Any Experience with the Chery?

There is a Chinese car company called Chery that I don’t know much about. I remember seeing a youtube video a few years back of a guy reviewing his, saying that it gets a lot of bad publicity, but he loves it for “x” reasons. Well, I had forgotten all about it until I got to Taiwan and started seeing them! The entire idea is just “neat” to me. I mean, its this super small, 4 door, underpowered, bare bones car that is cheap to buy, good on gas, and will get you from A-B without being an old beater. Maybe I am so fascinated because its so completely opposite of what I am used to seeing in the US.
Anyway, I saw a few for sale, and really cheap (I also see a lot of Suzuki Solio’s really cheap, too), and I thought to myself “Man, I would love to own one of those just to have something cheap to play with and not take seriously”.

What I would like to know is, does anyone have any first hand experience with them? What can you tell me about them? What are your thoughts? If the Chery is just absolutely “avoid at all cost”, then can anyone tell me what the best bang for the buck is when it comes to a “micro” car?

I didn’t bought one but tried one while I was in China. Looked nice, good finishing. I was looking at Chery A3 that is designed by Pininfarina. I owned another Chinese car from a small manufacturer: Shuanguan Motors. Now, keep in mind that the engine would probably consume more than a european or a japanese car (one of my friend owned a Zhonghua FRV, similar to Cherry A3 and the oil consumption was lile 12 liters per 100km on highways for a 1.6L engine), on the long run I would also consider reliability. Some cities in China use Cherry A1 as cab and after few years those cars are a mess compare to the Huyndai Elantra used in Beijing (some of them are over 500K km and still running fine and impecable).

pop my chery?

try having a crash on one of them.

worst piece of shit on the road.

Well Chery owns 100pct of VOLVO now, so hopefully some of that tech will get into the Chery .

And, unfortunately, vice versa.

cf Nissan / Renault hook up. Allegedly (and I think, believably) Renaults got a bit better, Nissan’s got quite a bit worse.

On Chery, yes. I have had some experience with the local Taiwanese car. The rubber components can perish and split within 1 year. I even had to replace a petrol filler pipe which had perished and split within 18 months of being produced. The suspension was worn out after 1,000km and 18 months. The front wiper works tremendously slowly and doesn’t clear rain in a storm. the door cards fall to pieces and the cloth drops off after almost no wear and tear at all. The gearbox is an automatic manual style box with a harsh gear change to say the least.
The Chery suffers the highest rate of depreciation over any car on the market, and thats assuming anyone would repurchase it.

Now on the subject of platform sharing this isn’t always a bad thing. The European Toyota Aygo has been a great car even though it is a cooperation with another two French car companies. Volvo improved enourmously from using Ford’s C1 platform as well as Yamaha engines for the XC90.
Nissan have improved with the Tiida which shares a Renault platform but utilizes Nissan engines and boxes. Suzuki worked with Fiat on the SX4 program and I haven’t seen any poor results on that one.
Peugeot now use Toyota components on some of their cars. But would I want a Japanese car with European engine in it or gearbox? No thanks. But then again I’m not saying that cross developement in these cases would necessarily be a bad thing either.

[quote=“Ducked”]And, unfortunately, vice versa.

cf Nissan / Renault hook up. Allegedly (and I think, believably) Renaults got a bit better, Nissan’s got quite a bit worse.[/quote]

Yes when Chrysler merged with Benz. Benz got to be like Chryslers used to be. And Chrysler got closer to Benz quality.

I think Benz lost something like 20 plus billion dollars with their Chrysler debacle.

[quote=“tommy525”][quote=“Ducked”]And, unfortunately, vice versa.

cf Nissan / Renault hook up. Allegedly (and I think, believably) Renaults got a bit better, Nissan’s got quite a bit worse.[/quote]

Yes when Chrysler merged with Benz. Benz got to be like Chryslers used to be. And Chrysler got closer to Benz quality.

I think Benz lost something like 20 plus billion dollars with their Chrysler debacle.[/quote]

In my honest and humble opinion, and in relation to the subject of quality, I can’t agree that this merger alone had the sole responsibility for the detrimental effect to Mercedes quality. It has always seemed to me that the predictable and gradual reduction in Mercedes quality was due, not to merger deals or lack of will, but more to do with European government regulations pertaining to “environment” and “safety” as well as legislation pertaining to the workforce. Mercedes have cut and cut corners again and again to maintain their profit and image, but their vehicles have suffered hugely as a result. The way I see Mercedes is a shell of their former selves in that they can no longer produce a single, reliable vehicle. But they continue to turn on the consumer with tactile feel, audible and confidence inspiring sounds and interesting sounding acronyms. If you ask me, and forgive me for speaking freely, but, they produce some of the shittiest cars on the road. Crappy plastics that don’t go five years without turning tacky and gluey and dropping to bits, soy based wiring shrouds which turn brittle, flake and cause electrical shorts and fires within a few short years, the list goes on. I have seen better quality in Chinese cars, and I don’t say that lightly, believe me.
Chrysler? Believe it or not, I would say that some of their cars are better built than Benz, but the distinction isn’t great. It seems to me that Chrysler could do better if they spent more time on ironing out their awful build quality. Materials wise I would say they seem to be better than Benz, but then almost everyone is!
Benz is presently little but a brand and an excellent group of engineers. Unfortunately it seems blatantly clear that those engineers are not allowed to produce a car the way they see fit. They seem to have their feet and hands tied in very tight knots indeed by governments and the marketing department.

Renaults and Nissans:
I would consider myself as very much on the ground when it comes to car quality and performance.
I would whole heartedly say that as far as my own experiences, I have NOT seen Nissan performance or quality suffer as a result of dealings with Renault. I can’t say I have too much recent experience with Renault in Taiwan as their cars really do not sell well here, so I can’t speak for their brand. I continue to be a supporter of the Nissan brand so far however, although I have always been quite select in which models I recommend versus those I don’t.

[quote=“tommy525”][quote=“Ducked”]And, unfortunately, vice versa.

cf Nissan / Renault hook up. Allegedly (and I think, believably) Renaults got a bit better, Nissan’s got quite a bit worse.[/quote]

Yes when Chrysler merged with Benz. Benz got to be like Chryslers used to be. And Chrysler got closer to Benz quality.

I think Benz lost something like 20 plus billion dollars with their Chrysler debacle.[/quote]

In my honest and humble opinion, and in relation to the subject of quality, I can’t agree that this merger alone had the sole responsibility for the detrimental effect to Mercedes quality. It has always seemed to me that the predictable and gradual reduction in Mercedes quality was due, not to merger deals or lack of will, but more to do with European government regulations pertaining to “environment” and “safety” as well as legislation pertaining to the workforce. Mercedes have cut and cut corners again and again to maintain their profit and image, but their vehicles have suffered hugely as a result. The way I see Mercedes is a shell of their former selves in that they can no longer produce a single, reliable vehicle. But they continue to turn on the consumer with tactile feel, audible and confidence inspiring sounds and interesting sounding acronyms. If you ask me, and forgive me for speaking freely, but, they produce some of the shittiest cars on the road. Crappy plastics that don’t go five years without turning tacky and gluey and dropping to bits, soy based wiring shrouds which turn brittle, flake and cause electrical shorts and fires within a few short years, the list goes on. I have seen better quality in Chinese cars, and I don’t say that lightly, believe me.
Chrysler? Believe it or not, I would say that some of their cars are better built than Benz, but the distinction isn’t great. It seems to me that Chrysler could do better if they spent more time on ironing out their awful build quality. Materials wise I would say they seem to be better than Benz, but then almost everyone is!
Benz is presently little but a brand and an excellent group of engineers. Unfortunately it seems blatantly clear that those engineers are not allowed to produce a car the way they see fit. They seem to have their feet and hands tied in very tight knots indeed by governments and the marketing department.

Renaults and Nissans:
I would consider myself as very much on the ground when it comes to car quality and performance.
I would whole heartedly say that as far as my own experiences, I have NOT seen Nissan performance or quality suffer as a result of dealings with Renault. I can’t say I have too much recent experience with Renault in Taiwan as their cars really do not sell well here, so I can’t speak for their brand. I continue to be a supporter of the Nissan brand so far however, although I have always been quite select in which models I recommend versus those I don’t.

[quote=“sulavaca”][quote=“tommy525”][quote=“Ducked”]And, unfortunately, vice versa.

cf Nissan / Renault hook up. Allegedly (and I think, believably) Renaults got a bit better, Nissan’s got quite a bit worse.[/quote]

Yes when Chrysler merged with Benz. Benz got to be like Chryslers used to be. And Chrysler got closer to Benz quality.

I think Benz lost something like 20 plus billion dollars with their Chrysler debacle.[/quote]

In my honest and humble opinion, and in relation to the subject of quality, I can’t agree that this merger alone had the sole responsibility for the detrimental effect to Mercedes quality. . …etc, see above

Renaults and Nissans:
I would consider myself as very much on the ground when it comes to car quality and performance.
I would whole heartedly say that as far as my own experiences, I have NOT seen Nissan performance or quality suffer as a result of dealings with Renault. I can’t say I have too much recent experience with Renault in Taiwan as their cars really do not sell well here, so I can’t speak for their brand. I continue to be a supporter of the Nissan brand so far however, although I have always been quite select in which models I recommend versus those I don’t.[/quote]

I don’t have a personal opinion on this, since my experience of both makes (A Renault Dodge truck which was great, but arguably wasn’t really a Renault, a Renault 5 which was pretty good, though the automatic brake adjusters were a nuisance, and a Nissan Sunny which was probably the best car I’ve had, though the automatic choke was a nuisance) is positive, limited, and predates the Renault merger.

I was quoting a book I bought 2nd hand in Australia, The Dog and Lemon Guide. Its written for the ANZ market and of course isn’t necessarily gospel, but its generally convincing, For example, its extremely scathing about Mercedes.

4WIW on Nissan it says "Carlos Ghosn, the Renault man who turned Nissan’s fortunes around, has almost godlike status in Japan. However, what Ghosn did was the page one of any economics text book…Modern Renaults share bits with Renaults. Renault quality has therefore improved from “appalling” to merely “dreadful”, while Nissan quality has often dropped from “reasonable” to “poor”.

Some modern Nissans simply don’t have the reliability that you can usually take for granted with Japanese vehicles. For example, in a recent reliability survey, 40% of Nissan X-Trails had an engine problem.

A decade ago, Nissan was one of the most reliable Japanese makes, according to some British reliability surveys. Now its the least reliable Japanese make sold in Britain, according to the consumer magazine Which. "

(I’d guess quite a lot of British Nissans are / were made in Sunderland, so UK surveys may not be globally relevant)

[quote=“Ducked”]…Some modern Nissans simply don’t have the reliability that you can usually take for granted with Japanese vehicles. For example, in a recent reliability survey, 40% of Nissan X-Trails had an engine problem.

A decade ago, Nissan was one of the most reliable Japanese makes, according to some British reliability surveys. Now its the least reliable Japanese make sold in Britain, according to the consumer magazine Which. "

(I’d guess quite a lot of British Nissans are / were made in Sunderland, so UK surveys may not be globally relevant)[/quote]

So the big gripe on the British X-Trail is the diesel engine failure rate. The diesel engine is designed by Japan Nissan for use in only Nissans as far as I know. I am not sure quite how serious their issues are as we don’t get them over here at all. Their petrol X-Trails were very reliable.

I think you may have been quoting this one: dogandlemon.com/sites/dogand … _blurb.pdf

The Which survey of vehicle reliability considers issues AND cost of repairs. This can often skew the “reliability” of a vehicle quite a bit and in my mind isn’t in fact a reliability rating, but closer to a satisfaction rating. According to Which, the two most reliable “new” superminis on the market are the Peugeot 107 from 2005 onwards and the Citroen C1 :astonished:. Then in the most reliable “used car” supermini section, of cars from four to eight years old, we see Peugeot dead last. :ponder:

Still, I wouldn’t be too concerned with purchasing the brand with the lowest rating of a Japanese manufacturer because of issues with one or two models in particular. I’d rather take their worst Japanese car over the best European car any day. Unless it was an Isuzu! I hate working on those things! :wink: And of course, let’s all stay well clear of diesels! Eauach!

heres a thought … If you want a car , that literally gets you point a-b no issues? Chery can get you there. On top of anything else? Driving that car basically says your poor , but if u don’t care , go for it. Not many people can even afford cars so yeah. But I’d take that Suzuki over that Chery. Second, when maintenance comes to mind , its easy to repair, easy to replace, but how many times your replacing parts depends on how you drive . The ability to customize this vehicle is less compared to the Suzuki. Now , lastly, if your considering safety in mind, the Chery lacks safety completely. I’m gonna tell you straight up , most the blue trucks you see on the road, lack complete safety, except anything over 3.49 tons are Japanese so they are better built, but from what I heard the fuso’s in Taiwan are built by CMC and not actually by Mitsubishi so the safety standards are probably lower. I’ve seen accidents involving those micro-trucks. Let’s just say anything over a 45-50KMH impact from any side, and your looking at a fatality, permanent scars, broken bones, fractures. Not to mention your car will be completely totaled at the end of all this, compared to an average model vehicle. So , basically what my two-cents are. Avoid the Chery if you have some money to put out on a better micro-car. If your absolutely a stingy person, then go for the Chery, but in the end, all micro-cars are unsafe so … kind of a dilemma again LOL.

This is a huge assumption which isn’t really true. A car’s safety comes down to a number of main factors and weight and momentum may be one of them in the event of a collision with a heavier vehicle [at times], but the vehicle’s size is not simply the be all and end all of it’s level of protection and/or accident avoidance capabilities. One only needs to look at some of the crash testing reports at euroncap.com/home.aspx to see many examples of vehicle performance in crash testing. Vehicle size is not necessarily the determining factor in a vehicle’s “safety”.

Euro NCAP have provided a list of popular supermini test results on this page which can even be compared to some larger MPV vehicles on this page.
If there is one factor which seems to be apparent over the course of years of testing, it is that many more modern cars perform better in crash testing than many older models. This is largely due to advancements in engineering as well as more modern inclusions of standards such as pedestrian protection.

Of course there is an issue in Taiwan which is the lack of transparency concerning vehicle design and standards of safety and this is undeniably an issue for some. Of course for those which can afford it is sometimes more practical to purchase a foreign import vehicle which has been built to conform with standards such as the Euro NCAP standards for example.

So… in the end , I basically summed up your paragraph ? Dude, I’m not stupid, but really all what you said is great for being technical, but do people really want to spend their time reading something like that? I don’t mind reading what you said at all, but others might . And of all the vehicles I’ve driven, the smaller the worse, the lighter , the worse, basically. Now, yes I consider the factors of the speed, temperature, weather, weight of vehicles, anything you could think of. Now tell me , if you were to have a CMC Veryca crash head-on into a Chery ? Who would win ? None . Their both micro-cars, except ones a sedan or hatchback thing, and ones a micro-van or micro-truck. In the end, it doesn’t matter . I have seen some luxury cars pass with a marginal rating for their safety tests , yes, your right that not all cars for their size or weight or whatever can be judged so easily , but come on , if you were to crash a Mercedes into an Isuzu NPR, I’m bettin the driver of the Isuzu will be launched out the window while the whole front end of the benz would be trashed since their designed to deform on impact. Now if you were to crash a Benz into a a Mercedes Actros, or a Hino 700 series, I’m bettin the Benz would lose completely . I’m just simplifying what you said because in the whole end of buying a car, you have the risk of crashing it or having someone crash into you, and you can’t really predict when or what or how it happens, so any car you buy has a risk. Now I’d like to think I would like to purchase a vehicle with higher safety standards or weight or how the frame was made and designed for more money than buying a car that lacks pretty much everything . I don’t think of micro-cars any bad, and the fact that when I lived in China, I happily drove a Micro-Van around for almost a year. And let me tell you, it does get you to Point A-B. It does decent on gas. It seats 6 + Driver = 7 , it can carry loads in the back, just fold the rear seat back. Now , the cons ? Its a “No Frills” car which means nothing fancy, just all the basics. Radio, A/C/Heat/Steering Wheel, Clutch,P-Brake,Brake,Gas,Roll-Up Windows. It was a 1.1L, the one I drove . When I open the door, the thickness of the metal for the whole car was literally just sheet metals welded together a couple times. I rear-ended a JMC truck, which is a Isuzu NPR copy, at like 5KMH, and let me say, I ended up needing to replace the plastic grill, the plastic headlight covers, the plastic bumper, the cheap front metal hood. So , if you don’t have the cash, go for it.