Pistonheads vehicles you don't "get"

[Tastyweat]

soad said:

MX-5. Woefully under powered...

Supercharge it :P

I really miss my 1.8 supercharged '5... 220bhp at the wheels, 950kg and a LSD... that's fun

[Depthhoar]

dbdb said:

I like the W124 but I can't quite fathom the great depth of enthusiasm there is for them on PH. I don't see why they are so much more popular on here than the XJ6 - which drives better, rides better, is faster, better equipped and apart from earlier cars, just as reliable. The British car look and feel has been unfashionable for a long time - maybe this explains it.

Couldn't agree more. The XJ6 is indeed an excellent car. Maybe they're burdened with the reputation of BL awfulness that did so much to damage the Jaguar brand, admittedly some time ago now? Reputations being hard-won, easily lost and all that (as Mercedes found out with the W124's successor).

[Tastyweat]

SUVs... all of them, every brand, every make, every type.

(note: does not include genuine off road vehicles like a proper range rover or SUVs that are good at off road like a range rover [sport not included])

They seem like the most stupid thing ever invented.

- Terrible fuel economy
- Slow (mostly)
- Poor handling
- Worse in a crash than most well-built "normal" vehicles due to the size of the panels/frame and subsequent flimsyness

Oddly, the last one is why many soccer-moms tend to buy the silly things as they assume that it's safer because it's bigger...

They're an horrific waste of space, money and a clear demonstration of the extreme stpuidity of the driver.

To give them credit... at the very least... they are a very big badge saying "stay well clear of this driver" or "get past this one as fast as you possibly can"...

/rant

[Impasse]

Apart from my Supercharged RRS on All Terrains of course.

[Digby]

MX-5.Plenty fast enough when the road suits.If you don't think so, you are not trying hard enough.

Volvo.No love here for the new ones, but the old ones are funny because you can buy one for a grand, spend a few hundred more and be in to 300 bhp territory.

[Tastyweat]

Digby said:

MX-5.Plenty fast enough when the road suits.If you don't think so, you are not trying hard enough.

Volvo.No love here for the new ones, but the old ones are funny because you can buy one for a grand, spend a few hundred more and be in to 300 bhp territory.

Have you tried a charged on though?

They're hilarious

[jamieduff1981]

Tastyweat said:

Digby said:

MX-5.Plenty fast enough when the road suits.If you don't think so, you are not trying hard enough.

Volvo.No love here for the new ones, but the old ones are funny because you can buy one for a grand, spend a few hundred more and be in to 300 bhp territory.

Have you tried a charged on though?

They're hilarious

I had 2 MX-5s and liked them a lot. I seriously considered power modifications, but bought a TVR instead. Good cars though, and a great footing for moving on to higher powered stuff.

[jamieduff1981]

Squiggs said:

cerb4.5lee said:

Squiggs said:

maxdb said:

TVR's - as much as I try and like them, they just don't do it for me. They just remind me of a kit car.

Can't believe I got to page 4 before they were mentioned .....!

They may look the part but they're uncomfortable to sit in, uncomfortable on the ears, have badly fitting panels and are generally badly built in every other department.

They are badly built I agree with that and woefully unreliable but they aren't uncomfortable to sit in...nowhere near, in terms of uncomfortable on the ears I would much sooner listen to a roaring petrol V8 than all the crappy diesels that you have to put up with in daily life now and all the muted Turbo engines as well...now that is what I class as uncomfortable on the ears.

I had the misfortune to take a TVR (a Chim I think) up the M11. Whether it had been modified in any way I don't know but the seat was thin and uncomfortable and after a couple of miles I just wanted to turn the exhaust volume down from 11 to a more comfortable 1 or 2.

It's probably more a car your husband would enjoy.

Seriously though, the seat just sounds like it's had some massively obese backside crushing it its whole life because TVRs are extremely comfortable as sports cars go.

They all tend to vary noise-wise - most have been modified. They're supposed to be noisy though. Silence is for inline 4s that nobody wants to listen to.

[Axionknight]

IroningMan said:

MR2 - ugly chav death trap
205GTi - noisy cocoa tin
BL Mini - hateful in every respect

You take that back!

[anonymous-user]

Axionknight said:

IroningMan said:

MR2 - ugly chav death trap
205GTi - noisy cocoa tin
BL Mini - hateful in every respect

You take that back!

+1. One of the most originally engineered and clever cars ever designed.

[forzaminardi]

If a car has some charm or character it is usually a PH-y car irrespective of how ostensibly 'good' it is.

[MarshPhantom]

wormus said:

Axionknight said:

IroningMan said:

MR2 - ugly chav death trap
205GTi - noisy cocoa tin
BL Mini - hateful in every respect

You take that back!

+1. One of the most originally engineered and clever cars ever designed.

Good car in the sixties, stayed in production way too long and cost so much to make that they couldn't make money - I'm not sure that is a sign of good design. My only experience was a loan car I had for 3 days that had 3 different problems on each day I had.

[heebeegeetee]

swerni said:

Has anyone mentioned MX5' s and how underpowered they are yet ?

They have, and I always think those comments are made by people who can't drive well, and thus can't go quickly without the use of lots of bhp - whereas we all know that a true utter driving god doesn't need lots of bhp to go quickly.

[so roll me further bitch]

Audis, people just buy a badge. The cars look awful.

[kambites]

For me the biggest one is the new MINI. Everyone raves about it as a drivers' car but all the ones I've driven have felt poor in just about every respect - the steering is too light and lacks feel; the suspension is far too firmly sprung yet bouncy due to poor damping; the ergonomics are terrible; the engines are unremarkable at best... I simply don't see any appeal at all, it's not even remotely practical.

Next up would be most non-M BMWs with M-Sport suspension. How can they get the M cars so right yet get the sports suspension on their mainstream models so wrong (although I've been told the very latest models which I haven't driven avoid this)?

Oh and the styling of modern Alfas. The 159 was a nice looking thing but everything since has just been plain ugly to my eyes. The fact that everything since the 156 and its contemporaries has been average to drive at best doesn't help either.

Edited by kambites on Friday 24th July 08:07

[MattHall91]

Please read the thread title!

It's not 'cars you don't like', it's so-called PHers cars! It's not difficult

[heebeegeetee]

TommoAE86 said:

heebeegeetee said:

My pal has one, it ferries his life while being fast at the same time, and it's going to cost him £6500 to use it for two years.

See that's the same as it cost me to get my Skyline from Japan, only life thing it can't ferry is long thin things from Ikea.

Indeed he has a host of other interesting machinery, none of which you'd want to use for the daily grind. And each to his own of course, but I definitely would not want to use a 1993 car as a daily.

I get the Golf R. Very good when you find yourself on an m'way, or a holiday, or carrying stuff, or as a B-road weapon. Brand new, all for less than £7k over 2 years, I think ownership of an (also excellent imo) GTi over the same period would not cost less.

I'm struggling to see what's not to 'get'.

[anonymous-user]

so roll me further bh said:

Audis, people just buy a badge. The cars look awful.

I thought they only made one car.....in white. You just choose it in small, medium or large?

[Speed 3]

Think you'll find they do it in grey too....

[jshell]

RobM77 said:

I don't get off roaders that never go off road or tow heavy loads. I'm not one of those greenies who gets upset because people want to buy them, I just don't get it. From my perspective they're slow, or at least slower than a car would be with the same engine; they don't handle well, or at least they handle worse than they would with a lower ride height and less heavy beefed up componentry; and they cost loads to run in tyres, fuel and things like brake pads, wheel bearings etc. They don't seem to have a single redeeming feature that someone might like for road use - they're a 100% practical vehicle, so when never used for what they were designed for - what's the point? The only thing I can think of is some of them have seven seats for large families and they do drive better than any people carriers I've driven - although personally I'd rather use contraception and buy a four seater like a 5 series!

See, I'm on the other side of this. I see, for certain roads, a tall, well powered 4x4 as a faster car than most. I don't mean in outright power and handling, but in terms of front and rear visibility. I run a 59 plate diesel Cayenne and can drive it cross-country way quicker than I would have anything smaller, faster and with less long-range visibility. Front vis gives a clear view over cars, through corners (over walls, hedgerows etc) and the ability to better spot cameras, speed traps etc. It also lets see gaps for moving into after an overtake or over undulating roads. High, clear, rear vis gives the ability to quickly spot closing barges that may be cop cars or just way faster cars that may foul an overtake - as does the huge door mirrors. The suspension is 'good enough' and the comfort & load carrying are ace.

I think the ability to judge forwards conditions allows a much better flow or momentum whilst trying to cover point-2-point as quickly as possible.

Of course a faster, smaller car is much, much quicker on clear, traffic free open roads - but, how many of them are left?