16th Feb 2006, 07:33
Quite right; you shouldn't fault a car for being too noisy, too small or poor-riding, or having poor visibility or performance when a test drive would have made all those deficiencies obvious to anyone with half a brain.
Only the fuel consumption issue is a sensible criticism.
Maybe it is only running on 4 cylinders!
3rd Mar 2006, 16:23
Either one of three things.
A. Something is wrong with the engine and it’s something you should schedule an appointment for.
B. If it is normal operating noises then it’s something that should have been picked up on during test drive and before purchase.
C. Substandard fuel. This could also explain less mpg.
If you are getting less fuel mileage then you may need to look at the source. Not all gasolines are the same. Be sure you are using “top tier” fuels. Shell, Chevron, Phillips, and QuickTrip to name a few. Lower quality fuels are usually purchased because they are perceived as more economical. But once the decrease in mpg is taken into consideration then any perceived benefit is already gone. Then add on the mechanical problems that substandard fuels can cause and they really were not a bargain at all.
Try changing where you get your fuel from first. If after a tank or two you don't see any improvement then schedule a service appointment.
Angel.
19th Sep 2006, 09:05
We also don't know all the facts here. Such as are you using top tier gasolines or poor quality no name brand gasolines? Are you keeping up with your regular scheduled maintenance intervals? Using correct oil and filters? Using any after-market performance chips or anything else?
Then again maybe if you had taken the time to give more background and explanation in your review it wouldn't be so open to doubt and speculation.
27th Sep 2006, 12:46
If a car is so mechanically fragile you have to be careful if it's "top tier" gas or not, that's pretty sad. Especially for a brand-new car that doesn't have a right to be fussy like a cheap, old, high-mileage car does. I've owned plenty of those and the only car I've owned that was fussy about what gas I used was a Toyota Camry. Darn all that high tech crap they put in cars now. I'm not talking about if you're using 87 octane when the owner's manual specifies a higher minimum grade. That's a no-brainer. I'm talking about using a different brand of gasoline over another. Most American driver's don't even contemplate that, nor should they have to when they pay tens of thousands of dollars for a new vehicle. You shouldn't have to stop and think to yourself "Oh wait, I'm driving a Ford, so it only runs well on Shell gasoline." How dumb. Any old car I've driven has run just fine on whatever brand of 87 octane I put in it, except for that fussy Camry. As far as I'm concerned, any vehicle of any brand that needs major engine or transmission repairs before 100k is pretty crappy. Any other major repairs before 50k miles is pathetic. There are better cars than that out there. I know, since I've owned a couple.
15th Feb 2006, 09:57
I think the first comment was entirely justified. The question the reviewer is supposed to answer is: "What things have gone wrong with the car?" There are way too many reviews on this site which answer that question with complaints about things the reviewer should have noticed prior to purchase, but didn't, and then they proceed to fault the vehicle maker for their own lack of observation. And this is for new cars, not even considering all those reviews by people who buy an old high-mileage beater for several hundred dollars, get upset because it needs repairs and proceed to brand that particular brand/model a "lemon" in their review because of it. Now THAT'S obnoxious!