has been in the automobile circles are a popular saying “domestic cars are very good at first glance, but over time it is hard to say open slightly!” In fact, as an insider, I am on this perspective view of two points, some models of identity, while the other part, even if put on the market as a network about cars, after a long period of “operational” test quality in fact there is no obvious decline.
In a lucky coincidence, our department has recently brought a WEY of VV5– factory this May 2018, we have experienced 20,000 kilometers 4S shop customers violence test drive, configuring stay in August 2017 the first generation VV5, may be able to fully verify, in the end as its own brand positioning of a luxury car, after being doubled waste can not talk about quality.
we get the car just started, the instrument panel on a “maintenance reminders,” the store is how people do not care?
A few days after my depth of experience, first say ugly words ahead.
The first and most obvious is the power tailgate problem has emerged, worthy of recognition was just the popular “kick induction” is now quite easy to use, but the tailgate open to most top, will swing it, then it automatically closed, for the first time with a colleague was shocked fans to his head. This should be just a small repair it on the right, but the people at the mouth of the “small problem with a long time more” is the truth.
Also the vehicle fluency system is not a problem, but car navigation positioning, our basic navigation using a mobile phone. At that time, the Great Wall car system has not considered formal force, so I have to forgive it.
The second is a panoramic image, quality WEY now with the car, even with a lot of cars Harvard are not in the same language, can only sigh vehicle technology with each passing day.
to the core member, first talk chassis. Currently this VV5 chassis or the continuation of the overall feeling of great tenacity, butIt seems to have been a bit “loose” feeling, mainly in the over large pits or deceleration zone, jumping by a big margin, slightly more crushing sound. This new car VV5 even on my previous test drive H6 does not appear.
Because VV5 soft suspension will be set, so after some small potholes or run over gravel and the like, in fact, sense or be kept in place vibration digest more thorough; but the above is too large deceleration zone, the car’s shock absorbers will be unable to pull some sense (I do not know whether it is because the above-mentioned “long-term non-maintenance”).
Further test drive using a 235/55 R19 Michelin hub, between the large aspect ratio and the above mentioned softer tuning set, that In fact, Taiwan VV5 test drive “nod” phenomenon is more obvious.
Then talk engine, it should be able to think I recognition portion. When VV5 2017 models of its full-line only when the 2.0T version, but this is violence after 20,000 km test drive the car, we just get it cleared up fuel consumption – a day after his colleagues and from Nanshan – Longgang away, actually do one hundred kilometers to the fuel consumption of 6.8L (one-way about 40 kilometers, half of the high-speed, single drive, no air conditioning in winter).
Test drive way can be observed, about 80km / h speed, powertrain remained at 1500 rpm speed is less than 7.
into the hands of my table is significant 7.2L / 100km, said the Great Wall as a true SUV, and after a long period of customer test drive, the fuel consumption can make me some do not believe – often 10L or more, is what I have knowledge of the Great Wall SUV inertia. The condition for measurement, it is inevitable intense driving, and finally repeated rapid acceleration and some traffic jam sections (double-clutch frustrated test) after traveling boom to 8.5L / one hundred kilometers.
ready to give this VV5 fuel consumption praise when reversal came – and from Longgang and Nanshan colleagues informed through he added with a grease gun twiceMeasured oil appears that the actual fuel consumption than the table probably significantly more than 1L / one hundred kilometers.
said return force performance, this 2.0T maximum horsepower of VV5 197, peak torque 355Nmiddot; m, 7 matching speed dual clutch. Now look at the data say really really sorry displacement, the engine can only say that technology advances too fast, this year 2.0T Which is not more than 200 independent car? It actually accelerated test session, pulled straight transmission Sport mode only 5500 rpm shift, the downshift paddle implementation can be considered fast, or very fun.
In fact, this dual-clutch in 2017, the same level in terms of already relatively smooth, after all, we just left the car for a test drive. Re-test drive today, it still retains the “slow shift” feature, from the perspective of “do luxury” in terms of energy or recognition, but in this setting, do not expect it to be able to give the feeling of movement too.
But here that is a question of whether this new H6 VV5 or there, or that is a feature. That is in Normal mode, the turbine is very vague point of intervention – which can lead normal acceleration, feet slightly deeper point, the engine cranky, accompanied by the sound of increase, the car is easy to forward channeling.
So after my test drive article has mentioned, if you are a long drive in the congested road, I would also recommend ECO mode VV5 / H6 on the one hand the power of the car will be more linear and more controllable, on the other hand, the engine will be maintained at a relatively gentle stage, in addition to fuel economy, the key is not so noisy – we measured down, ECO, Normal and Sport of the noise level three block , able to show a qualitative difference. Also worth mentioning that, starting from the first generation VV5, the front window on the use of double glazing.
Written in the last –
In general, a complete test drive test drive by violence 2W kilometers VV5 my assessment is greater than disappointing surprise, even though the problem has been trying to dig. Engine and dual-clutch performance can be satisfied, did not appear frustrated, jitter or failure, but also to maintain smooth very powerful. As for fuel consumption, although this conclusion can not be a “happy fuel consumption table”, but found it significantly better than the table about 9L 100 km fuel consumption, but also more common in the same grade level.
