7 seater advice

kidcat

We had a renault espace for two years that spent more time in the garage than we did driving it. It got so bad I refused to drive it and bought a small car to run kids to school in and left the espace parked up until it was p/xed. We now have a Fiat 8 seater that is a very reliable work horse, its a diesel and works about 33mpg on short runs but can hit 50mpg on a long run. Have spent very little on it and can honestly say that while its not the most attractive car out there its reliablility and practicality far outweigh its looks.
We moved house almost entirely using it. When all the seats are in its got good luggage space too, I always carry at least two prams - sometimes a double buggy as well as the other two and still have room for my shopping.

Its major plus point over the Galaxy/Sharan is that the back doors slide open which means that even in a very tight car park space I can always get the car seats/kids in easily.

Friend has a Zafira and its great as a normal car with a couple of occassional seats but if you need 7 seats all the time you really will need a full size MPV instead.

Rolandtheroadie

AdrianHi wrote: »

The car less reliable than a Grand Voyager (as determined by an index of repair cost vs. fault frequency) is a Jeep, which is another vehicle from the same group. In fact you would be better off with a Peugeot, Citroen or Renault.
Friends have one, they only do 4000 miles a year, it's 4 years old. If you count number of garage visits over the miles covered, if I had this vehicle on my annual mileage it would be in the garage 3 to 4 times a year for repairs alone. Unacceptable. Don't get me started on father in laws Jeep...:(

Cant argue with that but I looked at everything I could (with the exception of the seating arrangement of a grand espace) and found it was what I needed.
Even with the rear seats fully back, I can fit in the double buggy or enough luggage for the 6 of us for a week away.
As I do most of the repairs myself and have always had a weak spot for problematic cars (fan of Rover) I tend to just take my chances.

alleycat`

Not suggesting you might crash but i wouldn't put a dog (or anything else for that matter) in a old grand voyager (circa 6 or 7 years old).

I think it got a crash rating of about 1 star!

Rolandtheroadie

alleycat` wrote: »

Not suggesting you might crash but i wouldn't put a dog (or anything else for that matter) in a old grand voyager (circa 6 or 7 years old).

I think it got a crash rating of about 1 star!

3 stars reduced to 2 due to poor performance in a frontal impact apparently. As the dog would be in the back, it should be ok.

94% for side impact.

hartcjhart

scotsman4th wrote: »

Grand Voyager 2.5 diesel.
32-33 MPG round town, 7 REAL seats and a massive boot (not alot of 7 seaters have a decent boot).
As mentioned about the kia, take the seats out and you've got a van.

yep I second that,we have a few(all diesels),but we use our main one for towing the car recovery trailer and when working on our houses we take the seats out and you can lay an 8x4 sheet of plasterboard flat:T

Rolandtheroadie

hartcjhart wrote: »

yep I second that,we have a few(all diesels),but we use our main one for towing the car recovery trailer and when working on our houses we take the seats out and you can lay an 8x4 sheet of plasterboard flat:T

I got 600kg into the back of ours the other week there an drove 240 miles without even knowing it was there. With the seats out, it would have been bordering on it's limit.

plane_boy2000

AdrianHi wrote: »

The car less reliable than a Grand Voyager (as determined by an index of repair cost vs. fault frequency) is a Jeep, which is another vehicle from the same group. In fact you would be better off with a Peugeot, Citroen or Renault.
Friends have one, they only do 4000 miles a year, it's 4 years old. If you count number of garage visits over the miles covered, if I had this vehicle on my annual mileage it would be in the garage 3 to 4 times a year for repairs alone. Unacceptable. Don't get me started on father in laws Jeep...:(

I second that - A friend had one and it ruined them. Paid 19K for it and spent almost that much running it for 4 years. Whoever has it now probably got a good buy as nearly everything is new!

Rolandtheroadie

plane_boy2000 wrote: »

I second that - A friend had one and it ruined them. Paid 19K for it and spent almost that much running it for 4 years. Whoever has it now probably got a good buy as nearly everything is new!

Thats a good point too. the wife's is an 02 plate 1 previous owner from new 131k miles on the clock.
So far? £13 for anti roll bar bushes. Thats us coming up on a year and it's due an MOT.
Just had to buy a battery too but I dont think thats a voyager specific fault.
It crunches when coming down the box into second sometimes and the front suspension seems soft.
I'll definately replace it with another one or the Dodge equivilent.

Sulphur_Man

If you can find a good one, and dont mind the thirst of a 2.3 petrol, then a Honda Shuttle could be worth a look. Very highly regarded by Honest John.

alleycat`

scotsman4th wrote: »

3 stars reduced to 2 due to poor performance in a frontal impact apparently. As the dog would be in the back, it should be ok.

94% for side impact.

From NCAP:-

The Grand Voyager scored enough points overall to be awarded a three-star adult occupant rating. However, its performance in the frontal impact did not meet the minimum level for that rating and the car was awarded two stars. The driver's chest struck the steering wheel and distorted its rim and the chest compression measured by the dummy indicated an unacceptably high risk of serious or fatal injury. As a result, the final star in the adult occupant rating is struck-through.
Several structures in the dashboard presented a potential hazard to the driver's knees; the dummy recorded high femur compressions and the protection offered to this body region was rated as poor. The passenger compartment became unstable during the test. The footwell ruptured during the impact and rearward movement of the accelerator pedal was 288mm which, combined with dummy readings indicating a high risk to the tibia resulted in a 'poor' rating for protection of the lower legs, feet and ankles. In the pole test the curtain airbag didn't deploy as intended, becoming trapped between the dummy's head and the B-pillar. The car scored no points and was awarded no stars for the protection it offers to pedestrians.

So overall great your dogs alive - shame the driver almost certainly died:eek:
The total score is 1 1/2 stars for the car as it is so poor in a head on crash.