Great Wall Motors

[Ph@t-G]

The way I think of it is a Chinese-made car is just like buying a metal coffin on wheels, only when you crash and die, they can just transport the metal scrap with your corpse straight into the hole in the ground, cause your squished body will be too hard to scrape off.

The price that is paid for a Chinese-made car is around the same cost as a fairly decent funeral package, so essentially you're making a pre-payment for your funeral.

[Adriano]

I find it kind of ironic that everyone is saying how they are as dangerous as a 10 year old car, when we are on a forum that 95% people own 10+ year old cars that cost them more than a 3 year old GW, just sayig

[Mayuri Krab]

I find it kind of ironic that everyone is saying how they are as dangerous as a 10 year old car, when we are on a forum that 95% people own 10+ year old cars that cost them more than a 3 year old GW, just sayig

This & my car is almost 20 years old & has less "safety features" compared to a GW or other Chinese brand (no ABS or airbags)

& I find it even funnier when people make a big deal about missing "traction control" features on cars like Chery/Geely... FFS if you are losing traction so easily to the point of being dangerous in a gutless POS like that, then you must be driving like a complete wanker in the rain.

Edited December 21, 2012 by Mayuri Krab

[GTR-N1]

I find it kind of ironic that everyone is saying how they are as dangerous as a 10 year old car, when we are on a forum that 95% people own 10+ year old cars that cost them more than a 3 year old GW, just sayig

If I was to manufacture a car ( no matter how shiny it looked on the showroom floor ), and saved costs by using B grade steel as GW has done, I shouldn't complain if I was caught out by ANCAP don't you think?

[Adriano]

At teh end of the day ANCAP is a bit of a joke, if I was in a head on i would rather be in a GW than an I30(or hundreds of other new cars), its simple physics, the GW is higher and heavier, just dont run into a ranger or landcruiser etc, then again i drive trucks, so i only need worry about tanks, cliffs or immovable objects

[GTR-N1]

^^^ don't let me stop you.

Someone's gotta buy 'em

[m.j.h]

At teh end of the day ANCAP is a bit of a joke, if I was in a head on i would rather be in a GW than an I30(or hundreds of other new cars), its simple physics, the GW is higher and heavier, just dont run into a ranger or landcruiser etc, then again i drive trucks, so i only need worry about tanks, cliffs or immovable objects

And other truck drivers

[zoomzoom]

At teh end of the day ANCAP is a bit of a joke, if I was in a head on i would rather be in a GW than an I30(or hundreds of other new cars), its simple physics, the GW is higher and heavier, just dont run into a ranger or landcruiser etc, then again i drive trucks, so i only need worry about tanks, cliffs or immovable objects

Ah yeah. The "more mass is better" argument. Take a massive classic american car and see how well the mass argument is in terms of safety.

When you treat the car as a singular object, you dont take into account the metal behind you. When the engine and chassis in front of you suddenly decelerates, you need the structure around you to stop the metal behind you from wanting to crush into the engine. I dont see how sitting up higher is any better, if there is engine intrusion into the passenger area, youre still at risk of crippling leg injuries.

That structure where the passengers reside is where safety technology has made leaps and bounds. If GW arent up to par with technology, why buy something new?