Proton Mpi Reviews - Page 2 of 3

1992 Proton Mpi 12 Valve 1.5 12 Valve from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.5 12 Valve Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 2 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Previous carVauxhall Astra

Summary:

Safe, reliable motoring that would go on for decades

Faults:

The carburettor float or jet had become faulty, so fuel economy was compromised.

Rust had invaded the sills, but were welded.

The interior was starting to fall apart.

Gearbox had become crunchy.

Exhaust middle section collapsed (though it had been on the car for 13 years!)

General Comments:

One of the long line of eastern cheap cars, there certainly wasn't anything wrong with the engine. I can honestly say, I have never known an engine to sound, drive and pull like a new one. It was -incredible-.

The speed in a straight line was pretty good as well. On corners though, you had to be careful, as I lost the back end going 10 mph round a roundabout!!

The interior didn't last as well as the engine though. The seats crumpled up, the door cards where thin and the dashboard compartments were like cheap children's toys.

AS much as the body liked to flex, and the interior was a bit shabby, this is one solid car, reliable on every cold winter morning!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 12th September, 2005

1992 Proton Mpi SE 1.5 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1996
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.5 petrol Manual
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired45000 miles
Most recent distance115000 miles
Previous carVolvo 940

Summary:

Cheap and cheerful runabout, which is let down by it's engine and poor quality plastics

Faults:

Body work panels became scruffy and dented surprisingly easily.

Much of the plastic trim fell off within the first year.

New starter motor was fitted in 1998.

New radiator fitted after other over-heated on my way to work three years ago.

Seats are fraying an beginning to look tatty.

Also the usual things like the exhaust was replaced.

General Comments:

The cars performance was pathetic in comparison to my Volvo, which was stolen.

The engine is reliable and quite economic though it is gutless.

The equipment levels however were fairly good.

It is cheap and quite good value for money, though servicing and certain parts are getting a little expensive.

The cabin is gloomy and the cheap nasty plastics do not help.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 6th July, 2005

23rd Nov 2005, 10:33

You clearly think the Volvo was a better car, which is undoubtedly was, but it was also 5 times the price.

1992 Proton Mpi GL Saloon 1.3 12V MPI from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1992
Most recent year of ownership1994
Engine and transmission 1.3 12V MPI Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired40 miles
Most recent distance14000 miles
Previous carVolkswagen Beetle

Summary:

Cheap and tough at heart

Faults:

Delivered with minor paint damage (repaired under warranty).

Radio cassette failed within a year (also replaced under warranty).

Spare wheel mysteriously swapped for a wrecked one. Not discovered until a year old when unable to prove which (of two dealers) had done this.

Synchromesh unreliable on 2nd gear from new (dealer disagreed there was a fault). Strangely, fast changes were OK, but leisurely ones produced an awful crunch. Possibly a clutch fault as 3rd gear also became affected though less so.

No problems with engine or bodywork.

Interior trim looked cheap, but nothing broke.

General Comments:

Now very basic motoring, but in its day a reasonably good looking up-to-date car.

Performance strong for engine size (I saw 110 mph indicated with a bit more to come) though felt slightly unstable over 90 mph. Again, acceleration decent (enough to burn the puny rubber). Weak point is traction and front grip generally.

Rolled quite a bit on its soft springs though brakes felt fine. Engine noisy and boomy if worked hard otherwise reasonable. Engine had an annoying characteristic of constantly speeding up and slowing down at idle. This is apparently to do with the emissions-control systems.

Comfort is OK provided you don't need a lot of legroom (especially in back). Sloping sides also reduce shoulder room. Boot is big and well-shaped.

Mine averaged around 34-36 mpg in mainly city driving. Not brilliant, but in practice I have only got better mpg from diesels.

Selling the car was a problem as not many dealers were interested. In the end I lost £3200 even selling privately.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 13th August, 2004

1993 Proton Mpi SE 1.5i from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1993
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.5i Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired108968 miles
Most recent distance110967 miles
Previous carVolvo 440

Summary:

An economical Escort beater

Faults:

Old fashioned interior.

General Comments:

This is a very reliable, economical and enjoyable car to drive.

I have managed to install a new stereo system, and have still got plenty of room to spare.

Starts every time, never breaks down and is nice and quiet.

Absolutely rock solid bodywork, no rust at all.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 24th April, 2004

Average review marks: 6.6 / 10, based on 10 reviews