Stupid things non petrolheads say... Vol 2

[ewand]

Ifinishposts said:

So you advised him (best of the bunch) now you are taking the mick for the tat it has had fitted?
If that was the best I would hate to see what the other choices were.

I think the point is that his colleague didn't take his advice, and bought some old nail instead...

[SCJM21]

Best of the bunch as a base car, I didn't really pay much attention to the 'tat' and it was actually he who pointed it out and asked if I could help take it off (except the 3D plates) Also, at what point was I taking the mick, I said on the plus side because I was quietly pleased that he also didn't appreciate some of the stick on bits.

Anyway, since then I've been receiving links to diffusers, spoiler lips, M-stripes on the grill etc. It's his car, you do you etc, the point I was making was making a very immediate buying decision and showing remorse before even collecting it.

Edited by SCJM21 on Monday 20th May 09:49

[WarrenB]

Saw something on TwiXter that made me chuckle, 'using premium fuel lowers your revs on the motorway'.

[The Mad Monk]

aturnick54 said:

WarrenB said:

Mad how someone will spend £2k on a new iPhone, obscene amounts of money for her hair doing every few weeks, new clothes, nails, etc. Yet when it comes to tyres they'll go for the absolute cheapest thing they can find.

People have their priorities in the wrong places. And I do find it funny how people will drive around a fairly new Audi, but refuse to spend money to look after it.

'Champagne lifestyle, lemonade budget' springs to mind

And the dog(s), don't forget the dog(s).

I have got no money and it's not my fault.

[LARK F1 GTR]

I was thinking the other day about people who seem to be "into cars" and drive what I'd call a rare car (something you no longer see that they've clearly looked after and spent money on) but look at you blankly when you give them the thumbs up or something, especially when you're in, or driving a non run of the mill car.

On the other hand there are those who are into cars who smile and beep the horn in acknowledgement

[Blown2CV]

currently engaged in an argument with someone on another platform regarding petrolheadism.

He said anyone who is rich and collects cars must be a petrolhead.

I disagreed.

I said that I believe rich car collectors are not inherently petrolheads. Taking the example of modern Bugatti. Yes they are top trumps favourites, i get that... however the owners... Many of them seem to be gauche instragram tts or just show offs in general. The cars are basically like some kind of rolls royce top speed edition. The car may be an engineering marvel, but it's ugly as sin and possibly more just a demonstration of wealth... not really desirable as such. Not to me anyway.

who's the fkwit in this convo?

[-Lummox-]

Blown2CV said:

currently engaged in an argument with someone on another platform regarding petrolheadism.

He said anyone who is rich and collects cars must be a petrolhead.

I disagreed.

I said that I believe rich car collectors are not inherently petrolheads. Taking the example of modern Bugatti. Yes they are top trumps favourites, i get that... however the owners... Many of them seem to be gauche instragram tts or just show offs in general. The cars are basically like some kind of rolls royce top speed edition. The car may be an engineering marvel, but it's ugly as sin and possibly more just a demonstration of wealth... not really desirable as such. Not to me anyway.

who's the fkwit in this convo?

His view seems a little simplistic. There's no reason people can't be rich and petrolheads, but being rich and owning expensive cars doesn't automatically equate to being one.

You could collect them as part of an investment strategy, based purely on speculation of which ones will increase in value the most... then again you could collect them because you like cars and have the means to collect them...

Taste (as to which cars the rich person likes) is very subjective and I don't think you could say anyone who likes cars YOU don't like is therefore not a petrolhead.

[garypotter]

RazerSauber said:

SCJM21 said:

Had a bit of an odd back and forth with a colleague yesterday - he sent me a list of links to cars out of nowhere asking for my opinion on them. Looks like he just searched for a local car supermarket and sorted under £x price, I said I didn't realise he wanted a new car and the response was "well my MOT is due in 2 weeks and I don't have a spare key nor know where the V5 is"...I'm certain he said his finance is up soon so *shrug* (it's a 5-door Ibiza FR).

Anyway, I plucked a 118i out of the bunch as probably the better of the lot (think it was in the £12-13k area). The response was that he was going to test drive it in 20 minutes.

Later that night I messaged asking how it went and he replied saying he's picking it up shortly, got £4k for the Ibiza and signed up for £220 a month over 48 months on finance for the 1 series. Asked if he was satisfied and the response was "not really, was probably a bit hasty and I've probably made a mistake but oh well"..

I'm still a bit miffed. On the plus side, he asked if I could help him get rid of the eyelids, fake badges and 3D plates!

A fool and his money..
[
Or not his money as he is ticked up to the eyelids.....

[Blown2CV]

-Lummox- said:

Blown2CV said:

currently engaged in an argument with someone on another platform regarding petrolheadism.

He said anyone who is rich and collects cars must be a petrolhead.

I disagreed.

I said that I believe rich car collectors are not inherently petrolheads. Taking the example of modern Bugatti. Yes they are top trumps favourites, i get that... however the owners... Many of them seem to be gauche instragram tts or just show offs in general. The cars are basically like some kind of rolls royce top speed edition. The car may be an engineering marvel, but it's ugly as sin and possibly more just a demonstration of wealth... not really desirable as such. Not to me anyway.

who's the fkwit in this convo?

His view seems a little simplistic. There's no reason people can't be rich and petrolheads, but being rich and owning expensive cars doesn't automatically equate to being one.

You could collect them as part of an investment strategy, based purely on speculation of which ones will increase in value the most... then again you could collect them because you like cars and have the means to collect them...

Taste (as to which cars the rich person likes) is very subjective and I don't think you could say anyone who likes cars YOU don't like is therefore not a petrolhead.

I've never, ever, seen a bugatti owner talking about how amazing they are. All I have seen online are top speed trials and people illustrating the running costs. It's not really about likes and dislikes - some cars just aren't really enthusiast cars.

[SCJM21]

LARK F1 GTR said:

I was thinking the other day about people who seem to be "into cars" and drive what I'd call a rare car (something you no longer see that they've clearly looked after and spent money on) but look at you blankly when you give them the thumbs up or something, especially when you're in, or driving a non run of the mill car.

On the other hand there are those who are into cars who smile and beep the horn in acknowledgement

I had two instances of that this week, a guy in an Alpine A110 was beside me so I looked over and gave him a smile and a thumbs up but received a very vacant and blank expression in return. Secondly, old Golf GTI driver seemed very confused when I was matching his pace and giving him the nod.

I just want to show you appreciation for your automobile sir, acknowledge me!

[Truckosaurus]

Blown2CV said:

I disagreed.

B2CV is correct. The opposite is also true, you can be a total petrolhead and not own an interesting car if funds or circumstances don't allow it.

[aka_kerrly]

Truckosaurus said:

Blown2CV said:

I disagreed.

B2CV is correct. The opposite is also true, you can be a total petrolhead and not own an interesting car if funds or circumstances don't allow it.

Absolutely , you only need to look at the "joy of running an old shed" thread to realise that there are plenty of petrolheads who can enjoy all kinds of cars that others consider very much bland/boring/rubbish etc.

I also enjoyed the reply from someone who always tries to acknowledge or engage with owners of interesting cars only to be met with no reaction whatsoever.

This happened to me, there is a guy who works on the same industrial estate as me and it took a few months to realise that we both have a Civic Type R and a Golf GTI because I kept seeing his Civic whilst I'm driving my Golf and vice versa until one day we were both driving our Type Rs and seemed to put two an two together at the same time

[blueg33]

Blown2CV said:

I've never, ever, seen a bugatti owner talking about how amazing they are. All I have seen online are top speed trials and people illustrating the running costs. It's not really about likes and dislikes - some cars just aren't really enthusiast cars.

As a member of the Bugatti owners club I am going to comment.

Most don’t own a Chiron or a Veyron, most own something that’s a hundred years old and they race them up hills and carry out the maintenance themselves. I would argue that they are closer to being petrolheads than many on here who just buy a new Porsche, BMW, Audi or Range Rover which they take to a main dealer for an oil change and a software update.

[Blown2CV]

blueg33 said:

Blown2CV said:

I've never, ever, seen a bugatti owner talking about how amazing they are. All I have seen online are top speed trials and people illustrating the running costs. It's not really about likes and dislikes - some cars just aren't really enthusiast cars.

As a member of the Bugatti owners club I am going to comment.

Most don’t own a Chiron or a Veyron, most own something that’s a hundred years old and they race them up hills and carry out the maintenance themselves. I would argue that they are closer to being petrolheads than many on here who just buy a new Porsche, BMW, Audi or Range Rover which they take to a main dealer for an oil change and a software update.

OK acknowledged - i was meaning moderns

[murphyaj]

Blown2CV said:

I've never, ever, seen a bugatti owner talking about how amazing they are. All I have seen online are top speed trials and people illustrating the running costs. It's not really about likes and dislikes - some cars just aren't really enthusiast cars.

The default answer to the question "I am extremely rich, what extremely expensive car should I buy so everyone knows how extremely rich I am?" appears to be a Veyron or Chiron. There are exceptions of course, Jay Leno and Jenson Button both bought Veyrons and i think they can both be classed as petrolheads. But look down the rest of the list of famous owners and I think your hypothesis generally holds true.

[Luis Nazario]

WarrenB said:

Saw something on TwiXter that made me chuckle, 'using premium fuel lowers your revs on the motorway'.

Isn’t this correct though, all other things being equal?

Higher octane (petrol) fuel means the spark can be delayed (because of greater resistance to knock), meaning greater compression, meaning more torque, meaning fewer revs to produce the same bhp?

The difference would perhaps be marginal, but I don’t think the statement is incorrect?

[ewand]

murphyaj said:

The default answer to the question "I am extremely rich, what extremely expensive car should I buy so everyone knows how extremely rich I am?" appears to be a Veyron or Chiron. There are exceptions of course, Jay Leno and Jenson Button both bought Veyrons and i think they can both be classed as petrolheads. But look down the rest of the list of famous owners and I think your hypothesis generally holds true.

And well-known petrolhead and racer, Lord Pembroke, had a Veyron from new, though he did later say he had more fun in his 1970 Datsun

[Speed addicted]

murphyaj said:

Blown2CV said:

I've never, ever, seen a bugatti owner talking about how amazing they are. All I have seen online are top speed trials and people illustrating the running costs. It's not really about likes and dislikes - some cars just aren't really enthusiast cars.

The default answer to the question "I am extremely rich, what extremely expensive car should I buy so everyone knows how extremely rich I am?" appears to be a Veyron or Chiron. There are exceptions of course, Jay Leno and Jenson Button both bought Veyrons and i think they can both be classed as petrolheads. But look down the rest of the list of famous owners and I think your hypothesis generally holds true.

To be fair it’s not like there are cheap versions of these cars that the less spectacularly wealthy can buy.
The thought process could be that they’ve worked extremely hard and deserve the most luxurious rocket ship available. Maybe they’ve always wanted one. Who knows.

If I was in the position to buy a super/hyper car I’d be put off by the idea that everyone thought I was showing off, where in reality I’d want something mad because of what it is and the feeling it gives when you drive it. The publicity element would be a serious downside for me,

[captain_cynic]

Luis Nazario said:

WarrenB said:

Saw something on TwiXter that made me chuckle, 'using premium fuel lowers your revs on the motorway'.

Isn’t this correct though, all other things being equal?

Higher octane (petrol) fuel means the spark can be delayed (because of greater resistance to knock), meaning greater compression, meaning more torque, meaning fewer revs to produce the same bhp?

The difference would perhaps be marginal, but I don’t think the statement is incorrect?

It's usually the opposite as most cars are mapped to use a leaner fuel/air mix with higher octane fuels. So filling up with premium petrol will eek out an extra few MPG unless your car is so old it doesn't have a modern ECU.

Diesel makes no difference as it's ignited by pressure not a spark.

Back in Oz I ran my Honda Integra DC5 on 98 as it'd use 1 litre less per 100 KM (11L/100KM Vs 12L/100KM on Ron 91).

[Gad-Westy]

Luis Nazario said:

WarrenB said:

Saw something on TwiXter that made me chuckle, 'using premium fuel lowers your revs on the motorway'.

Isn’t this correct though, all other things being equal?

Higher octane (petrol) fuel means the spark can be delayed (because of greater resistance to knock), meaning greater compression, meaning more torque, meaning fewer revs to produce the same bhp?

The difference would perhaps be marginal, but I don’t think the statement is incorrect?

But, unless a CVT is involved revs and speed are a linear relationship regardless of power. So the only way that statement could be true is if either driver slower with a high octane fuel or use a higher gear.