What is the most overrated car manufacturer?
Discussion
m8rky said:
BMW and VAG, Hear endles stories of problems and engineered in expensive repairs on BMWs. Steering lock, light ecu designed to fail if no repair and engine faults.VAG seem to be generally unreliable contra to their image.
You're missing the point though, much like everyone else. This isn't about marques, it's about individual cars that are over rated.Trouble is, what is over rated for one person, will not be over rated for someone else. It is all relative to people's experiences.
For me, my Impreza WRX STi was s
t and didn't deliver to me what everyone else said it would. Who is wrong? Me or everyone else? Well as this is PH, everyone else as far as I am concerned 
Joking aside, I had a bad example of an Impreza, and as always, YMMV.Beer Man said:
Pommygranite said:
Compared to what else from 1995?
this.
TheAngryDog said:
m8rky said:
BMW and VAG, Hear endles stories of problems and engineered in expensive repairs on BMWs. Steering lock, light ecu designed to fail if no repair and engine faults.VAG seem to be generally unreliable contra to their image.
You're missing the point though, much like everyone else. This isn't about marques, it's about individual cars that are over rated.Trouble is, what is over rated for one person, will not be over rated for someone else. It is all relative to people's experiences.
For me, my Impreza WRX STi was s
t and didn't deliver to me what everyone else said it would. Who is wrong? Me or everyone else? Well as this is PH, everyone else as far as I am concerned Joking aside, I had a bad example of an Impreza, and as always, YMMV.Beer Man said:
Pommygranite said:
Compared to what else from 1995?
this.t looks department.Beer Man said:
Well aren't you a charming person.
Yes, yes I am. I see the was lost on you.StuntmanMike said:
TheAngryDog said:
m8rky said:
BMW and VAG, Hear endles stories of problems and engineered in expensive repairs on BMWs. Steering lock, light ecu designed to fail if no repair and engine faults.VAG seem to be generally unreliable contra to their image.
You're missing the point though, much like everyone else. This isn't about marques, it's about individual cars that are over rated.Trouble is, what is over rated for one person, will not be over rated for someone else. It is all relative to people's experiences.
For me, my Impreza WRX STi was s
t and didn't deliver to me what everyone else said it would. Who is wrong? Me or everyone else? Well as this is PH, everyone else as far as I am concerned Joking aside, I had a bad example of an Impreza, and as always, YMMV.Beer Man said:
Pommygranite said:
Compared to what else from 1995?
this.t looks department.. The last BMW looks wise that I don't mind is the E60 M5, but even then I still think the E39 looks nicer.john banks said:
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.
RobM77 said:
john banks said:
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.
ORD said:
I always think that people who bang on about traction and 'all weather' ability must be driving on different roads - roads with no traffic, no speed enforcement and amazing sight lines; the roads I drive on are mostly limited by sight lines, speed limits and crappy surfaces. In terms of actually getting along the road, a measly 300bhp through only one axle (but good mechanical grip) is far far too much car to ever lack for pace on our roads. I can just about imagine going slightly faster in standing water in an AWD car, but even then, hanging onto my licence and maintaining a safe stopping distance would limit speed, rather than traction or grip or power. I think I would be able to do a typical mixed journey 95% as fast in a car with 200bhp, to be honest.
I agree with the sentiment but I would go further. - On most average commutes, a 1.0-litre ecobox is as fast as a Ferrari. I'm seemingly always stuck behind some ditherer doing 37 in a 60, with either blind corners or oncoming traffic preventing any overtakes regardless of what car I'm in. Actually, the Discovery is a revelation in those conditions. - It's not been tuned yet so it's glacially slow (0-60 in 15.8) but it's so relaxing that you don't really mind...whereas when driving the Mini, you always want to go faster and the dawdler in the MPV ahead is a windowlicker.As for those that say they "need" AWD in the UK; they need to surrender their licence...and their testicles.*
* Unless of course they live up a mountain or go off-road.
ORD said:
RobM77 said:
john banks said:
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.
The less grip and traction a road car has, the more enjoyment I get for a higher percentage of the time. I can understand people finding grip and traction enjoyable from the point of view of making more progress, but my enjoyment is very different. I do find it more enjoyable being on the limit at a higher speed, but for me the public road isn't the place for that. I do own a fast car, a Lotus 2-Eleven, but I enjoy that car on track. On the road I drive a slow car with modest grip but lovely balance and handling (BMW 320d) and I enjoy it more. The thing is, even in that, I'm going way quicker than most other cars if I'm enjoying myself and I wouldn't want much more performance to be honest, it would just piss people off and threaten my license. In the Lotus, driving down a B road at 60mph is like driving a normal car at 20mph. To be honest it did take me years to come to that conclusion, because at first a faster car is more fun, but after a while you realise that if you have 30% more grip (my 330ci vs my 320d), you're having 30% less fun. Once you realise that, you concentrate on control and the basic chassis.For those saying BMW there needs to be a clearer point made than just 'BMW!'
As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
Pommygranite said:
For those saying BMW there needs to be a clearer point made than just 'BMW!'
As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
That's if power makes the difference between mediocre or brilliant for you. For me it doesn't any more than volume on a hi-Fi determines its quality. One of the best BMWs I drove last year was a 116 MSport.As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
m8rky said:
BMW and VAG, Hear endles stories of problems and engineered in expensive repairs on BMWs. Steering lock, light ecu designed to fail if no repair and engine faults.VAG seem to be generally unreliable contra to their image.
Yeh, Citroen have nothing on thoses BMW's. Have you ever driven one to compare the difference? I can honestly say it is vast!I have nothing against Citroens but I wouldn't be slagging BMW's off if I owned one
john banks said:
Location, weather and traffic density changes many things. 2WD plus snow tyres isn't getting me to work or up a farm track in drifting snow, but I don't want an SUV. Sometimes an emergency calls for the ability to cover ground quickly. These are my priorities, others are different.
If that was in response to my earlier comment, some "farm tracks" are effectively a green lane. 
One thing I will say is that AWD isn't some magical silver bullet in winter conditions. - I've seen some people get stuck in SUVs when I've managed fine in when driving a normal car on summer tyres...and I don't claim to be a "driving god" (before that st starts).RobM77 said:
That's if power makes the difference between mediocre or brilliant for you. For me it doesn't any more than volume on a hi-Fi determines its quality. One of the best BMWs I drove last year was a 116 MSport.
Agree with the sentiment Rob. - In fact, you can often have more fun in an objectively rubbish car than in a competent one. - See CH's 2CV video for proof...in fact, sometimes I find myself looking for an older small car with lots of character as a runaround / for when I've got my Land Rover in bits.Pommygranite said:
Beer Man said:
TheAngryDog said:
Bland as f
k, innit mate 
Besides, I think you missed the point about what an 'M' car is supposed to be about.
Extremely bland and just has no soul or passion.
We have an E39 M5 in the house hold and whenever I drive it I feel empty.
RobM77 said:
Pommygranite said:
For those saying BMW there needs to be a clearer point made than just 'BMW!'
As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
That's if power makes the difference between mediocre or brilliant for you. For me it doesn't any more than volume on a hi-Fi determines its quality. One of the best BMWs I drove last year was a 116 MSport.As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
ORD said:
RobM77 said:
Pommygranite said:
For those saying BMW there needs to be a clearer point made than just 'BMW!'
As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
That's if power makes the difference between mediocre or brilliant for you. For me it doesn't any more than volume on a hi-Fi determines its quality. One of the best BMWs I drove last year was a 116 MSport.As a car manufacturer they are most definitely not overrated
You don't win c.60 World Engine Awards, countless Motorsport class wins, make €5b profit each year and make €1.5b profit by being overrated.
I can't remember more than 5 car tests that Audi have won but I can't remember more than 15 tests BMW have lost.
The big distinction, BIG distinction is that their base stuff is incredibly competent but doesn't set your world alight and if you drive say a 116 or 316 right back to model inception you might wonder where the sparkle found in 328,528,635,m series is and I think that's right. They feel extremely underpowered. So yes, their lower end stuff is quite mediocre but anything mid range and above is pretty bloody good.
RobM77 said:
SonicHedgeHog said:
Chris Y said:
1. BMW
2. Audi
3. VW
This. All badge and no substance. Bloody expensive too.2. Audi
3. VW
So what do I want from a premium manufacturer? I want more than soft touch plastics and a fancy badge. I expect the design to exceptional. I want to look at the car and go "Wow!". It needs to be more than a massive set of alloys and a load of exhaust pipes. The design needs to be new and imaginative rather than barely evolutionary.
It's not my job to design cars so I can't tell you exactly what is missing, but if I'm going to spend a lot of money (and it is a bloody lot of money for some of these daily drivers) then I want to be excited. Rolling out the same old stuff that's got a bit more power and had a nip and tuck isn't enough. I'll spend my money on other things like amazing holidays instead.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff