Northern_Mike wrote:jacksun1987 wrote:I hate the look of new cars. They look like bubbles on wheels. 1980s 1990s cars look solid.
New cars look like bubbles on wheels for a reason. They're safe and strong.
There's aspects of the styling that affect the crashability (or vice-versa) - small windows and thick pillars, huge front overhangs, general bulk - but styling has ALWAYS gone in cyclical phases. Look at the average normalmobiles from any era, and they'll bear a strong resemblance in general shape. It goes back years. When it comes down to it, it takes a brave manufacturer to put something into production that's really DIFFERENT, and - on the whole - they tend not to sell well as volume cars. As niche models, they can, with the right badge, but then with the right badge damn near ANYTHING will sell well. (1-series, anybody?) Even Audi proved the badge doesn't make you invincible, when they took a bath with the rather clever and laudable A2.
411514 wrote:Why is the C5 hated so much. I've had mine now for almost 4 years, in that time its has not failed to start once.
Wanted for nothing other than basic servicing and consumables (droplinks/balljoints/brakes). Not a spot of rust
on it despite being 10 years old and after a wash looks perfectly smart and modern. I have had a xantia in the
family in the past and find the C5 much more spacious inside and a more refined/smooth drive. Only the 110hdi
engine but perfectly spritely, couldn't want for more great on the motorway.
You could have easily described a <stifles yawn> Toyota there. If that's the best you can find to say in its favour, then Xac is bob-on with...
Xac wrote:It is dull as dish water basically.
jacksun1987 wrote:I think what puts me off is the electrics in the c5.
Yes, and no. It's a general build quality thing. When I was running a very late CX GTi as a daily, in the very late '90s - 70k in three years, taking it to 180k - the problems with it were expensive "hard stuff" mechanical maintenance and repairs. All of those jobs were a PITA to do, and were expensive as a result. When I replaced it with an XM, the problems weren't basic mechanics. They were death-by-a-thousand-papercuts things. Lots of niggly stuff, usually down to cost-cutting, corner-cutting plastic parts a bit too flimsy for the long-term job. They were a PITA to do, and were expensive as a result.
It's entirely possible for electronics to be reliable. Sure, not in the same league as even a Mk1 C5, but neither the CX nor XM were electrically simple, and - on the whole - those aspects were reliable. It's just the cheese-paring that stops them being reliable. And the sheer impossibility of repairing when parts are unavailable, or even diagnosing and repairing without specialist kit that is itself getting old and flaky. Am I right, Lexia-owners?