[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by Clivey

Except that's precisely the opposite of my point - I considered just about every new-ish car in the category and found that the C4 was the one I could barely find fault with.

My criteria (briefly - for a daily driver): A C-segment hatchback that manages over 40 MPG in town, is comfortable cruising along the motorway (and when I'm stuck in traffic), looks interesting and performs reasonably well when I'm on the right road for more enthusiastic driving.

The 147 - Too old in terms of design, the least safe, flaky quality.
The 1-Series - Too expensive, junior-repmobile image, don't like the front-end styling, everything's optional at extortionate cost.
The A-Class - Only just affordable, not sporty enough.
The Astra - 1.7CDTi engine outdated, missing desirable specification and lack of cubby holes in the cabin.
The C30 - Only 4 seats, expensive and hadn't been on the market long enough to find cheap enough used examples.
The Civic - Too expensive, the only diesel is too big (purchase price, insurance costs, fuel bills) and once again, hadn't been on the market long enough to find cheap enough used examples.
The Focus - Just horrible apart from the handling/engine/bootspace.
The Golf - Too bland (only top-of-the-range models have any styling details on top of the basic shape), lacking desirable features, the same "repmobile" image as the BMW and expensive.

I see your point but I think you are rather limiting it. What I mean is that when you consider a certain car to be a class leader you've got to consider the whole range not the model that suits you best. If I did that I'd consider the 1-series to be top of the tree and yet I don't think it is, but it suited what I wanted/needed.

I mainly agree with your analysis, but I still think the Golf's the best. Another interesting alternative to consider is the new cee'd. Zero cred and image but it seems to be a good car with excellent diesel engine especially. And in 3 door form it's quite a looker.

Ultimately, like the supercar discussion, it all comes down to subjectivity. So we porbably won't agree.

Originally Posted by Clivey

Why is that, then (that you can't like it)? As I said - I'd consider it if I were looking for a 2.0-litre and had that sort of money to spend, but I'm glad we agree that
the 1.9-litre 105BHP diesel isn't the greatest.

I think I have the same problem as you, I just can't get round the styling. It's just too bland and too tall. The Scirocco seems to solve that, but annoying it's wider (why?) and it'll probably be even more expensive as well as not having what for me is the strongest selling point for the Golf, the twincharged engines.

Thing is if I was to buy a Golf I'd probably buy a Seat Leon, altough that doesn't have the twincharged engines either. Damn...

Originally Posted by Clivey

Hmmm, I didn't realise they'd not yet released an autobox for the 2.5 - they have for the 2.3, though. My guess is that'll be added as the range expands.

As for the price: If you honestly compare it to the domestic competition, you can't tell me it's not worth it...!

I can. But can they?