS models is biased too much towards comfort at the expense of handling. I should point out though that I do drive quite quickly through corners and everyone has their own tastes. My tastes are for fun and involvement over pace. I'm far happier in a 130i for example than in an RS4.
Edited by Escort3500 on Sunday 2nd November 09:04
Escort3500 said:
Every car is a compromise and it all boils down to personal preference, practicality and taste. I wasn't influenced by the (predictable) Audi haters and chose a B7 RS4 over an M3 for various reasons, including all-round weather capability (my old 3 Series daily is a joke in snow even with winter tyres) and space (it's an estate).
The B7 RS4 stands head and shoulders above most other Audis though. - It's almost unbelievable that they can make brilliant cars like that and the R8, yet at the same time be satisfied with some of the Golf-based mediocrity they also sell. Having said that though, BMW make abominations like the 5GT and 2AT and the disparity between models from mainstream manufacturers, such as Ford, can be even greater.Escort3500 said:
No matter how good the 130i is, I wouldn't spend that much on a car that is so ugly, but that's of course down to personal taste.
At least some people realise that. 
jhonn said:
Actually...I don't know the answer to your question - my 'rant' was based on experience of the more recent Nissan utility models (Navara, Pathfinder), and how their engineering integrity had decreased from when they built Patrols, pre-Renault.
I suspect that you are correct when you say that Nissan premium models (GTR) and Infinity will have little Renault input.
Isn't the gtr/350z engine derived from a renault design?I suspect that you are correct when you say that Nissan premium models (GTR) and Infinity will have little Renault input.
I may well be wrong, either way renault can certainly do engines (f4r/t) even if they struggle a bit with the bits that transport them from place to place..
For me overrated = aston martin. The car park at my previous job was rammed to the gills with astons of various shapes and sizes (meteoric share price rises) - I swear the only time you'd see more chromed plastic tat in one place is on a tour of the hotwheels factory.
Escort3500 said:
Every car is a compromise and it all boils down to personal preference, practicality and taste. I wasn't influenced by the (predictable) Audi haters and chose a B7 RS4 over an M3 for various reasons, including all-round weather capability (my old 3 Series daily is a joke in snow even with winter tyres) and space (it's an estate). No matter how good the 130i is, I wouldn't spend that much on a car that is so ugly, but that's of course down to personal taste.
Edited by Escort3500 on Sunday 2nd November 09:04
Definitely.As I said a page or two ago, I don't believe there's such thing as an over-rated or under-rated car, and definitely not in the sense that this thread has collectively defined. Instead I think these are cars that just exceed or fail to meet our expectations, which are based on our own personal requirements. As I said above, I was massively underwhelmed by the A4 2.0TDi I ran for three months last year, and also the RS4 that I had a decent test drive in; this doesn't mean that either car is rubbish, or over-rated, it's just that my requirements were not met by these cars - they did do some things very well indeed, but they're not things I have much of an interest in. When I look at the press reviews of Audi, even though I've yet to drive one I like, I think the reviews are completely accurate and I genuinely can't see where any over or under rating comes from. The message I get from reviews is "nice interiors, neat styling, steady and secure in all weathers, well screwed together, but somewhat dull as driver's cars", which is exactly what I get every time I drive one.
Having said that, I also think for many people this thread is just an excuse to show off by claiming that they think popular car makes are rubbish, which is for demonstrating that they know something that everyone else doesn't - you see it for Apple as well over on the tech forums, and I remember when I was looking for an engagement ring I saw the same for any well known jeweller. You get it for Hi-Fi too - its always the obscure makes that people bang on about, because they think it makes them sound clever. These people also see all the marketing the bigger and more popular companies put out, and assume that owners and buyers are suckered in by that, probably because they project their obvious vanity onto other people and assume they're like that too. When you look at their claim further, as expected it's just based on plain snobbery, rather than any intelligent reasoned argument. A mate of mine summed this up well as we chatted about his next car: he just said "BMW? I'm not owning one of those". For every other manufacturer mentioned we had a discussion - some short, some long, but BMW he wrote off instantly and without reasoning purely on the basis of the badge, and he probably would have done the same for Audi. That's nothing to do with being under-rated or over-rated, that's just snobbery and vanity.
So both of the above factors make most of the content of this thread I think. The press are normally pretty accurate when reviewing cars. I don't know about everyone else, but I rarely get a surprise when I drive a car having read reviews and listening to opinion.
DoubleSix said:
You're all being vague.
What are these "oily parts" that are of poor quality "just under the surface"??
Educate us with real examples if you have them...
1.2 & 1.4 Audi A1s stretch their timing chains, 25k miles and up or so.What are these "oily parts" that are of poor quality "just under the surface"??
Educate us with real examples if you have them...
2.0 TFSI engine has a piston ring problem, 30-35k mile engines removed from cars and binned. Later on (because it was costing so much) this reduced to re-ringing and maybe new pistons
Flappy inlet manifolds made so cheaply that the mechanism wears, eventually it all twists so only half of it opens
Electrical faults all over the place. One new car was delivered with a myriad of electrical faults, traced to a a whole number of earth points not secured in the factory
Multitronic gearboxes, nicknamed as "multichronic" - for good reason.
DSG gearboxes are hardly fault free
2 litre golf gti engines have a crappy timing chain tensioner, it loosens off, the result is not pretty. There is at least one revised part for this because its a design fault, yet if it causes a failure you will be presented with a bill, if you're lucky VW wll contibute, but you'll still pay in to 4 figures.
On the less oily bits front a friend was incensed when he found interior grab handles now secured with a plastic fixing, much like you'd find holding a door card on rather than a bolt or screw. His problem ? there wasn't any nice way of removing the handle other than prise it out with a screwdriver - not easy to do and not cause damage - he wanted to leave the car as he found it.
In all honesty VAG are no better than any other manufacturer out there, but have a cult following in the vein of Apple phones etc. That alone is what carries them, for now at least.
RobM77 said:
I don't believe there's such thing as an over-rated or under-rated car, and definitely not in the sense that this thread has collectively defined. Instead I think these are cars that just exceed or fail to meet our expectations, which are based on our own personal requirements.
Is it comfy sitting on that fence? 
ORD said:
Audis will tick the comfort box. Horrible, horrible, horrible as driver's cars.
I am pretty sure that about 80% of the people who say they want or need an LSD have no idea how it would affect handling; almost none of these people would actually benefit from having one. Manufacturers know this and add useless LSDs to road cars so that pub bores and Top Gear presenters can go on about how such and such a car now has one.
I am loving my S8 so much that I'm selling my GTR. It is quicker in the wet, and as much "fun" in the dry, accelerates nearly as well without making a fuss but has a cultured noise and imperious traction. The tail flicks just a little on corner exit where the GTR wants to slide whilst I do not think going any faster in mixed conditions. I do not think I am a skilled driver, but can really appreciate the rear diff upgrade compared to the A8 I just sold. The extra power, different wheels/tires and sport suspension also impinge, but the rear diff is distinctively different.I am pretty sure that about 80% of the people who say they want or need an LSD have no idea how it would affect handling; almost none of these people would actually benefit from having one. Manufacturers know this and add useless LSDs to road cars so that pub bores and Top Gear presenters can go on about how such and such a car now has one.
RobM77, agree on weight transfer, but the front axle can still get a few hundred BHP down, so add that to the 300 or so to the rear and my personal preference is for slightly rear biased AWD. For modest power, RWD may be best overall for fun.
chrispmartha said:
Beer Man said:
because they're s
te and overrated. Are you not getting the point of this thread????
And no, I have absolutely no wish to drive either of the i cars.
Again not sure why you're so angryte and overrated. Are you not getting the point of this thread????And no, I have absolutely no wish to drive either of the i cars.
Perhaps he should be using my user name instead?
Beer Man said:
FeelingLucky said:
Beer Man said:
THE most overrated?
BMW.
to be fair, their marketing department must be staffed entirely by genius types as their cars are f****** awful
As soon as I read the header I thought some knobbler is bound to say BMW, the manufacturer that makes the //M series.BMW.
to be fair, their marketing department must be staffed entirely by genius types as their cars are f****** awful
Cars that (almost always) hugely out perform their underpinnings. Have a read through the other suggestions and ask yourself, did you call it right with BMW?
Anyway, apart from the M3, M5 and M6 (which, let's face it, are either ugly or bland), which, if my baby maths is correct, is three cars.
Out of HOW many in the range?????
Bland as f
k, innit mate 
Besides, I think you missed the point about what an 'M' car is supposed to be about.
There have been some funny, clueless posts on this thread. Beer Man's is up there with them.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff