Modern Cars, they're a bit **** really.

K.C. Leblanc

K.C. Leblanc

K.C. Leblanc

Soldato
Joined
13 Sep 2003
Posts
8,557
Location
Glocestershire
For the last 6 months I've been driving a 1993 Volvo 940. To be frank it was on borrowed time when I bought it for £300 and it's now very broken. So it's been replaced with a 2002 Octavia.

Yes I know in real terms the Volvo cost a lot more when it was new. But my god in comparison the Skoda's just horrible. I think I'd have most of the same gripes if I'd swapped the Volvo for a newer one. So in an attempt to quantify my ramblings let's have some bullet points.

  • Visibility, older cars have much more slender pillars giving a much better view. Despite being massive the 940 was a doddle to park. You could get within inches of other cars with confidence because you could clearly see what you're doing.
  • Under the bonnet, the Volvo's engine didn't have any silly covers and the engine was the right way round. Almost everything under the bonnet was accessible and despite only having a basic mechanical knowledge I could pick out most components and work out what they did. One the other hand most newer cars seem to be designed on the basis that under the bonnet is only restricted to main dealers.
  • Tyres, it didn't have either alloy wheels or low profile tyres. Net result was a decent set of tyres could be bought for £300 and a kerbed rim could be repaired with a hammer for next to nothing. Yes I know alloys with slim tyres look nice, but they're move expensive to replace and don't do the ride any favours. Surely there's no need for them on a mid spec mainstream car.
  • Driving, the Volvo 940 isn't a sports car. But on the other hand you could tell what was going on when you were cornering. Most of the newer cars I've driven are too insulated and don't really seem to give you any clue what's going on.
  • Design, I've driven a Citroen, a Peugeot, a VW and a Volvo all from the early 90s. And they all had a very defined personality, none of them were better or worse, but they were all different and it was clear that the manufacturers had different aims and aspirations. These days I get the feeling most manufacturers are aiming to make the same product. Yes we have cars like the Mini and the Citroen DS range, but their the individuality seems to me to be a bolt extra.

Sorry for the slightly wooly rant, but I just get the feeling that in some ways we're going backward. I'm almost tempted to shell out a stupid amount of money to fix the Volvo on the basis that I will end up with a car I prefer to something I could buy newer for the same amount of money.
 
Last edited:
Visibilty...give you that. But the trade off is better crash protection, and more and more cars are fitted with parking aids to compensate.
Bonnet...yes, but im guessing you're going to spend less time under the bonnet of a modern car anyway.
Tyres...just because a car has alloy wheels doesnt mean it only comes with low profile tyres.
Driving...thats a side effect of improved comfort I imagine, and also car specfic. Im sure plenty of modern mundane cars give good driver feedback.
Design...purely subjective, but I think most modern cars will look better than a 90s Volvo.

I might miss some aspects of slightly older cars, but on the whole I think its a bit of a stretch to claim that modern cars are **** because of that :p
 
I'm the opposite, I love all the extras you get on well specced newer cars.

I've got a Foucus Titanium at the minute and it's got loads of kit on it, things that I would have thought would only be on much higher priced cars.

I drove my brothers Rover (little sporty hatchback thing) he's got the other week and was surprised how bare it was inside and utterly **** to drive. Give me fancy new cars all day :D
 
So what you're saying is, a car that was always crap, is in fact crap.

Stop the press!

I hardly think just because you feel an Octavia from 2002 is rubbish, that you can brandish all modern cars ****.....
 
I drive a 2009 car and a 1994 car. The 2009 car is absolutely streets ahead in terms of comfort, equipment levels and economy.

But I'd rather drive the 1994 car because it has personality and individuality. Everything else on the road nowadays is a boring jelly mould box that I would hardly look at twice (and I include a lot of expensive cars in that).

EDIT: Things I love about it (see sig)... the noise, the rumble and vibration as it starts up, the light and nimble feeling, sitting close to the ground in what is now a relatively small car (it was large for its day) and the utterly fantastic communication through the pedals and steering that you simply don't get nowadays. I even love the long gear throw and the fact you have to drive it rather than simply point it in a direction and press the go pedal. The 2009 is nice to drive in the cold wet winter but aside from those few months I'd choose the older car over it.
 
Last edited:
The tyre thing on modern cars is an interesting one. Its all very well making a warm hatch look cool with 20" rims and super low profile tyres, but when some McDonald's worker buys one for £2k second hand in 5 years time they are going to have a heart attack when even the cheapest set of tyres costs almost a grand.
 
G|mp said:
Rover (little sporty hatchback thing)
Click to expand...

What is this beast? I can't imagine there are any new cars that are worse than the majority of Rovers.

Skeeter said:
The tyre thing on modern cars is an interesting one. Its all very well making a warm hatch look cool with 20" rims and super low profile tyres, but when some McDonald's worker buys one for £2k second hand in 5 years time they are going to have a heart attack when even the cheapest set of tyres costs almost a grand.
Click to expand...

Part worns m8
 
Modern cars are overweight and worse visibility mainly due to fashion and safety.

Drive a 205 gti and that epitomises light weight, visibility and performance but you sure wouldn't want to have an accident in one, they fold up like tin foil.
 
Your Skoda should be fully serviceable under the bonnet at home, pretty basic car. My problem with modern cars is that the reliability appears to be receding after progressing so much from cars of the 60s/70s.
 
K.C. Leblanc said:
  • Design, I've driven a Citroen, a Peugeot, a VW and a Volvo all from the early 90s. And they all had a very defined personality, none of them were better or worse, but they were all different and it was clear that the manufacturers had different aims and aspirations. These days I get the feeling most manufacturers are aiming to make the same product. Yes we have cars like the Mini and the Citroen DS range, but their the individuality seems to me to be a bolt extra.
Click to expand...

Sure;y this depends a bit on what cars you drove? As you mention the Mini and the Citroen DS are you sure you weren't just driving those same cars from the 90s and ignoring the fact that there will be boring samey cars from all the manufacturers that due to the fact that they were all the same no one bothered to keep them running for very long?
 
Top marque cars of the 80's were expected to have a lifespan of 20+ years in the case of Mercs. BMW's were just a little behind but due to being driven by faster types.

Today's cars are built down to a budget. True they have lots of options and toys, but in some areas the cost cuttings are quite big. I doubt some of the budget BMW's and Mercs will still be on the road in 20 years unless a lot has been spent on them. They are better protected so shouldn't rust as easily as in the past however so who knows.

I had a few issues with my new BMW a few years ago and remember commenting to a dealership that my 'old banger' 3 series that I recently sold even in this era did many miles without any problems, so how come my new BMW has broken springs already and a few other broken parts. The asnwer came that they don't make them like they used to.
 
Last edited:
What you really mean is that the original Octavia is a bit ****, not that all modern cars.

My car is from the same year and I have none of those issues other than the tyre price one.
 
[TW]Fox;25524459 said:
What you really mean is that the original Octavia is a bit ****, not that all modern cars.

My car is from the same year and I have none of those issues other than the tyre price one.
Click to expand...

If you read the list of the OPs gripes they aren't specific to that era of Octavia at all.

I agree on the visibility. Going from my 2002 Octavia to a 2008 Grande Punto was a real eye opener as I found the front visibility shocking. I found the same on other new(ish) cars that I've driven as well.

People get a bit hung up over engine covers I think. They take a few minutes to remove at most and then the oily bits are fundamentally the same. I find basic servicing on my 98 MX5, 02 Octavia and 08 Punto pretty similar in terms of access. The addition of bolt on complexity and things like direct injection do raise the bar beyond the traditional home mechanic but that doesn't effect regular maintenance on the whole.

Tyres, completely agree. Give me a comfortable ride over some big rims any day of the week on a mid level car.

I sort of agree with regards to driving but the trade off is a more comfortable ride. Wrap me in a bubble and deliver me to work, that is fine by me for the daily commute. I do like that analogue feel you get with an older car hence why I have an MX5 for weekends.

Design... Don't really agree on this one. Considering the constrictions and expectations designers are working with I think there are some very striking designs being created.
 
Why didn't you get a Volvo 960?
Good ones can be had for under a grand and they will go on forever.

The Mk1 Octavia is ****.

You used to have a Chrysler Neon didn't you? Surely the Octavia is better than that turd?
 
I agree with OP on this, for starters I dislike new modern cars as there is more stuff to go wrong on them and cost more to repair.

For example, gf's moms 08 focus had its LCD display lit up 24/7...cost £140 to be put right by ford by rebooting the computer, bloody rip off and shouldn't have broke in the first place.

I drive a 99/00 fiat punto 16v(vroom vroom) and my visibility is great as well as being simple to look after and cheap and easy to repair. The only thing I dont like about it is the sluggish electric windows which is an easy fix once I get around to it.



As for gadgets on cars like parking sensors for good drivers its just an aid to to improve there parking on which they don't have to rely on, for bad drivers its an aid that they will learn to rely on it all the time and the more people rely on technology the less they will think for them selves and working things out.

Thus, making people stupid....
 
There is one thing and it might just be me but the quality of the dashboard and materials used has gone down.

Some people say it's on it's way up again but with 2003/2004-2008/9/10 (Extremely vague I know) They just weren't up to scratch in my very narrow opinion.

E39 to E60 is a prime example.
 
Visibilty - Agree with that. I wouldn't class modern cars as hard to park, just not as good in terms of all round visibility. Parking sensors help here.

Bonnet - Totally agree with this, it's a side effect of ridiculous emissions laws dreamt up by people who have never had to run a car on any kind of tight budget.

Tyres - Steels are ugly I'm afraid, and if you don't want expensive tyres, don't buy a car with big wheels. I pay £150 a corner and I don't sympathise, I chose to go with that size.

Driving - There are many modern cars that are great to drive, so I don't agree here either.

Design - There are some good looking cars, some bad, but there's also a market for "cute" cars - these are normally aimed at young women, who only buy on looks and colour. Not a lot can be done about that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom