French cars - Failing MOTs

[hdi_man]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

French cars top the list. Citroen is number 3 !!

funnily enough my 3 yr old C5 failed its 1st MOT....there is no way a car should be doing that after a full dealer service history.

POORLY BUILT

the stats are there for all too see, if you want reliability buy Japanese

[robert_e_smart]

Hardly conclusive.

What it does show is that people don't prepare their car for MOT tests, rather than the cars themselves are poor.

If people ensured that their lights all worked, and they had no blown bulbs, legal rubber, then it would be a different story.

[hdi_man]

OK, what about this...

http://good-garage-guide.honestjohn.co.uk/mot/citroen" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

12.8% of Citroen MOT failures for suspension !!
11.1% for breaks.

compare this to Honda...

[addo]

I cannot speak for how they fare in a European climate, but my observations of newer Japanese engineered and built cars as presented in Oz, is...

They are thoroughly engineered to last the warranty period and a bit, with a degree of vagueness in servicing allowed for. After several years and towards 280K (say 170K miles) it depends much more on how well they have been looked after, as to how good they are.

Note that my comments exclude Japanese designs actually built elsewhere, such as Asia or Oceania. They are borne from diagnosing and fixing sh*t in a workshop, not from reading journalese.

I don't feel that overall they are designed for "large module" servicing so well as European cars (ie; replacement of a steering rack or clutch). Nor do they cope well with the absolute neglect lavished on them by some deadhead owners, such as 20K+ oil changes. However, such vagaries of maintenance lead at times to interesting displays of car character, which perhaps lifts them above the numbing sameness I feel piloting many.

[SaabC5]

Having watched cars being MOT'd for years (friend is a VOSA tester) i'm totally shocked by how many people hand over the keys to their cars without so much as a cursory glance at its basic features. Blown bulbs, bald tyres and knackered wiper blades are the norm, it takes but a few minutes to check these basic things BEFORE submitting a car for a ticket. The other one is the "rubbish cart" car that has the detritus of 28 McDonalds meals scattered all over the interior, if thats how the owner treats their car then it stands to reason its going to be poorly maintained and a likely fail. A quick wash and vac goes a long way to show you are a carefull car owner.

[robert_e_smart]

The GB MOT system doesn't encourage MOT preparation though. You pay your fee, and are entitled to a free re-test after failure items have been rectified. Many will go in with the attitude of lets see whats on the list, rather than lets pass.

In Northern Ireland the MOT centres are Government owned and run. The test fee is £30.50, a retest is £18.50. With our system there is incentive to pass the test first time round rather than fail and be lumbered with a re-test fee. My motto is, I'd rather give the local garage a tenner to set the headlamp aim, than give the Govt £20 odd quid on a re-test for failing on something simple like this.

The other advantage of our system, is that they test centres have no vested interest in selling you replacement tyres, or charging you for remedial work on failed items.

[addo]

Wait until it's privatised and there becomes a vested interested in failing cars over a certain age.

[Northern_Mike]

Wait until it's privatised and there becomes a vested interested in failing cars over a certain age.

It almost is already. There are testing centres that are also garages...

I take mine to two old boys who run a testing-only place. They're good and have no reason to fail anything. Most people don't know that there are also local authority run MOT testing stations in most towns - used for council vehicles and such. You can take your car to one of these without danger of being stiffed.

Last year a friend of mine took her 406 HDI to a local garage/tester. It failed - a suspension arm, emissions, a balljoint and a cracked anti-roll bar. I had a look at it and couldn't actually see anything wrong with it - there wasn't even visible smoke. They quoted her £550 to repair it.

I took it to a well known Citroen/Peugeot specialist in Slough, who took it to his MOT man. It passed with no work at all. He charged me for a test.

I did go back to the original garage with the pass cert and ask for a refund of the test fee, or I would report them to Vosa. They paid up. I reported them anyway.

[steelcityuk]

"The most common reasons were lighting and signalling (164,837 failures), followed closely by tyres (96,760 failures), headlight aim (82,555 failures) and issues with the driver’s view of the road (80,605 failures)."

"European manufacturers are at the bottom of the table for first MoT failures. The worst performer, Renault, was followed by the British-built MINI, with Citroen taking third from bottom place."

Well my take on this is, that the lighting and signalling fails are lazyness and bulbs blow. Tyres wear on any car. Headlamp aim, mearly changing a bulb will alter this as will suspension wear and tear. Drivers view of the road presumably means chipped windscreens (my Prius has a chip in the windscreen). Non of theses things point to build quality to me. But the cars are likely to cheaply bought, run on a budget and not cared for.

The Mini in second place. I've never liked them so I'm biased but I think they're over priced badly designed crap. I'll take a Mk2 Cooper S 1275 any day failing that a 1275 GT Clubman with RC40 fitted.

Steve.

[Xaccers]

Binis are badly built, BiL's has been in the garage more often than not, and at 4-5 years old was suffering from rust!
Also driven by people who think they are cute, the sort who don't know that an engine needs oil and take their car to the garage to fill up the screenwash.

[ashy90]

Also driven by people who think they are cute, the sort who don't know that an engine needs oil and take their car to the garage to fill up the screenwash.

I would have to agree with that! lol

[HDI]

Cars suffer from the appliance mentality syndrome now. Owners see a 20k service interval and think they can just ignore the car for this mileage !!
Well maybe for the first 20 or even 40k thats survivable but if they just got into the habit of looking under the bonnet every other week, even to check the oil, there would be fewer problems.

[addo]

Owning anything with the Alfa "Twin Spark" motor, will teach you to check the oil weekly. It likes a drop!

[Napoleon]

My new-to-me VSX passed its MoT today - and I had no idea of its provenance, really.

But I have had the height corrector replaced and bothered to check the lights and fuses all worked, tyres are good. But there had to be an element of 'put it in for test and see what comes out', in this case, as I don't really know the car, unlike my TD hatch, of course.

I didn't have to do much on the VSX beyond replace a rear windscreen wiper blade and a couple of fuses.

Great cars, these Xantia, doubt you'll persuade me to buy anything else!

[citronut]

maybe citroens fail on suspension because the average MOT tester aint got a clue wht they are looking at/for,

regards malcolm