Kia 7 year warranty

EdGasket

Clutches are not covered even if it goes within 2 years and low miles. Many disatisfied people with that one (search internet) especially on the Carens. I think they have fitted a clutch with too weak a spring to make it light but this also causes slip and wear. However they say it is the owner's driving style to get out of the warranty claim even though the owner probably did 100K+ miles on their prevoius car/clutch. Otherwise it's a pretty good warranty.

LandyAndy

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

Some of these posts are hilarious, a longer warranty seemingly less desirable than a short one because they're bound to reject most claims due to wear.

Nah. Missed the point.

I bought two New Mazdas three years ago. As with every Mazda I've owned nothing has gone wrong with them. Nothing. To me that is far more useful than having random faults repaired for free over an extended period

GolfBravo

gilbert_and_sullivan wrote: »

Some of these posts are hilarious, a longer warranty seemingly less desirable than a short one because they're bound to reject most claims due to wear and tear.

And where does it say that?

The 5/7 year warranties are definitely desirable. The point is that thanks to their long warranty their perceived quality is high. But when you look at reliability reports (JD Power, TUV, etc.) their quality only matches your average Peugeot/Citroen/Vauxhall.

And secondly, before you commit your £££ to a car mainly because of its 7 year warranty that "should cover most things" check their list of exclusions and compare it to the main issues identified in those quality surveys. Clutches covered? No. Transmissions? No. Exhausts? No. Shock absorbers and suspension bushes? No. And the exclusion list will only get longer due to wear and tear (due to age and mileage).

GolfBravo

losing_my_coolant wrote: »

What was a ball ache is that the local dealer keeps no spares, so it was 2 trips per fault, one to diagnose, another when the part was actually ordered in.

Dealers don't keep spares these days, they only keep consumables to keep costs down. All spares are usually despatched by manufacturers for next day delivery.

jase1

GolfBravo wrote: »

their quality only matches your average Peugeot/Citroen/Vauxhall.

/Volkswagen/Seat/BMW...

And in any case this is totally disingenuous.

Those surveys have shown one continuous trend for the best part of 30 years:

Japanese = good,
French = junk,
Everything else = somewhere in the middle.

Hyundai are fairly consistently at the top end of the non-Japanese mainstream.

Whether or not you agree with those findings, that is the way these things always play out.

Of course, it should also be noted that Kia/Hyundai are also no more expensive than the other middling marques -- so you're not really paying anything for that peace of mind. Not being as good as the better Japanese manufacturers notwithstanding, it's pretty difficult to get anything more reliable that isn't Japanese for the same money.

The moral of the story is to buy Japanese (and not one engineered outside Japan) in the first place...

jase1

LandyAndy wrote: »

Nah. Missed the point.

I bought two New Mazdas three years ago. As with every Mazda I've owned nothing has gone wrong with them. Nothing. To me that is far more useful than having random faults repaired for free over an extended period

Hmmm.

Try telling that to the Mazda 6 diesel owners, quite a lot of whose cars have gone bang very expensively.

Mazda over the last ten years or so = Ford. As such, inferior to Toyota and Honda, and on-par with Mitsubishi and Nissan who have also had Eurobox infestation in their designs.

All cars have failure rates that are non-zero. All this innuendo about transmissions etc not being covered is just that.

BTW I'm not trying to say that Mazda make unreliable cars, but they're hardly the last word either. They weren't far off 15 years ago, but there are too many plastic Ford compromises littered all about the place now for them to still hold that esteem.

Perhaps now they've split from Ford again they'll improve -- although where that will leave Ford's considerable improvements over the same period from their earlier "Dagenham Dustbin" status remains to be seen.

Because I've been a cheapskate, my last two cars have been Fords. One had a Ford-designed engine, which was a wretched thing -- noisy, prone to poor starting and underpowered compared to its peers. The newer one is a 2l Mazda lump which is an absolute revelation by comparison. Both cars are rattly heaps, and Ford is uninterested.

LandyAndy

jase1 wrote: »

Hmmm.

Try telling that to the Mazda 6 diesel owners, quite a lot of whose cars have gone bang very expensively

I am one. Only done 50k miles in the three years I've had it but it hasn't gone bang yet.

Planning to keep it at least as long again. Well see.

neilmcl

Also, something to bear in mind is that the 7 year warranty is limited to 100,000 miles.

iolanthe07

My son in the US bought a new Ford truck with a ten year warranty. Why is Europe so far behind?

atrixblue.-MFR-.

my father baught a used approved kia, with less that 10k on it. it 08 plate 2 years ago.

they replaced a defective anti roll bar drop link, more padding to cure dash rattle under the 7 yr warranty with no issues. i guess its dealer specific on what they are prepared to do.