Reliability and quality of 'european makes of car'

puddy

I often hear that makes like Renault, Citroen and Fiat etc are terribly made, have bad electrics etc etc. But theres loads sold, so why do people buy them if they are so bad, they cant be can they??

jase1

They are cheap, and they look pretty. It is as simple as that.

No-one would buy a Renault for reliability, not if they'd done their research in any case.

Many cars are sold to fleets in any case, where the buyer isn't bothered about reliability as the cars are under warranty for three years then sold.

Once they're on the market, well they're there aren't they so they'll be sold eventually.

If build quality and reliability was all people cared about when buying a car we'd all be driving around in Hondas and Subarus.

This argument that is used about a lot of things (not just cars), "x million can't be wrong" etc is entirely bogus. Of course x million can be wrong -- it depends on how you define 'wrong'.

puddy

well i ask the question for exactly that reason, we pulled up in co op car park and next to us was a renault twingo and i thought, oh thats really nice looking and then realised it was a renault and thought, 'oh, i cant think about having that then' and then wondered why, as the person driving it clearly thought it was worth having.

ive a micra and my partner a note. we chose japanese for the reputation and i suppose when thinking about when i change the car in the future, i put the european makes out of the picture.

jase1

Unfortunately the Micra and Note are both Renaults underneath these days.....

The build quality tends to be better on the Nissans but they still aren't what they used to be in reliability terms.

That's not to say that all Renaults fall to bits in year four, they don't, many of them remain reliable for a good long time, but it's much more of a gamble as there are plenty of lemons around.

mikey72

I have had european cars, mainly old british, then Italian, then French. Now "english" (Well Vauxhall).
Never been a problem.
French diesel is one of the more reliable, the italian Fiat was great to drive.
I used to work in automotive electronics, the only thing that was different was the european manufacturers put their hands up to faulty ecu's and other electronics, the japanese used to be "no fault found" for everything. But they didn't send them back, but still replaced them with new. And I know they didn't work when I sent them back.

Subaru go through turbos like there's no tomorrow. But they are very niche, you buy one because you want one.

A lot of it is perception, if you tell everyone you're the best, some people believe you. If you admit to a fault, a lot of people like to join in kicking you when you're down.

We are probably one of the most unpatriotic nations as well, French buy French, German buy German, Italian buy Italian.
We hate British, then hate europe, but love Japanese.

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

Unfortunately the Micra and Note are both Renaults underneath these days.....

The build quality tends to be better on the Nissans but they still aren't what they used to be in reliability terms.

That's not to say that all Renaults fall to bits in year four, they don't, many of them remain reliable for a good long time, but it's much more of a gamble as there are plenty of lemons around.

That's a good example, they're built on the same line, by the same people, (or robots), so why should the Renault badged version be built to a lower quality?
Why is it worth changing everything to decrease the builld quality, and indeed, how would it be done practically?

puddy

yes, we had heard that about the nissans but they still okish in terms of reliability scores, certainly not the best (for the note at least) but not the worst. the old style micras were much better than mine is.

Strider590

puddy wrote: »

I often hear that makes like Renault, Citroen and Fiat etc are terribly made, have bad electrics etc etc. But theres loads sold, so why do people buy them if they are so bad, they cant be can they??

Because 67% of people are more concerned with how it looks, than they are about how it works

And because a lot of people/families buy the same make of car over and over again DESPITE how bad they are.

jase1

No they aren't. Renaults are built in France, most small Nissans in Sunderland.

Micra reliability sank like a stone when they moved to the bug-eyed model. Which was a Clio under the surface.

You're thinking of the Toyota/Peugeot Aygo/107, where there really isn't any difference in quality as they are built in the same (Eastern European) factory.

Some mid-2000s Nissans and Renaults alike were horrendously unreliable. I wouldn't have a Laguna or Megane from that period given to me, especially the diesels. And the Primera was just as bad.

As for Subaru, you're referring to cars that are thrashed to within an inch of their lives and yet still manage to remain in one piece on the whole. The (much rarer) "ordinary" Subarus like the 2l NA Impreza was an absolute paragon of reliability.

And if the French are so honest with their faults, how does that explain their inaction when it came to Clio bonnets?

mikey72

jase1 wrote: »

No they aren't. Renaults are built in France, most small Nissans in Sunderland.

Micra reliability sank like a stone when they moved to the bug-eyed model. Which was a Clio under the surface.

You're thinking of the Toyota/Peugeot Aygo/107, where there really isn't any difference in quality as they are built in the same (Eastern European) factory.

Some mid-2000s Nissans and Renaults alike were horrendously unreliable. I wouldn't have a Laguna or Megane from that period given to me, especially the diesels. And the Primera was just as bad.

As for Subaru, you're referring to cars that are thrashed to within an inch of their lives and yet still manage to remain in one piece on the whole. The (much rarer) "ordinary" Subarus like the 2l NA Impreza was an absolute paragon of reliability.

And if the French are so honest with their faults, how does that explain their inaction when it came to Clio bonnets?

If Nissans are built in Sunderland, that must mean Nissan relibilty is down purely due to Nissen getting worse then.

Also Nissan thought european cars were so good they wanted to put their name on them at the time.

All european cars are poor because a Clio had a sticking bonnet catch once?

jase1

mikey72 wrote: »

If Nissans are built in Sunderland, that must mean Nissan relibilty is down purely due to Nissen getting worse then.

Nissan's cars did get worse, yes. As a result of being infested with inferior components. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Would I buy a Nissan now (and I am speaking as someone who ran a succession of very reliable 1990s Nissans)? Not on your life. For the very same reason that I wouldn't buy the Renault equivalent. Some Sunderland build (note build, not reliability, for they are two different things!) is still in evidence but for the most part, if you buy a Nissan these days, you're buying a Renault.