Modern car quality

E

Elfreako

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
1
Location
Randburg
"Cars manufactured in the 2000s (2000 - 2011) although lacking some modern features, had far nicer interiors compared to new cars on sale today".

Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
 
/stares at car's interior

Nope, disagree.
 
Elfreako said:
"Cars manufactured in the 2000s (2000 - 2011) although lacking some modern features, had far nicer interiors compared to new cars on sale today".

Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Click to expand...

Source of statement?

It depends on the car.
 
Older cars had less planned obsolescence I reckon. e.g. Some of the older mercs were ridiculously over-engineered.

Not sure whether that translates into better interior though. I'd be inclined to say no.
 
Older cars were meant to do a million miles and not break a sweat, and brand loyalty was a big thing a couple of years ago.

Modern cars are designed by engineers with small budgets and with little means to deviate, and limited by penny counting accountants who value gross profit above anything else.
 
wabbit16 said:
Modern cars are designed by engineers with small budgets and with little means to deviate, and limited by penny counting accountants who value gross profit above anything else.
Click to expand...

You can't paint all cars with the same brush. An i10 is very different to a BMW 3 Series.

It depends on the car. More expensive cars are perceived to have better quality materials. It was the same in the 80's, 90's and 2000's.

You get what you pay for.
 
What I was getting at was that cars are generally not built for longevity as volumes = profit in most cases. Different story when it comes to higher calibre cars such as Lambo's and Koenigsegg's, but I digress.

Every manufacturer wants to get to the top of the sales charts wherever they may have their cars up for sale, but you can't sell the average Joe a new car every 3 years if the one he is driving still suits his needs, giving Joe no reason to get rid of it. Of course this opens another can of worms if you look at people who trade up every x years, but for the man on the street who wants to buy a car to keep for 10 - 12 years it is another story altogether.

EDIT: I heard you say 'you get what you pay for' but I have seen Corolla's outlast Merc's from the same era which would be from a higher price bracket, but given that there are so many circumstances to take into consideration (mileage, how they were driven, service history, etc.) I consider it a moot point which could fork off into many debates eventually:)
 
Take a simple example, the 2000 Corolla and compare it to the new Corolla... The new one is much nicer!
 
Stuff and nonsesnse. Have you seen a 1967 Chev impala compared to the rubbish they make today?
 
Disagree, interiors have gotten better not worse.
 
For the same money as back then?

Sure, because inflation and exchange rates mean that what you paid for a GTI then you now almost pay for a bottom of the range Polo.

So of course the interiors and general quality won't be the same.

But a Polo from that era and a Polo now are also two very different things.
 
bheinche said:
Compare the interiors of the Mk IV Golf and the Mk V Golf.............
Click to expand...

Which one are you saying is better?

Because on the flip side I often hear that the V was again better than the VI for instance and I tend to somewhat agree depending on the spec level or more so the standard spec level.

Although I don't exactly recall the IV now I don't recall something particularly being wrong with it. Maybe just that the design was older and also more old fashioned. Doesn't mean there's a quality different though.
 
Nah disagree, newer cars IMO may look a little more "kitch" on some models, but overall I would say quality on most premium models that I have sat in are definitely better.
 
Generally I would say newer cars have the better interior, but it would also depend on the car. Some cars are just not designed to get awards for it's interior. E.g. The Datsun's interior :sick:
 
SauRoNZA said:
Which one are you saying is better?

Because on the flip side I often hear that the V was again better than the VI for instance and I tend to somewhat agree depending on the spec level or more so the standard spec level.

Although I don't exactly recall the IV now I don't recall something particularly being wrong with it. Maybe just that the design was older and also more old fashioned. Doesn't mean there's a quality different though.
Click to expand...

I am also confused, the IV wasn't that bad, in fact I think it was partially better than the V. Though it did suffer from VW perceived quality where little things would break, the clip on the cubby hole, the sun visor, the latch on the arm rest wouldn't work and a few other little things. My dad had a Jetta MK IV Highline and it was beautiful inside, I had a Polo MK4 Comfortline which was also not bad inside but suffered a similar issue where little things broke, that never broke on my old Astra IE.
Saying that my Cruze has issues with the steering wheel and gearknob which deteriorated quite badly in only four years, GM won't replace it as those parts only have a warranty for three years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X