Pistonheads vehicles you don't "get"
Discussion
S10GTA said:
T
i did, this is what he put, or did i misunderstand?200Plus Club said:
Personally i really don't get the Peugeot 307 or 308 cc at all. The one with the flat tray rear and arches way too big and wide for the wheels. It has an air of "wheelbarrow " about it and i just cant believe people buy them.
My other wouldbe the Fiat 500L. Just buy a huge 4x4 or large family hatch if you need a giant oversized vehicle. Its not a fiat 500 in any sense of the word i can see
Or you could read the opMy other wouldbe the Fiat 500L. Just buy a huge 4x4 or large family hatch if you need a giant oversized vehicle. Its not a fiat 500 in any sense of the word i can see
"So, can someone enlighten me?
or
Share your "don't gets" and hope someone comes along and enlightens us all."
ORD said:
kambites said:
A tarted up family car?
The M3 and by proxy the CSL is a tarted up reps car but that's not an insult - that fact that they take a cheap(ish) mass-produced rep-mobile and improved the bits which can make it drive better is precisely why the M-division are able to produce such good cars at the prices they do.
Hardly fair. Bespoke engine (until now) and bespoke suspension. The bits that matter were far more than 'tarted up'.The M3 and by proxy the CSL is a tarted up reps car but that's not an insult - that fact that they take a cheap(ish) mass-produced rep-mobile and improved the bits which can make it drive better is precisely why the M-division are able to produce such good cars at the prices they do.
FastRich said:
jshell said:
See, I'm on the other side of this. I see, for certain roads, a tall, well powered 4x4 as a faster car than most. I don't mean in outright power and handling, but in terms of front and rear visibility. I run a 59 plate diesel Cayenne and can drive it cross-country way quicker than I would have anything smaller, faster and with less long-range visibility. Front vis gives a clear view over cars, through corners (over walls, hedgerows etc) and the ability to better spot cameras, speed traps etc. It also lets see gaps for moving into after an overtake or over undulating roads. High, clear, rear vis gives the ability to quickly spot closing barges that may be cop cars or just way faster cars that may foul an overtake - as does the huge door mirrors. The suspension is 'good enough' and the comfort & load carrying are ace.
I think the ability to judge forwards conditions allows a much better flow or momentum whilst trying to cover point-2-point as quickly as possible.
Of course a faster, smaller car is much, much quicker on clear, traffic free open roads - but, how many of them are left?
This. I used to have a full fat Range Rover - ok, so not as quick as the Porker but in terms of safety and the ability to read the road ahead, it was fantastic. I'm sure that by seeing the brake lights come on 4 cars ahead and merely backing off, rather than not seeing the brake lights until they were on the car in directly front and then having to hit the brakes, I saved the nation many hours of traffic jams. I think the ability to judge forwards conditions allows a much better flow or momentum whilst trying to cover point-2-point as quickly as possible.
Of course a faster, smaller car is much, much quicker on clear, traffic free open roads - but, how many of them are left?
of course i should drive to the conditions and you may well be driving sensibly looking ahead, but this is far from normal driving for most large vehicles.
200Plus Club said:
S10GTA said:
T
i did, this is what he put, or did i misunderstand?200Plus Club said:
Personally i really don't get the Peugeot 307 or 308 cc at all. The one with the flat tray rear and arches way too big and wide for the wheels. It has an air of "wheelbarrow " about it and i just cant believe people buy them.
My other wouldbe the Fiat 500L. Just buy a huge 4x4 or large family hatch if you need a giant oversized vehicle. Its not a fiat 500 in any sense of the word i can see
Or you could read the opMy other wouldbe the Fiat 500L. Just buy a huge 4x4 or large family hatch if you need a giant oversized vehicle. Its not a fiat 500 in any sense of the word i can see
"So, can someone enlighten me?
or
Share your "don't gets" and hope someone comes along and enlightens us all."
skyrover said:
GravelBen said:
On the flipside, you could drive a Nissan Patrol of similar age which would also have character and be great off-road, but drive far better and not fall apart.
Maybe I just don't 'get' Landrovers.
Both will rot and fall apart.Maybe I just don't 'get' Landrovers.
Edited by GravelBen on Wednesday 29th July 01:44
The land rover however can be restored to like new for very little effort/cost and has a massive aftermarket.
There is a reason so many commercial mining operations use land Cruiser or Patrol over land Rover products. As a classic car I can understand the attraction, tinkering etc. But as a commercial vehicle or even private vehicle, I do not get the attraction.
kambites said:
The more recent ones have pushed the engine forwards a fair bit. "Nearly mid-engined" is pushing it, however - the flywheel now sits pretty much exactly on the rear axle line with the gearbox in front of it and engine behind it.
Last one I tried was a 996. Hated it. Having the end you steer bobbing all over the place just doesn't appeal to me. I'm sure it has advantages in motorsport, but so did the Stratos and Delta S4 and both are reputedly evil cars to drive fast for the average enthusiast. I'd rather have a car that gives confidence and not worry about shaving tenths off a lap time.200Plus Club said:
Seriously, all 911s look horrible? Have to disagree there with ya. Peugeot 308cc s look horrible, this is a stunner!
I know looks are subjective and some people love 911s but I just think they look like someone made a car out of soap and left it in the bath too long. When they need to restyle it, every decade or so, they just throw it back in the bath.Robert Elise said:
FastRich said:
jshell said:
See, I'm on the other side of this. I see, for certain roads, a tall, well powered 4x4 as a faster car than most. I don't mean in outright power and handling, but in terms of front and rear visibility. I run a 59 plate diesel Cayenne and can drive it cross-country way quicker than I would have anything smaller, faster and with less long-range visibility. Front vis gives a clear view over cars, through corners (over walls, hedgerows etc) and the ability to better spot cameras, speed traps etc. It also lets see gaps for moving into after an overtake or over undulating roads. High, clear, rear vis gives the ability to quickly spot closing barges that may be cop cars or just way faster cars that may foul an overtake - as does the huge door mirrors. The suspension is 'good enough' and the comfort & load carrying are ace.
I think the ability to judge forwards conditions allows a much better flow or momentum whilst trying to cover point-2-point as quickly as possible.
Of course a faster, smaller car is much, much quicker on clear, traffic free open roads - but, how many of them are left?
This. I used to have a full fat Range Rover - ok, so not as quick as the Porker but in terms of safety and the ability to read the road ahead, it was fantastic. I'm sure that by seeing the brake lights come on 4 cars ahead and merely backing off, rather than not seeing the brake lights until they were on the car in directly front and then having to hit the brakes, I saved the nation many hours of traffic jams. I think the ability to judge forwards conditions allows a much better flow or momentum whilst trying to cover point-2-point as quickly as possible.
Of course a faster, smaller car is much, much quicker on clear, traffic free open roads - but, how many of them are left?
of course i should drive to the conditions and you may well be driving sensibly looking ahead, but this is far from normal driving for most large vehicles.
By "nice cars" I assume you mean "smaller cars". Cayennes and Range Rover's aren't exactly "not nice cars".
I often follow nice big cars in my nice small car and agree the view is blocked. However I blame myself for buying a small car, not the nob in the big car for buying his.
QuantumTokoloshi said:
The Landcruiser will still be running, unrusted, and unserviced, well after every single body panel, drive train and engine component of the Land Rover has been replaced 4 times over.
There is a reason so many commercial mining operations use land Cruiser or Patrol over land Rover products. As a classic car I can understand the attraction, tinkering etc. But as a commercial vehicle or even private vehicle, I do not get the attraction.
How does the saying go? 'If you want to drive into the Bush get a Landrover. If you want to drive out of the the bush get a Toyota'. There is a reason so many commercial mining operations use land Cruiser or Patrol over land Rover products. As a classic car I can understand the attraction, tinkering etc. But as a commercial vehicle or even private vehicle, I do not get the attraction.
heebeegeetee said:
QuantumTokoloshi said:
The Landcruiser will still be running, unrusted, and unserviced, well after every single body panel, drive train and engine component of the Land Rover has been replaced 4 times over.
There is a reason so many commercial mining operations use land Cruiser or Patrol over land Rover products. As a classic car I can understand the attraction, tinkering etc. But as a commercial vehicle or even private vehicle, I do not get the attraction.
How does the saying go? 'If you want to drive into the Bush get a Landrover. If you want to drive out of the the bush get a Toyota'. There is a reason so many commercial mining operations use land Cruiser or Patrol over land Rover products. As a classic car I can understand the attraction, tinkering etc. But as a commercial vehicle or even private vehicle, I do not get the attraction.
Nickbrapp said:
That makes a golf a company vehicle.
Are you getting touchy because you paid over the odds for a fancy 3 series with no air con?
Not at all. Just puzzled why someone with an averagely dull Golf would pick fault with something interesting?Are you getting touchy because you paid over the odds for a fancy 3 series with no air con?
Actually mine has air con, and is not a CSL. I grin and bear the pain of owning the it and whilst this is obviously a chore, one day, if I work really hard maybe i'll be lucky enough to work for a company that will think highly of me enough to supply a company Golf
FastRich said:
Yes Robert, agreed - most large vehicles are driven by nobs.
By "nice cars" I assume you mean "smaller cars". Cayennes and Range Rover's aren't exactly "not nice cars".
I often follow nice big cars in my nice small car and agree the view is blocked. However I blame myself for buying a small car, not the nob in the big car for buying his.
a little tease.By "nice cars" I assume you mean "smaller cars". Cayennes and Range Rover's aren't exactly "not nice cars".
I often follow nice big cars in my nice small car and agree the view is blocked. However I blame myself for buying a small car, not the nob in the big car for buying his.
Though i don't like spiralling car sizes, especially when it cocoons people from their responsibility to others.
I don't regret my preference for smaller cars, just means i have to drive defensively around others.
Robert Elise said:
a little tease.
Though i don't like spiralling car sizes, especially when it cocoons people from their responsibility to others.
I don't regret my preference for smaller cars, just means i have to drive defensively around others.
Then buy a small car. It's not as if they don't still exist. And it's not exactly as if bigger cars didn't exist in the past either.Though i don't like spiralling car sizes, especially when it cocoons people from their responsibility to others.
I don't regret my preference for smaller cars, just means i have to drive defensively around others.
Just don't expect a long running model name to still be the same class and sized vehicle it was when introduced.
Not exactly a small car..
And not exactly a big car..
yonex said:
Nickbrapp said:
That makes a golf a company vehicle.
Are you getting touchy because you paid over the odds for a fancy 3 series with no air con?
Not at all. Just puzzled why someone with an averagely dull Golf would pick fault with something interesting?Are you getting touchy because you paid over the odds for a fancy 3 series with no air con?
Actually mine has air con, and is not a CSL. I grin and bear the pain of owning the it and whilst this is obviously a chore, one day, if I work really hard maybe i'll be lucky enough to work for a company that will think highly of me enough to supply a company Golf
I bet your doors " sound just like a golf"
Did I mention it's white and newer than yours? Therefore much much better
200Plus Club said:
RobinBanks said:
It may be a good car, but it doesn't look especially nice to my eyes. It looks very average to me.
Just Average or "horrible"?Judging by the attention it gets generally (trust me not bought for that reason at all) I'd suggest a lot of people seem to think it looks decidedly non average. You get thumbs up from little kids and older guys in nice cars. So far a very good reaction to its looks.
Out of interest, what would you rate as a nice looking car if not a 911 carrera ?
If we're talking similar age then I think for instance a Ferrari 348 or Jaguar XJS is a much more aesthetically pleasing car. I haven't tried to denigrate it in any way - the styling just doesn't really appeal to me.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff