Mention a particular car, someone has to mention...

[LunarOne]

Cold said:

Yet oddly, the superior car chase in the film Ronin starred a BMW 5 Series and Peugeot 406 not the Audi S8.

Probably because the Audi kept understeering! It's true though. I have an Audi and its handling when pushing on is not something I'd want to rely on. Seems to understeer on braking and understeer under acceleration. Give me an E46 over a B7 any day!

Oh and I loved Ronin. I even pushed the boat out and spent £2 on a DVD of it!

[Wadeski]

Corvette - Cart springs in the rear

Also, it's amazing how many of these are just quotes from Top Gear. For the average punter the opinion of C/H/M on cars was gospel, even though it was written for entertainment.

[braddo]

sociopath said:

The thread is about things people say about specific cars, and you and the other replier have confirmed my post to be 100% accurate by actually saying it and arguing it's normal. It's not my problem if you don't like it and don't understand what the thread is actually about.

Given your defence I guess you have a BMW.

It's a weird thing for you to get uptight about. It's very common for when referring to popular BMW/Merc/Porsche models. I have to admit to glazing over if someone is talking about model numbers for Z4s and X5 etc.

But anyway, I don't see how it's much different to referring to Mark I/2/3/4 versions of models - loads of Ford models, Jags, Golfs, Land Rovers, Corollas, Lotus elise/exige etc etc.

You posting style suggests you'd jump on someone who gets a Mk3/Mk4 Cortina mixed up while shaking your head at E30 BMW references...

[ajprice]

On the Audi understeer from the engine being in front of the wheels.

2008 RS6 V10 from the latest Harry's Garage video



https://youtu.be/fKjs49cISGk

[C5_Steve]

Wadeski said:

Corvette - Cart springs in the rear

Also, it's amazing how many of these are just quotes from Top Gear. For the average punter the opinion of C/H/M on cars was gospel, even though it was written for entertainment.

This.

Usually followed by "aren't they made of plastic" because Jezza poked the rear end of a C6 once.

[braddo]

C5_Steve said:

This.

Usually followed by "aren't they made of plastic" because Jezza poked the rear end of a C6 once.

Oi! No codenames Mr C5!!

[VeeReihenmotor6]

VW Corrado "nice Scirocco mate"

Porsche 911 (996/997.1) "bore score / chocolate engine"

[OldDuffer]

Range Rover = Range Rooney or "Are you a drug-dealer?"

LR Defender = Why is it spattered in homoerotic shonk?

LR Series = Brown beer and facial-hair.

[p4cks]

VeeReihenmotor6 said:

Porsche 911 (996/997.1) "bore score / chocolate engine"

There's a very good reason.

[sociopath]

Triumph Man said:

sociopath said:

evil.edna said:

sociopath said:

MikeM6 said:

sociopath said:

Any BMW mentioned on PH and apparently you have to mention if its an E46 or an E17 or whatever. No one else outside PH knows or cares

I always wondered why some get worked up about using model designation, it's not exactly complicated and most people who know about cars understand what an E46 is. Is funny the things people get their knickers in a twist about

I was going to say E60 M5 someone has to mention rod bearings, but I don't want to upset any sociopaths.

Oh bugger, I said it anyway.

They really don't, because knowing about cars doesn't necessarily mean caring about BMW internal model codes in any way shape or form.
As a test I asked my wife (ex Ford Advanced Research Engineer) and some of her ex colleagues who still work at Dunton, none of them had a clue.

But right on Cue, you did it for me anyway

Strange post. Especially, since Ford was a place in which, with regard to Ford products, everybody spoke in model codes - because of all the platform sharing, it was the only way you could be absolutely sure you were talking about exactly the same thing.

Some people also referred to other manufacturers models and powertrains by their internal codes. It wasn't because of some strange train spotting type nerdiness - it was so people could be absolutely certain we were all on the same page talking about the exactly the same thing without the need to go into further descriptive dialogue.

This is something I experienced at quite a few other OEMs, in the UK and abroad. It is not just a PH or Ford thing.

Not sure what your point is or why you have to draw on some tenuous link to try and give it credence.

The thread is about things people say about specific cars, and you and the other replier have confirmed my post to be 100% accurate by actually saying it and arguing it's normal. It's not my problem if you don't like it and don't understand what the thread is actually about.

Given your defence I guess you have a BMW.

This is a car forum, it's not unreasonable for people to use model codes, and BMW and Mercedes-Benz seem to have the most universally understood codes. It's also useful for ascertaining which BMW someone's talking about. I, for example, have a 1995 BMW 5 series. Is that an E34 or E39? Could be either. (It's an E34)

Typical BMW driver doesnt understand what the thread is about, doesn't like my post, and argues that what I'm saying is 100% right.
ie People who have BMW's always post model codes.

I'm not sure why that's hard to understand since you're all arguing with me that it's OK to do so, but since you can't find your indicator stalks either, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[C5_Steve]

braddo said:

Oi! No codenames Mr C5!!

Sorry I can never remember the model year

[bodhi]

sociopath said:

Typical BMW driver doesnt understand what the thread is about, doesn't like my post, and argues that what I'm saying is 100% right.
ie People who have BMW's always post model codes.

I'm not sure why that's hard to understand since you're all arguing with me that it's OK to do so, but since you can't find your indicator stalks either, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

Yeah the old "BMW Indicator" trope was mentioned on the 5th post of this thread.

Also my BMW came fully fitted with indicators. They just have filters on the lenses so drivers of lesser cars can't see them

[BananaFama]

Re 'model codes......"I went out in my C5 yesterday "

Corvette ,Citroen or Sinclair ?

Someone yesterday mentioned their Clubsport S , I had no idea what that was until someone posted a pic of theirs ,a Golf with added yawn !

My first thought on the above was a Porsche 911

Edited by BananaFama on Friday 31st March 15:23

[braddo]

A young chap on here some years ago used to refer to his Bertone coupe. It was an Astra.

[donkmeister]

BananaFama said:

Re 'model codes......"I went out in my C5 yesterday "

Corvette ,Citroen or Sinclair ?

Someone yesterday mentioned their Clubsport S , I had no idea what that was until someone posted a pic of theirs ,a Golf with added yawn !

Wait until you see what Tesla fanboys mean when they say M3...

I've no problem with model codes when the context is there, model name takes precedence so a C4 with nothing else is a Citroen, but a 911 C4 or Corvette C4 is valid.

[MikeM6]

sociopath said:

Typical BMW driver doesnt understand what the thread is about, doesn't like my post, and argues that what I'm saying is 100% right.
ie People who have BMW's always post model codes.

I'm not sure why that's hard to understand since you're all arguing with me that it's OK to do so, but since you can't find your indicator stalks either, I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

I thing you have misunderstood the thread to be honest, but don't let that get in the way of a good hissy fit. You fight those nasty BMW drivers, show them who's boss!

[Baldchap]

cerb4.5lee said:

I look back now and think this about my Dad's 1979 V8 5.0 Mustang(he owned it from 1980 to 1990). It only had 140bhp which doesn't seem very much at all now, however it did have 250ft/Ibs of torque though(that is only 20ft/Ibs less than my 370Z offers now). So it would've felt fairly punchy I would've thought back then to be fair.

The Mustang was also miles quicker at the traffic light GP against the 1982 Escort XR3 that my Dad also had as well. That was a fun day looking back now!

Never realised the 370 had so little torque. Turbos really have changed the game. My 3 cyl 1.6 has similar torque (presumably more 99% of the time).

[SturdyHSV]

As mentioned above, it's amazing how much of popular car culture is realistically just Clarksonisms, the man has had an enormous influence on people's perceptions of and conversations around cars, whether they like it or not

Any American car leads to Clarkson-esque similes, interior plastics from recycled chocolate boxes, pram based suspension, plastic bodywork (but when a British company uses the same material it's clever lightweight engineering etc.), all engines made from iron, can't go around corners, low specific output and on and on.

Any ~2000s Porsche = engine failure every 20 miles

RX-7 / RX-8 = 15mpg...of oil.

Camaro = Cow on the roof

Jag XJ = Nikasil liners

[cerb4.5lee]

Baldchap said:

cerb4.5lee said:

I look back now and think this about my Dad's 1979 V8 5.0 Mustang(he owned it from 1980 to 1990). It only had 140bhp which doesn't seem very much at all now, however it did have 250ft/Ibs of torque though(that is only 20ft/Ibs less than my 370Z offers now). So it would've felt fairly punchy I would've thought back then to be fair.

The Mustang was also miles quicker at the traffic light GP against the 1982 Escort XR3 that my Dad also had as well. That was a fun day looking back now!

Never realised the 370 had so little torque. Turbos really have changed the game. My 3 cyl 1.6 has similar torque (presumably more 99% of the time).

I do have a little grumble about it myself to be honest, especially if I've just been out in the M4(a straight 6 cylinder 3.0 twin turbo) and I jump into the 370 afterwards. In my head I think how can a car with a relatively reasonable sized engine(a V6 3.7 litre) have so little torque.

As you say turbos have definitely changed the game in comparison to a lot of NA engines for sure.

[StuE39]

FN2 Civic Type R:

1) 1 hp more

2) inferior rear beam