Which car best epitomises style over substance?

[kambites]

300bhp/ton said:

Fundamentally it isn't hugely different in concept to the Ferrari F355 F1 box.

Which also gets slated for ruining the car and quite rightly so IMO, it's a thoroughly nasty gearbox.

[Vince70]

Nothing to do with premature automated clutch wear or clunking when pulling away the box is complete rubbish and really lets the car down it's such a shame as it's such a nice looking little motor...
Like I say I've driven more than a few and owned one for a few years.

It's such a shame that more time wasn't spent on research and development before it was put in production as it really could of been a great car ..
Why do you think it was only in production for just over 3 years could be something to do with warranty claims..

I'm hardly a hater of the roadster as soon as I saw one back in 2004 I knew I had to buy one but I'm not blinkered enough to know it's got more than its share of faults.

But you also notice that because it looks so good a lot of people remove the badges as a lot of owners don't want people to think it's a smart car so that's one of the reasons I've put the car up on this thread..

But I've got to admit I still look at them in the classifieds as I still like them and I also now have a watertight garage so another one as a weekend car to potter about in on a dry day might become a reality again.

Edited by Vince70 on Monday 24th August 22:45

[300bhp/ton]

kambites said:

300bhp/ton said:

Fundamentally it isn't hugely different in concept to the Ferrari F355 F1 box.

Which also gets slated for ruining the car and quite rightly so IMO, it's a thoroughly nasty gearbox.

Seem to recall at the time it didn't. Ok JC moaned like a good'un. But plenty of road testers liked them. And I think sales backed this up with a lot of F1 variants being sold vs the traditional manual.

[300bhp/ton]

Vince70 said:

It's such a shame that more time wasn't spent on research and development before it was put in production as it really could of been a great car ..
Why do you think it was only in production for just over 3 years could be something to do with warranty claims..

Edited by Vince70 on Monday 24th August 22:45

What an absurd blanket conclusion to make.

Yes there where warranty claims, mostly due to the SAM unit... and water leaking onto it. Nothing to do with anything else on the car and especially not with the gearbox.

Lets not forget they also built over 43,000 Roadsters. Compare to say TVR that according to Wikipedia managed to build less than 22,000 over it's entire existence!

[lostkiwi]

Vince70 said:

Nothing to do with premature automated clutch wear or clunking when pulling away the box is complete rubbish and really lets the car down ...

I changed the clutch on mine for the first time in its life. It had over 110k miles. I get no clunks pulling away, or any other issues with the drive train.
The box is fine for what it is - a very early incarnation of the robotic manual.

As for it ruining the car...Really? For me its something that adds to its enjoyment. Flicking up the closely stacked ratios with the paddles is great fun!

[PorkRind]

puma
new scirocco
audi - all bar the rs's / r8..

[Mr2Mike]

Vince70 said:

But a Fiat Panda is a small run of the meal family hatch and not a sports car.. And I'm hardly slagging the roadster off apart from the fact it has a horrid box which if you own one you will understand it's useless

No I don't understand that it's useless, but you do need to learn how to use it properly to get the best out of it. I'd be the first to admit that it's not as good as a manual box and clutch, but it's far better than most people seem to think. The clutch also need to be set-up and calibrated properly, otherwise the shifts can be significantly slower.

You are under the misapprehension that a "sports" car is all about performance, but this isn't the case at all. For instance the 1.6 Mk1 MX5 has comparable straight line performance (the Brabus Roadster is quicker), and yet few people would argue that the Mazda is not a sports car.

Look at some of the classic sports cars e.g. Spitfire, MG Midget/MGB etc. None of these were fast cars, yet all are sports cars. Sports cars are more about the driving experience than the performance.

[Vince70]

300bhp/ton said:

Vince70 said:

It's such a shame that more time wasn't spent on research and development before it was put in production as it really could of been a great car ..
Why do you think it was only in production for just over 3 years could be something to do with warranty claims..

Edited by Vince70 on Monday 24th August 22:45

What an absurd blanket conclusion to make.

Yes there where warranty claims, mostly due to the SAM unit... and water leaking onto it. Nothing to do with anything else on the car and especially not with the gearbox.

Lets not forget they also built over 43,000 Roadsters. Compare to say TVR that according to Wikipedia managed to build less than 22,000 over it's entire existence!

Funny that I had a clutch and new softwear installed under warranty on mine plus a new steering rack plus steering wheel and I also had the upgraded seals fitted all under warranty plus the dreaded bulkhead sealed on mine and some new rear number plate lights as these had also filled up with water mine was one of the good ones and wasn't that bad though as it stayed in the garage most of the time and I would only allow it out on dry days but after all the repairs under warranty it was a good little motor it's just a shame that it couldn't come out of the factory as it should.
It cost Mercedes on average €3000 on warranty claims on each car so hence why the plug was pulled.. Think of it as the Laguna II of the sports car world.
Why are you going on about the TVR I've never owned one so can't comment on one of those but like I say I still like the roadster for all it faults and it was a brave attempt from such a manufacturer to enter the sports car world.

Next you will be saying that it's really well screwed together but if you have your fingers crossed and some silicon seal for the rubbers and a set of widgets and some Thompson roof paint for the bulkhead you might just get away without a Wet Sam unit..
Another idea some people use is to turn the Sam unit around the other way to stop water ingress but it's hit or miss if that works also.

Edited by Vince70 on Tuesday 25th August 13:15

[300bhp/ton]

Vince70 said:

Funny that I had a clutch and new softwear installed under warranty on mine plus a new steering rack and I also had the upgraded seals fitted all under warranty plus the dreaded bulkhead sealed on mine and some new rear number plate lights as these had also filled up with water mine was one of the good ones and wasn't that bad though as it stayed in the garage most of the time and I would only allow it out on dry days but after all the repairs under warranty it was a good little motor it's just a shame that it couldn't come out of the factory as it ought too.
It cost Mercedes on average £3000 on warranty claims on each car so hence why the plug was pulled.. Think of it as the Laguna II of the sports car world.
Why are you going on about the TVR I've never owned one so can't comment on one of those but like I say I still like the roadster for all it faults and it was a brave attempt from such a manufacturer to enter the sports car world.

Next you will be saying that it's really well screwed together but if you have your fingers crossed and some silicon seal for the rubbers and a set of widgets and some Thompson roof paint for the bulkhead you might just get away without a Wet Sam unit..
Another idea some people use is to turn the Sam unit around the other way to stop water ingress but it's hit or miss if that works also.

Which bit don't you get that I own one too???


123,000 miles on the clock!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lives outside 24/7

Clutch needs replacing, but is still original and this car is remapped.

Steering rack is original too.

It's used every day pretty much. Drove 36+ miles to work this morning in it and it's sat outside the office now in the rain and will be driven home again later today.

[lostkiwi]

Vince70 said:

Funny that I had a clutch and new softwear installed under warranty on mine plus a new steering rack and I also had the upgraded seals fitted all under warranty plus the dreaded bulkhead sealed on mine and some new rear number plate lights as these had also filled up with water mine was one of the good ones and wasn't that bad though as it stayed in the garage most of the time and I would only allow it out on dry days but after all the repairs under warranty it was a good little motor it's just a shame that it couldn't come out of the factory as it ought too.
It cost Mercedes on average £3000 on warranty claims on each car so hence why the plug was pulled.. Think of it as the Laguna II of the sports car world.
Why are you going on about the TVR I've never owned one so can't comment on one of those but like I say I still like the roadster for all it faults and it was a brave attempt from such a manufacturer to enter the sports car world.

Next you will be saying that it's really well screwed together but if you have your fingers crossed and some silicon seal for the rubbers and a set of widgets and some Thompson roof paint for the bulkhead you might just get away without a Wet Sam unit..
Another idea some people use is to turn the Sam unit around the other way to stop water ingress but it's hit or miss if that works also.

Whilst there is no doubt the implementation of the design could have been better most of the ones on the road now have had all the issues well and truly sorted.
Mine had a couple of small leaks when I got it - one from the left rear corner of the folding roof and one from the drivers wing mirror where someone had whacked it and distorted the mounting frame. The sunroof leak was fixed in two minutes with a small amount of sealant to build up a rubber lip on the seal and the drivers mirror was fixed by removing the mirror, straightening the mounting frame and reassembling. Been dry ever since - coming up to three years.
Turning the SAM round to stop water ingress will never work as cables enter it from both sides. Also, condensation from wet carpets will kill them just as surely as a water drip so all the leaks need to be sorted. The bulkhead one is well documented and takes a couple of hours and then it will be good for the life of the car. The cause being a poor rubber seal which can be remedied with Sikaflex. Once the bulkhead leak is fixed the SAM should be OK but for additional peace of mind remove it and coat all the boards with a conformal coating.
Leaks are not unique to Smart Roadsters though - other cars with soft tops also suffer. MX5 for example. Z3s are another as are some Mercs and MR2s. Pretty much anything with a removable roof will leak at some point. But its not anything really to do with the substance/style thing.....

[lostkiwi]

300bhp/ton said:

Which bit don't you get that I own one too???


123,000 miles on the clock!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lives outside 24/7

Clutch needs replacing, but is still original and this car is remapped.

Steering rack is original too.

It's used every day pretty much. Drove 36+ miles to work this morning in it and it's sat outside the office now in the rain and will be driven home again later today.

Ditto all that - but mine has 128k miles. If you want a hand doing the clutch ask - its not a hard job.

[Vince70]

The car was pulled due to warranty claims is a known fact about the car.. You must be extremely lucky
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster

[lostkiwi]

Vince70 said:

The car was pulled due to warranty claims is a known fact about the car.. You must be extremely lucky
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster

Ah yes the well known font of all things accurate Wikipedia...
It did point out the warranty claims weren't £3000 per car but actually €3000 - so about 33% less at the time it was canned.

[DiscoColin]

Max M4X WW said:

What about..



Ok they did come with a 3.0 V6, but a 2.2 4cyl or HDi?

Somewhat short of front end grip and some of the switchgear was a bit fragile, but they actually weren't that bad compared to their contemporaries IMHO.

[irocfan]

lostkiwi said:

Vince70 said:

The car was pulled due to warranty claims is a known fact about the car.. You must be extremely lucky
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster

Ah yes the well known font of all things accurate Wikipedia...
It did point out the warranty claims weren't £3000 per car but actually €3000 - so about 33% less at the time it was canned.

ahhhh so only a few k per car - still not exactly a ringing endorsement is it? (ps I do like 'em!!)

[Ali_T]

white_goodman said:

No, I haven't driven one...

THere's a lot of that on this thread. If I hadn't driven my current Alfa, I'd have believed the press and their obsession with German cars and been far more miserable than I currently am.

[pSyCoSiS]

This hideous, heap of st

http://www.discountcabrio.com/images/categories/ch...

The Chysler PT Cruiser Cabriolet.

And before 300 starts defending them, - DON'T! A total and utterly pointless car. Why someone would want to spend the cash on one of them is beyond me. Plenty of other convertibles for similar money, by why on earth you buy one of them?!

[anonymous-user]

lostkiwi said:

Vince70 said:

The car was pulled due to warranty claims is a known fact about the car.. You must be extremely lucky
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_Roadster

Ah yes the well known font of all things accurate Wikipedia...
It did point out the warranty claims weren't £3000 per car but actually €3000 - so about 33% less at the time it was canned.

If they are as good as certain posters are making out on here then they'd still be building and selling them.

[kambites]

St John Smythe said:

If they are as good as certain posters are making out on here then they'd still be building and selling them.

I was under the impression they were pulled largely because they were far too expensive to produce. Something the gearbox probably also didn't help with.

[anonymous-user]

kambites said:

St John Smythe said:

If they are as good as certain posters are making out on here then they'd still be building and selling them.

I was under the impression they were pulled largely because they were far too expensive to produce. Something the gearbox probably also didn't help with.

I do like the look of the Brabus Roadster. But for the prices they go for they are just too underpowered imo.