Discussion
For a while I've been trying to get information and videos on Bristol. There's very little out there when it comes to media, and I don't understand why.
To me, they look like absolute s
t and I can't understand why they command such high prices. I'm trying to find a video review or unbiased article which will prove me wrong. Anyone?
I'm starting to suspect its a bit of a scam but I can't even find negative reviews... Weird.
To me, they look like absolute s
t and I can't understand why they command such high prices. I'm trying to find a video review or unbiased article which will prove me wrong. Anyone?I'm starting to suspect its a bit of a scam but I can't even find negative reviews... Weird.
AndrewCrown said:
Dear Funk Star
May I suggest you go and find a few.. sit in them. drive them.. and then I think you will 'understand' their enduring appeal...
Bristol Motors exhibited a classic case history in absolutley understanding their own (super niche) market. It did not need to advertise or seduce journalists or generate reviews as they were already talking one to one with their next customer over a Dubonnet. Under Mr Tony Crook, Bristol Motors would not even sell you a car if he didn't like you. Rare.. kind of cool and lost.
Explore a bit more...
Cheers
A
I would love to, I've never even seen on in real life - although I would likely mistake it for an old Rover :-/May I suggest you go and find a few.. sit in them. drive them.. and then I think you will 'understand' their enduring appeal...
Bristol Motors exhibited a classic case history in absolutley understanding their own (super niche) market. It did not need to advertise or seduce journalists or generate reviews as they were already talking one to one with their next customer over a Dubonnet. Under Mr Tony Crook, Bristol Motors would not even sell you a car if he didn't like you. Rare.. kind of cool and lost.
Explore a bit more...
Cheers
A
Remomonza said:
While attending the Greenpower final at Goodwood this year with my son's school race car team, got chatting to an engineer about an electric powered Metrocab taxi that was being displayed for promotional purposes. I was interested in the construction of the taxi, as its interior was made from carbon fibre. He told me that Metrocab was part of the Frazer Nash group, which also included Bristol cars. I asked him what the new Bristol was going to be like, but he would not give anything away. He just said it was going to be technically very interesting.
http://www.frazer-nash.com/news/news/bristol.html
Interesting. Thankshttp://www.frazer-nash.com/news/news/bristol.html
Just watched a YouTube video of a dealer showing off a Blenheim 2. When he shows where the spare wheel is kept, you can hear the squeak and see the panel wobble around. It looks bloody atrocious.
It looked like a car built in early 70s Britain, not a £130K plus "premium" machine.
I've decided it was a scam. I think anyone who purchased one was probably too embarrassed to admit their foolishness. Again I've never even seen one in real life ☺
It looked like a car built in early 70s Britain, not a £130K plus "premium" machine.
I've decided it was a scam. I think anyone who purchased one was probably too embarrassed to admit their foolishness. Again I've never even seen one in real life ☺
MintSprint said:
I've not been 'taken in' by anything, Sweety.
I know that, objectively, cars like Bristols are far from perfect.
But I have enough imagination to realise that the world is a more interesting and stimulating place because, it has all sorts of things in it that don't make sense to people like you
Not to get involved in this, and frankly I have a personal love for quirky (crappy) old Italian cars, but if you have to imagine your car is good then there's definitely an issueI know that, objectively, cars like Bristols are far from perfect.
But I have enough imagination to realise that the world is a more interesting and stimulating place because, it has all sorts of things in it that don't make sense to people like you
MintSprint said:
I ought to point out that I am not, never have been, and almost certainly never will be a Bristol owner, but...
What if you don't imagine that your car is (objectively) good?
What if you simply don't care that it's flawed?
I appreciate that PistonHeads, like many internet forums, is by its very nature populated by a high proportion of socially inept, hence insecure, people with tendencies toward OCD and/or existing somewhere toward the Aspergers end of the autistic spectrum.
They will be absolutely incapable of even comprehending the fact that there could be confident, well-adjusted people out there, some of them with enough money to buy a new Bristol without worrying too much about the depreciation or the fact that there are objectively better products available. They buy them because the car appeals to their iconoclastic tendencies (which may well be the reason they have enough money not to worry about buying a Bristol in the first place...), and because it makes them smile.
Some of these people (shock! horror!) may even be well-adjusted enough to recognise the fact that the world isn't going to come off its axis because their car has variable shutlines, illogical switch positions, or (despite the fact that it exists in a country with busy roads and a 70mph speed limit) can't lap the Nurburgring in less than 8 minutes. It makes no difference.
Of course the variable shutlines and unergonomic switch positions will drive the OCD/Aspergers types absolutely nuts, but this is good enough reason in itself to buy a Bristol, IMO.
I understand what you're saying, really I do. And that's all well and good if you're paying £1500 for an old MR2 / MX-5 / "fun POS' car. I've had loads of them, and I can overlook flaws in anything. However, if I was paying top money for a car, I'd expect it to excel in at least one area. The Bristol, to me at least, has no redeeming features. It's not beautiful, it's not fast, they don't seem to handle well, they are not built well, the cabin is horrid. If it was £1500 second hand I could maybe see the charm.What if you don't imagine that your car is (objectively) good?
What if you simply don't care that it's flawed?
I appreciate that PistonHeads, like many internet forums, is by its very nature populated by a high proportion of socially inept, hence insecure, people with tendencies toward OCD and/or existing somewhere toward the Aspergers end of the autistic spectrum.
They will be absolutely incapable of even comprehending the fact that there could be confident, well-adjusted people out there, some of them with enough money to buy a new Bristol without worrying too much about the depreciation or the fact that there are objectively better products available. They buy them because the car appeals to their iconoclastic tendencies (which may well be the reason they have enough money not to worry about buying a Bristol in the first place...), and because it makes them smile.
Some of these people (shock! horror!) may even be well-adjusted enough to recognise the fact that the world isn't going to come off its axis because their car has variable shutlines, illogical switch positions, or (despite the fact that it exists in a country with busy roads and a 70mph speed limit) can't lap the Nurburgring in less than 8 minutes. It makes no difference.
Of course the variable shutlines and unergonomic switch positions will drive the OCD/Aspergers types absolutely nuts, but this is good enough reason in itself to buy a Bristol, IMO.
Edited by MintSprint on Saturday 13th December 11:49
To me,the Bristol is like those iPhone apps called "I'm rich". People will buy them simply because they are expensive.
Also, the fact that the owner continually lies about them f
king pisses me off. Aerospace standards - fk right off.- again never driven one, never seen one in real life*
RedBull said:
I actually agree with most of what you say but it's the bit I've quoted that makes it hard for me to take your opinion too seriously. With cars, if you have never even seen one I fail to understand how you can have such strong opinions.
I also have never understood the desire for a Bristol, I really don't like them at all. A very good friend of mine sold his C3 Corvette and bought himself a Bristol 410. After spending a considerable amount of money and time on it, he now has a superb example, even winning a trophy at the owners club. He loves the car but I just do not get it at all.
I find it very ugly, although one of the better looking Bristol models, but still ugly. Some of the other models are beyond ugly as can be seen by some of the pictures on this thread. I can see no reason whatsoever to buy or even like a Bristol. But the fact that I don't get it doesn't make them irrelevant or belittle the love that others have for them.
As a car enthusiast there are many cars that hold absolutely no interest to me at all, and there are many that do. I have cars that divide opinion between love and hate. My friend loves his Bristol and I am very glad that he does, we joke about our contrasting opinions and it's all good.
Hey, at least I'm honest :-) I don't pretend to be a car expert, I was just hoping someone in this thread would change my opinion by listing some of the positive aspects of owning Bristol. So far, all I can see is "they're flawed but I love them".I also have never understood the desire for a Bristol, I really don't like them at all. A very good friend of mine sold his C3 Corvette and bought himself a Bristol 410. After spending a considerable amount of money and time on it, he now has a superb example, even winning a trophy at the owners club. He loves the car but I just do not get it at all.
I find it very ugly, although one of the better looking Bristol models, but still ugly. Some of the other models are beyond ugly as can be seen by some of the pictures on this thread. I can see no reason whatsoever to buy or even like a Bristol. But the fact that I don't get it doesn't make them irrelevant or belittle the love that others have for them.
As a car enthusiast there are many cars that hold absolutely no interest to me at all, and there are many that do. I have cars that divide opinion between love and hate. My friend loves his Bristol and I am very glad that he does, we joke about our contrasting opinions and it's all good.
NomduJour said:
There are some real chips on display here, it's a bit like Owen Jones compering a Daily Mirror dolts' convention.
The only "hype" about the cars is internet-generated, perpetuated by people who don't possess the power of independent thought - "Yeah, I heard that stuck-up old git wouldn't sell a car to anyone without tweed underpants", "Clarkson couldn't drive one so I hate them and know they are rubbish I love Top Gear he is so funny and Clarkson said my car was good and I want to go on Top Gear", "I have never set eyes on one but I categorically know that the build quality is appalling", "i saw blenhim on net innit and was st bruv ad no nav or zenonns lol or S line or msports badge".
Objective comparison becomes pretty irrelevant when cars are old, but my experience (of the V8 cars) tells me that they are still quick by modern standards, are well-made, comfortable to travel in, good to drive (everything heavy contained within the wheelbase, well-located rear axle, good steering, great directional stability), still practical to use regularly and generally a nice place to be.
I don't see anyone here saying things like that.The only "hype" about the cars is internet-generated, perpetuated by people who don't possess the power of independent thought - "Yeah, I heard that stuck-up old git wouldn't sell a car to anyone without tweed underpants", "Clarkson couldn't drive one so I hate them and know they are rubbish I love Top Gear he is so funny and Clarkson said my car was good and I want to go on Top Gear", "I have never set eyes on one but I categorically know that the build quality is appalling", "i saw blenhim on net innit and was s
t bruv ad no nav or zenonns lol or S line or msports badge". Objective comparison becomes pretty irrelevant when cars are old, but my experience (of the V8 cars) tells me that they are still quick by modern standards, are well-made, comfortable to travel in, good to drive (everything heavy contained within the wheelbase, well-located rear axle, good steering, great directional stability), still practical to use regularly and generally a nice place to be.
What model did you spend time with? I've not seen a single pic of one where the interior looked anything more than amateur.
NomduJour said:
I have a 411 and a 603. Interiors look fine to me:
I wonder if people think the Blenheim is the only Bristol that has existed.
That does look good (excluding the transmission tunnel). How much of that is due to it being "restored" though? I'm hard pushed to believe it left the factory like that.I wonder if people think the Blenheim is the only Bristol that has existed.
What in particular do you like about your cars? In what areas are they better than the competition? Interesting to speak to someone who actually owns them
Edited by Funkstar De Luxe on Saturday 13th December 13:49
MintSprint said:
That's because you've been very thoroughly conditioned by the major manufacturers to have a clear perception that 'quality' is what they want to sell you this year.
They take a great deal of trouble to make sure that this perception evolves, so that in 5 years time, you'll be as horrified by the 'poor quality' and 'dated aesthetics' of today's cars as you are of those horribly passe things that were built back in the dark ages of 2010.
However could we have lived without the luxury of swathes of genuine, soft-touch leathergrain-effect charcoal plastics, trimmed with the sporty sophistication of chic, aluminium effect plastic highlights? Oh, the humanity!
And Of course an organically sculpted piece of plastic with concealed fixings as a glovebox handle is superior to a to a braided strap, secured by (shock! horror!) visible screws. How could anyone possibly think otherwise?
It must be, because the manufacturers of the cars who have developed such components in an effort to make their current model year look more modern than last year's model year tell you it is, right?
Say 'baaaaaaaa!', you lovely, perfect little consumer, you!
Hmm, funny you should say that. I'm actually a quality engineer for a major manufacturer.They take a great deal of trouble to make sure that this perception evolves, so that in 5 years time, you'll be as horrified by the 'poor quality' and 'dated aesthetics' of today's cars as you are of those horribly passe things that were built back in the dark ages of 2010.
However could we have lived without the luxury of swathes of genuine, soft-touch leathergrain-effect charcoal plastics, trimmed with the sporty sophistication of chic, aluminium effect plastic highlights? Oh, the humanity!
And Of course an organically sculpted piece of plastic with concealed fixings as a glovebox handle is superior to a to a braided strap, secured by (shock! horror!) visible screws. How could anyone possibly think otherwise?
It must be, because the manufacturers of the cars who have developed such components in an effort to make their current model year look more modern than last year's model year tell you it is, right?
Say 'baaaaaaaa!', you lovely, perfect little consumer, you!
NomduJour said:
I generally prefer to make my own mind up about things, but whatever suits.
If there's a dislike towards Bristol because of what they are, then you'd also expect to see similar feelings toward Allard, Apollo, Bitter, Bizzarini, Cunningham, De Tomaso, Facel, Ginetta, Gordon Keeble, Intermeccanica, Iso, Jensen, Lister, Marcos, Monteverd, TVR etc.
To be fair, most of those manufacturers produce 'sports cars' - so as long as they have a big engine and interesting enough styling they can get away with poor build quality. Luxury cars are more difficult to let pass.If there's a dislike towards Bristol because of what they are, then you'd also expect to see similar feelings toward Allard, Apollo, Bitter, Bizzarini, Cunningham, De Tomaso, Facel, Ginetta, Gordon Keeble, Intermeccanica, Iso, Jensen, Lister, Marcos, Monteverd, TVR etc.
The 411 is an acceptable looking machine.
MintSprint said:
That makes sense then.
You'd hardly be any good at it if you didn't believe your own propaganda (and that of your employer's marketing department)?
You misunderstand what I do. Through material choice, design, and manufacturing processes I define and control the quality of our products. I am not in charge of saying "our products are good quality". Neither is anyone else for that matter (marketing included). Engineering and marketing are departments that don't really communicate.You'd hardly be any good at it if you didn't believe your own propaganda (and that of your employer's marketing department)?
SamPet said:
That's concerning. Marketeers should be investigating what consumers want and should really be communicating those insights to the engineering teams, no?
ETA: whether the consumers' wishes are right or not
No, why the hell would marketing do that? Product planning do that. You have no idea.ETA: whether the consumers' wishes are right or not
MintSprint said:
But you are in charge of ensuring that your company's products meet customer perceptions of quality.
And the marketing department is responsible for ensuring that those perceptions constantly but predictably shift, so that they can only be fully met by this year's model.
You have heard, I am sure, the term 'planned obsolescence'. Like it or not, you are a cog in that machine...
They're certainly not immune, but Bristol are less fixated on Planned Obsolescence than most manufacturers, and most Bristol purchasers will be people who are less taken in by it.
No, that's massively incorrect. Quality as in how the products function, how they last, how adequately they do their jobs, as well as manufacturability. Perception of quality is through design. Don't mistake me for a touchy-feely engineer.And the marketing department is responsible for ensuring that those perceptions constantly but predictably shift, so that they can only be fully met by this year's model.
You have heard, I am sure, the term 'planned obsolescence'. Like it or not, you are a cog in that machine...
They're certainly not immune, but Bristol are less fixated on Planned Obsolescence than most manufacturers, and most Bristol purchasers will be people who are less taken in by it.
Also, there is no planned obsolescence in my industry that I have seen. There are huge and false compromises put in place in order to differentiate highend / lowend models, but there is not planned obsolescence. Hell, we provide spares for 15 years.
I'm pleased that everyone understands my job more than I do :-D
I'm not willing to discuss work any further - it's the weekend now! :-P
Edited by Funkstar De Luxe on Saturday 13th December 14:27
MintSprint said:
Thankyou - that's made my weekend!And I'm betting that you don't even see the tiniest smidgen of irony in those statements!!
15 years, eh? Who'd have thought anything could remain current and technologically viable for that long?!And no, things don't remain "current" for that long. That's why a new fiesta is lightyears better than a 15 year old fiesta. The limit of spares is not planned to diminish the product, it's simply what is affordable and practical to stock.
I'm not willing to discuss this further.
Edited by Funkstar De Luxe on Saturday 13th December 14:51
MintSprint said:
Top quality flouncing! 
This will be my last reply to you, because I'm sure you're trolling.Planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence in industrial design is a policy of planning or designing a product with an artificially limited useful life, so it will become obsolete, that is, unfashionable or no longer functional after a certain period of time.
I have shown you that there are practical issues with supporting a product long term. The storage space required and management of stock. The manufacturing of the parts, maintaining tooling, and the contracts required to sign up a manufacturer for 20+ years. That is not artificially limiting the lifespan.
None of these factors have anything to do with design or planning, but instead are manufacturing constraints and cost impact to the user.
We can make a product that would be supported indefinitely, but those added costs would be passed on to the users. It doesn't make the product any better.
Comparing the maintenance and support of a jet fighter to an automotive product is idiotic.
MintSprint said:
In my industry, we're still able to provide cost-effective spares support for products whose lifespan is counted in millennia, but we're not as clever as you engineers. wink
No, no you can't.MintSprint said:
the majority of those advances could be retrofitted to older vehicles
Really? You think someone would take a Fiesta in for an engine or chassis upgrade? Consumable does not equal planned obsolescence.Best one I could find. Sounds nice at least
2004 Bristol Fighter HD video: http://youtu.be/haBXcHBk06M
2004 Bristol Fighter HD video: http://youtu.be/haBXcHBk06M
williamp said:
Hillman imp rear lights, karmann ghia numberplate light, triumph door handles.. Worthless mongrel of a car...
Using parts from mainstream manufacturers was very common. Less so these days,but still takes place. At least aston got better. My dbs v8 shared its brake callipers with the lambo muira. Made parts very cheap and easy to source...
Holy crap, this has just appeared on YouTube! Can't wait to see it!
Bristol Fighter: The Coolest Car You've Never Heard Of - XCAR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py8tjm6AqkE
Bristol Fighter: The Coolest Car You've Never Heard Of - XCAR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py8tjm6AqkE
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff