Rate my car

[Pondrew]

Can you give me the reg’s so I can check this for you? It depends on so many variables that I could not give you an answer without checking myself.

Not that bothered TBH. But good luck with it!

[Argyll Andy]

I guess you are evolving it anyway..

The algorithm takes into a huge amount of data. I have a database of around 60 million UK vehicles with Mot histories, average mileage, scrapped mileage etc etc. I use all of this to see common patterns with vehicles that deteriorate at a set age, average mileage etc. equally, it will scan a MOT to check if any general big issues have shown up such as Oil leaks, Engine knocking, rust on chassis. Some of which are classed as ‘advisories’ which are actually detrimental to a vehicle’s health.

The website has been designed to allow not so vehicle-educated users understand if a vehicle is good, bad, reliable, all within a simple score. It’s very complicated to get the score absolutely accurate. But it’s getting better and better every week.

Given this info, curious how my Z4, which is under 2 yrs old gets a very poor score? Lack of MOT history etc have an adverse score weighting?

[Zed Baron]

I only got 658! for a car with full BMW/s/h, fantastic MOT history and only 37k on the clock said its getting old (over 10 years old). Guess tomorrow I'll move it out of its garage after the 8 years of ownership and then the pampered jalopy better head to the scrappers, I'll join it on the heap Shame, I took it for a sprint around Loch Lomond a couple of weekends ago and it still drives like new

[Argyll Andy]

I took it for a sprint around Loch Lomond a couple of weekends ago and it still drives like new

You should’ve give me a shout and we’d have joined you

[Pondrew]

Given this info, curious how my Z4, which is under 2 yrs old gets a very poor score? Lack of MOT history etc have an adverse score weighting?

It's cos your Scottish! Racist they are!

Or possibly because it's bollox. I tend to lean toward the latter!

[Zed Baron]

You should’ve give me a shout and we’d have joined you

I should have done Andy, the weather was nice for once. It was spur of the moment thing, usually spend my weekends working now Saw two E89s on the Crianlarich side, a grey and a white one. Heading up there , the road seemed to be full of Porsche's, R8's and McLarens.

[Pondrew]

I only got 658!

The reason above applies, mate.

[Zed Baron]

I only got 658!

The reason above applies, mate.

[Phoenixboy]

I’ll settle for that

IMG_2813.jpeg (114.08 KiB) Viewed 221 times

IMG_2812.jpeg (127.67 KiB) Viewed 221 times

IMG_2811.jpeg (133.45 KiB) Viewed 221 times

IMG_2810.jpeg (138.92 KiB) Viewed 221 times

[B21]

Well my wife’s friends MGF that is worth not a lot certainly got a hammering…that one reflects reality to an extent..poor thing is close to a scrapper..

[pvr]

My Z4 is a wreck

[True-Blue]

This seems pointless to me;

Unless it’s factoring in purchase price vs market average, point in the depreciation curve, work required, work recently completed, common problems of that model, it’s inherent reliability and average cost of repairs - etc, etc… far too many variables.

Also, some people take their vehicles to main dealer every year, have it MOT’d and then pay for everything on MOT to be fixed by main dealer. I’m guessing this would hammer a car due to failed MOT’s but not take into account Main dealer repairs/maintenance? - not saying that’s a good way to work, but lots of people do this.

[Ole gits rule]

My old Zed has a score of 825 - it has 83k miles on the clock on a 11 plate where as my M4 score's 855 with 31k on the clock being a 15 plate.

SWMBO DS3 Crossback scored 454 - it failed its only MOT on a slit in the tyres, not even noticeable unless on a ramp and rectified on the spot at the stealer, her car is a 2019 with 34k on it and immaculate, with every extra on it when purchased, also states the last V5 change was 11 months ago - we have had the car since day 1 so not certain its even got the correct car (DS3 v DS3 Crossback).

Not certain how this works as Zed Baron has a score of 658 and only 37k miles and Pondy's even less on both points?

Seems very random on how the algorithm works and is of no use to anyone who has any knowledge of or interest in cars from what I can see right now, it seems to be heavily weighted towards mileage and MOT data which is not a very accurate way to create a score as TB has said.

The quick tips give away more info, they appear to have nothing but mileage and MOT data, service history is not known and its states things like brake pads / tyres (consumables) have little impact on the score where as engine knocking does, how do they know what tyres are on the car /when they were changed or if the engine is knocking?

I say a car with four branded tyres is better than a car with 4 Nagasaki no stops on there, shows someone has probably not skimped on maintenance.

[pvr]

My high score car is my M and it stated that the positives were that it was a one owner car, and no MOT listings and low miles (16k)

[Ole gits rule]

Just put my Bro California coast in there and scored 660 - absolute nonsense thats a £70k transporter less than a year old with about 4K miles on it

I would ignore everything spews out