[fatboyslim]

Well, my head said supreme reliability and I voted for supreme reliability. But my heart says the "thud".

Supreme reliability would basically means the overall ownership experience which in turn could mean "Total lifecycle cost" along with mimimum probability of getting stuck in "Ravines of Chambal" at 12 am. But all of these one can only logically think and feel from second person reviewes or post purchase experience.

But when someone goes to buy a car, one cannot measure reliability (I am talking about my own limited mental faculties here), and hence extrapolates that with the "thud". Hypotheis is if it "thuds" every component should have been made with quality. so in conclusion:

1. Supreme reliability: Post-purchase & logically derived
2. Thud: Pre-purchase & emotionally induced

Classic example: Skoda Laura & Toyota Corolla.

Well, I have managed to confuse myelf fully with this mumbo-jumbo. (In the act of wearing a helmet for all the brickbats coming my way)

Cheers!
fatboyslim


Cheers!
Fatboyslim

[ramzsys]

good reliability + nice thud = sweet sixteen always
good reliability + no thud = daily wife

no reliability + nice thud = one day affair
no reliability + no thud = Better luck next time..

[alpha1]

I asked earlier also, no one really respnded:
How does heavier gauge sheet metal leads to a better build quality?

[sdp1975]

Originally Posted by alpha1

I asked earlier also, no one really respnded:
How does heavier gauge sheet metal leads to a better build quality?

From Car Glossary - Build quality - What Car?

Generally, well built cars look and feel very solid and use high-grade materials throughout.

The heavier sheet metal would add to the feel of a car being "solid".

I like your avatar.

[abhi413]

"Supreme Reliability" is the main concern but can be only felt or realized over time.

The "Thud" on the other hand, gives you a sense of safety and satisfaction every time you sit inside the tank of a car. Very effective psychological boost.

It's a toss-up, but i guess the former wins this one. "Supreme Reliability" for me.

[vinmechanic]

Reliability in my terms would be predicting failure of mechanical component or system in its operating life. obviously nobody wants the failure to occur sooner. Japanese are best at their design and precision in manufacturing. My vote goes for reliability.

[Speed Pujari]

I am kind of somewhere in between when it comes to voting.
Are those options stated here are mutually exclusive in nature??

Does that means a car which provides supreme reliability cannot have a thud and vice versa???

I dont know what to say, but my palio has never failed till date and the major maintenance include replacing tyres, batteries, engine oil, clutch plates (75k kms), and routine servicing.

7 years on and no rattling like swift and the likes of Japs. No stability issues, and I get the wheel balancing/alignment done only once in a year, even then there is a very negligible deviation (the car faces all sort of terrain over the weekend and bangalore roads on weekdays).
I drive rash with no pity on car's clutch, brakes, Gas pedals , I dont care about the pot holes. Mechanic says the suspension can go on for another 20k kms.
I have no experience of owning Japs, but let the long term owners speak if they are getting same level of reliability?

My car is european and gives a veryyy loud thud.

What do I vote since both option holds good for me.

[ajman28]

I would go with supreme reliability.

When we say "thud" are we talking about the sound and feel alone?

The thud generally comes when the manufacturer uses heavier material. But does heavy material = more safety? I sure dont think so.

Originally Posted by shishir_bn

Best build quality IMO for indian standards in the AMBASSADOR car. You need not have ABS or airbag for that car.

Looks like someone needs to spend more time with Team BHP

[sajo]

I have gone with Supreme Reliability.

Build quality is nice to have, but reliability is what counts at the end of the day.

[HammerHead]

Though I voted for The "Thud", doesn't this thread trying to say that the cars with 'Thud' cannot be reliable? which IMO is not true. Wrong comparison

[agbenny]

I owned an Aveo, Which has Build Quality - But is that supreme reliable or thud? I do not think it has either.
I hope build quality begins from the body and goes in depth, in detail.

[buddha]

This is one interesting thread! And quite relevant these days, now that the Japs vs Europeans wars are heating up (especially VW - Honda).

Originally Posted by alpha1

I asked earlier also, no one really respnded:
How does heavier gauge sheet metal leads to a better build quality?

Indeed thats a good question come to think of it. Perhaps European carmakers understand human psyche better: "Presentation matters". Its well accepted now that all humans respond to advertising better when it endorsed by good looking faces. Similarly we like being in a thick, heavy car I suppose. Wonder why the Japs dont make one or two heavy cars just for the heck of it. As you said, its just heavier gauge sheet metal. How difficult would it be to use? Though I am guessing Jap engineers would hate the resulting inefficiency

[GTO]

Originally Posted by buddha

Indeed thats a good question come to think of it. Perhaps European carmakers understand human psyche better

Not really, it's a question of where they are coming from. Japanese metros are congested (not unlike India) & average speeds are really low. There's also tax incentives on small cars, while fuel efficiency is a priority.

Driving in Europe, on the other hand, is a lot about high speed (e.g. Auto Bahn is in the backyard of Mercedes, BMW and VW). Europeans (and North Americans) also stress on safety a lot more than their Asian counterparts.

Now, see how the local conditions reflect in the philosophy of their car makers. Heck, Japanese cars remain better to drive at low speeds, while the Euros rule at 150 kph.

Wonder why the Japs dont make one or two heavy cars just for the heck of it.

Check out the kerb weight of the new Honda Accord sometime. It's in the ballpark of an E Class

[NOS Power]

I've voted for supreme reliability. The thud does make one feel very secure but going to a dead stop in the middle of nowhere due to an electronics issue is something I won't take after spending a premium for European metal.

I for one think that Japanese cars are slowly starting to get that ''thud'' feeling too. I don't know how Lexus cars are in comparison to the German tanks but I think overall Japanese cars are getting there.

One more thing, if we talk about tinny older Japanese cars, a bit of damping inside the door panels and all should help.

A question to the members. Do you think Korean cars (i'm talking about Hyundai in general) are making cars that have a mix of both the supreme reliability along with a bit of thud? Or are they tinny like the Japs? The reason I am asking is that off late the Hyundai's feel solid and do not rattle at all even after extensive usage. Also the parts replacement frequency and overall reliability is very very good.

[srishiva]

"Thud" is not just a matter of using heavy metal. The sound is what we like.

As I have heard from my Detroit engineer friends, Lexus makes sure it gets the sound it wants (that of a wooden door thud, in LS). People work on that aspect and the sound is not just the accidental result of metal thickness.

Manufacturers do think about fuel efficiency, safety and feel (depending on the class in which they position their vehicles).

The euro vehicle panels are more rounded in appearance which is also done to give a solid feel. They know that.