[Closed] Dacia Duster what are they like as an everyday family car

have a logan mcv
would buy again

A mate has one, under the bonnet the electrical components are mostly all branded nissan/renault.
Tha dacias are more or less just rebadged previous generation renaults.
Id buy one.

Make sure to go and test drive.
Having recently had the misfortune to drive a Sandero I question how Dacia sell any cars at all. If the performance/handling of the Duster is even remotely similar you'll run from the showroom screaming.

I'd also look at the NCAP rating - how any manufacturer can produce a car in this day and age with a rating of 3 is beyond me; a 2001 BMW 3 Series got a 4 star!

Had a Duster 1.5dci ( 2wd ) from new for 2.5 years, apart from an issue with the heater ( which Renaults have as well as it's sourced from that ) it has run faultlessly.

Averages 43 mpg in a rush hour commute into Leeds.

Performance is fine, previously had a Qashqui 1.5, there's no difference as the engine is the same.

Handling - well it's a SUV type of vehicle, so it handles as such, again no different to equivalent vehicles.

Haven't crash tested it - so can't comment on that !

Yes- I would buy another.

do test drive.

I found the 1.5 DCI to be good

but the little 1.2TCE to be ok round town - really smooth quite refined as far as engines go and utter gash on the motorway - as in the sales woman was shouting at me when doing 70 and i had to hold the gears plenty long to get it there

In the end i will probably own one at some time - but it wont be new.

I'd echo Buenfoxas point. We were all set to get a brand new Logan until I saw it only had a 3 star NCAP test.

Got a 2nd hand 3 series instead, glad I did to be fair, so far at least.

buenfoxa - Member
I'd also look at the NCAP rating - how any manufacturer can produce a car in this day and age with a rating of 3 is beyond me; a 2001 BMW 3 Series got a 4 star!

I'm pretty sure the NCAP tests and requirements for testing change over time. A 2001 4 star might not be as good as a 2016 3 star.

Maybe an expert can confirm but my understanding is:

If a car is missing certain crash avoidance technology e.g. radar controlled emergency braking then no matter how good it's crash performance is than it is limited to 3 stars

Also since the ratings get change over the years they get become harder to achieve so you can't make a comparison between a car tested now and another tested umpteen years ago.

3 stars: Average to good protection for the occupant [u]but does not have crash avoidance technology.[/u]

Maybe an expert can confirm but my understanding is:

If a car is missing certain crash avoidance technology e.g. radar controlled emergency braking then no matter how good it's crash performance is than it is limited to 3 stars

Also since the ratings get change over the years they get become harder to achieve so you can't make a comparison between a car tested now and another tested umpteen years ago

We are talking about a car tested in 2011 - at which time they didn't include crash avoidance measures so could easily reach 5 stars. As a better comparison lets use a Fiat Panda - 2011 - 4 star according to NCAP!

I get a lot of hire cars for work and I had a Duster for a week last year. It was by far the worst hire car I have ever had. Build quality was very poor, bits of the car were falling off and it only had 60 miles on the clock. It was also unrefined and unpleasant to drive. Both the 05-13 and 2013 onwards Octavia are a much nicer car. I would strongly recommend a test drive first.

I cannot decide if Dacia Duster is ugly or normal but to me it is slowly inching towards Ssang Young category.

Therefore, unless it is bomb proof I think you should at least look at other make as well, even Yeti is 100 times better looking ...

OP, you've done it now!

The Duster is an SUV which as we all know is pretty much the worst type of car to own in STW-land. You'd probably get less abuse running over a baby robin riding a fat bike than you would admitting to owning an SUV!!

I can almost hear the pitter patter of outraged feet as the haters run from the Porsche Macan thread to get involved in this one & tell you what an extravagant eco-hating moron you are & that you should buy an Octavia estate instead. But, I see you've already got one of those....!

Oh, wait a minute. Perhaps if it's a cheap, honest, salt of the Earth type SUV, it'll be alright. We'll see.....

Get a Lada Niva - cheap, look rubbish, but very good at what they are designed to do!... 😀

http://www.markkey.co.uk/nivacar.html

I like the look of the Duster and absolutely love the look of the Yeti. A mate test drove both and said the Duster was a bit agricultural so bought a Yeti. I doubt either would be as smooth as a Beemer six pot. Probably not as fast as a Porsche Macaw either. Or as cool as Jeremy Clarkson.

That Niva is brilliant. They've really worked on the design since the 70s! New grill! And the "spectrum"! Depths of the sea. I want one. Come to think of it I could buy all of them for the price of one of Jambalaya's motors.

I can almost hear the pitter patter of outraged feet as the haters run from the Porsche Macan thread to get involved in this one & tell you what an extravagant eco-hating moron you are & that you should buy an Octavia estate instead. But, I see you've already got one of those....!

I think most of the criticism aimed at the Macan is its rather suspect sporting pretensions and whether such a vehicle really deserves to wear a Porsche badge.

A Dacia is a cheap Renault they are relatively popular because they are cheap and most people really couldn't give two shits what they drive as long as it gets them from A to B. I submit the continued success of Peugeot and Vauxhall as a brand as proof enough of this reality

Get a Lada Niva - cheap, look rubbish, but very good at what they are designed to do!...

ever driven one.

utter gash . steering wheel feels like its attached to the front wheels by elastic the suspension parts bend looking at them and they rust for fun.

shite reliability and shite offroad due to poor quality parts But very easy to repair when it does go tits up.

Can be modified to be great offroad -but its hardly the same car once you do it.

(spent a fair bit of time in FSU states over the years - if you want something from there thats decent off road then try a UAZ)

- one of the guys in the office had a UAZ - and one of the others got a brand new ford ranger of the mazda b2000 shape and got all mouthy about the UAZ being shit.

Only one thing to do - 20ton lifting strap was put between them in the yard and tug of war. The uaz just took the piss. HE stalled it and just applied the brakes - the ranger didnt even move it just sat spinning its wheels. he started the uaz and just drove off pulling the ranger behind him spinning. ranger had to go in for a "warrenty" on the gear box shortly after.

Perhaps if it's a cheap, honest, salt of the Earth type SUV, it'll be alright. We'll see.....

[b]No![/b]
There is no reason for a 2wd SUV to exist other than as part of a scientific experiment to determine what proportion of the population are foolish enough to buy a 'car' that is worse in every way than a similarly sized estate car.

A Dacia is a cheap Renault

Would anyone recommend a Renault?! V happy with my Yeti.

Yeti is better than a similarly sized estate car due to higher ceilings and easily removable rear seats. Great when taking my bike in a bike bag on holiday with son in back and 2 seats removed.

Logan MCV here. Very happy with it and would have another.

I think a Logan is a more practical family car than a Duster, with a much bigger boot. And it's cheaper. But each to their own.

fifeandy - Member

No!
There is no reason for a 2wd SUV to exist other than as part of a scientific experiment to determine what proportion of the population are foolish enough to buy a 'car' that is worse in every way than a similarly sized estate car.

It's available in 2wd or 4wd......

richmtb - Member

I think most of the criticism aimed at the Macan is its rather suspect sporting pretensions and whether such a vehicle really deserves to wear a Porsche badge.

There was that, yes. But towards the end an awful lot of it just seemed to an anti-SUV spittle fest....

e.g.

partly it's the sheer impracticality of them, for such a huge vehicle it has a pitiful load and passenger space really. Every part of them is driven by fashion and heap of very bad taste. At least with a van it's got a geniune practical purpose, with the mega AWD SUV types the practical reason is generally that there is just no way I'd get a 2wd car up my gravel drive...
Throw in the propensity of the owners to want to insulate their precious offspring in a safety bubble that is fairly bad for the other users of the road and the fact that for their actual needs a decent estate is much more practical they are worm as a status symbol. Honestly if you lower a T5 and bling it up I'll have the same contempt...

4x4 compentent off road vehicle designed for going off road.
SUV? Elevated estage car with lots of toy buttons often supplied without 4wd, sensible tyres etc. a marketing mans wet dream sold to people who's idea of the countryside or offroad is an unsurfaced car park. As ironic as the name Sports Untility Vehicle, as the review started with "handles well for a 2t lump"

An SUV is a higher, heavier, more expensive, worse handling, less fuel efficient, less practical car, sometimes with 4x4 and with the fashion lead looks of an offroader, normally used by people who like to give the impression that they're outdoor, moneyed or superior type's etc. Normally this couldn't be further from the truth.

The owners of these vehicles try to justify this by saying yes but gives better visibility, safer for the kids etc. Well 2 tonnes of badly driven SUV is not safer for anyone else on the road or their kids is it (or your kids if you'd consider walking them to school for a change), and the high roofline often blocks visibility for other road users.

As someone previously said "I can't give a damn what others think" - well that kind of sums up the kind of person who buys SUV's for me, oh and maybe you should consider giving a damn actually.

Can you not understand though how those who live in a town and who drive an unnecessarily large and thirsty 4x4's or SUV (when in reality an estate car - or sports car if you want a fast vehicle) would far more suit their needs (i.e. choosing vanity/status/image above everything else including the safety of others) might be perceived as a shallow and selfish decision by others? Narcissism really has gone crazy!

That Niva website is amazing.... take a look at the "USED SALE!" tab.

12 grand for what looks like a stretch version (and is the ugliest car I've seen in a long time)? And the last 2 photos appear to show all the parts that have already fallen off...

^^^
Fair enough.

None of that strikes me as untrue though.

Dacia Duster escapes a lot of that criticism though by not really being an SUV. Its lighter then most well equipped hatchbacks for a start. Does have a quite small boot though.

[img]

Failed the moose test

I have a 4wd Duster, 1.5DCi commercial.

Work car, not family car so can't comment on space/seats for family use.
As a car though it is great and quite capable as a 4x4. Ground clearance is the main limiter for serious off-road use.

The 4WD has a superior gearbox, but it is low and short, so economy at 70+ is poor.
The 2WD I believe is better economy wise because of the gearbox, not the 4WD (inactive over 40mph).

Feels a bit cheap in places, lots of plastic but no issues in 10000 miles so far.
Overall I am happy. Great for the money, but better vehicles out there if you can spend more.

My dad's been running one for about 18 months - no complaints from him. I've driven it a few times, only things that annoyed me were the headrest (a bit too sticky-outy for my bonce), and the crappy cruise-control button (down low on the center console, and a strangely solid clunky action). May buy it off him when his lease is up.

Yeti is better than a similarly sized estate car due to higher ceilings and easily removable rear seats. Great when taking my bike in a bike bag on holiday with son in back and 2 seats removed.

Do the back seats fold flat? Does the front passenger seat back go flat (forward or back)? Do the rear seat squabs get in the way of folding the front seat flat? I know the rear seats come right out but that's a bit too much of a chore as a regular process.

Not tried the front seats but don't think so. The back seats fold flat and the also the whole lot can then fold up and forward so more floor space. Mine lives without its rear seats as mostly it's just me in it and I just add one when my son needs to come along - just takes a minute.

Over here in Ireland here are lots of Dusters especially 131 plates as they were a cheap alternative new car [post euro crash].
Test drove a new one 2014 ,but we were refused finance as we have no credit rating as we have no mortgage,credit cards etc,but own our house outright.
so we got a s/h hyundai Santa Fe instead.4wd suv.
Suits as a tow car2.0crdi,easy swallow 2 bikes whole with rear seats down,40 mpg on average.

My job is to do with vehicle quality complaints. One complaint was for a dacia that would vibrate like crazy in 4th gear.
As their defence, the Dacia Dealer actually said: "people aren't used to dacia's, they need to realise that it is a cheap vehicle with low build quality. It's just how they are"

I wont be going anywhere near one!

I've had a Lodgy for 3 years in which time it's had a new rear wiper motor. I'd buy another, a Sandero, or even a Dokker, but I'd only buy the 4x4 version of the Duster as unless you need 4x4 the others are more refined (and the Stepways have nearly as much ground clearance).

I've driven both 1.5 diesel and 1.2 tce versions of the Lodgy, with the opposite verdict to Trail Rat. The 1.2 tce is straight out of the current Megane, 5 bhp more than the diesel, a much longer torque curve and very smooth. At 70mph wind noise is much more of an issue than engine noise with either of them. I drive on generally traffic free roads and average over 45mpg except when there's snow on the roads, the diesel didn't make economic sense quite apart from the fact I'd rather not poison people with soot and NOX (and recent German reports say the total greenhouse gases from a diesel are the same as a petrol it's only the CO2 that is lower).

There's lots of black plastic but none has fallen off or broken. I've spent the last couple of days sleeping in the back with Madame, a mini-motor home.

Early Duster had corrosion problems apparently.

Know a lass with one and she said she's pleased with it.

I have been running a Sandero for a year and a half. If you are trying to be a boy-racer then it handles like a bucket, but so far I'm ok with it.

I don't think we get the Lodgy or Dokker here in the UK.

I had the misfortune to have to drive one back from Cornwall. It was hideous. I don't understand how they sell any of them.

I don't understand how they sell any of them.

Look at the prices. In rural France Dacia's are sold in huge numbers. They've done a good job on the styling of the Duster (by which I mean it's hideous but looks very like the Japanese SUVs that cost a lot more rather than earlier Dacias which just looked cheap.).

tbh i dont find them any worse than Vauxhalls or skodas - both their own brand of hideousness and ergonomic nightmares.

I had a Romanian built one for 3 years. Never had any trouble in the Alps snow. It's very cheap inside but I didn't have any major mechanical problems over 100,000 km. Ride quality is not amazing but it's ok. I would recommend it if the price is right.