RE: Service History: In an ordinary world

[GIYess]

C70R said:

MC Bodge said:

C70R said:

God, I absolutely despair.
Those of you who think that the Mk4 Astra was a "good handling" car need help. It's not even in the top 50% of all-time "good handling cars". Can we please stop talking such absolute tripe.

In common with many of the other 'connoisseurs' on PH, you sound a bit silly.

I'm not a connoisseur by any means, and you don't have to be some sort of expert to know that the cooking mk4 Astra definitely didn't "handle like a dream". I had several as hire cars (with a variety of engines) back in the early noughties, and I remember absolutely nothing remarkable about the way they drove. Bearing in mind I was an impressionable early-20-something with little experience at the time, I'm sure I would have been very easy to impress. Most contemporary roadtests seemed to agree with me too. Even Parkers could only find the following 'praise' to heap on it:

Parkers said:

There are more thrills to be had with Astra than some other cars in its class.

PH is notorious for rewriting history for the sake of emphasising how terrible cars are "these days", and so much sh*te is spouted around this kind of thing that it deserves to be called out.

You obviously have a bee in your bonnet. Ok I have already corrected myself. Maybe "handles like a dream" was not the right word but it was a decent handling car compared to other cars of that period and some I have driven since. Obviously I was not comparing it to something like a Bugatti Veyron or some other super car.

Good Grief man just take a breath and calm down. There will be plenty more things in life to get your blood pressure raised than a stranger on the internet taking a fond look back at an old car.

[C70R]

My blood pressure is perfectly fine. I just get fed up of dross, hyperbolic posting that rewrites history to support the "everything was better in my day" PH cliche. It's totally unnecessary - you could have just said the Astra was "good to drive", but you had to go all Clarkson.

[MC Bodge]

C70R said:

My blood pressure is perfectly fine. I just get fed up of dross, hyperbolic posting that rewrites history to support the "everything was better in my day" PH cliche. It's totally unnecessary - you could have just said the Astra was "good to drive", but you had to go all Clarkson.

You do appear to be getting a little agitated about this.

Fwiw, I would say that cars had come on massively in the 90s. Handling, roadholding, braking and reliability / user friendliness of ordinary cars had increased massively over most of those from the 1970s and 1980s (and some that continued in the 90s) rather than just a gentle improvement.

The legal requirements to comply with were less onerous too.

[uncler]

Mr Tidy said:

I bought a 2 seat sports car in 2014, but needed something vaguely sensible for daily duties.

So I bought a 1996 Mazda 323f with just over 60K miles, but some scrapes on the bodywork (I think the previous owners may have been pensioners on the South Coast)! Being the 1,500 cc model it was in the cheap road tax bracket and had a non-interference engine - just in case the cam-belt snapped!

It drove just fine, smooth and comfortable albeit a bit roly-poly in the handling department! But it was so slow! So I replaced it with an E46 325ti after 6 months (more than twice the power was a big attraction)!

But other than that the Mazda was a great car! Central locking, electric windows in the front, A/C - that's all I really need!

I too used to have one of these with the same 1.5 engine. It was great actually and compared to other cars of that generation it looked fantastic too.

In fact, just yesterday I picked up a 2015 Mazda 3 fastback in Sport Nav trim with the 2.0 120hp petrol engine - like a modern day equivalent of the old 323F. It feels wonderful to drive, despite me coming from a car with over twice the power. Lovely gear change, good ride quality despite the sport trim. It feels light, nimble, connected. All the qualities I used to love in the 80's and 90's cars I used to own. Its not even embarrassingly slow (although a 165hp version of the same engine can also be had for a bit more punch). I felt right at home in it after about 30 seconds of driving, compared to other recent cars I've driven where it takes time to become accustomed to the feel of the machine.

I would urge anyone wanting to experience the (good bits) of how an older car feels, to give the Mazda 3 a go. Petrol versions only though I expect!

[aaron_2000]

C70R said:

but you had to go all Clarkson.

Say's the guy massively overreacting to absolutely nothing?

[C70R]

MC Bodge said:

C70R said:

My blood pressure is perfectly fine. I just get fed up of dross, hyperbolic posting that rewrites history to support the "everything was better in my day" PH cliche. It's totally unnecessary - you could have just said the Astra was "good to drive", but you had to go all Clarkson.

You do appear to be getting a little agitated about this.

Honestly, I'm not.
Being fed up of reading repetitive, hyperbolic dross being posted on the internet (and calling people out on it) does not equate to increased blood pressure or agitation...

[C70R]

uncler said:

a 2015 Mazda 3 fastback ... wonderful to drive ... light, nimble, connected

Oh Lord, I despair. I'm just going to exit this thread quietly, and leave everyone to talk utter b*llocks about exceptionally ordinary cars.

[aaron_2000]

C70R said:

MC Bodge said:

C70R said:

My blood pressure is perfectly fine. I just get fed up of dross, hyperbolic posting that rewrites history to support the "everything was better in my day" PH cliche. It's totally unnecessary - you could have just said the Astra was "good to drive", but you had to go all Clarkson.

You do appear to be getting a little agitated about this.

Honestly, I'm not.
Being fed up of reading repetitive, hyperbolic dross being posted on the internet (and calling people out on it) does not equate to increased blood pressure or agitation...

Absolutely seems like you're getting salty tbf

[SidewaysSi]

80-90s cars were in my opinion pretty much the pinacle.

Yes there was some bad cars but the great stuff is very probably better than today's cars if you enjoy driving, particularly on road in the UK and value the physical interaction with the car.

Don't think that is a particularly contentious view.

[GIYess]

As I clearly know nothing about how cars drive I can say one thing I doubt anyone could deny. The 90s/00s were definitely the pinnacle of reliability.

[MC Bodge]

C70R said:

uncler said:

a 2015 Mazda 3 fastback ... wonderful to drive ... light, nimble, connected

Oh Lord, I despair. I'm just going to exit this thread quietly, and leave everyone to talk utter b*llocks about exceptionally ordinary cars.

Probably for the best

[jagnet]

GIYess said:

As I clearly know nothing about how cars drive I can say one thing I doubt anyone could deny. The 90s/00s were definitely the pinnacle of reliability.

Having recently replaced the last of the four ABS sensors on Mrs Jagnet's '97 A3, I'm a little disappointed that they've only lasted ~20 years. That's the trouble with modern driver aids and reliability

It may be old but I've tried to keep her car in fine fettle mechanically. Last week it sailed through another MOT with no advisories.

Around town and on country roads it's a pleasure to drive thanks to its diminutive size and weight.

[anonymous-user]

GIYess said:

one thing I doubt anyone could deny. The 90s/00s were definitely the pinnacle of reliability.

The hey-day of TVR.
You might find it interesting to have a chat with some Range Rover owners.
Or perhaps with anyone who's been within 1,000 miles of a Rover K-series engine.

[legless]

rockin said:

The hey-day of TVR.
You might find it interesting to have a chat with some Range Rover owners.
Or perhaps with anyone who's been within 1,000 miles of a Rover K-series engine.

Or someone who's owned a PSA XUD that threw a rod through the block, or any owner of a Nissan Navara D22, or anyone who's experienced sudden disintegration of a plastic pulley on a GM Ecotec engine.

It's fair to say that modern cars are more complex than ever, but aside from BMW N47 timing chains I've not heard of a mainstream modern engine having issues with self-destructing.

[CABC]

K series was a fantastic engine, especially in an Elise.
hgr was the famous problem, best mitigated by careful warm up / cool down. if it did fail, then spend a few hundred to fix a classic light, free-revving engine.

[anonymous-user]

CABC said:

K series was a fantastic engine, especially in an Elise.
hgr was the famous problem, best mitigated by careful warm up / cool down. if it did fail, then spend a few hundred to fix a classic light, free-revving engine.

An engine that's "fantastic after it's been rebuilt" falls a very long way short of most people's definition of a fantastic engine.

[MC Bodge]

CABC said:

K series was a fantastic engine, especially in an Elise.
hgr was the famous problem, best mitigated by careful warm up / cool down. if it did fail, then spend a few hundred to fix a classic light, free-revving engine.

I remember my friend's Dad getting a new Rover 214GSI (G Reg?) It seemed amazingly advanced and fast compared with with the Escorts and Astras that most Dads around there (Merseyside) were driving around in at the time, if they weren't in Cavaliers or Sierras.

[rastapasta]

legless said:

rockin said:

The hey-day of TVR.
You might find it interesting to have a chat with some Range Rover owners.
Or perhaps with anyone who's been within 1,000 miles of a Rover K-series engine.

Or someone who's owned a PSA XUD that threw a rod through the block, or any owner of a Nissan Navara D22, or anyone who's experienced sudden disintegration of a plastic pulley on a GM Ecotec engine.

It's fair to say that modern cars are more complex than ever, but aside from BMW N47 timing chains I've not heard of a mainstream modern engine having issues with self-destructing.

I worked on XUD's back in the day and never heard of this. They were good for black smoke north of 100k but very easy to work on and parts were dirt cheap. you could buy them in supermarkets in france.

[GIYess]

- Nissan Primeras
- K11 micra
- Most Hondas from that era
- Mercedes (While not perfect still pretty good)
- Pug 306 Turbo diesel
- VW Golf MK4/caddy vans
- Any PD engine VWs/Skodas
- Pug 405/6

The list goes on. Yes again you can pick holes on particular vehicles like landrover, but overall in that list is a level of reliability we will not see again with all the emission equip etc now.

[havoc]

I think the key point here isn't the handling of these cars necessarily (although all 306/406 handled very well by anyone's standard, as did the Mk1 Focus and the EG/EK-series Civics).

It's the control interaction, the feedback, and the ride/handling balance (back when Jaguar hadn't followed the Germans into overly-stiff ride for the hell of it).
- Hydraulic PAS, or even no PAS
- Throttle cables rather than "sportily mapped" DBW that sometimes feels more like an on/off switch
- Sensible brake servos not over-aggressive VAG ones
- Less NVH, meaning more of the road-surface made it through to your (sadly possibly velour) seat
- Taller sidewalls giving both a much better secondary ride (the main issue with the ride in modern cars - damping technology has improved over time), and giving a little more progression in the break-away
- Lack of ESP requiring engineers to actually tune a chassis, and lack of nanny-state permitting even humdrum hatchbacks to exhibit lift-off-oversteer on demand (or not, if you were clumsy!)
- Mainly nat-asp engines not turbos, so those smaller tyres weren't overwhelmed with torque and you could use that longer-travel accelerator pedal more precisely.


The issue with modern cars is partly weight, but it's more a mix of technology (led by legislation) and image/marketing
- image and marketing want you to buy the big, blingy wheels with no sidewalls and a st secondary ride that can't deal with potholes. And they want you to think that stiff = sporty, as that means their engineers can spend less time and money on dampers and damper development.
- ...and technology finding unwanted answers to (often emissions) questions - DBW is more fuel efficient, but very few companies spend the time (money) to map the throttle pedal well. Turbos are more fuel efficient, and turbos mapped for maximum low-down torque even more so on the bench (unlike the real-world), which doubles the DBW issue. EPAS also removes a parasitic drain on the engine, for even less CO2.