Ford Or Vauxhall? Which Is Worse

[SWoll]

Monkeylegend said:

Not an excuse. We all like to think that because we show an interest in cars and post on websites like PH, we are a bit more discerning when it comes to analysing a car in all its aspects.

Most normal people won't care, they want a cheap means of transport and that's what these companies provide.

If I asked my other half what she thought about the plastic dash in her Renault she would most likely want to section me.

I totally agree that its a case of not knowing better most of the time or basing purchasing decisions purely on aesthetics. Again, these reasons have nothing to do with which is the better car as anyone who is willing to hand over thousands of pounds without any thought to comparing the options available to them is an idiot as far as I'm concerned.

Put 100 drivers in an Insignia with no badges and no idea of what it is and then do the same with a Mondeo and I wonder how many would choose the Vauxhall? Same goes for Astra v Focus and Corsa v Fiesta.

Ali_T said:

Kind of depends what era we're talking about. Ford easily won the 70s but seriously dropped the ball in the 80s just as Vauxhall found a little mojo. So much so that people often forget what a laughing stock most Fords were then. The 90s is a draw, but only by virtue of both of them returning to bland mediocrity, and its been more or less a Ford win since then.

But, beyond a handful of halo models, both just produce barely acceptable transport for the masses. And if that's all you want, why not buy Japanese and at least get the pretence of reliability? Or French or Italian and get a modicum of character to accompany tye bits falling off? Because Ford and Vauxhall really aren't any better built than either and are significantly blander. I still stqnd in awe of both manufacturers interiors, wondering who the hell would sign such dreadful design off for production and whether he was too busy walking his guide dog to notice...

90's is a draw? Ford released the Focus and Ka, both of which were game changers in their sectors. When did Vauxhall ever shake up the industry?

I've always found Fords to have a little something that makes the feel like they were designed by someone who at least likes driving. Vauxhalls always feel like they have been designed purely by accountants.

Edited by SWoll on Saturday 5th November 09:45

[lee_erm]

Ali_T said:

But, beyond a handful of halo models, both just produce barely acceptable transport for the masses. And if that's all you want, why not buy Japanese and at least get the pretence of reliability? Or French or Italian and get a modicum of character to accompany tye bits falling off? Because Ford and Vauxhall really aren't any better built than either and are significantly blander.

Find me a bad review of a Fiesta, I'd say the fiesta is more than acceptable. It's certainly not bland either. Volkswagen make bland cars, Ford make cars that are usually at least sharp to drive

Ford is the 5th most reliable manufacturer according to this. I reckon there's a strong correlation between build quality and reliability.

http://www.whatcar.com/news/honda-named-uks-reliab...

Can't say I agree with your comment on character with regards to Italian cars. Chince isn't character, neither is a car that's crap to drive like 99% of mainstream Italia stuff.

Edited by lee_erm on Saturday 5th November 09:44

[Jimmy Recard]

SWoll said:

I totally agree that its a case of not knowing better most of the time or basing purchasing decisions purely on aesthetics. Again, these reasons have nothing to do with which is the better car as anyone who is willing to hand over thousands of pounds without any thought to comparing the options available to them is an idiot as far as I'm concerned.

Put 100 drivers in an Insignia with no badges and no idea of what it is and then do the same with a Mondeo and I wonder how many would choose the Vauxhall? Same goes for Astra v Focus and Corsa v Fiesta.

Having been in all those cars quite a bit, I think I'd have to say the Vauxhalls

[Monkeylegend]

SWoll said:

Monkeylegend said:

Not an excuse. We all like to think that because we show an interest in cars and post on websites like PH, we are a bit more discerning when it comes to analysing a car in all its aspects.

Most normal people won't care, they want a cheap means of transport and that's what these companies provide.

If I asked my other half what she thought about the plastic dash in her Renault she would most likely want to section me.

I totally agree that its a case of not knowing better most of the time or basing purchasing decisions purely on aesthetics. Again, these reasons have nothing to do with which is the better car as anyone who is willing to hand over thousands of pounds without any thought to comparing the options available to them is an idiot as far as I'm concerned.

Put 100 drivers in an Insignia with no badges and no idea of what it is and then do the same with a Mondeo and I wonder how many would choose the Vauxhall? Same goes for Astra v Focus and Corsa v Fiesta.

But it's all subjective, what you like and think is better is not the same as me most likely, so I don't think it is a simple as saying Ford is better than Vauxhall or vice versa.

People who buy Ford, for whatever reason, and it could purely be based on cost, looks, they live nearer to a Ford dealership for example, presumably use these reasons for their choice, so to them the Ford is a better buying proposition. That doesn't make it any better or worse than Vauxhall.

There will also be financial considerations which make one a better buy, so it's not all about the dynamics or perceived quality of each.

[Jimmy Recard]

Monkeylegend said:

But it's all subjective, what you like and think is better is not the same as me most likely, so I don't think it is a simple as saying Ford is better than Vauxhall or vice versa.

People who buy Ford, for whatever reason, and it could purely be based on cost, looks, they live nearer to a Ford dealership for example, presumably use these reasons for their choice, so to them the Ford is a better buying proposition. That doesn't make it any better or worse than Vauxhall.

There will also be financial considerations which make one a better buy, so it's not all about the dynamics or perceived quality of each.

Spot on for me. I bought my used Vauxhall in February of this year. In my opinion it was a handsome, comfortable car that is fairy cheap to run, nice to drive and cheap to buy.

I say that a Focus would be more fun to race down a twisty road, but didn't meet what I wanted/needed from the car quite as well as the Astra. A Golf would've been suitable, but more expensive to buy and I preferred the styling of the Vauxhall.

There are personal and pragmatic reasons there and I think it's easy to see how they're justified, although I dot have to justify them.

[s m]

Agreed Jimmy - seems to be like the 'recommend me a fun car' question?

It is very hard to know what someone considers to be fun and whether they'd find Car A or Car B more fun

Everyone's idea differs slightly ( or markedly in some cases )

[Jimmy Recard]

s m said:

Agreed Jimmy - seems to be like the 'recommend me a fun car' question?

It is very hard to know what someone considers to be fun and whether they'd find Car A or Car B more fun

Everyone's idea differs slightly ( or markedly in some cases )

Exactly - everyone has different preferences and priorities. Just because one person dislikes Vauxhalls or Toyotas or Skodas doesn't mean that that car won't suit another better than its rivals.

The Astra wasn't on my final shortlist when I bought it (that was a Saab 93 Aero and mk5 Golf GTI) but when I stumbled across the ad, I realised it was ideal for what I wanted

[coppice]

Ali_T said:

But, beyond a handful of halo models, both just produce barely acceptable transport for the masses. .

Barely acceptable? Most mass produced cars are pretty much of a muchness and by any standard of the past are hugely competent. All will run at illegal speeds without issue , all have more grip and braking than most ever need and few need frequent servicing. And they use half the fuel their predecessors did as well as being far ,far safer in a shunt .Tell us how much more superior your daily driver is and why - and why you don't belong to the 'masses' , as you contemptously term most people. Amazing taste , Croesus level riches ?

[layercake]

I don't know lads, both are about the same, however 10 years ago i had a Mondeo mk3 which was replaced with Vectra which I preferred, the ride seemed to be better as if it was on rails, cut to 2016 i had the new Mondeo mk5 its one big beast or as her in doors called it a 'great big space ship' ! however for some reason i did find myself starting to like it

[iSore]

SWoll said:

Rubbish., Driven plenty over the years, including GSi/VXR models of Astra, Vectra, Insignia, Omega, Zafira and have all been poor at best. Also driven a lot of Fords over the same period and they are far superior in every way IME.

Currently have the 'pleasure' of driving a 66 plate Insignia hire car whilst waiting for my new company car. Did 6 hours and 300 miles in it today and it was an utterly hateful experience.

My FIL has always been a Vauxhall man, right up until he got a job a couple of years ago where he gets to drive a lot of different marques on a daily basis. Funnily enough he's just bought himself a 16 Plate Mondeo 'Vignale' Estate as a retirement present to himslef and will apparently "never touch another Vauxhall with a bargepole". Says it all IMHO.

I had a 2.0 diesel Insignia in 2012 for 6 weeks as a courtesy hire car after a non fault accident. Once I'd got used to that sodding EPB and sharp clutch, I found it to be a perfectly decent car. I've hired plenty of Vauxhall over the years - the current and previous generation Astras have always been decent cars. My ex neighbour is on his fourth consecutive problem free Zafira.


GM stuff is perfectly good, as is Ford.

[GroundEffect]

Nanook said:

gazza285 said:

B'stard Child said:

SWoll said:

Never driven a Cav. First Vauxhall experiences where in a friends 2.5 V6 GSi Vectra (rock hard suspension, axle tramp, heavy and dull steering, notchy gearbox, not very quick) and my FIL's Calibra Turbo (so disappointing as loved the way it looked, and a world away from the similarly 4x4, 2.0 Turbo Impreza I bough a little later).

Confused!!!

Spot on on most of the rest mind

Apparently the wheel hopping of a FWD is also called axle tramp, I have no idea why...

Axle tramp is something that occurs on live axles. Something a Vecra most certainly does not have on the front!

It's Wheel Hop in a FWD car. That's what it's called in the industry.

[henrycrun]

Any preferences for Ford Automatics v Vauxhall Automatics ?

[ANJ91]

I drive the latest Vauxhall Astra and there is nothing that I really dislike about it. Maybe the driving position isn't the best.

It's a 1.4 turbo petrol with 150 bhp, under 8 seconds to 60 and 40mpg average.

I am not very attached to it as it's just a lease I will hand back after 2 years but I can't really fault it especially for the price.

All my family and friends complimented me on the car (probably because it was new) but I definitely see why someone wouldn't want to drive a Vauxhall though. It's just good value for money.

I am looking forward to what the new Astra VXR is going to be like too.

[Pommygranite]

Could never get on with the writing font Vauxhall/GM/Holden use in all their cars so am a Ford man.

[camhasnoname]

The current Corsa with a CVT box is the only car I have ever got travel sick in whilst actually driving it. It was pretty much brand new and I suspect the horrific smell of plastics didn't help.

That said, I can't say that I'm particularly fond of Ford's current crop either.

[qska]

How about if we add Skoda into the mix - how do you think it places itself compared to Ford/Vauxhall??

Speaking of boring st boxes - I guess the VW Golf must be one of the mega boring, dull, dreary ones, plus Skodas before 2013 (the new ones are marginally easier on the eyes).

[Frankthered]

coppice said:

Barely acceptable? Most mass produced cars are pretty much of a muchness and by any standard of the past are hugely competent. All will run at illegal speeds without issue , all have more grip and braking than most ever need and few need frequent servicing. And they use half the fuel their predecessors did as well as being far ,far safer in a shunt.

This is very true; it's very difficult to find a really bad car these days, certainly compared with vehicles from the past. Almost everything is competent these days, so what people (and journalists in particular) have to focus on to differentiate between them is really details. What makes a car "good" now is whether or not it is appealing and that appeal may take many different forms. It may be more fun to drive than its rivals, more frugal with fuel, have retro styling, modern styling, have more space than its rivals, be more reliable, have a well appointed interior, or indeed just have a perception of quality and reliability.

This is Vauxhall's problem, really; they don't have a niche, or at least not one that they exploit well. They've spent the last 20+ years making cars that are ok, no great appeal other than being competent and average. (With a couple of notable exceptions, of course.)

Many cars that are average in many ways are very successful because they are appealing.

[powerstroke]

qska said:

How about if we add Skoda into the mix - how do you think it places itself compared to Ford/Vauxhall??

Speaking of boring st boxes - I guess the VW Golf must be one of the mega boring, dull, dreary ones, plus Skodas before 2013 (the new ones are marginally easier on the eyes).

Place them just but only just under Audi which is the current leader of the white goods cars ....

[Jimmy Recard]

Pommygranite said:

Could never get on with the writing font Vauxhall/GM/Holden use in all their cars so am a Ford man.

Funnily enough, I'm the opposite. It's one of the few things I dislike about Fords

[coppice]

qska said:

Speaking of boring st boxes - I guess the VW Golf must be one of the mega boring, dull, dreary ones, plus Skodas before 2013 (the new ones are marginally easier on the eyes).

This possibly says more about you than it does about Golfs ; they seem to be fit for more people's purposes than just about anything else , and have done so since the 70s. Ubiquity can encourage contempt but having owned lots over the years , from Mk 1 Gti on, they might have never set my trousers on fire like my Seven can but I wouldn't want them to. Competence doesn't mean boring or dull.