What is the least "PH" car?
Discussion
By least "PH", I don't necessarily mean a FWD diesel automatic crossover but just something totally devoid of character or interest i.e. if you owned one and were telling your friends about it, you would be stuck for something to say.
There are some older cars that might qualify, such as the Austin Maestro for instance but it does at least have rarity on its side now, the story behind its gestation is quite interesting and it's almost so bad, it's good!
No, I would have to go with something new and ubiquitous. Looking at the list of best-selling cars last year, I would have to go for a Vauxhall Astra 1.4/1.6 petrol. It's not good-looking (or bad-looking) just dull, it's gutless, going off RRPs, it's not that cheap. Oh, do the windscreen wipers go in opposite directions? That's quite interesting. To be fair I haven't driven the current gen yet but the last one was appalling and last time my FIL visited, he hired an Astra 1.6 and had to take it back and swap it for a Peugeot 3008 diesel because he hated it so much! And he's a GM man, who would rather walk than drive a Ford (or Skoda)! The Corsa is almost as dull but at least it is quite cheap and quite ugly (which is at least a talking point).
I can kind of understand that you might not buy a Ford Focus instead if you don't like the looks but personally, I would find the small premium for a VW Golf or Audi A3 not difficult to justify. Or just buy anything else (Megane, 308, Civic, Leon etc), as at least it's a bit more leftfield and interesting.
For some reason, my Canadian petrolhead friends are clamouring for the Astra in Canada, particularly the VXR model. To be fair, the only model that GM offer in this class in Canada is the Chevrolet Cruze saloon though. Stick a Buick badge on it they say (after all the Buick Regal is merely a rebadged Vauxhall Insignia)! Be careful what you wish for!
Apparently, this is the "sporty" SRi model.
I have the same problem with most Hyundais (I find it hard to picture what any of them look like) but at least they are well-equipped, have a long warranty and you can tell people that they're quite good cars now actually!
What in your opinion is the least "PH" car?
There are some older cars that might qualify, such as the Austin Maestro for instance but it does at least have rarity on its side now, the story behind its gestation is quite interesting and it's almost so bad, it's good!
No, I would have to go with something new and ubiquitous. Looking at the list of best-selling cars last year, I would have to go for a Vauxhall Astra 1.4/1.6 petrol. It's not good-looking (or bad-looking) just dull, it's gutless, going off RRPs, it's not that cheap. Oh, do the windscreen wipers go in opposite directions? That's quite interesting. To be fair I haven't driven the current gen yet but the last one was appalling and last time my FIL visited, he hired an Astra 1.6 and had to take it back and swap it for a Peugeot 3008 diesel because he hated it so much! And he's a GM man, who would rather walk than drive a Ford (or Skoda)! The Corsa is almost as dull but at least it is quite cheap and quite ugly (which is at least a talking point).
I can kind of understand that you might not buy a Ford Focus instead if you don't like the looks but personally, I would find the small premium for a VW Golf or Audi A3 not difficult to justify. Or just buy anything else (Megane, 308, Civic, Leon etc), as at least it's a bit more leftfield and interesting.
For some reason, my Canadian petrolhead friends are clamouring for the Astra in Canada, particularly the VXR model. To be fair, the only model that GM offer in this class in Canada is the Chevrolet Cruze saloon though. Stick a Buick badge on it they say (after all the Buick Regal is merely a rebadged Vauxhall Insignia)! Be careful what you wish for!
Apparently, this is the "sporty" SRi model.
I have the same problem with most Hyundais (I find it hard to picture what any of them look like) but at least they are well-equipped, have a long warranty and you can tell people that they're quite good cars now actually!
What in your opinion is the least "PH" car?
280E said:
Not current, but the Fiat Stilo would be a worthy contender.
I agree. Ever since the ace Tipo and pretty Bravo/Brava, Fiat's C-segment offering has been a bit of a non-entity. The Stilo Estate was also pretty gopping. There was one Stilo that I found endearing though and that was the 5-pot Abarth version. Only 170bhp and probably crap but a good looking and slightly leftfield car. I would be tempted at shed money and probably live to regret it after nothing on it was working after 2 weeks! 
The newer Bravo would also be tempting at the right money. I don't understand why Fiat/Alfa can't make a really good looking, practical small hatchback with some Italian style (the 147 was gorgeous)! Instead we get the rather awkward-looking Giulietta and oh wait... the Bravo quietly went out of production last year!
I rather like the Honda Jazz too, especially the sporty one (not that that is an indication of PHness). It's roomy and practical where most others in the class are small and cramped and it would probably be quite a fun, economical little thing to biff around in! No, the average 18 year old wouldn't be seen dead in one though!
battered said:
I'd like to leap to the defence of the Vauxhall Astra 1.4. Not because it's any sort of driving machine but because it makes a great shed choice. I know very well, I made a profit on mine. Bought it for a staggering £275 and sold it 18 months on for £300, having taken it to France for work for 3 months. It did a sterling job and remains a car for which I have great respect and affection. Here's the rub though - it came to me with the usual collection of receipts, including one for about £2k when it was ~10 yrs old and ~60k miles. At that point I think it offers poor value - little merit over the sheddy version I bought, other than a newer plate, but still an old, grubby, boring car.
I was aiming more specifically at the new Astra 1.4/1.6. I'm guessing yours was a mk3 or 4? My first car was a mk3.5 Astra 1.4 and whilst I wouldn't go as far to say it was a PH car, compared to cars of similar class, age and money was OK. Much nicer than a mk5 Escort, better screwed together than anything French, more reliable than a Rover 200/400 K-Series and I'm not sure if a mk3 Golf was really much better! The mk4 still looked dull but drove surprisingly well (handling tweaked by Lotus?).I have however re-considered my choice and realise that I hadn't really considered any MPVs. My dad bought a new Citroen Xsara Picasso HDi "Desire" back in 2003. Initially I quite liked it. I thought that it was as stylish as a car like that can be (not so sure looking at it again now), it was very spacious and comfortable to ride in. However, when my parents went on holiday, my dad insured me on it so that I could pick them up from the airport. I thought that it might be nice to drive a "new" car for the week instead of my old 205 but my God, was it a horrible thing to drive. None of the controls (steering, accelerator, brake, clutch, gear lever) felt like they were connected to anything and it was quite a challenge to get any performance out of the thing. After 1 day, I went back to driving my 205, picked my parents up from the airport in the 205 and never drove it again!
Also, when I got a job at a Mercedes dealership, the first Mercedes that I drove was one of these:
with a 1.4 petrol and auto box. It was a massive disappointment and in terms of speed, it just seemed to speed up and slow down when it felt like it (the only time that I haven't felt in control of a car)!
I think I will have hit rock bottom PH-wise if I ever own one of these though (Kia Sedona)!
If you have money in the bank and lots of kids then it's not so bad for choice and there are some full-size MPVs that I could probably tolerate (S-MAX, Previa, Sharan) but a Kia MPV? No style, hard plastics, no performance or driving dynamics.
I hate to say it but for that kind of vehicle, the new Sedona does actually look pretty good though!
As much as I dislike the Astra for being so mediocre, I think the three vehicles above are even less "PH"!
Edited by white_goodman on Monday 10th August 17:27
RobM77 said:
perhaps not Sure, they're not to my tastes at all, but a) it's a performance version of a more humble car b) they attract a loyal following and c) they have a competition heritage (or at least the saloon and hatch do). Surely that makes it a very PH car doesn't it?
300bhp/ton said:
FIREBIRDC9 said:
I have one as my daily car.
Its not particularly amazing to drive , I just liked the way it looked.
Its refreshing in a world of dreary grey BMWs that all look the same.
Especially when my PT is in Electric Blue!
It's a shame we never got the exciting engine options in the UK though.Its not particularly amazing to drive , I just liked the way it looked.
Its refreshing in a world of dreary grey BMWs that all look the same.
Especially when my PT is in Electric Blue!
215 hp (160 kW) @ 5000 rpm and 245 lb·ft (332 N·m) @ 3600 rpm (2003–2005)
230 hp (170 kW) @ 5100 rpm and 245 lb·ft (332 N·m) @ 2400 rpm (2006+)
wiki said:
The PT Cruiser GT (also known as the GT Cruiser) is a high output turbocharged variant of the PT Cruiser introduced as a 2003 model. Much like the Dodge Neon SRT-4, the PT Cruiser GT uses the same 2.4L turbocharged I4 engine. The engine is upgraded over the standard PT with improved cooling, oiling, an aluminum cylinder block with steel sleeves, and forged internals. The PT Cruiser GT is much more powerful than the standard model and has the potential to make significantly more power with available and relatively simple performance upgrades. Upgrades such as MOPAR Stage 1 and supporting turbo components are common. Most performance parts from the Dodge NEON SRT-4 are compatible with the PT Cruiser GT.
Are you going to tell us that the Chevy Cobalt SS was the best FWD car ever made too? Something that a Canadian told me with great authority once having never driven any European or Japanese FWD performance cars!
Having nominated it and then others jumping on the Picasso hate wagon, I now feel compelled to defend it. The contemporary Renault Scenic was in all fairness no better and it had a certain Gallic charm (something lacking in most new French cars). I had some very enjoyable sleeps in the back of my dad's Picasso and maintain that it's a fine car as long as you stay well away from the driver's seat!
Things like the Kia Carens/Sedona have absolutely no charm whatsoever though and are totally average in every way. I could probably think of some other older Kias/Hyundais too if I had the inclination but some of them may be comically bad, which has a certain endearing quality!
The most boringly average car that I owned was my mk4.5 VW Polo 1.4 TDI. I had several of these as company cars and then stupidly bought one myself, as I had a limited budget, a long commute and needed something reliable and economical. Apart from being reliable and very economical it was completely beige in every way. Looks, performance, driving, comfort etc. It's the only car that I have owned that I never looked forward to driving!
Perhaps we're going about this the wrong way though. Dropping a ton of money on something pointless might be even less PH! I'm thinking of pointless cars like the 100k Audi Q7 V12 TDI. If you have to spend 100k on an Audi, get an R8. The c. 50k Q7 V6 TDI will do the job just as well/better than this one and spending twice as much on one doesn't really make it any "better".
Likewise the similarly expensive GL/GLS AMG. Is it really worth 34k more than the 350 CDI/Bluetec? Wouldn't 100k on a Mercedes be better spent on an S-Class or AMG GT?
If you have to spend 100k on an SUV, surely it has to be a G-Wagen or a FFRR?
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 19th August 22:24
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 19th August 22:25
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 19th August 22:26
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 19th August 22:27
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 19th August 22:32
RobM77 said:
Ah, I thought it was just another odd choice - we've had a lot on this thread!
I quite like the standard Civic actually - if you don't want good handling or performance then I don't think I've driven a better everyday car.
Thanks. Unfortunately I do! I quite like the standard Civic actually - if you don't want good handling or performance then I don't think I've driven a better everyday car.
Out of interest, are there any modern cars (i.e. within the last 5 years) that you rate for steering Rob?
RobinBanks said:
Those Polos were s
t. Much worse than the equivalent Corsa or Fiesta.
Really?t. Much worse than the equivalent Corsa or Fiesta. 
I'll happily admit that the latest Fiesta is better in every way but the old one? Also, when has the Vauxhall Corsa ever been a good car?
The 1.4 petrol Polo was pretty useless but the 1.2 was a reasonable base engine and VW TDIs are way superior to (and more reliable than) Ford or Vauxhall diesels.
I partly agree with you. The appeal of running a small car to me is low running costs but also fun. More compact, lighter, more chuckable etc. A 5k new mk1 Ford Ka could be fun, so why not a 12k Polo? It wasn't a terrible car but others in its class, Clio, MINI, Suzuki Swift, Mazda 2 and even the Skoda Fabia bizarrely were a lot more fun!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff