Is it time to take Korean cars seriously?

[daemon]

SuperPav said:

daemon said:

Its a relevant reason, but its definitely not a trait of the car.

If Peugeot were to put a 7 year warranty on a 308 and up the spec, would that make it a better car?

No. It would be Peugeot supporting the car in the marketplace by offering incentives.

If Peugeot were to up the spec, yes it would make it a better car. In the same way that a car with sat nav is better than a car without sat nav for the same price.

No it wouldnt be. It would still be a rather naff little car, just with better spec. It wouldnt make it handle any better, it wouldnt make it more of a drivers car, and it wouldnt make it more fun to drive. And dynamically it wouldnt be any better.

SuperPav said:

Your logic is like saying a Mercedes E-class with manual windows, steel wheels with hubcaps and no central locking would still a be good car in today's marketplace because of its inherent goodness. No, it wouldn't. It would be penny pinching ste.

No, you're reversing my logic, thats not the same.

Theres a certain spec that people expect buying a saloon car - probably alloys, climate, CD, electric windows. Thats a "standard" expectation. People have a certain perception of what a car in a particular class should offer. If a car is not meeting that standard then typically they wont buy it.

If a manufacturer choses to over laiden a car heavily with spec such as say leather, reversing cams, etc. It doesnt make it a better car, its just a marketing incentive.

Its like "dont look at the car, look at all these shiny baubles instead"

Another example - the Fiesta ST is undoubtedly best in class. The latest offering by Skoda with the VRS isnt. The VRS is just ok as a car. If Skoda laidened a Fabia down with spec such as leather and reversing cams, and lots of toys, would it make it the best in class? Would it make it a better car than the Fiesta ST?

Rover did this with the Rover 800 v Merc E and 5 series. They took quite a nice car that wasnt great and put in loads of spec in an attempt to encourage people away from their german cars. It didnt make the Rover 800 any better, it just had more toys to play with.

SuperPav said:

Take your point re: warranty.. The warranty does not make it a better car, but equally does make it a more attractive package for some people.

Yes, as does a better spec - it does not make it a better car, it may however make it more attractrive for some people.

Edited by daemon on Thursday 7th May 22:46

[Devil2575]

daemon said:

SuperPav said:

Take your point re: warranty.. The warranty does not make it a better car, but equally does make it a more attractive package for some people.

Yes, as does a better spec - it does not make it a better car, it may however make it more attractrive for some people.

Edited by daemon on Thursday 7th May 22:46

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

[CrgT16]

Having read this thread i found it interesting and informative.

At present KIA is like that bland girl at biology class, not fat, not fit, not pretty, not ugly.... You ended up with her but somehow you keeping telling your mates she is a good cook! We both know whom you wanted to sleep with...

[ZX10R NIN]

That's a different view but wouldn't you say the same for the Octavia Mondeo Passat Accord Insignia aren't they all "Good Cooks"

When compared to the C Class A4 etc

To most who are buying a new car for around 19K Spec Warranty Power Handling Servicing Costs all matter to what degree each of those is a priority is down to the individual.

If you go for the best in class then everyone should be in a Mondeo (best mix of all the above) the reason people aren't is because some are badge snobs therefore they'd rather have a Passat, Others want more equipment so opt for the Octavia.

Having driven the Optima I'd say it's handling is no better or worse than the Octavia ride comfort seemed better & for driving from A-B it's a decent steer.

The Megane RS is the best handling hot hatch out there it constantly wins the group tests, the Interior well spec'd, is a nice place to be & well priced, yet you don't see as many of those as you see Golf GTI's Focus ST's etc.

Adding a 7 Year Warranty 3 Years Free Servicing 2 Years Breakdown Cover & the same level of as a ST3 to a 208 GTI which handles pretty well, will increase it's market share & put it on peoples radar.

Edited by ZX10R NIN on Friday 8th May 08:33

[kiseca]

ZX10R NIN said:

That's a different view but wouldn't you say the same for the Octavia Mondeo Passat Accord Insignia aren't they all "Good Cooks"

No but everyone knows they're nicer rides

[ZX10R NIN]

kiseca said:

No but everyone knows they're nicer rides

So you mean everyone knows they've got form!

[CrgT16]

Harmless banter... Eheh

To be honest I had a bit of prejudice regarding Korean cars just because it was based on old perceptions of the brands. After this thread I may consider a test drive if I am on the market for that kind of vehicle.

So the lack of brand kudos, history, etc still would make a KIA buy a rational, not emotional buy. Whilst a more established brand even like VW can have some emotion attached to it. Saying that VAG group on the whole is really bland and soulless in the. 21st century.

[northwest monkey]

Pfft.

Korean cars are very 2012. Chinese is where it's at these days.

I've had an MG6 for 2 years now and I'm happy with it. I'll be very, very interested to see what happens in the next few years.

[daemon]

Devil2575 said:

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

Porsche only offer a 2 year warranty so they dont make good cars then?

Renault offer a four year warranty, does that make their car better than a Skoda?

The fact is a 7 year warranty sells new cars for KIA and it protects the residuals of their used cars. It also generates footfall for the dealer service department.

Also, dont forget the 7 year warranty only covers defects at the time of manufacture. It doesnt cover what could be deemed as wear and tear or "gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage".

http://www.kia.co.uk/~/media/pdf/Warranty/Kia%207%...

[cars1993]

Nope

[Devil2575]

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

Porsche only offer a 2 year warranty so they dont make good cars then?

Renault offer a four year warranty, does that make their car better than a Skoda?

The fact is a 7 year warranty sells new cars for KIA and it protects the residuals of their used cars. It also generates footfall for the dealer service department.

Also, dont forget the 7 year warranty only covers defects at the time of manufacture. It doesnt cover what could be deemed as wear and tear or "gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage".

http://www.kia.co.uk/~/media/pdf/Warranty/Kia%207%...

Which warranties do cover wear and tear items?

[daemon]

ZX10R NIN said:

That's a different view but wouldn't you say the same for the Octavia Mondeo Passat Accord Insignia aren't they all "Good Cooks"

When compared to the C Class A4 etc

They're not in the same class, as it were.

ZX10R NIN said:

To most who are buying a new car for around 19K Spec Warranty Power Handling Servicing Costs all matter to what degree each of those is a priority is down to the individual.

Uh huh. Because they form a subjective view.

ZX10R NIN said:

If you go for the best in class then everyone should be in a Mondeo (best mix of all the above) the reason people aren't is because some are badge snobs therefore they'd rather have a Passat, Others want more equipment so opt for the Octavia.

Yay! You're getting it!

Mondeo best in class sells the most shocker! However some people dont want a mondeo, so they look subjectively at their own needs and chose a different car!

Doesnt make the Optima a good car though.

ZX10R NIN said:

Having driven the Optima I'd say it's handling is no better or worse than the Octavia ride comfort seemed better & for driving from A-B it's a decent steer.

Average car drives similarly to another average car! You're on form today.

ZX10R NIN said:

The Megane RS is the best handling hot hatch out there it constantly wins the group tests, the Interior well spec'd, is a nice place to be & well priced, yet you don't see as many of those as you see Golf GTI's Focus ST's etc.

Yup. However best handling doesnt make it the best car overall. That comes down to the Golf GTI as its a better all round car to live with.

ZX10R NIN said:

Adding a 7 Year Warranty 3 Years Free Servicing 2 Years Breakdown Cover & the same level of as a ST3 to a 208 GTI which handles pretty well, will increase it's market share & put it on peoples radar.

The penny has dropped!

Extend the warranty on an average car and you can put it on peoples radar and increase sales!

[daemon]

Devil2575 said:

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

Porsche only offer a 2 year warranty so they dont make good cars then?

Renault offer a four year warranty, does that make their car better than a Skoda?

The fact is a 7 year warranty sells new cars for KIA and it protects the residuals of their used cars. It also generates footfall for the dealer service department.

Also, dont forget the 7 year warranty only covers defects at the time of manufacture. It doesnt cover what could be deemed as wear and tear or "gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage".

http://www.kia.co.uk/~/media/pdf/Warranty/Kia%207%...

Which warranties do cover wear and tear items?

None, however if a dual mass flywheel goes on a car with 10K miles at a year old, it would be reasonable to deem it a fault. What happens if the flywheel goes at 95,000 on a 6.5 year old car? Is that caused by gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage?

So what really does it cover? A wheel bearing goes at 90,000 miles. Is that a manufacturing fault or wear and tear?

Sat NAV goes in year five? Oops not covered, exclusion.

Sound system needs a new amp in year four? Oops, not covered, exclusion.

[daemon]

CrgT16 said:

Harmless banter... Eheh

To be honest I had a bit of prejudice regarding Korean cars just because it was based on old perceptions of the brands. After this thread I may consider a test drive if I am on the market for that kind of vehicle.

Yup. Totally agree. As i've said if i was in the market for a 4x4 i'd definitely have Korean cars on my list to drive.

[daemon]

Devil2575 said:

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

Porsche only offer a 2 year warranty so they dont make good cars then?

Renault offer a four year warranty, does that make their car better than a Skoda?

The fact is a 7 year warranty sells new cars for KIA and it protects the residuals of their used cars. It also generates footfall for the dealer service department.

Also, dont forget the 7 year warranty only covers defects at the time of manufacture. It doesnt cover what could be deemed as wear and tear or "gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage".

http://www.kia.co.uk/~/media/pdf/Warranty/Kia%207%...

Which warranties do cover wear and tear items?

Loving how you avoided responding to any of the points i raised.

[daemon]

northwest monkey said:

Pfft.

Korean cars are very 2012. Chinese is where it's at these days.

I've had an MG6 for 2 years now and I'm happy with it. I'll be very, very interested to see what happens in the next few years.

I think the chinese are definitely worth watching. It will be some time yet before they are up there making good cars and with decent market share.

[Dannbodge]

Personally I think KIA have stepped up their cars recently.
They certainly aren't bad looking and it seems they have their target market nailed.

Personally I would never have one, but I wouldn't be disappointed if my OH decided to get one.

I think the Cee'd looks great and is certainly a competitor for the focus for us.

[Devil2575]

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

Really? Have you considered that they can offer such a good warranty because it is a better car? i.e. they are putting their money where their mouth is.

Porsche only offer a 2 year warranty so they dont make good cars then?

Renault offer a four year warranty, does that make their car better than a Skoda?

The fact is a 7 year warranty sells new cars for KIA and it protects the residuals of their used cars. It also generates footfall for the dealer service department.

Also, dont forget the 7 year warranty only covers defects at the time of manufacture. It doesnt cover what could be deemed as wear and tear or "gradual wearing of mechanical components due to mileage".

http://www.kia.co.uk/~/media/pdf/Warranty/Kia%207%...

Which warranties do cover wear and tear items?

Loving how you avoided responding to any of the points i raised.

I don't know whether Renault are more reliable than Skoda, or whether a 2 year warranty makes Porsche bad cars. I certainly know that Porsche seems to have had some significant engine issues over the last few years and VAG are hardly a paragon of reliability.

The fact is that offering a longer warranty is going to cost the manufacturer money, potentially lots. How much depends on how many breakdowns not related to wear and tear that their cars suffer in the 3-7 year period. I'd suggest that they are doing this because they are confident in the quality of the product.

[kambites]

Whatever the warranties do or don't say about them, Kia and Hyundai do consistently very well in both reliability and customer satisfaction surveys.

[ZX10R NIN]

I have to say that at the moment I can understand why Porsche are only offering a Two Year Warranty.