Perhaps you can post a copy or reference to the article then? I've been a member of Which for many years - including when the Metro was introduced - and can't remember this one at all. Or are you merely quoting a press report?
I'd love some proof, Huge.
Of course big business hate them - because they can't be influenced by the big bucks of advertising. And I do have a pal on their 'board' who is one of the most honest people I know. Any firm evidence of any corruption would wind him up and get results.
The fact is the Mini boxes from the 60's were actually better than the
80's Metro boxes from a strength point of view- Two things happened when the A+ engine was introduced for the Metro and Mini, the helix angle of the gears was changed to reduce noise and a critical bearing that was always expensive was replaced by a substandard one.The result in the early 80's was excessive bearing and thrust washer loads eventually resulting in gearbox failure, particularly in the
1.3's, the MG and the MG Turbo.In a similar way tosspot Quentin Willson declared the Mini was a better buy than the Mini because it was "more reliable" and would always start in the morning. Effectively they were the same car, built on the same production line, just with a different body. Just as he got that wrong he also managed a few years ago to sell a few cars that had time traveled hence reducing their mileage - yet he calls himself the motorists friend.
Which is and always has been crap though.
Right. Nice to have inside information.
I had very early Minis in the NE of Scotland and never had starting problems in the coldest of days. Same as any other car with SU carbs - unless something was wrong.
So saying the Metro gearbox was crap was crap?
IMHO, most simply read the press synopsis of Which reports. Which are about as accurate as most press synopsis of *anything*. And I'd rather they didn't allow them - or charge dearly for their use - and have editorial control of the contents - and a right to reply. To get the benefit of those tests, you have to read the results completely and carefully - it's mostly all there. Then you'll understand that they really do rather a good job. Glance through them and you'll just get what they are designed to do - to give a rough guide to those who really aren't much interested in the product but want something which is adequate and good value for Mr or Ms average.
But anyway, you're not forced to buy Which or pay for it through taxation or advertising. It is paid for *purely* by subscription. Which begs the question why so many seem to hate it. I'd say it's because it can't be 'bought' by big business, and that scares many.
I guess it comes under 'fair use' and no doubt Which would (privately) reckon that all publicity is good publicity. What you say is also true of political stories: what the Institute of Fiscal Studies actually said in their recent report on incomes is very different to the Michael Howard/Daily Mail version of same.
I object to hearing 'headline' reports on the news before I've even received the current issue. Few can read it before the evening of the day it's meant to be received by, so I'd like an embargo on reports for a day after that.
Right. Not familiar with that one, but certainly familiar with politicians of all colours bending the truth or statistics to suit their views.
A fairly recent Which article sticks in my mind. It was a memeber's survey of their cars - reliability and what they thought of them. So basically a straw poll, and open to experimental error, but of interest nevertheless.
Jaguar didn't do terribly well on the reliability front. On a sample of about 60 recent cars.
Jaguar (Ford) went ballistic saying the sample was far too small to be meaningful.
But if you read the piece fully, it turned out that those owners were
*very* satisfied with their cars, their dealers - and what's more would be happy to recommend them to friends, and buy another. Ie, exactly what a car maker should be aiming for and proud of.But the headline makers of the media simply wanted a headline that said a Jaguar was less reliable than some boring car costing half the price.
We interrupt this programme...
Hi
Remember me? Im the original OP asking why I could not get the book in the shops.
Anyway my copy from Which? turned up yesterday, thanks urchaidh, with the part-p and harmonised wiring additions.
Im happy!
OK, carry on people.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.