Rate my car

Argyll Andy said:
You should’ve give me a shout and we’d have joined you :driving:
Click to expand...
I should have done Andy, the weather was nice for once. It was spur of the moment thing, usually spend my weekends working now :cry: 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.
 
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..
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1819.png
    IMG_1819.png
    284.9 KB · Views: 419
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.
 
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.
 
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)
 
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 :headbang:

I would ignore everything spews out
 
pvr said:
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)
Click to expand...
My Z4 has never failed an MOT (had 8 now), had two advisories, once for old tyres and once for corroded discs. Both were more than 3 years ago and it has had clean MOTs before and after. 31k miles on a ten year old car. Gets a score in the 500s, so around 50%. I don't understand how the data is computed.
If it becomes a 'thing' and people start to take notice of it, it could devalue very very good cars and increase some of those not so good IMO.
 
Pondrew said:
pvr said:
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)
Click to expand...
My Z4 has never failed an MOT (had 8 now), had two advisories, once for old tyres and once for corroded discs. Both were more than 3 years ago and it has had clean MOTs before and after. 31k miles on a ten year old car. Gets a score in the 500s, so around 50%. I don't understand how the data is computed.
If it becomes a 'thing' and people start to take notice of it, it could devalue very very good cars and increase some of those not so good IMO.
Click to expand...

Yep, it’s complete bollox :thumbsdown:
 
True-Blue said:
Pondrew said:
pvr said:
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)
Click to expand...
My Z4 has never failed an MOT (had 8 now), had two advisories, once for old tyres and once for corroded discs. Both were more than 3 years ago and it has had clean MOTs before and after. 31k miles on a ten year old car. Gets a score in the 500s, so around 50%. I don't understand how the data is computed.
If it becomes a 'thing' and people start to take notice of it, it could devalue very very good cars and increase some of those not so good IMO.
Click to expand...

Yep, it’s complete bollox :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

Don't mince your words but I agree its total nonsense, its utter crap and willingly be used by people who know nothing about cars and they will end up driving away junk based on what I can
 
My Z has 8 years life left in it, according to that.

The 30 year old Golf has 10 year left - just until I pay no more tax and MOT :lol:

The Golf condition is almost perfect though according to this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom