Britain's most unreliable cars

Cliff D'Arcy
by Lovemoney Staff Cliff D'Arcy on 20 May 2012  |  Comments 38 comments

In 2011, one in five cars failed its first MoT test. Japanese vehicles are best and French are worst!

Britain's most unreliable cars

When you drive away a new car, you get peace of mind from knowing that it won't need an MoT test for its first three years.

But once you hit the three-year mark, your vehicle needs a yearly check-up to make sure that it’s roadworthy and safe to drive. 

So what proportion of cars fail their first MoT test at three years old?

The answer is a fifth (20%), a level which seems disappointingly high to me. However, as you'd expect, some makes and models are less reliable than others. 

Indeed, a new survey from motoring website HonestJohn.co.uk found a wide variation in pass rates for first-time MoTs last year. Based on Honest John's data, these are the manufacturers to trust and those to avoid (based on motor manufacturers with at least 5,000 MoT tests in 2011): 

The UK's 15 most reliable car makes 

Manufacturer

No. of tests

Pass rate

Lexus

5,735

88%

Suzuki

20,548

86%

Honda

71,203

85%

SAAB

12,801

84%

Toyota

89,616

83%

Audi

77,773

83%

smart

5,185

83%

Mercedes-Benz

56,786

83%

Land Rover

30,048

82%

SEAT

22,412

81%

Mazda

41,085

81%

Hyundai

22,072

81%

Volkswagen

140,994

81%

Skoda

30,193

81%

BMW

88,620

81%

* Based on brands with more than 5,000 MoT Tests in 2011. 

The 15 car marques listed above are all above-average, as their pass rates exceed the UK average of 80%. 

Note that all three top places are taken by Japanese manufacturers: Lexus (88%), Suzuki (86%) and Honda (85%). In fourth place is Sweden's SAAB* (84%), followed by Toyota of Japan (83%) and then Audi of Germany (also 83%). 

Of these 15 reliable car brands, five are Japanese, another five are German, and there is one entry from each of the Czech Republic (Skoda, owned by VW), South Korea (Hyundai), Spain (SEAT, owned by VW), Sweden (SAAB) and the UK (Land Rover, owned by India's Tata Motors). 

Hence, if you're looking for a reliable car, then buy Japanese or German, as these two countries' manufacturers take 10 of our 15 top spots for reliability. 

Unlucky 13: the least reliable car makes

At the other end of the reliability scale lie these 'unlucky 13' car brands, all of which have average or below-average pass rates for first-time MoT Tests in 2011: 

Manufacturer

No. of tests

Pass rate

Kia

25,875

80%

Nissan

60,967

80%

Ford

267,727

79%

Jaguar

16,125

79%

Mitsubishi

12,224

79%

Vauxhall

266,653

79%

Volvo

26,447

78%

FIAT

48,632

77%

Peugeot

98,345

77%

Chevrolet

14,588

76%

Citroen

76,320

76%

MINI

33,762

76%

Renault

70,821

76%

* Based on brands with more than 5,000 MoT Tests in 2011.

Two brands -- Kia and Nissan -- offer average reliability by exactly the UK's overall pass rate of 80%. However, the remaining 11 marques are all below-average in terms of first-time pass rates. 

In last place -- and taking the wooden spoon -- are Renault, Citroen, MINI and Chevrolet, all four of which have the worst pass rate of 76%. Peugeot and FIAT also do badly at 77%, followed by Volvo at 78%. 

Ford, Jaguar, Mitsubishi and Vauxhall all have pass rates just below the 80% average, with all four brands achieving a 79% pass mark. 

Based on brand nationality, this list of sub-par cars contains four from the UK (Ford, Jaguar, MINI and Vauxhall; although all four are foreign-owned), three from France (Peugeot, Citroen and Renault) and two from Japan (Nissan and Mitsubishi). 

Of the remaining four, there is one each from Italy (FIAT), South Korea (Kia), Sweden (Volvo) and the US/South Korea (Chevrolet). 

Buy Japanese or German, but never French 

I used to work in the motor-finance trade, and what strikes me is how closely this statistical survey matches what industry insiders say. In particular, 'wise insiders' will tell you to buy German or Japanese cars for reliability, while avoiding French cars like la peste (the plague). 

What's more, this also closely reflects my own experiences as a car buyer. The most reliable car my wife has ever owned was her 1997 Volkswagen Polo, which was an absolute joy to drive and run. 

On the other hand, the absolute worst car my spouse has ever owned is her 2003 Renault Megane Scenic. While it scores well for its engine performance and driving comfort, her Renault has an awful record for electrical reliability. Indeed, we've spent thousands of pounds replacing faulty electrics since we bought my wife's Renault in 2004. 

So when we come to replace her car this year or next, my wife and I will take a couple of reliable Japanese brands for a spin, with Honda and Toyota at the top of our wish list. What's more, we have vowed never to buy another Renault! 

Finally, you can find the first-time MoT pass rates for 302 different makes and models of car -- which range from 93% for a classy Rolls-Royce Phantom to an appalling 59% for a Chrysler Grand Voyager -- at the Honest John website here

How reliable is your car? Would you buy the same make and/or model again? Please tell us in the comments box below! 

More: Get quality quotes for car insurance | Why your car insurance is still too expensive | How to beat parking fines

* SAAB is currently in receivership.

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (38)

  • Talent
    Love rating 79
    Talent said

    Hmmmm, like school league tables, take with a pinch of salt....

    What isn't shown is the type of failure and what the impact on safety is. Also some cars are more likely to have owners that put their vehicle in for a pre MOT check. Some owners are more likely to have regular maintenance programmes. Obviously, if stuff has been fixed before the MOT, it is less likely to fail.

    Some MOT fail items are far more serious than others. Minor headlamp misalignment, for example, will fail the test (easy to fix) and some vehicles are prone to this. Another may get a far less frequent brake system fault. Which one looks better when all you can see is the numbers?

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • easygoing
    Love rating 170
    easygoing said

    So only 1% divides the bottom of the best and the top of the worst. Let's face it this just a list and to divide it up at some arbitrary point is silly. This seems to be padded out by taking a pop at Renault. There will be many people, myself included, who have had good experiences with that brand.

    So all we have is someone's list. . . . . .

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • anorak
    Love rating 1
    anorak said

    This is pointless article.

    To be of any benefit you need to know is it

    - minor faults (bulbs, windscreen wipers etc) or major faults.

    - the mileage

    - how has the car been looked after

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Olesuffolkbuoy
    Love rating 0
    Olesuffolkbuoy said

    Three absolutely spot on comments. Take note Mr Journalist - I could not agree more with their responses. Thats the problem with regurgitating someone elses statistics.

    Before you publish this kind of ill thought out material perhaps you should engage your literary skills in checking your title line - ONE IN FIVE CARDS indeed!

    We can forgive the lamentable absence of any real technical analysis but language? Is this not an area in which you should be an expert? (LOL - and I dont mean 'love you lots'!)

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CaptainFlak
    Love rating 32
    CaptainFlak said

    Another shallow poorly researched article with an attention grabbing headline, I want the minute of my life back that it took to read it.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • OorWullie
    Love rating 38
    OorWullie said

    It may also depend on how much money the garage thinks it can make from finding or creating faults (okay, its a bit cynical but that's life). Like the causes of death statistics; they may not be related to what illness caused the death such as cancer causing a heart attack so heart attack becomes the statistic. The statistics can only be a guide but not a particularly reliable one. Having said this I owned two Accords which I had in total for around 20 years and found them to be exceedingly reliable. My only complaint was the cost of annual service and maintenance by the main dealer. The second Accord we had for 11 years from new until the goodlady wrote it off while taking the dogs for their constitutional; I am glad to report that the dogs were okay (and so too was the goodlady)!

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 410
    CuNNaXXa said

    Well, considering that the Fiesta is the biggest seller of all cars, as reported by LoveMoney in another article, this means that Fords have more cars on the road, which means that the chance of having a failure for the first MOT is somewhat higher.

    I've said this before, and I will say it again. Statistics can be adjusted to suit any purpose. As much as an accountant can make 2 + 2 equal anything they bloody well like, as statistician can do exactly the same to statistics.

    So, does the results of this survey take into account production values, and is it farely weighted so that the higher mass production companies like Ford and Vauxhall are balance with the slower producers such as Renault and Citroen?

    The simple truth is that if you only build a few units a year, your quality should be impeccable, while as you up the build schedule, the quality will start to drop off more, until you get to a point where it stabilises at a happy medium. The simple truth is that if you have an error rate of 1 in 1000, and you produce 1000 cars, you will probably have around 1 error, whereas if you produce 100,000 cars, you will have 100 errors.

    Also, what constitutes a failure? A bald tyre? A blown bulb? A windscreen wiper that smears? A chip or crack in the windscreen directly in the driver's line of sight? Corrosion? Poorly repaired crash damage? The simple fact is that almost anything can cause an MOT failure and retest.

    Also, vehicle usage needs to be factored in. If I bought a brand new car and did just 10,000 miles in three years, I would be gutted if it failed its first MOT, especially if it was on a significant point, yet if I had done 100,000 miles in the first three years, I would probably half expect a failure, simply because of the mileage.

    So, does this article make any real sense, or contribution? Of course not. Every car is different, and while we may end up with a right pup of a vehicle (one that seems to have everything wrong with it), the majority of us tend to end up with a reasonably reliable vehicle for our needs.

    After all, Lexus is there at the top of the table, so by rights everyone should be clamouring for a new Lexus, yet people don't. Why is this? Well, in my case, I like to drive a car that excites me, and a Lexus doesn't do it for me.

    Oh, and it matters not a jot that Renault are bottom of the table, because people who love to drive a Renault will continue to do so. Choosing a car is like choosing a partner. You don't go out with the girl who is most reliable, costs little to maintain, and doesn't argue with you. You go out with the girl who excites you, and who needs pampering, and who challenges your own opinions.

    Basically, you want to feel alive, and choosing a car based on a numerical statistic just won't cut the mustard. You want looks, feel, drive ability, passion, cargo space and anything else you put into the mix.

    No one buys purely on need. If we did, the entire open top market would collapse instantly.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mike10613
    Love rating 626
    Mike10613 said

    Any statistics on 14 year old Vauxhalls like mine that sail through the MOT every time? I might take it run down to spaghetti junction this afternoon; I have my sandwiches ready...

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Kaz64
    Love rating 23
    Kaz64 said

    Mike10613. I have an 18 year old Vauxhall Cavalier that sails through each year, and costs little in the way of repairs. I will keep him, as he is reliable and comfortable.

    Sadly, the build quality of most cars today is not what it once was. Yes, there are more electrical goodies, (more to go wrong!), but as long as I have ABS and airbags, that is good enough for me.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • electricblue
    Love rating 769
    electricblue said

    I think there was a better balance between longevity and electronics sophistication with cars built in the early to mid nineties. 70's and 80's vehicles were, apart from Mercedes, Volvo and Saab, terrible rot boxes. I don't think the article means a jot in real world motoring and no breakdown of MOT faults in the statistics means we learn nothing. Some cars are notorious for regular silly little electrical faults which would cause MOT failure, but cost little to rectify. Don't anyone try to defend Renault, please...you really are wasting your time. The cars may be a joy to drive but even in France they have a lousy reputation.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • nickpike
    Love rating 308
    nickpike said

    Daughter bought a brand new mini. At 3 years it broke down on the road. needed a new £191 thermostat. According to the roadside mechanic, this is a regular problem with Minis.

    So much for British vehicles. She has just replaced it with an Audi.

    I find these stats a bit hard to believe. Every new car I have purchased has passed the first MOT, about 10 cars. What do they fail on, could be something very minor like a light bulb.

    I have a Hyundai Sonata at present, bought new, and has passed all its 2 MOTs. Honda may show up with a better score, but Hyundai's are a lot cheaper to buy.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • edwardmk2879
    Love rating 65
    edwardmk2879 said

    I've owned several Vauxhalls, all Astra's. My current one is a five years old silver Astra turbo convertible. It's fast, comfortable and pretty economical for a 190+bhp car.

    They've all been totally reliable, and have all sailed through their MOT's.

    That's probably torn it for next year of course. However, the article is so superficial and woolly as to be of little use, as previous commentators have observed.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • electricblue
    Love rating 769
    electricblue said

    MINI issues are NOTHING to do with it being British made. It's BMW engineered and the engine and gearbox have no British design input. If you want a really unreliable car, buy a new Mercedes.

    Report on 20 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • anney
    Love rating 1
    anney said

    As far as I am concerned the most illuminating aspect of this article was the opinion (though second hand I know) of 'industry insiders', something I wish I had had access to before buying my second hand Renault Laguna. Now on its third heater/air conditioner unit which is also starting to fail (sounds trivial I know but it is impossible to drive a car full of condensation in winter) and with a failed electric window mechanism on the drivers side. Both apparently very common faults for this car and costing far more than any engine problems I have had with it so far but neither something you think to check up about before buying as you would with engine reliability. Will not look at Renault again.

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • onlinegenie
    Love rating 2
    onlinegenie said

    Interestingly enough, the experience of the author and contributors is directly opposed to my experience. I have had several Volkswagens, most of which gave no end of trouble. Since giving up on VW my wife and I have been buying French (Peugeot and Renault) and have had very few problems with either.

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MK22
    Love rating 169
    MK22 said

    Article might be a useful guide to separate two otherwise suitable cars. But who would want be seen in a Lexus, even if they were dead? Interesting that it doesn't compare too well with the 2011 JD Power reliability survey.......

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MK22
    Love rating 169
    MK22 said

    And, like onlinegenie, I know someone who was forced to switch company car from a Peugeot to a VW and within a couple of months was tearing their hair out with the hopeless unreliable of the VW, unlike the Peugeot that had never failed.

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • The Bank Manager
    Love rating 79
    The Bank Manager said

    When the Honest John website reveals all the makes and models, it's actually Rolls Royce (owned by BMW) that is top of the tree with the 2008 Phantom, which scores 93%.

    So whilst on one hand, the Royce is British built by BMW and is so well put together, how come the Mini (also owned by BMW) and 'assembled' in the UK too, is so poor at 76%? Is it attention to detail anyone?

    BMW's however average out at 81%, so the moral of this story is to ditch the iconic Mini, for which BMW over-charge, forget their own products (mainly the 3 Series and 5 Series) and buy yourself a reliable Phantom.

    We all have Phantom's...don't we??

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • electricblue
    Love rating 769
    electricblue said

    @Bank Manager

    Stick to money. You clearly have no clue about manufacturing. 'Attention to detail' is not an issue at the Mini plant. The guys there are as finicky as they come. BMW specify all the parts, so no amount of careful assembly will eliminate inherent faults. Comparing a mass market car with a hand-assembled icon? As pointless as the article itself. British engineers are amongst the best in the world, when they don't constantly have to fight accountants and clueless money men.

    Report on 21 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • The Bank Manager
    Love rating 79
    The Bank Manager said

    Hey electricblue, you obviously have a limited range towards a sense of humour and you don't get 'tongue in cheek'...do you?

    BTW, I do have a good depth of knowledge regarding manufacturing and have toured a few car plants (more recently Jaguar's Castle Bromwich plant) over the years, as well as understanding the supply chain and I DO appreciate that it's the sum of the parts.

    You also state 'The guys there are as finicky as they come. BMW specify all the parts, so no amount of careful assembly will eliminate inherent faults'. I have no doubt about this, but there are car plants all over the world where the collation of these parts when building the car can lead to say electrical faults, leaks or general NVH (that's noise, vibration and harshness electricblue)!

    Such a scenario is not limited to one particular manufacturer, but the way they assemble the vehicle has a great deal to do with this, in tandem with the quality of the parts they use.

    Just wanted to clarify this for you.

    Report on 22 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • electricblue
    Love rating 769
    electricblue said

    @ Bank Manager

    As I said, stick to subjects you know something about. I've visited banks a lot of times, it doesn't make me a banker. I do design and supply tools into automotive manufacturing plants and assist with problem solving. Reliability issues with the Mini have never been related to the three areas you mention and in any case, leaks and NVH problems are not reliability issues. I also know of no current vehicles where any laxness in assembly results in electrical faults. All electrical connectors these days have positive engagement latches and good seals. Any reliability issues are due to inherently poor design or component location and that is not the responsibility of the line workers.

    Report on 22 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • The Bank Manager
    Love rating 79
    The Bank Manager said

    So electricblue, I appreciate your advice as to your background, but just because a person has a certain trade, it appears that you are pidgeon-holeing them into that category and that they know little else.

    A pity you take that stance, as I've been a car nut from a very young age, so that's from where I draw my knowledge.

    Like I said, you ought to read something and take it in the manner it was written/posted, being 'tongue-in-cheek' and not as an affront to anyone.

    I have not lambasted Mini workers, I have used the tools provided by the site to review the figures and gave an opnion (something one can do in a democracy!), so I accept that you have the right to disagree, but as you know so little about my background, your statement that I clearly have no clue about manufacturing, holds no water, as I've seen manufacturing in many guises, over my numerous years.

    Before you stated that you design and supply tools into automotive manufacturing plants and assist with problem solving wasn't aware of that, but now I know so, I respect your knowledge in that area.

    So for example, I understand that you'd recognise NVH, but many people who don't like cars as avidly as I do since I was 5 (when was given as a Birthday present my first Rolls Royce - a metal 'Dinky' Silver Shadow that I still have), may not.

    Report on 23 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • vincentbir
    Love rating 0
    vincentbir said

    I think a breakdown by model would make sense.

    I have a Scenic 2012 model, mostly based on 2009 model which is very reliable (according the HonestJohn page), in the same range the Zafira is a disaster and the Scenic 2004 is bad as well.

    As ever with stats, reducing them to headlines is misleading.

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • bosun65
    Love rating 0
    bosun65 said

    These results are interesting. I have been a Citroen owner for more than 30 years and have never had a reliability problem with any of them (10 in all).

    My current 1999 Xantia 2.0i SX which I have owned for 10 years and 110K miles has been absolutely faultless and only last month had it's first MOT failure; a split seal on an anti-roll bar and a side light bulb. My wife owns a Saxo 1.4i Auto SX which has been almost as reliable but on a lower mileage.

    Perhaps if I buy Japanese or German in the future the garage will pay me money when they go in for service or MOT! :-)

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • OorWullie
    Love rating 38
    OorWullie said

    There was a murder in my locality last year (committed by a female) which was the first homicide for many years but note that the murder-rate for last years rose by 100% a very dangerous area, indeed, in which to live going by statistics!

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Poorpensioner
    Love rating 36
    Poorpensioner said

    and just to prove that statistics prove nothing - an increase from no murders to one murder is NOT a 100% increase !

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • KBAK1957
    Love rating 0
    KBAK1957 said

    I have a Fiat Stilo 1.9 JTD hatch 04 plate, bought in August 04 at 5 months old. 2 years no problems (apart from expensive servicing costs). Then just before xmas 2006 I had to have a new engine management computer and a few other bits = £1,100 in total. In Jan 2007 another costly problem including a instrument panel at £800. 1st MOT passed no problems, 2nd MOT, passed with a £100 spend. Then since then to now a constant spend almost every year ranging from £500 - to another £850 last xmas. Yes some bits were tyres, brakes etc, but also many others like broken front springs, new clutch, etc means I will never buy another Fiat. Shame because they make some stylish cars with plenty of equipment, but they are poorly made, poor electronics etc. My next car will be either Skoda (VW quality) or Ford (cheaper servicing and cheaper parts). Statistics can be read in different ways, so in my case my car usually passed MOTs with usually little expense, it's just the money I fork out between MOTs!

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • stevbo
    Love rating 0
    stevbo said

    The older a car is, the more likely it is there are to be problems. Some of the brands in the upper part of the rankings have not been around in significant numbers for very long, and would thus be expected to show up better.

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • stevbo
    Love rating 0
    stevbo said

    DID NOT READ PROPERLY - report was on first ever MOT, I had assumed it was on the first test in any year (that is retests excluded.)

    I WITHDRAW ABOVE

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Brian R
    Love rating 0
    Brian R said

    There is another factor, of course. Total mileage. My BMW320d nearly eight years old, that I have had from new, has done 125000 miles, and - touch wood - has never let me down. Yes, when the MOT comes along, there are things that need doing, but that's a case of wear and tear. I drove 210 miles yesterday, mostly motorway, from Hampshire to Warwick, keeping to the speed limit, and it returned a 55mpg. On a very long run I can get nearly 60mpg. I think that is good - and, when needed, it has the power to get out of trouble, and can acelerate very respectably in sixth gear at, say, 65mph. All in all, a nice car and a super power unit. Would not swap it.

    Report on 24 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 410
    CuNNaXXa said

    It would certainly be more viable to record not only the vehicle make and model, but the mileage as well.

    Since Ford, Vauxhall, BMW, Mercedes, Audi and Skoda now make up the bulk of fleet purchases, these vehicles will be subject to far higher mileages than their domestic cousins, so it would be advantageous to record overall mileages of each manufacturer at their first MOT.

    I am sure that you'd see a change in direction if MOT failures were affected by the total mileage of each marque.

    This could possible mean that a manufacturer who was ranked quite low might actually be more reliable than we think, simply because mileage was factored in.

    Damn statistics.

    'Hey, my Kia, which has done 12,000 miles passed its first MOT'

    'Oh, well. My Ford, which has done 150,000 miles, failed because a gaiter had split'.

    Report on 25 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • jbm1965
    Love rating 1
    jbm1965 said

    Suspect it would make more sense to test the owners.

    After 3 years the car condition is likely to have more to do with the way its been looked after than the make.

    Report on 26 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 410
    CuNNaXXa said

    True. Not many Bentleys are bought as fleet cars.

    Mind you, some fleet operators take pride in their service schedule, and company car drivers who have accidents often see their own personal insurance policy affected, so it pays them to be more courteous to other road users.

    (It turns out that if you don't declare an accident you had while driving a company vehicle when insuring your own personal vehicle, you are committing fraud. In the old days, you could get away with this, but since computerisations makes it easy to compare notes, it is no longer the case)

    ((I knew of one driver who was always have crashes in his company cars, yet felt he didn't need to declare these accidents on his personal policy. The insurance company eventually caught up with him, and his premium the following year suddenly quadrupled)).

    Report on 26 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Pechis
    Love rating 5
    Pechis said

    Renault = piece of shit

    My 7 year Espace has cost me close on £10k to keeo roadworthy in the last three years, it has broken down twice in the last year and I have had to be picked up by the RAC on both occasions as their Transits are too small to tow.

    I've never lived down my wife suggesting we sell it 4 years ago, my excuse was that depreciation on a new car is about the same as what I have spent to keep it going., that is now wearing thin and it is so unreliable.

    Never buying Renault again!!!!!!!!

    Report on 27 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 410
    CuNNaXXa said

    Actually, the most unreliable cars were the old British Leyland cars. They were always going wrong. How many people had to spray their distributors with WD40 just to get it started on a damp morning, and how many people had to bash their fuel pump with a small ballpein hammer to get it to pump petrol?

    Nah, modern cars are ultra reliable, compared to what we drove a mere thirty years ago.

    Report on 27 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Mary  3
    Love rating 0
    Mary 3 said

    My daughter and I both drive Ford Fiestas. Both were bought second hand. Hers is a 1.4 Ghia and mine is a 1.25 Freestyle. Both cars are ecconomic to run, thoroughly reliable and good to drive. We have each had to have relatively few repairs. I have owned many different makes of cars but would definately buy Ford again.

    Report on 27 May 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Limpet7R
    Love rating 0
    Limpet7R said

    We had a 2004 Megane 1.9 dCi from 18 months old, and no car I've ever owned cost so much in maintenance and repairs. Between its 3rd and 4th birthdays, it cost over £3,000 to keep running. Clutch hydraulic system failed, power steering failed, instrument panel failed, glowplugs went, turbo pipe split, EGR valve stuck, and the passenger window regulator fell apart. This was by then a 52,000 mile car with a full Renault main dealer history. Oh, and by this point, bits of the interior were already threadbare, the gearknob and steering wheel were both visibly worn, and various bits of trim had fallen off. It felt and behaved like a 15 year old starship-mileage scrapper, not a meticulously maintained, well cared for four year old car with average miles.

    Renault UK were disinterested, and I cut my losses in 2008 and sold it on. Bought a 2003 Golf which we still have to this day as a second car. It's now done 130,000 miles, and has been (and continues to be) as reliable as the tides. I wouldn't have another Renault as a gift. Badly made, appallingly designed rubbish which costs an absolute fortune just to keep running.

    Report on 02 February 2013  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Kaz64
    Love rating 23
    Kaz64 said

    "The older a car is, the more likely it is there are to be problems"

    Not so, Stevebo!

    The newer the car, the more there is to go wrong!

    An RAC man told my friend recently that the most reliable cars were the diesel Vauxhall Cavaliers of the 1990's. I own one, and with 180,000 on the clock, it just keeps on going.

    Report on 11 May 2013  |  Love thisLove  0 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 31Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 31 months (2.99% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status. A Balance Transfer fee of 3.5% will be applied, then reduced to 2.99% by a refund (terms and conditions apply). Plus an additional £20 fee refund on balance transfers over £2000.

Barclaycard 30Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 30 months (2.89% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status. A Balance Transfer fee of 3.5% will be applied, then reduced to 2.89% by a refund (terms and conditions apply). Plus an additional £20 fee refund on balance transfers over £2000.

MBNA 30Mth Platinum Credit Card Visa

0% for 30 months (2.89% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: Assumed borrowing of £1,200 for 1 year, at a Purchase Rate of 18.9% (variable), representative 18.9% APR (variable). Credit available subject to status.
W3C  Thank you for using One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest