In a rental car again overseas. This time a Mitsubishi Grandis. Oh good! I thought.
Well not - not really. Compared to the S-Max which only be a year or two newer in design there are several striking things which are far superior to the Mitsu.
1. Driving position is nowhere near as good, nor are you able to get as comfortable.
2. The steering wheel is too large and in a car park you are twirling away for little reward
3. The movement of the five passenger seats is far more awkward than the S-Max, with the middle row having a bench for two then a single seat and so less convenient for accessing the rear from either side. The rear seats do drop into the floor, but you have to remove the headrests first.
I do like the radio control with a big push push on off button which also controls the volume. It handles well generally and is a decent drive, but let down by the details.
|
Good points, Espada!
People often underestimate Ford cars....until they go and drive something else.
|
Having raised my kids at a time when A, i couldn't afford one and B, they wasn't much choice, i've never really got into MPV's, though one would have made life much easier i grant you.
So i'll take your word on driving position though i've not found Mitsi's uncomfortable in any way but slightly old fashioned which does have it's merits.
The trend towards small steering wheels and quick steering is great on a sporting car which is light and designed for being thrown around.
I notice S Max's are driven quickly on the road and seem nimble enough, not sure if that's what MPV's are usually really about though.
Maybe another view could be that the Grandis is a conservative type of people carrier and the S Max is a sporting version, there's customers for both i would imagine.
|
Perhaps yours was a petrol model, Espada - otherwise you'd probably have mentioned that the Grandis is ruined by the worst installation of a VW PD engine I've yet come across. I quite liked aspects of the Grandis I tried, but there was nothing that was good enough to make up for that awful engine.
My smaller son, then aged four, came with me and kept trying to say something to me that I couldn't make out for the din of the engine. When I stopped and turned round to listen to him it turned out to be: "Dad, let's get out of this noisy old car."
|
|
They do indeed steadily improve over time. Good as it is, I'm nevertheless beginning to wonder how much behind the times my 2003 Focus is.
|
I'm not sure time is really the issue, L'Es. The S-Max is based on the Mondeo, itself a well-sorted design made for European tastes and conditions, and produced in large numbers that justify the engineering investment. Mitsubishi on the other hand doesn't have the market or resources to make an MPV specifically for Europe, so we get an adaptation of a global model - hence the bought-in diesel engine.
Your Focus may not be the last word in fuel efficiency and may not have fairy lights round the headlamps but in the respects that matter to you I doubt it's far behind the current crop. It's a mainstream model, of course, so it faces more competition, but the original Focus was so good you may find the opposition is only just catching up.
|
|
Time is certainly an issue-if you bought a new Ford(or any other make) in 2008,you would wonder how it could be improved,buy a new one now and they have been improved and will continue to do so in the future.
|
|
What a pity there hasn't been a commensurate improvement in driving standards........
|
Gone the other way, OS... or is it that there are just as many bad drivers around as there used to be as a percantage of the whole... just more of them?!
Back on the OP, try getting into a 60s or 70s car and see how things have changed!!
|
...try getting into a 60s or 70s car and see how things have changed!!...
Yeah, I can't imagine anyone wanting one now, particularly something like a Maxi. :)
|
>> Yeah, I can't imagine anyone wanting one now, particularly something like a Maxi. :)
>>
Or the 2.2 auto Princess that has replaced it! ;-)
I think one thing that has gone backwards is the use of interior space... Because we have to carry several bulky items around in addition to luggage (the wheelchair and tri-walker) I've had to look closely at interior space and how its used, as well as how easy it is to get in and out of the vehicle for someone with limited mobility...
Its surprising just how many "large" cars including many 4x4s are absolutely useless on both counts... On many its like climbing up Mount Everest to get in and even with their large size the boots are tiny!
If you look back to the Maxi (to use that example!) it was an extremely good use of space, plenty of legroom in the front and the back and a decent sized boot (which will take the folded wheelchair and luggage unlike the similar sized Focus) - and we have supposed to have improved... Hence my current car, the Roomster, which when compared with the similar sized competition (Meriva, Note, etc) is a positive Tardis... just a shame about the exterior design... having said that the Maxi was a bit plain as well!
Last edited by: hobby on Tue 28 Sep 10 at 10:48
|
...Or the 2.2 auto Princess that has replaced it!...
Not a bad way to get about, roomy and comfy, with a bit of poke.
What's the change on the auto like?
Some were a bit jerky, if I recall.
|
2.2 auto Princess
My old man had one of those, a "P" reg, metallic bronze with a vinyl roof. He loved it as I recall and so did we. It was my first introduction to the concept of "automatic" and "front wheel drive" in fact it's probably the reason I've always driven automatics. I can remember him doing 100mph in it somewhere around the Broadbottom area where my gran lived.
I'd quite like to take one out for a spin, just out of curiosity.
First car we had with front and rear arm rests too, how exciting that was for a little boy...
|
>> Some were a bit jerky, if I recall.
>>
This one's ok! Very relaxing to drive...
And yes, it does have the front folding armrests, which unlike the Roomie's which are folded up permamently, don't get in the way!
|
I believe there is a strong collation between cars 'improving' and the lowering standard of driving.
Its seems to me that the more the car does for the driver (auto lights, auto wipers, etc) the less aware the drivers become of their surroundings.
where I do agree that modern cars are more comfortable, Im not convinced that they are 'better' or even 'safer'.
Let me qualify what I mean - Yes they are 'safer' in as much as when involved in an accident, you now have airbags, tensioning seatbelts, crumple zones..
But then you have poor visibility- A, B and C posts in the way, low rooflines, high waists, useless exterior mirrors...
Also soundproofing is so good, outside noise can hardly penetrate the cabin.
All make an accident more likely unless you are taking 110% notice of your surroundings.
Hmmm 110% notice of your surroundings.... nowdays you don't need to notice if is raining or getting dark - the car does that for you!
Also, the feedback modern cars give is IMHO nowhere near as good as in the past, or in some cases as good as is needed.
I have driven a good many cars, and some gave me no clue to the road grip, the PAS, ABS, and traction control took all of that away - no wonder the snow earlier in the year caused gridlock.
All in all, I'm not a great fan of the modern car, and its many 'driver assistants'
Don't get me wrong ABS, seatbelts, airbags etc have saved lives, but just how many accidents could have been avoided if the driver had been more aware of road conditions, and had better visibility etc?
|
"All in all, I'm not a great fan of the modern car, and its many 'driver assistants'"
Agreed. One of the reasons I like motorbikes is the feel they provide for the road and one's surroundings. I can't help feeling that replacing airbags with steel spikes would reduce the accident rate, if only among pedestrians!
|
>> Its seems to me that the more the car does for the driver (auto lights, auto wipers, etc) the less aware the drivers become of their surroundings.
I've not been around long enough to know the difference but a guy i know, who has, says that the driver aids are a god send.
He reckons as recently as the 70s and 80s you would get folks driving in fog with sidelights; people driving with only a clear patch the size of a small envelope on the manky / otherwise obscured windscreen; he says driving at night without lights was so common that if you drove at night for 5 days, you would come across at least one car without lights on 4 days.
His theory is that these folks still exist, it's just the computer does it all for them so they're not as obvious.
My theory is that driving's become much more accessible to all sorts of folks (which in general is a very good thing), folks who in previous decades would have not considered learning to drive because they thought themselves not able.
|
>> He reckons as recently as the 70s and 80s you would get folks driving in
>> fog with sidelights; people driving with only a clear patch the size of a small envelope on the manky / otherwise obscured windscreen; he says driving at night without lights>> was so common that if you drove at night for 5 days, you would come across at least one car without lights on 4 days.
there still are people like that
>> His theory is that these folks still exist, it's just the computer does it all for them so they're not as obvious.
I followed a car though a wooded area, its lights were flashing on and off as it passed under trees, was that safe? anyone in a sideroad could have thought he was flashing them out.
>> My theory is that driving's become much more accessible to all sorts of folks (which in general is a very good thing), folks who in previous decades would have not considered learning to drive because they thought themselves not able.
Well - if they weren't able (as in safe) back then, they will not be today - those are probably the idiots who cause most accidents by panicking, poor positioning, not noticing other road users etc...
|
>> those are probably the idiots who cause most accidents by panicking, poor positioning, not noticing other road users etc...
Yeah they definitely are (and from some of my other posts it's clear i get just about annoyed as it's possible to with them :-), but bigger picture, mobility of population is a net benefit to the country and its inhabitants. Even if they can't drive for toffee, as long as the accidents are mostly survivable it's still a net benefit.
|
|
I drive a Grandis a while back, a diesel. I thought it was dreadful. Noisy engine, low rent interior, choppy ride, not much space in rows 2 and 3 for anyone over 5'11" and little boot space.
|
|
Worst car I have ever driven was a 1981 Morris Ital owned by my ex father-in-law. It would have been in the early 90s and I drove it from Liverpool to Manchester. I was shocked by it's poor brakes and tendency to pull to one side under braking, tram-lining, body roll, pitching, and general wibbly wobbliness. It gave me a healthy new respect for my old 79 Peugeot 505 which had none of these traits and was superior in every conceivable way.
|
|
I don't want to harp on this but years ago lots of car radios had a big knob that you pushed for on/off and turned for volume. Wasn't it a good idea? Didn't even have to be on the steering wheel...
|
|
Absolutely Mike, the Lexus has that and it's perfect. No OTT crazy graphic or numbering system to indicate volume, just a big, round button that sits just where my fingers fall when I'm leaning on the arm rest.
|
>> No OTT crazy graphic or numbering system to indicate volume
Bah. COMPUTER. RADIO ON. SOMETHING LOUD. LOUDER. ;-)
|
The S-Max really is a revelation, and has left the rest of the MPV market standing in my opinion. My brother and sister in law bought a 2.0 TDCi Titanium X about six months ago, and it still amazes me how Ford have managed to make such a big, relatively tall car handle and steer like that. It feels the big old lump that it is when you first set off in it, but within minutes, it shrinks around you and feels like a well set up sporting hatchback. It's agile and light on its feet in a way that a 1.8 tonne car has no right to be, and the way it brakes, turns in to a corner, and the way it constantly gives you feedback through the steering and seat cushion is frankly astonishing for a car of this type.
Most impressive of all to my mind though, is that it does all this without sacrificing any of the core values of a good MPV. It's easy to drive, smooth riding, quiet, spacious, versatile, practical, easy to get in and out of, and very comfortable. It's also screwed together and finished in a way that wouldn't disgrace any of the premium German brands, and which you wouldn't have dreamed of on a Ford a decade ago.
In my humble opinion, it's one of the best, most accomplished mass market cars for a very long time.
|
|
My personal beef is with clocks in cars. I just want one where I can tell the time by looking at the position of the two hands with a knob in the middle to wind the time forward or back. Not some digital contraption where you need to consult the three pages of the manual devoted to the intricate series of button pushes needed alter the time, which happens frequently as they are hoplessly inaccurate.
|
Cars have definetly improved with time, in terms of comfort and quality.
Its the drivers aids that sometimes I dont like, some of them have been introuduced but not quite thought out.
Auto Lights: on the Vectra the rotary switch allows you to have, in this order
Auto (Left) - Off (Middle) - Side (right) - Dipped (Far right)
So even then I can choose whether or not I want to use the auto function which is used when SWMBO takes the car on a long journey. - I Like this its ok
However I notice that its common place now and they have included this on the new insignia to have them in this order
Off - Auto - Side - Dipped
So I have to use Auto whether I like it or not and this is true in SWMBO C4, Tenchnically you have to have them on auto whether you like it or not
It may not matter to most, but it matters to me. its not hard to reach down and switch the lights on when I want them on, not when the car things its best to.
Auto Wipers, Why Cant I have the option to switch between auto wipers and manually adjusted intermittant, without having to have it taken out by the manufactures diagnostic machine, i could then choose for myself if i want the car to do it, or control it myself.
Auto (useless) > Speed 1 > Speed 2.
Some things though Brilliant
Heated Mirrors - Saves making mucky wipe marks all over the mirror
Cruise Control - Fantastic when there is noone around
Auto Dim Mirror- Good, its a nice to have, not nessarcery
|
|
A good well designed pleasant car will stand the test of time.
|
Sorry Guys - been away from the computer for a few days.
Driven the Grandis more now and it has the petrol engine, which has little oomph until 2500rpm, a four speed gearbox (auto) which is too few gears for so little torque and whilst I am getting used to the driving position, you do realise after a while that the interior is pretty low rent although adequate.
The low ratio steering is driving me mad though!
Going on a log trip today so will let you know how it fares on a mix of highway and mountain roads in 33C temp.
|
|
Starting from its first release, how old does a car have to be before it's behind the times?
|
Hard to give a single answer to that, L'Es. You and I both have cars from the early 00s that we've had since new, and both are based on architecture launched in 1998. Yet mine doesn't feel like an old-fashioned car - although there's sometimes no getting away from the feeling that it's becoming an old one - and I don't suppose yours does either. But then we chose them carefully and they were well-regarded models in their time; owners of 2002 Vectras and Stilos might feel differently.
We might look at this in terms of decades: from 1980 to 1990 the key area of progress was reliability - my first car was an Escort 1.3 bought new in 1989 and it never went wrong, whereas my parents' cars in the 70s and early 80s frequently refused to start on cold or wet days. In the 1990s it was crash safety, with the accompanying increase in weight - my Escort weighed 830kg and even a base Focus would have been 300kg more - and in theft prevention.
Much of the progress in recent years has been in fuel efficiency and emission control. BMW has been the star performer here but there's also been a lot of putting small engines in large bodies - a 1.6D in a Volvo V70! - to keep the official statistics favourable, and the introduction of such things as DPFs, which serve a purpose but are not without their own problems. My Volvo seems more than adequately fuel-efficient, to the extent that I doubt a new one would be any better in real-world use.
I may just have used a lot of words to avoid answering the question. What do the others think?
|
Many hatchbacks still do not drive as well as my old 2002 Focus.
On t'other hand, it didn't have ABS or as many airbags as today's model.
I think a car from the 90s would seem dated, but one that's under 10-years-old much less so.
|
Having driven for nearly half a century (!) key improvements have been:
ease of driving and comfort
reduction in maintenance and improved reliability
safety
rust resistance.
Well that applies for most cars except: Mercedes, Mazda diesels, all Vauxhalls, all Renaults and Fords (rust).
|
...and Fords (rust)...
"Which Fords?" he said, rising to the bait.
Everyone tells me early Kas rusted, although many owners - including Humph on here - will give you an argument.
No other Fords made in the last 10 years are particularly prone to rust.
|
"No other Fords made in the last 10 years are particularly prone to rust. "
A statement made in total ignorance I fear.. of Ford's extensive rusty model range including:
Mark4 Fiesta - sills.
Puma: everywhere with unpainted metal in parts.
the Ka
And various threads of people complaining of rusty Mondeo doors..
That's the trouble nowadays : as peeps grow older their memory and eyesight fail :-)
|
Pumas are old now, as are MK 4 Fiestas, assuming we are talking about the same model.
Ford have probably sold more cars in this country in the last 10 years than any manufacturer.
The overwhelming majority are no more prone to rust than other makes, and not so prone as some.
"Fords rust" is a generalisation that does not stand up to even cursory examination.
|
>> No other Fords made in the last 10 years are particularly prone to rust.
>>
Mk3 Mondeos were.
Not sure if I am allowed to link back to "the other place" so I won't. Fri Oct 12 2007 highflier started a thread. I seem to remember, possibly incorrectly, rtj having the issue with his previous co. car too.
|
|
I think some cars date quickly, others less so and it is partly a reflection of the competition at the time. The Grandis is a good car, but the S-Max just blows it out of the water. A friend here in Israel drives a Grandis and when he was in the UK in the summer he rented an S-Max. Like me he liked it so much he is buying one to replace the Mitsu.
|
>> Like
>> me he liked it so much he is buying one to replace the Mitsu.
>>
The S-Max is indeed a very nice car, which drove very well on my test drive. I would probably buy, but for 2 factors:
1. No spare wheel - even the new Grand C-Max will have the option of a spacesaver, apparently.
2. The tales of woe and unreliablity on the S-Max forums - mostly electrical problems, but also leaking air-cons, etc. The dealers don't seem to acquit themselves too well, either.
|
...Mk3 Mondeos were...
OK, OK, apart from Fiestas, Mondeos, Escorts, Pumas, Consuls, Zodiacs, Kas, Granadas and the Model T, what has Ford ever done for us?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vbSRaXH3NM
Last edited by: Iffy on Mon 27 Sep 10 at 12:25
|
No Focus CC in that list, Iffy?
};---)
|
...No Focus CC in that list, Iffy?...
Not only do they rust through in no time, but the upholstery rots because of the regular soakings it gets from the leaky roof.
I know that's true 'cos I read it on an internet forum.
|
>> Hard to give a single answer to that, L'Es. You and I both have cars
>> from the early 00s that we've had since new, and both are based on architecture
>> launched in 1998. Yet mine doesn't feel like an old-fashioned car - although there's sometimes
>> no getting away from the feeling that it's becoming an old one - and I
>> don't suppose yours does either.
It drives OK but I get the feeling it's behind the times regarding features.
|
My first car....
2 cylinders; 4 valves per ENGINE!; no distributor; no radiator; no injection; no overhead cam; just about had heating in winter; no brake servo; certainly no driver 'aids' eg ABS, ESP, BFD etc; no PAS; no electric anything; no A/C; no head restraints; no airbags; no rear parcel shelf as standard; no central locking (remote or otherwise!); no trip computer; no radio as standard (let alone an In Car Entertainment system!).
That was < 20 years ago, but I suppose it was 10 years old by then, and the design dated back to the late 70's.
Not a 2CV - a Visa Special with the 2CV engine bored out to a heady 652cc, with an igntion computer!!! Taught me a lot about anticipation..... I'd love to have another one, but I would probably think it was noisy, slow and had hopeless brakes. Actually I thought that at the time!
|
I think we've strayed from the point of Espada's OP, which was that his S-Max seemed hugely more advanced than a rented Grandis. My counter to that was that he was comparing a particularly good model from one manufacturer with a mediocre - as well as older - one from another, so he was observing more effects than just the passing of time.
I don't think anyone doubts that a Visa or Princess would be inferior to its modern equivalent, but what examples are there of recent cars that are as far ahead of slightly older competitors as the S-Max is of the Grandis?
Dreadful thing, thread drift.
};---)
|
Rave review of the new C-Max here:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/road-tests/ford/c-max-2010?
Seems Fords keep getting better.
|
Back in the UK and straight into the S-Max at the airport. Ah - Home! Great driving position, positive steering, no suspension crashing over humps and potholes, torque low down.
I really like the outside look of the Grandis. Its a pity it isn't quite so advanced inside.
|
Its amazing how cars improve over time - Londoner
