Luxury Small Cars

[Jimmy Recard]

kambites said:

Tuvra said:

300bhp/ton said:

A tidy Rover P6 3500 or Triumph 2.5Pi are still very nice places to sit.

I know you love throwing in stupid curve balls, but surely your taking the piss now?

Why is it any more ridiculous than the Merc 190?

Agreed. None of them are particularly helpful for the context of this thread, but a P6 3500 or 2500Pi is probably more of a luxury car than a Mercedes 190.

I do stress though that I feel none of them are what the OP is looking for.

[Tuvra]

kambites said:

Tuvra said:

300bhp/ton said:

A tidy Rover P6 3500 or Triumph 2.5Pi are still very nice places to sit.

I know you love throwing in stupid curve balls, but surely your taking the piss now?

Why is it any more ridiculous than the Merc 190?

I haven't said anything about a 190?

If you think this is luxury then I have misinterpreted the word luxury:-

[kambites]

Tuvra said:

I haven't said anything about a 190?

I know but you picked out 300's suggestion as being silly when it was, to my mind, at least as sensible as a different car that several other people had suggested.

[sealtt]

Jimmy Recard said:

So in other words if most of that is steel, about £30 different?

Noo, think about the extra leather used to cover a much bigger cabin! The extra sound deadening materials. The higher rated components to support the weight of a bigger car. I'm no expert in car manufacturing obviously, but a logical guess would suggest there is a fair bit of cost difference through the quantity of materials used when creating a big luxury car vs a small luxury car. Though happy to be proven totally wrong, just what my assumption would be.

otolith said:

The lightest S-class seems to be about 8% heavier per unit of area covered than the lightest C-class - or 5% heavier per unit of volume if you treat them as a cuboid.

That is quite a notable difference if the weight comes from luxury enhancing material usage.

[Tuvra]

kambites said:

Tuvra said:

I haven't said anything about a 190?

I know but you picked out 300's suggestion as being silly when it was, to my mind, at least as sensible as a different car that several other people had suggested.

I think the 190 is more luxurious by modern standards, still a poor suggestion considering what the OP requires, I don't see how a classic Merc, Rover or Triumph can realistically be suggested as a "daily driver luxury small car". May as well suggest a silver shadow because its smaller than a Phantom....

Something like a Mini Mayfair would probably suit the needs:-

[AnotherClarkey]

sealtt said:

Yes maybe the interior quality is actually reasonably nice for the class, i got it as a courtesy car for a full size luxury car so less easy to judge. I had the hybrid model and two key points - without a doubt the least responsive engine I've ever driven, dangerously slow, and as mentioned before, the car was a ridiculously harsh ride, for no good reason - it's a Lexus hatchback, why would they make it like that!?

But obviously go and see for yourself, as I say I drive a very different type of car, so maybe my expectations are off.

Is this a new record for Pistonheads? A car with 134bhp and a 10 second 0-60 time being described as 'dangerously slow'?

[otolith]

sealtt said:

otolith said:

The lightest S-class seems to be about 8% heavier per unit of area covered than the lightest C-class - or 5% heavier per unit of volume if you treat them as a cuboid.

That is quite a notable difference if the weight comes from luxury enhancing material usage.

Yes. Would have to do more analysis to determine whether that's an artefact of how cars scale or whether it is a real increase in density due to specification. I would have thought that generally smaller cars would be more dense, but without spending some time checking I wouldn't know.

[300bhp/ton]

Jimmy Recard said:

I do stress though that I feel none of them are what the OP is looking for.

Neither do I now. But when I posted it, the op had not given any additional info and their opening post didn't say one way or the other. And to keep in context, the post I mentioned these cars started with me asking the op what their interpretation of luxury was.

[swisstoni]

Hello. I'm the OP.

It's not a 'what car' really. I was just looking at replacing my recently deceased barge with perhaps something smaller but not a step down in quality. But the spec of most smaller s/h cars is very low on the whole (not surprisingly as they are mostly bought on a budget).

I then started thinking if there were any smaller cars that were designed with luxury in mind from the off.
I seem to remember that the Lancia Ypsilon was supposed to be an up-market car from the outset. I suppose that tells me all I need to know about the idea really.

I have plenty of other ideas for the barge replacement - going smaller was just one.

[sealtt]

AnotherClarkey said:

Is this a new record for Pistonheads? A car with 134bhp and a 10 second 0-60 time being described as 'dangerously slow'?

Ha, on paper maybe it looks OK - that is the eco/hybrid model you are looking at? But you try driving it, not in the 'sport' mode which is manageable, but in the regular mode or eco mode - the car feels like it is broken, there is near zero throttle response.

otolith said:

Yes. Would have to do more analysis to determine whether that's an artefact of how cars scale or whether it is a real increase in density due to specification. I would have thought that generally smaller cars would be more dense, but without spending some time checking I wouldn't know.

Would be very interesting to see the amount of raw materials used in each car, especially differences in quantity of sound proofing material, etc used, though I suppose the manufacturers keep that sort of data to themselves.

[AnotherClarkey]

sealtt said:

AnotherClarkey said:

Is this a new record for Pistonheads? A car with 134bhp and a 10 second 0-60 time being described as 'dangerously slow'?

Ha, on paper maybe it looks OK - that is the eco/hybrid model you are looking at? But you try driving it, not in the 'sport' mode which is manageable, but in the regular mode or eco mode - the car feels like it is broken, there is near zero throttle response.

There is no model of CT200 other than the hybrid. I have not driven one but I do have a Prius, which has essentially the same drivetrain. There is no throttle response at all with these cars because you do not have control over the throttle. The electric motors respond rapidly to inputs from the accelerator pedal and the petrol engine gets fired up by the computer according to the total power demand on the system. Listening to the petrol engine is not really a good way to gauge progress but progress there certainly is.

[kambites]

Tuvra said:

I think the 190 is more luxurious by modern standards, still a poor suggestion considering what the OP requires,

Hmm, I'd say the opposite. I've spent a bit of time in both a 190 and a Rover P6 and I'd say the P6 feels considerably more luxurious (albeit not as well made).

I'd argue that the MINI is less luxurious than either - it's full of cheap silver painted plastic!

[sealtt]

AnotherClarkey said:

There is no model of CT200 other than the hybrid. I have not driven one but I do have a Prius, which has essentially the same drivetrain. There is no throttle response at all with these cars because you do not have control over the throttle. The electric motors respond rapidly to inputs from the accelerator pedal and the petrol engine gets fired up by the computer according to the total power demand on the system. Listening to the petrol engine is not really a good way to gauge progress but progress there certainly is.

What I mean to say is, you press the accelerator pedal (in eco or normal mode) and basically nothing happens. I found it terrible for town driving because of this, pulling out at junctions, trying to pass parked cars, etc. In sport mode it's OK, still not great, but in the regular modes, it seems unusable based on my 2 days experience as it's so slow to get moving and if you floor it the revs start jumping around the place. Not enjoyable, but maybe you get used to it after a few weeks.

[northwest monkey]

I'm pretty sure Peugeot did a 205 & 309 in "luxury" spec some years ago. Renault definitely did the Clio with leather & wood as a neighbour had one. I definitely think there's a market for an S-class type A-class. That Mini looks nice though - pretty much ticks the boxes for me.

[DrTre]

The Mini bac m30.
Thirty thousand, luxury never seen before (possibly).

Makes the Aston cygnet look a steal.

[rscott]

DrTre said:

The Mini bac m30.
Thirty thousand, luxury never seen before (possibly).

Makes the Aston cygnet look a steal.

Nah - you wan this Margrave Mini - http://www.gcminis.co.uk/products/rare-odd-minis/m... - How many others have built in cocktail cabinets?

[bigfatnick]

Reading this thread, it seems that people seem to think a car to not be a luxury car unless it has lots of gadgets and bling.

Am I one of the few people who considers a luxury car to be one without a bone jarring ride, with very little tyre noise, comfortable seating, adequate power transmitted through a smooth auto gearbox, cruise control and enough interior space to not be bashing elbows? It seems most don't care about these points.

Road noise suppression and a comfortable ride, in my mind are the who things missing in most modern cars.

[otolith]

Depends which end of the market you are looking at. Small to medium sized cars have got much quieter and more comfortable. Large cars have got too "sporty" for their primary function.

[kambites]

bigfatnick said:

Reading this thread, it seems that people seem to think a car to not be a luxury car unless it has lots of gadgets and bling.

The idea that a MINI with a cabin full of leatherette and silver painted plastic is more luxurious than a Rover P6 is a bit bizarre to me.

[DrTre]

rscott said:

Nah - you wan this Margrave Mini - http://www.gcminis.co.uk/products/rare-odd-minis/m... - How many others have built in cocktail cabinets?

That interior is just... Words don't exist...