RE: The Ferrari Macnab
Discussion
My issue lies not with the content, but with the article itself.
1150 words to cover a 3 day, length of the country jaunt taking in awesome scenary, and three nice different activities, in a Ferrari.
There isn't enough detail about the car to make it a PH road test, not enough detail about the journey and the places to make it a "road trip" style article and not enough about the activities to raise any interest.
I know it may be meant to be an editorial style shorter report to provoke debate (so in that respect I guess it's worked) but i'd be more than happy to take my time reading a 4 or 5 pages report in the style of the PH buying guides, which would also detract from the "review wrote up in 20 min on the train feeling"
1150 words to cover a 3 day, length of the country jaunt taking in awesome scenary, and three nice different activities, in a Ferrari.
There isn't enough detail about the car to make it a PH road test, not enough detail about the journey and the places to make it a "road trip" style article and not enough about the activities to raise any interest.
I know it may be meant to be an editorial style shorter report to provoke debate (so in that respect I guess it's worked) but i'd be more than happy to take my time reading a 4 or 5 pages report in the style of the PH buying guides, which would also detract from the "review wrote up in 20 min on the train feeling"
Hellbound said:
Haha, yes!
In 'the olden days' it was the poor who hunted and foraged the lands. Urban farming is just the beginning, we'll be taking your guns next. Mehehehehe....!
Well in fact they poached the land as everything belonged to the King and you could be hung for stealing the King's deer. Pretty much the same applies here - try shooting some privileged Lord's stray deer in the interests of "culling" and see how f*ck*ng shirty he gets about that concept.In 'the olden days' it was the poor who hunted and foraged the lands. Urban farming is just the beginning, we'll be taking your guns next. Mehehehehe....!
Edited by Hellbound on Friday 9th November 12:51
Dan_1981 said:
There isn't enough detail about the car to make it a PH road test
Once again, wait 'til Monday! 
Interested to hear that you'd welcome longer stories though. Accepted wisdom has it that traditional flowing copy doesn't go well online, hence the edit to keep it down to length. But if people are willing to take the time to read longer stories then only too happy to run them.
Cheers,
Dan
LuS1fer said:
BaronVonVaderham said:
Most animals shot for sport ARE eaten. Nobody's running around machine-gunning unicorns here. 
So why not teach the unemployed to shoot and then they can hunt these animals and not leech the system of benefits. Mind you, landowners get upset enough about riff-raff nicking their rabbits. On the other hand, I'd like to see the outcry if we started hunting cows and pigs instead of humanely killing them.Kept my ferrets amused and fed, and was a good way to spend an early morning.
Guvernator said:
Devil2575 said:
LongLiveTazio said:
If I wanted to read about an under-endowed man feeling powerful by killing an animal I would go elsewhere.
This.Also who the f**k uses the term 'Shooting Brake' these days other than pretentious t
ts.As for the article, mildly interesting but as others have mentioned, could have done with a bit more written about the car, rather than the shooting.
The name's from the type of carriage used by the gentry when off shooting.
Rotary Madness said:
So when did PH get taken over by the leftist hand-wringing daily mail brigade? It was a couple of animals killed for the purposes of culling/eating, hardly cock fighting is it?
+1Not the best written article granted, but I can't believe the reaction on here. It was an interesting article on how a car lives up to what is purports to be, a SHOOTING brake.
LuS1fer said:
On the other hand, I'd like to see the outcry if we started hunting cows and pigs instead of humanely killing them.
On the other hand, would you prefer wild deer to be driven into the back of a lorry in order to take them to an abattoir to be dispatched humanely??????Good Luck.
There does seem to be a significant amount of anti-shooting prejudice on here. Do remember tree huggers, that deer of all species are forest animals... in this country they have been driven out of their natural forest environment onto marginal moorland, and they don't thrive. Scottish red deer are typically half the weight of their Polish forest-dwelling counterparts. A significant number of animals get culled because they are in such poor condition that they will not make it through the winter. Not sure sure that a lingering starving to death is more acceptable than being shot.
And as for the other apparent common prejudice in this thread that shooters are somehow a bunch of Ruperts and Tim's Nice-But-Dim's, how many game keepers, beaters and pest-contollers have you lot met????
Cheers,
Effortless
Edited by Effortless on Friday 9th November 13:48
markCSC said:
Rotary Madness said:
So when did PH get taken over by the leftist hand-wringing daily mail brigade? It was a couple of animals killed for the purposes of culling/eating, hardly cock fighting is it?
+1Not the best written article granted, but I can't believe the reaction on here. It was an interesting article on how a car lives up to what is purports to be, a SHOOTING brake.
I quite enjoyed the article and from what I have seen of the car I think it looks pretty cool. I'll never be able to afford to own one but constructing an article around what the car was designed for doesn't seem like a bad plan.
It doesn't surprise me that people have come on shouting about how wrong this piece is when they have their heads so far up there own arses it's amazing they can even read the article. I wasn't aware that anyone was forced to read it fully either? If you read the first paragraph and were aware by then that it wasn't your cup of tea, you could have clicked the 'back' button rather than trawling through it all and then commenting on how much you disliked it. Get over yourselves and STFU!
Keep up the good work guys, I'd rather have an article available to read that isn't 100% suited to my tastes than have a day with no new articles. Variety is the spice of life and all that.
It doesn't surprise me that people have come on shouting about how wrong this piece is when they have their heads so far up there own arses it's amazing they can even read the article. I wasn't aware that anyone was forced to read it fully either? If you read the first paragraph and were aware by then that it wasn't your cup of tea, you could have clicked the 'back' button rather than trawling through it all and then commenting on how much you disliked it. Get over yourselves and STFU!
Keep up the good work guys, I'd rather have an article available to read that isn't 100% suited to my tastes than have a day with no new articles. Variety is the spice of life and all that.
Hellbound said:
Hi, interesting point of view. I understand why someone would be passionate about the countryside, I understand why someone would like to enjoy our wildlife and get outdoors. I also understand why bigger animals are fascinating to watch and learn about in their natural habitat.
But what I don't understand is what exactly is it about sitting there, watching a stag quietly eating, and then all of a sudden raising your rifle and firing a bullet at it. What is it, in those brief moments, that's so enjoyable? Is it the power? Is it the feeling of knowing you have dominion over such animals?
As for the 'controlling the ecosystem' remark. I understand the logic behind that. BUT what I don't understand is why on earth would do people turn it into a lifestyle and a sport. Surely it should be no more than a scientific and ecological concern which the government should just deal with without getting the general population involved.
I guess I'm ignoring historical context here, as well as the hunting/outdoor industry which clearly finds the whole thing lucrative.
As an aside, I've traveled in parts of the world where shooting is actually a real necessity, both for food and protection. A very different matter I think you'll agree.
I guess it's because it can take a good deal of skill to ensure a clean kill on an animal such as a stag, or quick reactions and good aim for grouse/pheasant.But what I don't understand is what exactly is it about sitting there, watching a stag quietly eating, and then all of a sudden raising your rifle and firing a bullet at it. What is it, in those brief moments, that's so enjoyable? Is it the power? Is it the feeling of knowing you have dominion over such animals?
As for the 'controlling the ecosystem' remark. I understand the logic behind that. BUT what I don't understand is why on earth would do people turn it into a lifestyle and a sport. Surely it should be no more than a scientific and ecological concern which the government should just deal with without getting the general population involved.
I guess I'm ignoring historical context here, as well as the hunting/outdoor industry which clearly finds the whole thing lucrative.
As an aside, I've traveled in parts of the world where shooting is actually a real necessity, both for food and protection. A very different matter I think you'll agree.
I don't think you could find a hunter/shooter/country sports-person that would enjoy being presented with an animal in a small room/cage and saying "kill that then". It's the process involved, the community of people, the equipment, preparation, etc. that has the appeal for anyone I've spoken to about it.
TonyHetherington said:
Nevertheless, I enjoyed this break from the norm and welcome similarly out-there articles.
I agree with this. Fieldsports being something I know nothing about nor have much interest in, I can't make any informed comments. But in no way did that detract from me enjoying the article. Well done PH for being bold enough to try something different, even if it has provoked some fairly strong (and in some cases, unfounded) criticism.crofty1984 said:
I guess it's because it can take a good deal of skill to ensure a clean kill on an animal such as a stag, or quick reactions and good aim for grouse/pheasant.
I don't think you could find a hunter/shooter/country sports-person that would enjoy being presented with an animal in a small room/cage and saying "kill that then". It's the process involved, the community of people, the equipment, preparation, etc. that has the appeal for anyone I've spoken to about it.
Good answer in part. If we were in Siberia or somewhere equally remote, I'd see the skill in using guns. Heck, there are plenty of places here in the UK that need such tools. But the shooting part looks too easy here, even pedestrian. It's all too matter of fact, there's no drama. I don't think you could find a hunter/shooter/country sports-person that would enjoy being presented with an animal in a small room/cage and saying "kill that then". It's the process involved, the community of people, the equipment, preparation, etc. that has the appeal for anyone I've spoken to about it.
I say, to spice things up, they should use hand weapons and no firearms. Now that would be a sport I could get into. It's no fun when there's no risk.
Dan Trent said:
Dan_1981 said:
There isn't enough detail about the car to make it a PH road test
Once again, wait 'til Monday! Interested to hear that you'd welcome longer stories though. Accepted wisdom has it that traditional flowing copy doesn't go well online, hence the edit to keep it down to length. But if people are willing to take the time to read longer stories then only too happy to run them.
Cheers,
Dan
I quite enjoyed the article. Yes it doesn't say too much about the car, but let's face it, PH is not just a car site. It's a forum for car enthusiasts. Otherwise why do we have all the other sections of the forum?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff