Kia Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

This morning I tried to start my 2009 1,6L diesel ceed but I failed. First everything was normal…all lights on the panel were flashing, but car didn’t start up and all lights turned off. After that when trying to start up the car two lights come up only: ODO flashing (no numbers shown) and rear passenger belts indicator. Is it the problem with battery or something else?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Modern batteries fail very quickly nowadays (think its due to calcification?). My non-Kia car was fine one day then the next morning lights were flashing everywhere, relays switching yet it tested out OK when I took it to the factors. Called auto electrician who said it was deffo the battery and I replaced it, been fine ever since.
 

·
Registered
Cerato S Hatch Auto
Joined
·
1,237 Posts
That's true. Also, because a lot of the stuff is digital these days, as the voltage falls it gets past a point when there's nothing happening at all. In the old days, you just needed enough to get a spark.
 

·
Registered
Cee'd VR-7
Joined
·
391 Posts
That's both scary and worrying. Makes me think the "old days" weren't so bad after all, bring back the SU carburetor and points I say.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
That's both scary and worrying. Makes me think the "old days" weren't so bad after all, bring back the SU carburetor and points I say.;)
If you want the "old days" back you can have them. Presume you mean the days when cars started to rot away before they were 3 years old, the days when the brakes were so poor going down a steep hill resulted in a car full of acrid smoke, the days when there was a whole street of people late for work on a winters morning because their cars would not start, the days when exhausts were lucky to last a year, the days when cars needed an oil change every 3000 miles and a major service every 6000 miles. I could go on.

Back in the late 70's I had Escorts, a short service cost about £30 at 6 months and £60 at 12 months, that was £90 a year. I was earning about £100 thus it was about a weeks wage, our Ceed costs about £250 for an average service annually which is not a weeks wage and a rise of 2.77x.

Everone says they wish they could bring back late 70's petrol prices, a quick Google says it was £1.27 a gallon meaning fuel has risen by 4.7x in the same period. Suppose I am lucky that my salary has risen by more than the price of a gallon (just) thus my motoring costs are way less than they were in the late 70's/early 80's.

When I passed my test in 1974 petrol was £0.40 a gallon and I was on about £16.00 a week, you did not go far.

I have to agree with you that they were easier to fix but in reality it was good job there was a mechanic on every street corner who could weld metal to rust and fit a set of points.

Fitting a new battery every 5 or 6 years at a cost of about £60 is OK in my book.
 

·
Registered
Kia pro ceed 3 2013
Joined
·
271 Posts
That's both scary and worrying. Makes me think the "old days" weren't so bad after all, bring back the SU carburetor and points I say.;)[

Hello RT
I see you threw a pebble into the pond and waited for the result. You got something of a lecture, despite giving a wink.
I have to wonder about instant calcifications. It’s normally someone has left the key in the ignition and run the battery down. Description sounds very much likely that’s what happened.
Harking back to the ‘Good old days’ at least one could service ones vehicle using a bit of common sense and have mainly trouble free motoring. Sixty years servicing my own motor and now if I touch my car, rewire an electrical socket, fix a leaking roof, etc. someone has a dickey fit.
Happy days. There goes another pebble or two.
 

·
Registered
2010 Kia Cee'd 2 - 124BHP 1.6petrol
Joined
·
560 Posts
lol, ah the old pebble in the pond effect, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. I agree in part, that cars should be mechanical and not so computer driven (for the purposes of maintenance, it made more sense) and, it could be fixed with a spanner, or a kick! nowadays if the sensors go, then your looking at a large bill to be diagnosed, let alone before a spanner is considered! but without technology, our cars wouldnt be quite so comfortable, fun or entertaining as they are now!

A plus to both sides, as there are negatives! I guess cars in that respect can be likened to a battery, the positives make it lively, but the negatives, kind of just sit there, but whilst they sit there seemingly doing so little, they save you getting a down right shock!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
Lets think about it.

30 year old car that had a tendency to start rusting the day you took delivery and needed a service every 6000 miles. It had a 4 speed box and about 70 or 80 bhp if you got a 1600 petrol and did about 35 to the gallon on average. Manual windows, manual locking, tin wheels, no air con, no power steering, no ABS, no airbags, get the picture.

Or a modern car, service every year (2 years for my BMW), 12 year corrosion warranty, 6 speed box, 115 bhp, 50 mpg, etc, etc. In the last 10 years other than servicing none of my cars have needed a garage visit, not even needed a battery.

Which do I prefer I wonder.
 

·
Registered
Kia pro ceed 3 2013
Joined
·
271 Posts
Lets think about it.

30 year old car that had a tendency to start rusting the day you took delivery and needed a service every 6000 miles. It had a 4 speed box and about 70 or 80 bhp if you got a 1600 petrol and did about 35 to the gallon on average. Manual windows, manual locking, tin wheels, no air con, no power steering, no ABS, no airbags, get the picture.

Or a modern car, service every year (2 years for my BMW), 12 year corrosion warranty, 6 speed box, 115 bhp, 50 mpg, etc, etc. In the last 10 years other than servicing none of my cars have needed a garage visit, not even needed a battery.

Which do I prefer I wonder.
All so true, and as you point out to some effect, cars have improved through the years. Come to think though, so has everything else, not forgetting that most car drivers pay much wampum for computer servicing today.
My motoring is coming to an end soon, due to old age, but I still have to remember touring Europe just after the war during school holidays from Finland down to the Adriatic and most points in between. I did it in one of your rustbuckets with its wind up windows and no air conditioner and had a super time of it all. Reliability? Had a clutch go in my lovingly remembered Sunbeam Alpine, otherwise little trouble? Of course I must put all that down to self maintaining my means of transport. I know it’s a dying talent; modern cars now have to speak to a computer when they feel ill. Enjoy your ultra modern car, as I do mine, but please don’t rush to decry old cars, they also served.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Whats more sad is the fact that when a sensible and genuine question gets asked and then gets a sensible and genuine reply another poster has to turn the thread into a piss take. RT take note please. Its not big and its not clever.
 

·
Registered
Cee'd VR-7
Joined
·
391 Posts
O come on it was just a joke, life's to short to always be serious. Perhaps when you have been a member longer you might just get to see the point.
 

·
Registered
Ceed 1.6crdi ('07)
Joined
·
648 Posts
30 year old car that had a tendency to start rusting the day you took delivery and needed a service every 6000 miles. It had a 4 speed box and about 70 or 80 bhp if you got a 1600 petrol and did about 35 to the gallon on average.
30 years ago was 1982. You're describing 1972.

Manual windows, manual locking, tin wheels, no air con, no power steering, no ABS, no airbags, get the picture.
Alloy wheels are only pointless cosmetic additions. If aircon was absent from a car I was interested in, it wouldn't be a deal breaker.

The Citroen BX (1983, admittedly) came with electric front windows, central locking and a pas option. The trouble is "progress" makes it difficult to find something modern with equivalent space efficiency and sufficient window area not to feel closed in. Modern cars are so much heavier that a 120bhp petrol 1.6 has almost no performance advantage over 90bhp. Effectively, a turbocharger is now required to bulk up the mid rev range.

Oh, and I interpret from the way casualty stats have flattened over the last 10 years little suggestion that airbags, 300kgs of deadweight and NCAP5 have made a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
30 years ago was 1982. You're describing 1972.
The car I am describing was a 1980 Ford Escort 1600. OK it was actually 32 years ago.

I replaced that with a 1984 Escort 1600, the only difference was it gained a 5s speed box, front wheel drive and a radio/cassette instead of a radio. Hateful car, put me off Fords until 1999.
 

·
Registered
Ceed 1.6crdi ('07)
Joined
·
648 Posts
The car I am describing was a 1980 Ford Escort 1600. OK it was actually 32 years ago.

I replaced that with a 1984 Escort 1600, the only difference was it gained a 5s speed box, front wheel drive
Front wheel drive gives it away. The only thing in common between the two was the badge on the boot. Your first Escort was basically a 30 year old design so hardly representative of the period - the Golf was a relatively late "fwd hatchback" entrant yet that came along in 1974!

and a radio/cassette instead of a radio. Hateful car, put me off Fords until 1999.
By all accounts, you were not the only one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
History lesson needed.

The mark 1 and 2 Escorts were both rear wheel drive. They ran from 1968 to 1980. They were virtually an Anglia with a more modern body, improved engines and a new gearbox. Nothing radical at all. So the car I bought in 1980 was at the time based on a 20 year old design which means the design is over 50 years old now.

The mark 3 was the first front wheel drive Escort. Boy did they get it wrong. The mark 4 was no better, only when the updated the mark 4 and call it the mark 5 did they actually get it right, over 10 years too late. Really sad thing was people bought them.

The Golf as you correctly say came out in 1974, that was 6 years before the Escort mark 3. But other than early cars having corrosion issues VW got it right first time. The Golf was the first hatchback in its class, the Allegro and Alfasud both looked like hatchbacks but neither were, Alfa did add a hatch later though. Renaults 12 and 16 were the probably the first hatches, about 1966 for the 16, earlier for the 4, but the 4 was smaller and very utilitarian and the 16 was a class bigger. Renaults first hatch in the Golf class was the 14, about 1977 at a a guess. The VW Passat predated the Golf but again that was a bigger car.

Here endeth the lesson
 

·
Registered
Ceed 1.6crdi ('07)
Joined
·
648 Posts
History lesson needed.
Looks about right. As you say, the 1 & 2 Escort was basically Anglia which is why I suggested 30 years.

I expect the assembly lines were hardly changed over that time too. An interesting comment in Wikipedia about the Marina "The Board decided to build the Marina at the Cowley plant, little developed by Lord Nuffield since the 1920s."

Contrast to the Fiat Ritmo/Strada "handbuilt by robots" which came in in 1978. I've never been nostalgic over the British motor industry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
273 Posts
An interesting comment in Wikipedia about the Marina "The Board decided to build the Marina at the Cowley plant, little developed by Lord Nuffield since the 1920s."
The Marina was a Morris Minor with a new body. Other than the change of engines and gearbox (Minor was 1100, Maraina was 1300 and 1800) they were pretty much identical under the skin down to the prehistoric Trunion front suspension with lever arm dampers. It got worse though, they paid Ital design to redesign the body (they changed the front and rear lights) and changed the old, reliable 1800 for a new unreliable 1700. My boss bought one, what a pile of shite. Ital design don't even mention it in their history.

As for the Ritmo/Strada being built by robots, who educated the robots. On paper it looked really good, the motoring press loved it (initially) but it rotted away and broke down at every opportunity. Fiat missed their only chance to dominate the class.
 

·
Registered
Cee'd VR-7
Joined
·
391 Posts
The Marina was a Morris Minor with a new body. Other than the change of engines and gearbox (Minor was 1100, Maraina was 1300 and 1800) they were pretty much identical under the skin down to the prehistoric Trunion front suspension with lever arm dampers. It got worse though, they paid Ital design to redesign the body (they changed the front and rear lights) and changed the old, reliable 1800 for a new unreliable 1700. My boss bought one, what a pile of shite. Ital design don't even mention it in their history.

As for the Ritmo/Strada being built by robots, who educated the robots. On paper it looked really good, the motoring press loved it (initially) but it rotted away and broke down at every opportunity. Fiat missed their only chance to dominate the class.

///////

Your so right about the Marina. For my sins I suffered one as a company car in the late 1970's . It was by far the worst car I ever had. I used to leave it unlocked in a car park in Brighton (a high crime spot) hoping that it would be stolen, even the crooks knew better! When I picked it up new, I discovered that it juddered in reverse and was told by the dealer "O don't worry, they all do that"! What a great day it was when it was changed for a Vauxhall Cavalier.
PS. I think we are drifting :eek:fftopic:
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top