When I was a student pilot, we did our first handful of familiarisation and evaluation flights in a 172. The instrument panel looked like someone had cut holes in an ironing board and stuck dials in it. The seats were no more than a 2 piece metal bench that someone had stuck thin cushions to, and the seatbelts would have looked at home in a 1940's car.
Then we transitioned to the SOCATA TB-10 Tobago for the rest of our training. It was like switching from a Russian built car to a Lamborghini. The instrument panel was ergonomic, recessed for shade, and the engine instruments were actually canted to face the pilot. We had Recaro racing seats in the aircraft which made long navex's more bearable. Inertia reel seatbelts. Gull wing doors that helped cool the aircraft quicker after sitting on a hot tarmac all day. Throttle controls that looked like a jet fighter instead of pull knobs.
The European design was simply leagues ahead, and made the flying experience so much better. I am thinking a major reason for the longevity of the Cessna training line is more to do with cost for budget conscious training schools, rather than being a better aircraft than any other trainer.