The most reliable cars!

This is the place for posts that don't fit into any other category.

Moderator: RichardW

User avatar
Honda
Posts: 35
Joined: 21 Mar 2006, 17:48
Location: France
My Cars:

Post by Honda »

Well, if we go digging in ANY country history, we will sure find ages of darkness. Under that logic, british shouldn't buy french cars since England and France have been at war and the french aren't highly regarded... Neither should french buy british cars since they still have a Queen. Neither Americans should buy Jap since that's bad for US economy. And so on.

Decca, what the hell do you want chassis dynamics in a Citroen?! It only makes sense in performance cars.

Renault, Peugeot and Citroen business is to build economical and cheap cars for the poor, not performance cars.

Now, a performance Honda NSX, BMW M6, Aston Martin DB9, etc, will need good chassis dynamics, to explore their muscle.
Homer
Posts: 1503
Joined: 26 Feb 2003, 10:52
Location: Yorkshire
My Cars: Current:
Volvo V60 D4 180

Previous:
BX16RS (two of),
BX19TZI,
Xantia 2.0i saloon,
Xantia 2.0 Exclusive CT turbo Break,
Peugeot 807 2.0 HDi 110,
Renault Grand Scenic, 2.0 diesel (150bhp)
C5 X7 2.0 HDi 160 which put me off French cars possibly forever
x 16

Post by Homer »

Paul Mi16 wrote:I had a relative who was a prisoner of war held by the Japanese. After describing his experiences about the Burma railroad my concious could never allow me to buy a Japanese car no matter how reliable they are. Shame too many people forget or choose to ignore this....
If you were going to have that attitude there wouldn't be many cars left for you to buy.

BMW, VW, Porsche, Audi, Mercedes - Nazi concentration camps.

Citroen, Peugeot, Renault - who can forgive them for helping the Americans in the war of independance.

Seat - nobody expected the Spanish Inquisition. :lol:

In fact you'd be hard pressed to find a country we have not had at least a couple of wars with, never mind one which manufactures cars.

I hate to tell you but nearly all the Japanese who committed those war crimes are dead, and those who aren't are certainly not building cars.
Sturdybloke
Posts: 191
Joined: 04 Dec 2005, 01:19
Location:
My Cars:

Post by Sturdybloke »

I can see this topic becoming locked again.....


And just to be a bit patriotic, I have a car that was assembled by some brummies. Well, assembled by some robots with a brummie accent annyhow :lol: .
User avatar
matt
Posts: 139
Joined: 09 Mar 2005, 03:34
Location: United Kingdom,Chesterfield.
My Cars:

Post by matt »

Honda wrote:
Decca, what the hell do you want chassis dynamics in a Citroen?! It only makes sense in performance cars.
When i were a lad i (15 yrs ago)i first started driving fords,escorts etc,then i wanted more power so turned to vauxhalls then brilliant 2.0 litre xe 16v lump,i thought all these cars were brilliant.I then took a 205 gti for a test drive and bought it(in 1996)

Only then did i realise just how badly other cars handled/drove,i had discovered steering feel/feedback/poise/grip.brilliant.

I love driving and i love being involved in the experience of it too.

So,we do need chassis dynamics,thanks,matt.
92 205 1.9 GTI(MODIFIED,SORRY )
1996 VOLVO 850 2.5 5CYL 10V
1999 EXPERT VAN TD - WHITE !
No more car's thanks!
User avatar
reblack68
Posts: 1047
Joined: 11 Feb 2004, 01:28
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by reblack68 »

Paul Mi16 wrote:I had a relative who was a prisoner of war held by the Japanese. After describing his experiences about the Burma railroad my concious could never allow me to buy a Japanese car no matter how reliable they are. Shame too many people forget or choose to ignore this....
You'd be hard pressed to find an industrialised country without a shameful history. Certainly not the UK or France, they both spent several centuries rampaging around the world.

Honda- you don't need a performance car, or even to drive fast, to benefit from good chassis dynamics. A car with a good chassis is easier to drive, more comfortable and safer than one with a mediocre chassis. Only the French consistently achieve good roadholding and a good ride.
Richard

No French cars of my own at present.
Care of a 1994 205 D.
User avatar
fastandfurryous
Posts: 1388
Joined: 07 Jul 2004, 17:57
Location: On the road, travelling at high speed. Meep Meep.
My Cars:
x 4

Post by fastandfurryous »

Honda wrote:Decca, what the hell do you want chassis dynamics in a Citroen?! It only makes sense in performance cars.

Renault, Peugeot and Citroen business is to build economical and cheap cars for the poor, not performance cars.
I hate to say it, but that attitude is a load of rubbish.

If that were true, we'd still all be driving cars with the handling of a 1970's Austin Maxi. (which makes a shopping trolley look good)

And I believe you might want to use the word "masses" rather than "poor" in your statement. It's somewhat less rude.
This is not a signature.
User avatar
Honda
Posts: 35
Joined: 21 Mar 2006, 17:48
Location: France
My Cars:

Post by Honda »

Yes that's what I meant - "masses". Sorry for my english.

French automobile industry targets the masses.

Although being national cars, rich frenchmen do not buy those cars.
Decca
Posts: 20
Joined: 04 Mar 2006, 10:54
Location: Canberra / Australia
My Cars:

Post by Decca »

Good chassis dynamics makes a car predictable in its handling, responsive to driver input and more importantly safer. When the going gets rough or when a tricky situation comes up... this is where the better chassis design will keep you out of trouble.

one example of a "problem" with the a honda a couple of years ago when a magazine did a comparison road test with a Peugeot ( cant remember the specific models off the top of my head) was that the Honda's road holding deteriorated quickly when the road got rough because the sleek low body shape at the front didnt allow for long spring travel.
Shape over Functionality????


Decca
405SRi, 306XT, 406HDi
Past: 403, 504GL, R12GL, 406ST
James.UK
Posts: 1169
Joined: 14 Dec 2003, 23:12
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:
x 2

Post by James.UK »

I still think that the Cit ZX 1.9 diesel pre 1994 facelift was one of the most reliable cars ever built. :D After 14 years, mine is still in better condition and more reliable than some two year old cars on the road when I first started driving... The fact that there doesn't seem to be a comparable replacement for it is a worry though, :? but still, my ZX will probably be around long after I have gone!! lol.. :lol:

I too, can remember taking the head of all cars at about 30,000 miles for a decoke and lapping the valves in again, cars going by with the big or small ends rattling like a banshee was a common sound. Points used to break almost on a daily basis if you got a bad batch. Plugs fouled up overnight, tyres and batteries went down while you popped into a shop for a paper. Rust holes appeared all over the car within six months of buying, mainly due to it being stuffed with paper and covered in body filler by the previous owner.. Anyone remember the Ford mk 4 "Dagenham dusbin"?? I think they were built with huge rust holes in the boot!! lol.. The Ford Zodiac I had used to go up on two wheels if you cornered too fast, and they all rolled over very easily because of those dreadfull crossply tyres we had. They really were awfull compared to what we have available today.

I repeat, the ZX I have is as reliable as any car can be.. Honda? Tuhh! lmho.. :lol: :lol: :lol:
.
James. (Nr M67 East of Manchester).
Dark Blue ZX 1.9D Auto 1994 'L' 5 dr (modified) Aura. 98K miles used daily. Ave mpg 40
Wedgewood Blue 75 CTD auto Connoissaur. 2002. 144k. used daily. ave mpg 40 ish.
Post Reply