GWM HOVER

Veroland said:
I'm not trying to insult you, you seem to be throwing comments around left right and center the whole time without ever presenting any evidence trying to back up your point of view
Click to expand...

And what was I suppose to back up with evidence? My opinion?


Oke will do.
 
Still haven't seen a single review (much less a positive one) of a Hover in any reputable motoring publication. Till then, methinks it's reasonable to remain skeptical.
 
Mila said:
Oh and being condescending is going to bring you anywhere. Neither is your car.
Try again. On my planet you drive a k@k car... mind you on this one too.;)
Click to expand...

That's ok :) I can live with it. IF, on your planet, one is measured by the car one drives perhaps it contributes to the reason you wonder why you ever got married? Possibly?
 
BCO said:
Still haven't seen a single review (much less a positive one) of a Hover in any reputable motoring publication. Till then, methinks it's reasonable to remain skeptical.
Click to expand...

Reasonable - yes - BUT only if you know what all the reputable publications are. SA publications won't give you much - you need to look at reviews from countries who have had them a little longer.
 
shearder said:
That's ok :) I can live with it. IF, on your planet, one is measured by the car one drives perhaps it contributes to the reason you wonder why you ever got married? Possibly?
Click to expand...

???? And what do you think you know about me?

Oh so I decided not to fall for a verimark car driver. Oh poor me. No my dear I buy my own cars(yes more than one and a few bikes ). And for men I have no trouble with them. I just do not feel the need to indulge them and change my name. ;)
 
Till the vehicle gets a satisfactory score in the Euro NCAP it will not have a good reputation.
 
shearder said:
Reasonable - yes - BUT only if you know what all the reputable publications are. SA publications won't give you much - you need to look at reviews from countries who have had them a little longer.
Click to expand...

Ah you know what - I am not here to fight! I like it - i am buying it and that's about that. I will take some pics and give feedback from time to time.
 
shearder said:
Ah you know what - I am not here to fight! I like it - i am buying it and that's about that. I will take some pics and give feedback from time to time.
Click to expand...

We're just trying to help you out here, bud. Don't make a R200k mistake and buy one of these. You complained about the trade-in you'd been offered on your Subaru, what do you think you're going to get for a used Hover? Seriously, it's not a smart move at all. But whatevs, it's your money.
 
Australia also has NCAP based testing called ANCAP.

A NEW ROUND of ANCAP crash-safety tests have seen the 2010 Volkswagen Polo top the list with a 5-Star safety rating, while the 2010 Toyota Hybrid Camry and the updated Great Wall X240 each scored a 4-Star rating. The Polo's 5-Star rating comes as little surprise, the 2010 World Car of the Year already a 5-Star model under Europe's similar Euro NCAP program. The Hybrid Camry's 4-Star rating - expected for some time and now...
Click to expand...

http://www.motorshout.com/Forum/t3334-vw-polo-awarded-5star-ancap-crash-safety-rating-hybrid-camry-and-gwm-x240-get-4-stars.aspx

So in terms of standards the Hover (X240) is on par with the Toyota Camry in australian tests. Ok if they are also bollocks then the camry may be a BS story... ;)

Anyhoo... I am happy!
 
Last edited:
Sorry but no.... You can claim what you want, but there is a reason the Euro-NCAP is rated so highly, its more rigorous than ANY of the other tests out there
 
the updated Great Wall X240 each scored a 4-Star rating.
Click to expand...

By contrast, the GWM utilities that we tested last November performed poorly and were only rated at 2-stars, so this new GWM X240 SUV is a significant leap forward.
Click to expand...

So does SA have the "updated" version?
 
He went on to say that in contrast, the GWM utilities that were tested last November performed poorly and were only rated at two stars,

"So this new GWM X240 SUV is a significant leap forward," Mr McIntosh said.

The tests showed the structure and restraint systems in the X240 clearly performed much better than the V240 utility tested in November.
Click to expand...

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/lifestyle/a/-/lifestyle/7148137/the-safety-anomaly/

And it really isn't made of tin foil - no matter what any South African tells you ;)
 
ToxicBunny said:
Sorry but no.... You can claim what you want, but there is a reason the Euro-NCAP is rated so highly, its more rigorous than ANY of the other tests out there
Click to expand...

I don't claim anything. It's freely available on the internet!\

Australian NCAP (ANCAP) began in 1992 with full
frontal 56 km/h barrier tests and added the 40% offset
deformable barrier test shortly afterwards. In 1999
ANCAP decided to harmonise its testing and
evaluation procedures with EuroNCAP (ENCAP).
This was so ANCAP could use the results of ENCAP
testing on European vehicles where the vehicle
specifications were essentially similar to those of the
Australian model, thereby reducing the number and
cost of tests required to produce consumer
information.
Click to expand...

It's available in black and white. Standards are almost 100% the same - for obvious reasons. I am not claiming but simply giving you, and others, info you could find yourself - BUT choose not to :)
 
BCO said:
So does SA have the "updated" version?
Click to expand...

Yes - but also the 2-stars were for a different GWM model not Hover. But yes, we have the Hover 3 which is updated - 2010 model.

But again -
I bought one of the first Hover that came into the Country, I have just bought my third one , the 2.5 Diesel 4x4.

My first Hover , My wife hit a tree at about 120 km dead stap and roled it over, With no safety belt. She was home with no injuries the next day....
So why am I now on my Hover number 3-- silly question....
Click to expand...
taken here
 
Last edited:
It's not so much them being bollocks, as that the EuroNCAP is the most stringent and for that reason the de facto standard. As an aside, did you read the Aussie test?

The tested model of Great Wall Motor X240 was introduced in Australia during 2009. Dual front airbags and antilock brakes (ABS) with Electronic Brake Distribution (EBD) are standard. Electronic stability control (ESC) is not available. No advanced seat belt reminders are fitted. Pretensioners are fitted to the front seat belts to reduce slack in the event of a crash. A three point seat belt is fitted to the centre rear seat. This provides better protection than a two point (lap) seat belt.

4 Stars. The X240 scored 9.48 out of 16 in the offset crash test. The passenger compartment held its shape reasonably well. Protection from serious leg injury was marginal for the driver. There was a slight risk of serious chest injury for the driver and passenger. The vehicle was awarded a default score of 16 out of 16 in the side impact crash test.
Click to expand...

So, no pole test and a "default score of 16 out of 16 in the side impact crash test"...? If it only scored 59.25% in the offset crash test, what would lead them to believe that it would get full marks for a side impact? Aaaah, but Aussieland's standards call for a side impact simulating a small car crashing into the vehicle being tested, and with the GWM having a high seating position it's exempted from the test and sommer gets full marks!? This is why EuroNCAP is much more meaningful than the rest of these tests. And the GWM is still an unmitigated disaster.

No thanks...
 
enigma243 said:
It's not so much them being bollocks, as that the EuroNCAP is the most stringent and for that reason the de facto standard. As an aside, did you read the Aussie test?



So, no pole test and a "default score of 16 out of 16 in the side impact crash test"...? If it only scored 59.25% in the offset crash test, what would lead them to believe that it would get full marks for a side impact? Aaaah, but Aussieland's standards call for a side impact simulating a small car crashing into the vehicle being tested, and with the GWM having a high seating position it's exempted from the test and sommer gets full marks!? This is why EuroNCAP is much more meaningful than the rest of these tests. And the GWM is still an unmitigated disaster.

No thanks...
Click to expand...

It scored same as the Camry :) but again - you are South African - we are bred to be negative! It is high enough to keep you alive and doesn't roll over like a Toyota :)
 
shearder said:
It scored same as the Camry :) but again - you are South African - we are bred to be negative! It is high enough to keep you alive and doesn't roll over like a Toyota :)
Click to expand...

The Camry actually had to do the side impact test, no?
 
shearder said:
It scored same as the Camry :) but again - you are South African - we are bred to be negative! It is high enough to keep you alive and doesn't roll over like a Toyota :)
Click to expand...

Actually, you'll find that "high" cars that aren't engineered properly are bloody dangerous in an accident to the occupants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X