Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Russian on January 06, 2007, 11:23:15 AM
-
Here's a 1hr 20 min long video of a Top Gear's host Jeremy Clarkson going full out to make fun on American car industry. It’s quite amusing if you enjoy Top Gear style humor.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4013662715321332704&q=the+good+the+bad+and+the+ugly+clarkson&hl=en
-
Has Hammond returned yet?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Has Hammond returned yet?
Coworker that I addicted to Top Gear showed interview with Humster few days ago. White Teeth seems to be doing well. Hopefully they can resume showing episodes now.
-
"...garden party of very rich apes."
:rofl
-
Comparing the Corvette to herpes... brilliant.
Clarkson rules.
Best use for a Prius I've seen yet.
-
ROFL.. this is fun to watch. :)
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Comparing the Corvette to herpes... brilliant.
Clarkson rules.
Best use for a Prius I've seen yet.
The corvette is like herpes..
great fun catching it, but not so much fun to live with every day :rofl
LOL Billy Bob.. sounds like a guy that posts here randomly :D
-
He's still bitter about the colonies.
-
I still think he's stretching when he says the Z06 is useless on the road. He just can't get over the fact that it's just as good as the Farrari - at one-third the price. He will never be able to admit that Americans have the ability to create a good car.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
I still think he's stretching when he says the Z06 is useless on the road. He just can't get over the fact that it's just as good as the Farrari - at one-third the price. He will never be able to admit that Americans have the ability to create a good car.
No, he probably won't... Then again, he also claimed to be annoyed by American teeth and American food, which leads me to believe that he's got a secret fetish for all things American.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
I still think he's stretching when he says the Z06 is useless on the road. He just can't get over the fact that it's just as good as the Farrari - at one-third the price. He will never be able to admit that Americans have the ability to create a good car.
I'm about 2/3 through it, and he admits that the Americans can make a good engine. He's liking that Rouch Mustang though.
-
"Big red V-10 axe murderer."
LOL.
-
Secretly I think he really does like America and it's cars. But with the application of his sarcastic British humour. But he has a point about American cars and their lousy interiors, wobbly handling and inability to get round corners. 'Handles like a land ship' as a English friend put it. Built down to a price I think. It is a puzzle that you Americans just can't get your cars right.
One thing to remember is that he bought a Ford GT40 with his own money! So he can't really hate American cars.
I laughed out loud when he tried to fill the Caddy and the Jag "built by Communists in the midlands" with water and when he blew away the Prius is a .50 calibre machine gun. Then when he walked across the intersection without getting killed. It would never happen here, he would die! Classic!
Still I would sell my soul for a '68 Mustang.
-
That test wasn't fair. He picked some of the worst vehicles the big 3 are making right now. Instead, he should have picked the... um... well...
-
Great episode. He couldn’t have scripted many parts of it any more in favor of the Europeans. I liked the Land Rover versus the prissy-kinda-looks-like-an-off-roader H2 and Escalade. The US is making more and more trucks that are only meant to be driven like poor handling cars, but there are also a few that probably could have done much better. Too bad he didn’t enter that old trashed Toyota Hilux Diesel into that race.
My favorite was the 300ish HP Mustang versus the 1 HP Mustang.
-
Most brits suffer from the same narrow mindedness... they think every road in the world is only 8 feet wide and has a curve around some first century rock wall every 50 foot or so.
They end up building glorified go carts and then expecting every car in the world to perform like a glorified go cart. We can build those too... it's just that there is no use for em... I like em fine... I have a 55 Healey with a chevy V8 in it. No way to put anything in it tho and a long trip is....ah.... "tiring".
they can't imagine hundreds of miles of straight as an arrow well paved roads that are two to 6 lanes wide... They can't think outside of 6 buck a gallon gas and when they do... they are still ruling class oriented... their powerful V8's get about 12 mpg...
I think it bothers them that working class people can afford cars like the vette that get 26 mpg and cost a third of what their ruling class pays for snob mobiles or... that the hot rod industry can produce an 800 hp mustang for cheap...
Heck... our specialty car makers build more cars than their big ones... Hundreds of thousands of 500-1000 hp crate engines are built here every year...
The real truth is that you can't really drive a big or a fast car much in england. even if you could afford it. You can stay in london for a week and never hear the sound of tires doing a 100 food burnout at night as you lay in bed.
You can't really build a hot rod in england... I mean.. they are not banned but... they are very difficult to licence and insure and build and most of all... afford. Here.... any bag boy at the supermarket can have a hot rod with a v8 and 300, 400 or more hp... fry the tires all the way down the freeway onramp.
It is fun to punch the big block el camino in first gear of the richmond gear 6 speed while you are going 10 mph and have the tires both go up in smoke all the way across the intersection... lots of crude Americans giving you the thumbs up and smiling.
We also have mountains...steep ones with gentle curves and wide roads... torque monster heaven.. weazy little foreign junk loses all hope. More than one BMW has wet itself when the grill of a 69 elky was glued to it's bumper no matter what it did...
cars should be judged in the context of where they will be driven. the show pretty much does that it's just that their tiny little island is not what I want in a driving experiance.
lazs
-
I wonder why he didn't test the original hummer against the landrover. I'm pretty sure that nobody ever claimed the H2 was anything but a pimped-out station wagon with wheel wells big enough to accomodate 24 inch rims.
-
GM discontinued the H1.
In all fairness, the off-road test was a bit staged. The bank they got the Escalade stuck on was one that would have gotten any of those vehicles stuck... ditch to sharp bank.
I guess he could have made his point in a better manner. But then, he's also not commenting on the fact that the Land Rovers might be good for a couple of weeks, but they are flaming POSs reliability wise. Hell, I can buy a 5 year old discovery for $5k that's "never been off-road".
I also wonder about the supposition that the U.S. builds disposable cars based on a test drive of a 94 GM. I'm kind of wondering how a 94 BMW would have done under the same conditions. Seems to me those were disposable cars also. In all fairness, BMW has greatly improved their reliability and longevity where the U.S. doesn't seem to be doing much, but from that era, pretty much everything fell apart.
Lazs... You could tell he loved driving the '68 Mustang and the Viper. He was just catering to his audience.
-
The fact that the H1 is out of production should be immaterial. It was discontinued years ago, and has not benefitted from the subsequent technological improvements that the Land Rover lived to see. Should be an easy victory for the Land Rover. It was omitted for one major reason: Because no production SUV will beat it.
He also failed to emphasize that the chrysler 300, for all of its rubbish-like handling, is about 1/3 the price of the M5.
And finally, I still have to ask... Where was the Saleen S7TT?
-
Mini D, that was the new Range Rover, not any Land Rover. Range Rovers are luxury SUV's and direct competitor of the Escalade etc. Also BMW make cars that last. Many 1980's BMW's still running over here, and my '91 BMW is running like it was new. Has developed a slight rattle behind the glove compartment somewhere though, but after 15 years of Norwegian winters who can blame it.
As for Clarcson's movie, I loved the Viper. Always loved that "axe murderer", and who need to go around corners faster than the BMW Z4 anyways? Not me!
-
Some of you guys might enjoy 23 minutes long Jeremy Clarkson MotorWorld videos. He reviews cities and countries while keeping it educational and entertaining.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=jeremy+clarkson&so=0&hl=en&start=10
-
LMAO.
Well, the Euros seem to have us beat at every angle.
In the 4X4 test, the Range Rover wiped the floor with the Cadd. Escalade and the Humvee.
The 415bhp Roush Mustang was supposed to be so much better than the normal 475bhp Mustang, but even the Roush was beaten by the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige, which Clarkson called the plastic toaster!
In the straight line test, the BMW Z4 held out against the Chrysler 300C SRT.
Gotta say, pretty embarrassing for most Americans!
-
ummm ya... that wasn't completely contrived and rigged... good to know the mindless minions are happy.
-
Range Rover is made by Land Rover Viking. I haven't seen many of the range rovers over hear, but a neighbor had a Discovery. It was a piece of crap. Now, I suppose the same company could build one well and the other poorly, but that would kinda go against the gist of the "all american cars are bad based on these" statements being made. Euros make disposable cars too. Even in the SUV world.
And I had entirely different observations on the mid 90's BMWs... my 91 525 in particular. There was nothing "built to last" about the car from the engine to the interior. My cousin had a 90 530 that was worse. I won't even comment on the 325's from that timeframe. They aren't anything to write home about. And... notice I didn't even bring up the mid-90s mercedes boodoggle.
In all fairness, BMW does seem to have changed for the better as has Mercedes. But the 90's was not the time any car company would point to as their shining decade.
-
PS... Jag and the Rover are fords.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
The real truth is that you can't really drive a big or a fast car much in england. even if you could afford it. You can stay in london for a week and never hear the sound of tires doing a 100 food burnout at night as you lay in bed.
It's funny just as I read the above, somebody did just that somewhere nearby. I know it's not London or England and I'm sure it wasn't a big V8 just some kid in his breathed-on ricer. Lying in bed here you can follow them thrashing their engines down the long straights on the edge of this city. No sign of the police either, they hang out in the town centre oblivious. :D
-
I can't help but wonder if Clarkson would like Shelby Cobra CSX 4000 or the Saleen S7.
American cars also.
Bronk
-
do range rovers still use a buick engine?
-
Originally posted by Bronk
I can't help but wonder if Clarkson would like Shelby Cobra CSX 4000 or the Saleen S7.
American cars also.
Bronk
He would like the Cobra because the Cobra was based on a British Car, so even if its biggest claim to fame was the result of an American, it would be, at its core, still a British masterpiece with a big, vulgar v8 in it.
He wouldn't like the S7 because it can defeat the Mclaren. He would claim that it is not a real car, but a cartoon, and would then proceed to get it stuck in dirt, or launch it into the air, to prove, on top of everything, that it was inferior to a Land Rover in off-road ability, and inferior to a Spitfire in airworthiness.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Range Rover is made by Land Rover Viking. I haven't seen many of the range rovers over hear, but a neighbor had a Discovery. It was a piece of crap. Now, I suppose the same company could build one well and the other poorly, but that would kinda go against the gist of the "all american cars are bad based on these" statements being made. Euros make disposable cars too. Even in the SUV world.
Yes, but the Land Rover is a $30-40,000 car. The Range Rover is a $70-80,000 car. Sort of like comparing a Fiat Punto with a Ferrari F430, both are built by Fiat, but only one is a Ferrari.
Originally posted by Mini D
And I had entirely different observations on the mid 90's BMWs... my 91 525 in particular. There was nothing "built to last" about the car from the engine to the interior. My cousin had a 90 530 that was worse. I won't even comment on the 325's from that timeframe. They aren't anything to write home about. And... notice I didn't even bring up the mid-90s mercedes boodoggle.
The difference between your '91 525 and my '91 525 is that mine was built in Germany to European standards, while yours was probably built in South Carolina and built to US standards. There is a reason why US BMW enthusiasts buy "eurospec" parts from Europe or even import cars from Europe themselves. European cars built for the American market are built with American "values" in mind: Cheap and disposable. So for example while your 525 had cheap plastic headlights mine has ellipsoid crystal glass lenses.
The most expensive thing I've done to my 525 is service the auto box in 2001. The second most expensive was replacing the dampeners and all the rubber bushes in the suspension last year. Not bad for 15 years of service, and I make a point of driving it at about 130 mph at least once a year just to see if everything is still working as it should.
-
Any of the foreign Corvette experts here got seat time in a C6?
-
I don't see any Corvette experts here at all. Going by Clarkson the C6 is the most decent US car there is (except the GT40), it was the Z06 he didn't like.
-
I have always found him a bit funny.... but man some of those "comparison" test were bunk.
what he said about the caddy is hilarious though "sounds like farts, many different types, and you don't want to hear any of them" :rofl :lol
-
Originally posted by Viking
Yes, but the Land Rover is a $30-40,000 car. The Range Rover is a $70-80,000 car. Sort of like comparing a Fiat Punto with a Ferrari F430, both are built by Fiat, but only one is a Ferrari.
Not at all like comparing the two. Or are you saying the Ferrari F430 is based on the Punto?The difference between your '91 525 and my '91 525 is that mine was built in Germany to European standards, while yours was probably built in South Carolina and built to US standards.
Ummm... you may want to check and see when that plant opened up. Right now, you're talking out your ass.
-
Did the plant open after 1991? Ok, but BMW's made for the US market are made with many cheaper parts than their European siblings. Ask any American BMW enthusiast, or just visit one of their bbs'. "Where can I get my hands on ellipsoid lights?", "Where can I get eurospec this and that". What is known as "sport suspension" in the US is the regular suspension here etc. America and Europe are two completely different markets, and the cars are made to fit those markets.
-
See how programmed you are viking? You change tunes without even batting an eye.
Oh well... let me just leave you saying that show was made for people like you. Your assumption that my BMW was made in the U.S. only highlights that. The irony is that the Z-4 he raced around the track was most likely made at the plant you cited as sub-standard.
I hope that helped.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Ok, but BMW's made for the US market are made with many cheaper parts than their European siblings.
i always thought BMW's were over priced junk, not like my 91 Honda Accord which is a finely crafted road machine built in Ohio.
-
Picking out a few things as I view this.
He is complaining about the Z06 being on leaf springs.
It in fact runs on ONE composite leaf spring in the rear.
This spring is transverse mounted . It probably weighs less than 2 coil springs rated for the same duty.
Just because its a leaf spring doesn't make it low tech.
Bronk
-
Now for the Mustang VS Lotus.
How road comfy do you think that Lotus is?
Yup he neglects to talk about that. I can't help but wonder why?
Bronk
-
For the off road challenge I noticed he left out JEEP .
Once again I wonder why?
He just keeps on playing to his audience.
Hope you Euros don't fall for all this BS.
Bronk
-
LMAO
Straight line challenge.
BMW 2x the price I'll take 1/3 of the diff put it into the 300 and smoke the BMW with ease.
Why not put a euro car thats close to the same price and see what it does?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Why not put a euro car thats close to the same price and see what it does?
For the same reason that he doesn't put candid show shots of drunken soccer hooligans side by side with overwieght, white-toothed Americans.
-
I wish somebody would post Consumer Reports ratings for every euro car he featured. If I recall, it goes something like this:
Lotus= **** Quality
Jag= Worse than **** Quality
Land Rover= Super **** Quality
Benz= **** Quality
BMW= ok
Funny, he never mentioned how any of those cars can absorbe a molotov cocktail thrown by angry muslim youth roiting in the streets (very important feature in euro land).
-
I don't know what he is getting at with the Atom vs Dodge Ram.
Why not have them move 1000 lbs of bricks around the track and see who finishes first?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Mini D
See how programmed you are viking? You change tunes without even batting an eye.
How so?
Originally posted by Mini D
Oh well... let me just leave you saying that show was made for people like you. Your assumption that my BMW was made in the U.S. only highlights that. The irony is that the Z-4 he raced around the track was most likely made at the plant you cited as sub-standard.
That show was hilarious, but I knew who would win long before those races started. Like Clarkson said, they were forgone conclusions. Also I never said the US plant was substandard, just that they build cars to substandard specs compared to plants in Europe. That's not the fault of the workers or the plant management. That's decided in Germany.
And btw. the BMW Z4 is crap … no matter where it is built.
-
You tell yourself whatever you need to hear to get over that one vulcan. Hold on to the different headlight theory as the bane of all vehicles reliability. That's a winnar!
Till then, I'll just see you as someone that got exactly what he was looking for in that show. Someone that got exactly what Jeremy was selling. You don't know any better, but that's OK.
-
I've already stated that my favorite car in that show was an American car, so you'll excuse me if I don't put much esteem in your judgment of my character; I'm not Vulcan btw.
I think the facts speak for themselves. Your 1991 BMW 525 was a POS. Mine is still running strong 15 years later with normal servicing and minimal repairs. Q.E.D.
-
This thread sure tanked fast.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
This thread sure tanked fast.
A US vs. Europe thread tanked fast on this bbs?! Outrageous! ;)
-
Originally posted by Bronk
I don't know what he is getting at with the Atom vs Dodge Ram.
Largest impractical car vs smallest impractical car would be my guess.
The whole show was a hodge podge of crap and camera angle designed to convey a message without any real comparisons. This way, the rest of the world will be convinced the U.S. doesn't know what they're doing dispite the fact that they designed the engine in the Jag and Range Rover and built both that atom and Z4 stateside.
Clarkson can sit back and enjoy the irony while he cruises the country roads in his GT40.
-
Whatever viking. You're little "built to lower standards" theory is quite a bit of crap and you seem to have been spoon fed every bit of it. This isn't a "U.S. vs the rest of the world" argument. I've not said anything other than most cars sucked during that "era" and provided an example that seems to have hurt your feelings. I'm sure there are people on your BMW forum that would support your views on the subject while they give repair advice to the others who were not so lucky to buy european spec'd cars.
Of course, I'm sure jeremy clarkson couldn't have found a 1 owner version of that car that was pristine either. But then, that's not what he was trying to do.
-
Aww Christ! Do I have to argue FOR you guys too?
The way I see it, you managed to build a car (Viper) that is just as fast as the BMW Z4 around a track, but is heavier, much faster in a straight line, and in the same price range. Not to mention it is WAY cooler.
There! I might as well just argue with myself. ;)
-
Intersting argument... say something completely false, back it up with something unsubstantial, then pretend you were talking about something entirely different all along. BRAVO!
-
BTW viking, I'd be really interested in hearing how the size of a sway bar or the type of headlights make a car more/less reliable.
-
I noticed you didn't like 1990's 3-series much. Here's a list of differences in the different specs for the E36 M3:
http://www.bmwmregistry.com/model_faq.php?id=15
The US-spec M3 had different engine (cheaper, less power), different suspension (cheaper), cheaper brakes (less effective), fewer options. In all respects the US M3 was just a beefed up 325 while the Euro-spec M3 was a true M (designed by BMW's motor sport division).
Late Euro-spec E36 M3's had almost a 100 more hp that their US counterparts.
-
I did mention them
What does any of that have to do with reliability?
-
Originally posted by Viking
I noticed you didn't like 1990's 3-series much. Here's a list of differences in the different specs for the E36 M3:
http://www.bmwmregistry.com/model_faq.php?id=15
The US-spec M3 had different engine (cheaper, less power), different suspension (cheaper), fewer options. In all respects the US M3 was just a beefed up 325 while the Euro-spec M3 was a true M (designed by BMW's motor sport division).
Late Euro-spec E36 M3's had almost a 100 more hp that their US counterparts.
Probably wouldn't pass cali emissions.
But I could be wrong.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Mini D
I did mention them
What does any of that have to do with reliability?
Perhaps that Euro BMW's are still running while yours are not? You tell me?
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Probably wouldn't pass cali emissions.
But I could be wrong.
Bronk
The reason was "due to excessive costs for the US market with the original engine". Some special versions were sold with the M engine (a few were made in Canada IIRC).
-
I'm sure they all are viking. Afterall, yours is. Mine must be the typical american BMW, while yours is the typical European version.
I tell ya what, why don't you go over to Germany and explain your theory to BMW, how the cars that they build for the states are crap and fall apart. See how that goes over.
You're being a bit stereotypical right now. That's why that show was custom made for you. That show is to European car enthusiasts what Hee-Haw is to rednecks.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Largest impractical car vs smallest impractical car would be my guess.
.
????????????????????
LMAO
Atom is a toy .
The ram on the other hand is a different story.
Have a few commercial fishermen friends who drive similar trucks.
Tows their boats, hauls their catch.
How about the guy who races for hobby. Lets see him tow his track car to the race with an atom.
How about just the ability to help a friend move something. Yea I'll just load this China cabinet in my atom.
Get real impractical...pffft.
Bronk
Edit for not getting MiniD's point
-
I said it wasn't a practical car.
It's a practical truck. That's just not what 75% of the people buy them use them for. The parking lot at work is full of them and I've never seen one towing a boat. Glad to know you have some friends that actually use them as trucks.
-
Ahh ok I get ya now.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Mini D
I'm sure they all are viking. Afterall, yours is. Mine must be the typical american BMW, while yours is the typical European version.
Make up your mind. Were all BMW's crap in the 1990's or just yours? Mine is good, and 1990's 3 and 5 series Bimmers are all over town here, so they must be good.
Btw. I missed this post:
Originally posted by Mini D
This way, the rest of the world will be convinced the U.S. doesn't know what they're doing dispite the fact that they designed the engine in the Jag and Range Rover and built both that atom and Z4 stateside.
Clarkson can sit back and enjoy the irony while he cruises the country roads in his GT40.
First lets start by dispelling the belief that Jaguar just adapted a Ford designed V8 to create their new power unit. The truth is actually the reverse. Jaguar designed the engine in its entirety, it is manufactured in the UK, and a simplified variant is shipped over to the US where Lincoln install it in their LS model.
Second the Ariel Atom used in the show is not the US built version. Clarkson mentions the power of the Honda engine in the show. The US built version differs from the European Honda-powered in that it has a GM Ecotec engine. (Another example of different US-versions of European cars.)
Third, The Ford GT40 is mostly European parts, and designed and tuned in Europe. As Clarkson also mentions.
I guess it is you who's "talking out of your ass" Mr. Mini D.
-
Links to backup jag and gt claims are forthcoming?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Links to backup jag and gt claims are forthcoming?
Bronk
If I must.
Jaguar AJ-V8: http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/v8_performance.html
Ford GT: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2484644722318196723 (time index 2:30)
-
Originally posted by Viking
A US vs. Europe thread tanked fast on this bbs?! Outrageous! ;)
Just noticed this.
I'm not on about US VS Europe.
What has me bugged is his inane comparisons.
He has made fun of vetts for being made of plastic, but it's a great thing when Lotus does it.
He omits road test when it doesn't fit into his agenda.
Once again we don't see much of that Lotus interior.
Cmon viking comment on that why don't you.
Or how about comparing one car to another at 2x the price.
Whats the point?
Are the Euro cars that are in that price range uninspired, underpowered little people movers?
Bronk
-
Spoon fed viking. Spoon fed. And completely ignoring sarcasm when you see it. I guess that works for you, though I thought euros were supposed to get sarcasm?
Stick with your thoughts on the jag engine. It's pure coincidence that they went with the V8 after ford bought them. Yeppers. Of course, you can't have europe knowing that a european car needed a little american help, can you?
Hell, you keep it up long enough and you'll actually start believing that the GT40 isn't just made containing parts from Europe, it IS a eurpoean car. You'll even convince yourself that a bunch of Europeans secretly designed it.
As for the Atom, he describes it as coming with a Honda 2000 then says this is a supercharged version of the car without saying it's a honda. You're reading a bit into that one. Basically, they'd have to have one imported for this or find one that's already been imported or just give Jay Leno a call and get the US one. If it makes you feel better, the ecotech is built in Germany.
I'll leave you to your car club chat viking. Rally the guys at your BMW forums together and let them know there's a desenter that needs to have a bunch more rhetoric spewed at him and your credibility was shot down the tubes with the "built in NC" lie.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Just noticed this.
I'm not on about US VS Europe.
Then this is not the tread for you apparently. ;)
Originally posted by Bronk
What has me bugged is his inane comparisons.
He has made fun of vetts for being made of plastic, but it's a great thing when Lotus does it.
He omits road test when it doesn't fit into his agenda.
Yes, he's out to make fun at your expense. It was a given from the start. All tests were set up to favor the European cars and were forgone conclusions.
Originally posted by Bronk
Or how about comparing one car to another at 2x the price.
The point was to test the most powerful US sedan to the most powerful Euro one. Well, even the Chrysler was mostly Mercedes though.
Originally posted by Bronk
Are the Euro cars that are in that price range uninspired, underpowered little people movers?
YES! :D
-
Originally posted by Viking
If I must.
Jaguar AJ-V8: http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/v8_performance.html
Ford GT: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2484644722318196723 (time index 2:30)
First link is no proof. Its a fanboi sight . I can send you to fanboi sights that say we never landed on the moon.
As far as what Clarkson says pfft. He makes more false statements than you can shake a stick at.
Try harder.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Viking
YES! :D
Ohh so the technically superior Euro car companies CAN'T build a car that can compete for the same price.
Good to know Viking thanx. :aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Stick with your thoughts on the jag engine. It's pure coincidence that they went with the V8 after ford bought them. Yeppers. Of course, you can't have europe knowing that a european car needed a little american help, can you?
Looks like the Ford Modular motor introduced in what early 90s?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Viking
Then this is not the tread for you apparently. ;)
Is that a Michelin tread or a Dunlop tread or a Goodrich tread or a Goodyear tread?
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Is that a Michelin tread or a Dunlop tread or a Goodrich tread or a Goodyear tread?
So viking can enjoy.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Ohh so the technically superior Euro car companies CAN'T build a car that can compete for the same price.
Good to know Viking thanx. :aok
Bronk
Sure they can. It's just that nobody here will buy it! ;)
Originally posted by Bronk
First link is no proof. Its a fanboi sight . I can send you to fanboi sights that say we never landed on the moon.
I see. You'll probably say the same for every site I dig up, so I shall not bother. Why don't you find an article from Ford that says they designed the thing? After all it was you US guys who made the claim that the Jag engine was US.
Originally posted by Bronk
As far as what Clarkson says pfft. He makes more false statements than you can shake a stick at.
Then you shouldn't have any problems disproving his claims:
Wheels - German
Brakes - Italy (Brembo I should imagine)
Transmission - British (a Ford subsidiary? Jag maybe Austin M?)
Body - British (Jag? Austin?)
Steering - British (from a Vanquish)
Chassis - British, set up by Lotus
If those are all lies then it must be easy for you to tell me who really made those parts.
Originally posted by Bronk
I'm not on about US VS Europe.
Really? You could have fooled me.
Originally posted by Mini D
[Wall of text personal attack]
Getting desperate? :D
-
Originally posted by Viking
Sure they can. It's just that nobody here will buy it! ;)
So everyone in Europe drives 70k cars?
Ohh and inst that Brit atom powered by a ricer engine?
For shame.
Bronk
-
No. Everyone (or near as makes no difference) in Europe drives small economic people carriers. Everyone here is a lot more concerned with fuel economy than hp.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Ohh and inst that Brit atom powered by a ricer engine?
Oh yes. Very nice engine too.
-
Aston martin 100% acquired by Ford in 1994.
-
So? It is still made in the UK. Why do you think Ford chose those parts?
-
Most of the stuff you listed for the GT is from a FORD owned company.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
So viking can enjoy.
Bronk
Pease don't quote Milo. That's just uncalled for.
Your spelling is not all that either. And unlike me I suspect English is your first language.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Most of the stuff you listed for the GT is from a FORD owned company.
Bronk
So? They are still designed and made in Europe by Europeans.
-
Originally posted by Viking
So? It is still made in the UK. Why do you think Ford chose those parts?
Bet it's not.
Its picked out of the ford parts bin.
Just because its in an Aston Martin doesn't mean it wont fit in some other FORD car.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Viking
So? They are still designed and made in Europe by Europeans.
Have a big gulp of that coolaid .
Bronk
-
By your logic that Chrysler 300SRT is European. Mercedes owns Chrysler.
It's a fallacy.
Ownership and nationality are two different matters. Even if Jaguar is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ford, Jaguar is still a British company with all its assets in the UK and British workers.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Bet it's not.
Its picked out of the ford parts bin.
Just because its in an Aston Martin doesn't mean it wont fit in some other FORD car.
Bronk
Ah there you see … we DO agree. The Ford GT is made from mostly European parts … owned by Ford of course.
-
Ahhh I see we poor Americans only use euro parts.
And you Euros would never use inferior american designed parts.
Ohh like ford steering racks in Aston Martins
An upgraded 1991 ford mod motor in a JAG.
Keep sipping.
Bronk
Edit : I remember reading about that motor development in mid to late 80s in Mustang mags.
Edit 2: fixed for viking
-
Originally posted by Viking
Ah there you see … we DO agree. The Ford GT is made from mostly European parts … owned by Ford of course.
No we don't I say was taken from the ford parts bin.
Then used by all ford's holdings.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Ahhh I see we poor Americans only use euro parts.
I never said that. Better take some of that Coolaid yourself.
Originally posted by Bronk
And you Euros would never use inferior american designed parts.
See above.
Originally posted by Bronk
Ohh like ford steering racks Aston Martins
What? That's not even a proper sentence.
Originally posted by Bronk
An upgraded 1991 ford mod motor in a JAG.
To paraphrase yourself: Links to backup jag and Ford claims are forthcoming?
I did. Will you be as honorable?
I think not.
Originally posted by Bronk
I'm not on about US VS Europe.
For each post you make yourself more the liar.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Pease don't quote Milo. That's just uncalled for.
Your spelling is not all that either. And unlike me I suspect English is your first language.
But unlike you I don't have the superiority complex.
I can appreciate euro-cars on top gear for what they are.
Sad they can't do a fair comparison to get some useful info.
Bronk
-
That's what I thought. You can't back up anything, not even with a fansite. All you could do was throw an ad hominem at me.
-
The Jag AJ V8 first produced and used in 1996 per...
http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/970914
Now have a look here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine
Notice side bar for similar engines.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_AJ-V8_engine
Now note when the first dual valve mod motors were used.
1991 Lincoln.
So YES your super duper JAG motor started out as a 1991 ford production engine.
Ohh and the first 4 valve DOHC was used in a 1993 Lincoln as well .
Shame Ford didn't let JAG use them till '96.
Bronk
Edit
To be clear the original design was FORD. Jag just adjusted to their needs.
Edit 2 : Hows that for "ad hominem" ehh.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
The Jag AJ V8 first produced and used in 1996 per...
http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/970914
That link doesn't seem to support your point of view.
"Jaguar Cars has designed and developed an all new V8 engine, the AJ V8."
Jaguar Cars, not Ford. All new.
"Design and development of the engine was carried out by a dedicated cross-functional project team working at a systems level. Extensive use was made of supplier expertise both to optimize the efficiency of the team and to maximize the benefits of supplier experience. Early supplier selection was carried out with the participation of the manufacturing team starting during the concept design stage. Particular attention has been paid to the robustness of the design and minimizing variability."
I wonder how many suppliers were based in America, if any? How many Ford employees were on the development team, if any?
Originally posted by Bronk
Now have a look here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Modular_engine
Notice side bar for similar engines.
The use of the word "modular" in the Ford engine had nothing to do with the engine itself, but the tooling of the assembly line. It's just a regular V8, similar to other V8's.
Wow! I didn't know the Chrysler PowerTech V8, GM Premium V, Mercedes-Benz M113/M115, BMW M62/S62, BMW N62, Nissan VH, Nissan VK, and Toyota UZ engines were designed and made by Ford!
Since the Jaguar V8 is "similar" it must be a Ford. Fallacy.
You seem to have a knack for fallacious thinking.
-
It's based off fords modular motor design.
Is it just a coincidence they started making the V8 jags shortly after ford acquired them?
Or more likely they took an already existing Ford V8 and tweaked it.
I'll go with the later.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
It's based off fords modular motor design.
How do you know? It could just as well be based on the BMW one or the Merc. Or perhaps they are telling the truth when they say it is all new.
Originally posted by Bronk
Is it just a coincidence they started making the V8 jags shortly after ford acquired them?
Seven years after. Not "shortly" in my book.
Originally posted by Bronk
Or more likely they took an already existing Ford V8 and tweaked it.
I'll go with the later.
Conjecture and fallacies are all you offer to support your claim. Even the sites you present support my point of view.
From my link:
" It is perhaps then not surprising that on the Jaguar V8 the tensioners on the secondary camshaft chains in particular have developed a reputation for being troublesome. In fact it may not be that there is any weakness in the tensioners themselves, rather that at certain critical speeds heavy torque reversals on the chain can produce higher than expected stab loads, a condition which can probably be exacerbated by some usage patterns. It is perhaps interesting that the later 4.2 V8 uses more rugged morse internal tooth primary chains and that when BMW introduced a similar V8 (four valve, twin OHC, Nikasil bores, sintered fracture split con-rods) in 1992 they used duplex chains throughout. Whilst Jaguar's design team, in choosing a single link chain drive, did specify that it should be rated for heavy duty, one wonders if there have been any regrets that space wasn't made to use a duplex chain rather than relying on the lightweight valve gear to let them get away with the narrower option?
Of course, all engines have weaknesses that only become apparent with time and the engineering of the Jaguar V8 is not without many positive attributes. The combination of quite large valves and cam profiles of modest duration, allied, in the case of the naturally aspirated 4 litre, to a variable timing mechanism controlling the inlet cams, results in an engine with a particularly wide spread of torque.
The early variable timing device was a two state system - either advanced or retarded over a range of 30 degrees (at the crankshaft). Retarding the inlet cam eliminated overlap so improving idle and drive quality at very low speeds and light loads. It also meant the inlet valve closed later thereby improving power at higher speeds. In the mid-speed, part to high load range, the cam was advanced giving early inlet closing to boost torque, the extra overlap then also providing a degree of 'internal EGR' to reduce NOx emissions. Later engines use a more advanced system that optimises the cam phasing within a much wider range of, incredibly, 48 degrees.
With the benefit of hindsight the decision to use Nikasil plated cylinder bores instead of conventional liners might be judged a bad mistake, but it is one that was understandable and which caught BMW off-guard as well. The Nikasil process had been used for years on motorcycle engines and is in common use for F1 and other racing engines so it is hardly unproven technology. At the time BMW's exceptionally tight control of oil on the bores was thought to be a factor in their troubles, which would not apply elsewhere. In truth, instances of failure of the Nikasil coating appear to have been induced by poor fuel quality in certain markets allied to short journey usage, and engines running on low sulphur fuel would be most unlikely to suffer the problem. Jaguar resolved service failures in an honourable fashion but eventually decided to abandon Nikasil and revert to conventional cast iron liners (from VIN 42776 XK8, 878718 XJ8). The advantages of light weight and close running clearances were sadly lost. Ironically the fuels which caused the problem have now virtually disappeared from the market. "
Strange how many teething problems Jaguar had with their new engine if it was just a tested and true 5 year old Ford V8. Also interesting that BMW introduced a similar engine in 1992, which affected the Jaguar design which later ran into similar problems.
[sarcasm] Seems like Ford should have designed their engines better! [/sarcasm]
-
arguing on the internet (to convience someone witha different viewpoint) is like winning the special olymics: You're a winner, but still in the speciall olympics...
(metaphor, not used to offend anyone with handicapped loved ones)
-
I believe the original saying uses the world "retard".
I'm not arguing to change his mind. It became clear very early that he'll never change his mind. I'm arguing because it is fun, thought provoking (sometimes) and improves my language skills.
-
Easy to forget how different we all are in our seperate little countries, different language, and ability to understand the subleties and irony in each others humour.
thats the problem with these internet things you forget we are from differing cultures and countries.
Topgear is not just about what car is better than the other, its about big boys toys and having fun with them, i watched up until the Lotus Exige against Roush mustang race, and to me he seemed to enjoy driving EVERY american car and loved the Roush Mustang.
Quote as he's driving the Roush: the cars 75% harder, like me, meaning his , well I'm sure you can guess.
Dont take him too seriously, just enjoy watching people play around with expensive toys.
:-D
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Clarkson can sit back and enjoy the irony while he cruises the country roads in his GT40.
Clarkson sent his GT40 back for a full refund after a month having it break down from only after 3 days from delivery...he eventually bought it back and still calls it the most unreliable car ever made
Top Gear, and Clarkson is the best motoring show on telly...the man's a legend!
Tronsky
-
I have no interest in cars whatsoever except for beeing a means of transport from A to B, but TopGear is still one of my favorite shows ever.
-
Something else that was kinda embarrassing - nothing to do with the cars tho - was when JC was in Las Vegas asking people on the street if they could name any European countries - most could not! Some did not know the capital city of France, or the capital city of Great Britain.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Something else that was kinda embarrassing - nothing to do with the cars tho - was when JC was in Las Vegas asking people on the street if they could name any European countries - most could not! Some did not know the capital city of France, or the capital city of Great Britain.
Stop showing off and tell us the names!. Like anyone really sits down and memorizes the names of those towns.
-
uh huh... no matter how hard he tried he could not find anyone who knew? Or is it he asked enough drunks and tards to make the segment? Where you one of them?
-
When a guy goes to great lengths to find fault or shame in something, and does so relentlessly, almost obsessively, I think it speaks more of the guy, or in this case, his target audience, than it does about the target of his mockery. If Clarkson hates America and Americans so much, he should stay away. If he likes cars so much, he should spend more time analyzing and driving them, rather than practicing his stand-up routine.
At this point, I'm not sure that he's even an automotive journalist. Given his sweeping tendancy to trumpet anything from Britian--a nation that has less to brag about lately than the US--he seems to be more of a low-rent modern day Mark Twain with a driver's license than anything else.
PS: On any given day, walking the streets of Las Vegas, you are about as likely to find a visitor from abroad than you are a citizen of the US.
-
he does not trumpet british cars.. you should just see how many times he comes down on brit cars like Astons etc.
You take this far to seriously neubob.
That beeing said.. american cars suck compares to anything else ;)
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
Clarkson sent his GT40 back for a full refund after a month having it break down from only after 3 days from delivery...he eventually bought it back and still calls it the most unreliable car ever made
must have been all those euro-spec parts in it.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
That beeing said.. american cars suck compares to anything else ;)
http://www.saleen.com/saleen_s7_main.htm
Yea what a piece of crap this is.:rolleyes:
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
he does not trumpet british cars.. you should just see how many times he comes down on brit cars like Astons etc.
You take this far to seriously neubob.
That beeing said.. american cars suck compares to anything else ;)
I don't do this often, Nilsen, but you've piqued my interest....
Post a link to a video, any video, where he rips on an Aston. Mind you, I'm not trying to doubt you, I just really really want to see that walking brillo-pad say something negative about a British icon.
-
viking.. you say no one would buy performance cars in your up if they were inexpensive...
I seen the cars people drive in england... traffic jams of the most boring cars I have ever seen in my life... the most gutless econoboxes all stacked up in rush hour traffic in the rain. front wheel drive crap boxes with the occasional "lord" in some late model euro supercar.
Even a six cyl mustang would be a better ride than what those guys actually had to choose from.
If you guys spent some time touring the U.S. you would have more of an appreciation for what we drive and why. My lincoln town care rides better than both the mercedes and BMW I drove recently... I coulda put the BMW in the trunk... 5 days on the road I 40 forever it seemed... big trunk...motels cheap gas and 23 mpg... Huge seats and lots of room.
Around town... 468 big block 6 speed... hotchkiss and bilstein suspension... I never even seen any 1969 cars in england except a line of healeys going to some show or something...
We have shows here that the guys add 400 hp on a dyno in their shop... and Americans are doing it in garages all over the country... there are cars that do the 1/4 mile in 9 or ten seconds running around on the streets here...
You do not want to try to run some euro supercar against one... and... you can do it here for less than 10 grand.
quarter milers and customs and hot rods and autocrossers... they are all here..
you smug euros don't have a clue as to what is happening in the automotive scene here in America.
We laugh at the show you guys smugly point to.... I watched them with 70's eyetie supercars and it proved not a one of the guys on that show really has the slightest idea of what goes on in a drivetrain or suspension.
They drive around and test cars that for real enthusiasts..... are nothing but basic raw material..
And that is the point.... without spending a fortune... the euro cars are the best they will ever get the day they leave the showroom... all downhill from there... The cheaper American cars are raw material.. Even a Viper is easy to double the HP on and fix the suspension so that you wouldn't (they wouldn't) recognize it. We can do it in our garage... and... we all have a garage eh mate?
lazs
-
If you guys spent some time touring the U.S. you would have more of an appreciation for what we drive and why.
Well Lazs2, the best selling cars in America are things like the Honda Civic and Toyota Camry. Correct me if wrong, but these same cars are available all over the world, including European countries. So maybe the auto scene in the US is not as different as you thought?
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Well Lazs2, the best selling cars in America are things like the Honda Civic and Toyota Camry. Correct me if wrong, but these same cars are available all over the world, including European countries. So maybe the auto scene in the US is not as different as you thought?
Where overseas have you lived FF?
-
FastFwd, That's not automotion, that's transportation.
Clarkson is just catering to his audience. He doesn't believe most of the BS he tells, and the rest of the BS is just prancing to make his journalist character attractive.
Sort of like Pen & Teller don't always straight for the jugular nor follow textbook rhetoric, when there's more entertaining debunking alternatives.
-
Originally posted by Neubob
I don't do this often, Nilsen, but you've piqued my interest....
Post a link to a video, any video, where he rips on an Aston. Mind you, I'm not trying to doubt you, I just really really want to see that walking brillo-pad say something negative about a British icon.
You just have to trust me on this cause i have no idea if the BBC has put every episode out on YouTube.
I have seen them all tho, and he bashes brit cars just as much as ferraris, germans or anything else. Him and the rest of the crew finds faults with almost every single car they test.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
http://www.saleen.com/saleen_s7_main.htm
Yea what a piece of crap this is.:rolleyes:
Bronk
dont bite everything you see... that ;) should have given you a clue.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
dont bite everything you see... that ;) should have given you a clue.
Was trying to add to it with you.
Like say saying "Yup nilson's right just look at this POS !!".
:D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by moot
FastFwd, That's not automotion, that's transportation.
The point I'm trying to make is that "japanese imports" like the cars I mentioned are the biggest sellers in America. Lazs2 is claiming that he saw a lot of boring cars on his travels in Europe. But Clarkson said the same thing about America, when he looked at that 6-way interchange. Sure, America makes Dodge Viper and 200mph Corvettes. Lazs2 is trying to make these cars sound like the norm. The sales figures tell a different story. America buys millions of jap import cars, which are probably no different from those sold in Europe/Australia etc.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Was trying to add to it with you.
Like say saying "Yup nilson's right just look at this POS !!".
:D
Bronk
So you agree that they are all crap? :aok
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
The point I'm trying to make is that "japanese imports" like the cars I mentioned are the biggest sellers in America. Lazs2 is claiming that he saw a lot of boring cars on his travels in Europe. But Clarkson said the same thing about America, when he looked at that 6-way interchange. Sure, America makes Dodge Viper and 200mph Corvettes. Lazs2 is trying to make these cars sound like the norm. The sales figures tell a different story. America buys millions of jap import cars, which are probably no different from those sold in Europe/Australia etc.
Have you driven much in England? I don't think you would say the above if you did.
-
most "jap import cars" are built in the USA.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
You just have to trust me on this cause i have no idea if the BBC has put every episode out on YouTube.
I have seen them all tho, and he bashes brit cars just as much as ferraris, germans or anything else. Him and the rest of the crew finds faults with almost every single car they test.
Ok, I trust you.
He's still a *****, though, with maybe the greatest job in the world.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
So you agree that they are all crap? :aok
Yup especially the S7.:aok
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Neubob
When a guy goes to great lengths to find fault or shame in something, and does so relentlessly, almost obsessively, I think it speaks more of the guy, or in this case, his target audience, than it does about the target of his mockery. If Clarkson hates America and Americans so much, he should stay away. If he likes cars so much, he should spend more time analyzing and driving them, rather than practicing his stand-up routine.
At this point, I'm not sure that he's even an automotive journalist. Given his sweeping tendancy to trumpet anything from Britian--a nation that has less to brag about lately than the US--he seems to be more of a low-rent modern day Mark Twain with a driver's license than anything else.
PS: On any given day, walking the streets of Las Vegas, you are about as likely to find a visitor from abroad than you are a citizen of the US.
I think you missed a good part of the show :
Top gear is anything but serious.
Example : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTeBuwVipfo
-
Originally posted by straffo
I think you missed a good part of the show :
Top gear is anything but serious.
Example : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTeBuwVipfo
I know that he's tongue-in-cheeking it most of the time. I just can't forgive this particular Brit for railing on the Countach in one of the Cable shows a few months ago.
He drove a car that, back in the 80s, was every red-blooded boy's dream, and spent most of his time complaining about how miserable it was.
-
Originally posted by john9001
most "jap import cars" are built in the USA.
Yeah I know - like my 1998 Honda - that's why I put those words in quotes.
-
Originally posted by john9001
must have been all those euro-spec parts in it.
:D Good one!
Originally posted by john9001
most "jap import cars" are built in the USA.
See? America CAN make good cars! ;)
-
In America you will see a lot of old muscle cars and trucks and Hot Rods on the highways. In england... all I seen was late model econoboxes with motors too small to even get over here... I rented a fiat that was so gutless that you couldn't even make it up a decent size hill around here or pass anyone on a two lane road... it was dinky and badly laid out and even if you could buy the thing here..... nobody would.
If you drive more than 15 minutes on any road in America you will see a modified car or 50. Not just wheels and such but HP and suspension mods.
It is actually rare to see a vette that hasn't been tweaked to some extent. The euro trash here is allways stock because... well... it just doesn't pay to work on em.
Here, you can make a mustang outperform the saleen and roush ones in a few weekends in your garage... You can buy 6 speeds and 400-1200 hp crate engines ... with warranties! they drop right in. the euro trash cars that approach 500 hp are rare and expensive and right on the edge tunning wise...
While... A 500 hp small block chevy motor is about 5 grand and common as dirt... GM sells a crate 760 hp motor right over the counter. People are dumping thousands of these things in mild looking street cars every year...
Those guys on top gear would probly wreck one trying to get a decent quarter mile time out of em.
cpxx.... we hear crap box "tuner" cars all the time too but ignore em.. I am talkiing about a big American V8 at full song going through the gears... you haven't lived till you did that. We hear it every day..
it isn't just the "ruling class" that gets to drive 500 hp cars here... the guy working at walmart probly has one with more HP than 9 out of ten euro supercars.
lazs
lazs
-
I'm not sure about the rest of the "big 3," but for the awhile there General Motors stopped being a car manufacturer and became a bank that happened to make cars. They we're making more money on financing than they were on the cars. No surprise that the manufacturing went to ****.
-
Lazs2
Sure that Roush Mustang was powerful at 415bhp.
But it still got beat by the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige.
-
Yes, but they sold that "bank" AKA GMAC. Now they are free of all thier distractions and can focus on grass roots issues. You can thank Bob Lutz for that one.
I think GM will emerge as the strongest of the big 3 in 5-10 years. Again, its all part of their grass roots campaign.
For example, when I first started working for GM we had no info. on our racing division...what they were up to and how they were doing. When Rick Wagner hired Bob Lutz, we got weekly updates on races around the world that GM was participating in.
It takes a while to change the culture in such a large company, but it is happening.
-
In all honesty Clarkson is somewhat of a Europhobe as well. He's what the Brits call "a little Englander". While ragging on the Americans is both easy and fun, sometimes I think the Germans get the worst of it.
Ze Germans were not pleased with this joke.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqRzGJjD11M
Jeremy with my favorite woman in the whole world (well … sort of).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtwPW5ZGtUs
Here he goes on about selling his Ford GT … and America again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD7vMsu_ysc
Germans again (lol "Messerschmitt shooting").
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtoiO5c7G3g
Well sometimes he gives ze Germans some credit (lol "then we'll sort out Rover).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyBIoc4RCKU
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Lazs2
Sure that Roush Mustang was powerful at 415bhp.
But it still got beat by the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige.
But how livable as a daily driver is it?
Quick to point out how the vett sucked on the road but not the lotus.
And he commented on the fact how good Roush Mustang was on roads .
Go ahead and gloss that over too.
Bronk
-
Actually he did call the Lotus a "plastic toaster".
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I have no interest in cars whatsoever except for beeing a means of transport from A to B
You woman.
:D
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Lazs2
Sure that Roush Mustang was powerful at 415bhp.
But it still got beat by the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige.
it got beat by a very sleek car with half the weight (and half the horsepower)
that costs about 5 times more than its worth.
you can build car with similar weight, greater power output, and ugliness that can only be countered with a tweed hat and a trophy wife. for a heck of a lot less. it'll also sound better.
-
Sure seems someone tossed all sense of humour overboard from the Mayflower.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
it got beat by a very sleek car with half the weight (and half the horsepower)
that costs about 5 times more than its worth.
Yeah, but that was one of the big points Clarkson seemed to be making. The American cars all weigh so much. The lighter, sleeker car beat the Roush Mustang because it was on a track with turns, where good handling and the ability to change direction quickly are important. I guess it was designed like that because their roads have more curves and you gotta have a car that can take 'em.
It wasn't just the Roush Mustang/Lotus Exige contest where excess weight lost the contest. That Range Rover versus Humvee/Cadillac was another - the Cad weighed over 4 tons! And it lost. The Humvee did a little better, but why did it stall out at altitude?
-
Originally posted by Viking
You woman.
:D
yeah i know...
would never surrender my Prada handbags to spend money on a car :D
My 2004 eurobox is plenty to get me were i wanna go.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
I guess it was designed like that because their roads have more curves and you gotta have a car that can take 'em.
LOL! Yeah, that's what all cars look like in GB.
The truth is, someone tried to make a car as similar to an open wheel racer as was legally possible to emulate a race car as much as possible. This wasn't driven by road conditions, environment or any consumer research. The arial atom was not designed for roads.
-
Originally posted by Choocha
I wish somebody would post Consumer Reports ratings for every euro car he featured. If I recall, it goes something like this:
Lotus= **** Quality
Jag= Worse than **** Quality
Land Rover= Super **** Quality
Benz= **** Quality
BMW= ok
Funny, he never mentioned how any of those cars can absorbe a molotov cocktail thrown by angry muslim youth roiting in the streets (very important feature in euro land).
Jaguar regularly comes out near the top of the JD Power ratings. Land Rover is vastly improved of late as well (admittedly both were previously awful). Even Benz has improved from its late 90's blip.
Lotus' are...well...er...made of plastic and stuck together with glue - what do you expect :D
Let's face it - this is Euro jingoism for a Euro market - in much the same way as we get US jingoism for the US market over here. Yanks have no right to be offended by Clarkson until Bill O'Reilly is removed from the airwaves.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
The point I'm trying to make is that "japanese imports" like the cars I mentioned are the biggest sellers in America. Lazs2 is claiming that he saw a lot of boring cars on his travels in Europe. But Clarkson said the same thing about America, when he looked at that 6-way interchange. Sure, America makes Dodge Viper and 200mph Corvettes. Lazs2 is trying to make these cars sound like the norm. The sales figures tell a different story. America buys millions of jap import cars, which are probably no different from those sold in Europe/Australia etc.
You're not far from the truth, but Euro brands outsell the Japs quite heavily - Renaults, Opel (or Vauxhall), Euro Ford and Fiat all of whom occasionally throw out a cracker, but who mostly build vehicles that are every bit as dull as their mainstream US counterparts.
Lazs experience with his lethargic Fiat is exactly the same as anyone renting in the US - Dodge Neon anyone?. Out of interest Lazs, did you get a stick or auto?
-
(http://www.hennesseyperformance.com/hennesseyperformance/images/Pic2.php?Item_ID=238)
http://www.hennesseyperformance.com/hennesseyperformance/ItemDetail.php?Item_ID=238&cart=xzwbrqBI&DoThis=Dodge+Viper&ActionReq=Where
http://www.motortrend.com/av/features/112_0606_sf_standing_mile_viper
Don't know why they make POS like this.
Bronk
-
You know, I bought me a 06 Mustang with a 5 spd manual transmission and the 4.0 V-6. I also got the Pony Package. I bought it to save some bucks not only in the purchase price but also a lower insurance rate vrs the GT.
I love fast cars but I quickly found that this one, with only a V-6 got me a ticket just as fast as the GT would have.
I use it to commute and it is also my only 4 wheeled vehicle. I have hauled rock in it, and actually got some 8' boards in it. I find it comfortable, I like the handling, and I find it to be plenty powerfull for my needs. It accelerates plenty well to merge with freeway traffic and will hum along at 80 mph all day long sipping gas at 26+ mpg.
Would I like a faster car? Sure, but only when I can afford the anciliary expenses associated with one.
1000 hp cars seem like such a waste unless you are going to put it on the track.
Mark
-
Originally posted by takeda
Sure seems someone tossed all sense of humour overboard from the Mayflower.
Somehow, I doubt that the British would be dying of laughter if one of our loud-mouthed satirists referred to their nation as a 'garden party of rich apes', and complained about how much it sucks to be there, all the while showcasing a montage of their broken yellow teeth, vomit-inducing cuisine and testicle-curdling females.
80 minutes of insults can be funny... Just not if you're the target.
-
Clarkson is an entertainer, an actor and a showman. I don’t care that his shows are rigged and his stuff might be scripted and heavily edited; he’s funny and enthusiastic.
-
Originally posted by Neubob
The fact that the H1 is out of production should be immaterial. It was discontinued years ago, and has not benefitted from the subsequent technological improvements that the Land Rover lived to see.
Looks like you can still get an H1 Alpha built to your specs with a whole bunch of goodies still. I kinda like the 6.6L turbocharged Duramax.
http://www.hummer.com
-
Originally posted by Neubob
Somehow, I doubt that the British would be dying of laughter if one of our loud-mouthed satirists referred to their nation as a 'garden party of rich apes', and complained about how much it sucks to be there, all the while showcasing a montage of their broken yellow teeth, vomit-inducing cuisine and testicle-curdling females.
80 minutes of insults can be funny... Just not if you're the target.
Two words: Little Britain
-
Originally posted by takeda
Two words: Little Britain
LB is hilarious, but I think that Americans who get offended by Jeremy Clarkson just don't get Brit humour and don't understand that the biggest piss-takers of the Brits are the Brits themselves.
imo tronski and eskimo2 nailed it, Clarkson is brilliant
-
The man is such a great taker of the piss he could almost be australian, or a kiwi!
Finally got to watch the rest of it today, and thought it was a great show. The stunts/match-ups in top gear are often geared to the ridicolous ie. Clarkson racing James and Hammond to Norway - them via the water, him in a McLaren SLR, but I thought the match ups in here were interesting. ie. The Lotus and Mustang were the same price, and it was mostly power vs. handling with the others. (And yet another exscuse to drive the Atom)
I'd say he was pretty fair with his reviews - and he did obviously love a number of the cars he drove..and it was fantastic to see the Stig (Some say that he's terrified of ducks and that there's an airport in Russia named after him, all we know is he's called the Stig).
All you have to do is watch any episode with the cool wall with the Hamster and Clarkson to see Clarkson rag on european cars, and I saw an episode where he picked the Chrysler Crossfire over an Audi TT, and Nissan 350z after a match up...and as for roaming the streets of Vegas, obviously no-one has seen Jaywalking on the tonight show...
I think takeda has got it right :aok
Tronsky
-
Originally posted by Mini D
LOL! Yeah, that's what all cars look like in GB.
The truth is, someone tried to make a car as similar to an open wheel racer as was legally possible to emulate a race car as much as possible. This wasn't driven by road conditions, environment or any consumer research. The arial atom was not designed for roads.
No, the car that beat the Roush Mustang was the Lotus Exige, not the Atom. And Bronk has a point, further up. ^ I have been a passenger in a similar Lotus, and it was noisy and harsh. There was no padding on the seats, that were like boards. 20 miles was plenty.
But remember, in the Brit (ie Clarkson) view, the Roush was not designed for roads - not with that fuel consumption. Would only be a niche market (if any) in Europe. Still, don't some of their Astons get 10mpg?
-
The Elise is in the exact same category. Hell, the early versions were sold with an "optional" passenger seat.
-
We all know lotus make GoKarty racing cars, small, fast nimble, very very basic interiors and probably leaky as hell too, but thats not the point, they are fun to drive, not for picking the kids up, if you have a smile after the drive, they've done their job.
Anyway lots of Clarkson Stuff on the Top Gear web Site heres his thoughts on American Muscle Cars (positive thoughts as he likes them)
like he says:
..Muscle cars, in short, are not as clever as Ferraris. But they're just as exciting...
whole article:
http://www.topgear.com/content/features/stories/2006/06/stories/08/1.html
lots of hime moaning about british cars and the British Nanny state too in the other articles.
Hope this brings a bit of balance, he's sarcatic about everyone equally.
:-)
-
wooley... "Lazs experience with his lethargic Fiat is exactly the same as anyone renting in the US - Dodge Neon anyone?. Out of interest Lazs, did you get a stick or auto?"
The car I drove was a stick. I have never driven but one neon and it was crap but.... it was twice the car that fiat was.. I hated shifting with my left hand btw... The worst car you could rent in America would be twice the car that fiat was. You would be laughed off the road or run off it if you drove that thing here...
The cars I seen in england were not jap cars. they were oddball stuff that looked and performed as badly as the fiat I rented.
lazs
-
and ffwd.... you may be able to beat a mustang with a go kart like the lotus in a race situation around curves...not acceleration or hill climbing (the things most people do day to day) but....
even at that.. you have a ten times more comfortable and roomy car that you can buy a part for at the corner discount auto zone and... for a few grand and a weekends work... you can still hop up the mustang to blow the doors off the go cart lotus in every except possibly thin ice on the lake racing.
We have shifter carts here that will blow the doors off the lotus. Ever driven a dwarf car? (single seat race cars with motorcycle engines).
The real truth is that the automotive experiance for the your-0-peeeans is like every other there and steeped in class restrictions... you have to buy your way up. The ruling class drives the high strung overpriced sports vehicles and turns their nose up at the lower class who drive crap boxes.
Here the automotive experiance is much richer and more free... (oddly enough) everyone has a chance to make his driveing experiance whatever he wants it to be for cheap... the road can have a porche alongside a 60's muscle car or 32 ford hot rod. Everyone has access to the kind of hp that the guys on that show have never even seen.
I wouldn't trade that for all the yellow crooked teeth and smirking ruling class and effite euro trash cars in the world.
But... the show is funny. It is just frustrating for people who know something about cars.
The equivlent would be to take the ford lightning truck and take any euro car with equal power to weight and then hook up a 35' power boat and trailer to them and a weeks worth of camping gear and then race em up a road that goes from 0 to 7000 feet up in about 20 miles.
Then go to england and shoot nothing but a bunch of snaggle toothed bar stool warmers and rain and gray skies.
plenty to laugh about with the cars and people of england.
My grandfather came from Scotland... a step up from england but just barely... I went back there and couldn't understand a word they said. Much like england... they laughed at my "accent".
I pointed out that I had no accent but that they did. More laughter... I pointed out that if I were wrong... How was it that they could understand every word that I was saying while they were all but unintelligable to me?
I also asked why it was that when they sang the sounded just like they were from southern kalifornia.
lazs
-
the main difference is fuel price and maybe insurance?:
And so the visious circle starts:
Most young people that like fast cars aspire to having a GTi or more recently 'RType' badge on thier car, but most are priced out insurance wise so they get a crapper slower more mushy base model :-( unless they only get 3 party cover, cos they "Wont crash Cos they are Uber drivers"
So you get a situation wear you have a young guy who gets a big loan for his Fast car which he cant afford or control properly in our crappy weather.
One night he stacks his pride and joy into a lamppost whilst showing off to his girlfriend and he loses the money he used to buy the car leaving him with a debt to pay off, and the insurance premiums go up even higher.
So true what Lazs2 says about buying your way up, as you need the cash for the insurance and fuel for the decent cars :-(
Edited as it made no sense hehe
-
Yeah Clarkson is funny as hell. Just looking at him sitting on the Toybota makes me laugh..
Clarkson talking about the 250hp outboard motor ".. and that's 600lbs sitting on the tailgate, that's like one whole american"
I love how he allways get's the top experts in a particular field working for him, and then promptly starts arguing with them.
Probably the funniest line I've seen yet was in the mini ski jump episode. The rocket scientists are going over a diagram with him, explaining the high tech rocket fuel which is a form of rubber and nitrous oxide for the oxidizer. Clarkson interupting when they mention the rubber fuel, "Look. Here's a tip, I've got a doctorate in engineering twice. You'll get more power if you use something like petrol or dynamite." I was lmao.
-
The link is dead
-
Originally posted by lazs2
and ffwd.... you may be able to beat a mustang with a go kart like the lotus in a race situation around curves...not acceleration or hill climbing (the things most people do day to day
I think what you might have meant was "you may be able to beat a mustang with a go kart like the lotus in a race situation around curves...not acceleration or hill climbing (the things most people do day to day - in America"
What I'm seeing here from the Euros (and from others who have been there, like yourself) is that gasoline is very expensive at $6 a gallon, so it's no surprise that the Euros have not developed an appetite for 10mpg muscle cars. Instead, their cars are developed to perform well in situations closer to home - like twists and turns, narrow roads etc. Why would the Euros in Europe developing a car to be sold in Europe at a European price with European gas prices in mind want to develop it to some sort of American specification?
plenty to laugh about with the cars and people of england.
I also wonder why you target england and not any other euro country, because England doesn't have much of a car industry any more and most of their cars are imports.
Hmm. Seems like you have an ax to grind.
-
I’ve owned 7 Fiats, just because I hate myself and like to make myself as miserable as possible. They are the worst cars in the world… ever. Some of them get a few points for style and even humor. The 128 had awful torque steer, would go up on two wheels and wanted to roll in a hard corner, there were these stupid shims for adjusting the valve gap, etc.
The only thing reliable about a Fiat is that you can be sure that it will be ready for the scrap yard just past 30,000 miles.
Still, there was something that I likes about the 500:
(http://home.milkmandan.org/dev/null/archives/fiat_500.jpg)
-
Fix
It
Again
Tony
That is all.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
I also wonder why you target england.
It's his Scottish ancestry - its in his genes and he can't help it.
Now Lazs, repeat after me:
"Yaes can take oor lives, but yeas can never take our FRRREEEEDDDDOMMMMMM"
-
the Link is dead
-
It seems that Euros and Asians like 3-door hatchbacks that can corner very well and go up to at least 160mph (Volkswagen Golf and Honda Integra Type R and Civic Type R). The cars mentioned above are the Euro and Asian definition of everyday sports car.
-
I had a 2001 Integra GSR. It was one of the worst handling FWD cars I'd ever driven... right on par with the Pontiac Grand Prix GT. It was too twitchy and unpredictable in corners even during moderate driving and the torque steer was rediculous. Combine that with the fact that you have to drive the car above 4000 RPM to get anything from it and a whopping 22mpg from a 4 cylinder and it's a downright ****. The very next car I got was a 2002 Jetta which I had for 3 months and got rid of for a number of reasons... and the fact that a new reason seemed to creep in every day.
It must be my biased big-road American favoritism that caused me to eventually settle on a Mini Cooper. It's not a perfect car, but it suits my needs perfectly. But then... so does my 1971 pickup from time to time.
-
About your Integra GSR.
Was it a 4-door model? Was the suspension modified (i.e. lowered & cambered). Integras GSR and Rs are suppose to be one of the best handling front wheel drive cars in the market.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
I’ve owned 7 Fiats, just because I hate myself and like to make myself as miserable as possible. They are the worst cars in the world… ever. Some of them get a few points for style and even humor. The 128 had awful torque steer, would go up on two wheels and wanted to roll in a hard corner, there were these stupid shims for adjusting the valve gap, etc.
The only thing reliable about a Fiat is that you can be sure that it will be ready for the scrap yard just past 30,000 miles.
Still, there was something that I likes about the 500:
(http://home.milkmandan.org/dev/null/archives/fiat_500.jpg)
Sorry, but I can’t see what’s to like about the Fiat 500. It looks like it was designed by a smurf.
I've never owned a Fiat but one of my brothers had a Fiat 127 as his first car. At first when he told me he had bought a Fiat I had an expectation of Euro sophistication of a poor mans Ferrari. But when he told me he had only paid $200 for it I had my doubts; until the first time I saw it... it turned out to be a 900cc micro hatch chitbox. At the time it was only about 10 years old but it was so riddled with tin worm that the only thing holding the body together was the paint. It was crude and unreliable, and as my brothers unpaid mechanic I had to get intimate with the damn thing. I prolly spent more time working on it than he did driving it. It was easily the worst car I have had anything to do with and I have had a few cheap and nasty cars over the years.
-
American road:
(http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/aug2005/20050810_highway.jpg)
Classic American affordable and practical sports car:
(http://www.noneckschevelle.com/images/carpics/TommyGunns66chevelle.jpg)
European road:
(http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/SIX/SIX007/AND-019.jpg)
Classic European affordable and practical sports car:
(http://www.bmwworld.com/pics/6er/7092_1024.jpg)
Each to his own.
-
Vike, how much of the US have you experienced first-hand?
-
Nada, zip, zilch.
-
Then you'll understand that a picture of a random car and a random road doesn't tell the whole story.
e.g. The Utah salt flats.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
About your Integra GSR.
Was it a 4-door model? Was the suspension modified (i.e. lowered & cambered). Integras GSR and Rs are suppose to be one of the best handling front wheel drive cars in the market.
No. It was a 2 door and it sucked in the corners. You can talk about what "its supposed to be" like all you want. The V-tech high rev madness, the torque steer and the poor mileage mean that you couldn't even enjoy it as a commuter by backing off a bit. There really wasn't an area it accelled in other than being light.
-
It's OK moot. Viking is going out of his way to avoid any reality based assessments and stick to stereotypes as much as possible. It's always been his way, thus multiple handles.
Take that chevelle he linked. It's lighter and has twice the horse power of that 633csi, but he'll swear the BMW is better based on his vast understanding of everything he's seen on tv.
-
fastfwd... I believe that we were talking about a lotus (english) and a tv show that was british with british comedians and actors. The show is funny.. I have watched it a few times. Of course I would talk about the brits.
It is also painful to watch if you know anything about cars. They don't. It seems the people who like the show the most are ones who really don't have any mechanical background or know anything about cars.
viking.. America is a very big place with a lot of different types of roads. I have 3 cars and a motorcycle... all three cars are vastly different and I enjoy them for what they are. I would be extremely unhappy with the choices of cars I could own in your-up. I hated the roads and I hated driving on the wrong side of the road and shifting with the wrong hand and getting screwed on gas prices.
Americas roads are of a wide variety and not all of us are fat. We do have better dental care but... why hate us for that?
The BMW that you show as "affordable" can be bought here for a couple of grand.. old BMW's are a drug on the market... extremely expensive to repair... a starter for one or alternator costs 10 times what one for an old muscle car costs for instance... they are gutless... mostly womens cars here.
lazs
-
TWO WHEELS ONLY
(http://www.hondasuisse.ch/_library/motos_scooters/funstuff/fonds_ecran/fireblade_800x600.jpg)
i win right? surely?
just throwing it out there, and its totally unrelated, but im interested in the reaction :D
-
Have you rode a lot of motorcycles?
just throwing that out there. If soooo... what do they have to do with the subject?
lazs
-
im only nineteen, so have only had 2, my first 400, and the one you see in the pic (but the 600 version, not the thousand there)
but my dad has had a bazillion, all across the range, and ive been a passenger on all of them, been taken to the limits
the last couple of posts have been regarding performance, cornering, acceleration, speed etc
also i think motorcycles are a more universal mode of transport, less manufaturers means there is alot less divide than the euro-american stuff your discussing...i believe. like i said its not 100% relevant, a new element, if you like. discuss it or do not, that is up to you, and anyone else.
-
I rode em for decades and... they are either hot and uncomfortable or cold and uncomfortable and they can't carry more than 2 people or tow a boat or 30 foot trailer (that would cut the performance a little eh?)
They are toys. not real transportation. You are dirty and tired when you arrive. You are vulnerable to the slightest whim of the cars around you or the road conditions or the weather. Most of the time I have spent in the hospital in my life was because of motorcycles.
I never wanted anyone on the back because I felt it limited me ( I have a concience) I have never been so misserable in my life as I have been a few (more than a few) times, on a motorcycle. I have also had some of the best times of my life.
But... as serious transportation? not even close. For the average person? you got to be kidding.
lazs
-
every market has its niches, like the fiat guy up there ^ some people will ride 2 wheels come hell or high water, and will enjoy every moment of it
your right, they are generally toys (the more toy like; motors in plastic, with a seat, a la superbikes definately)
but, although i understand the on-going argument of american muscle..practicality AND speed, against the elise, are these not also "toys" to some extent?
-
Has good ole' Jeremy ever looked at one of these?(http://www.canadiandriver.com/news/02images/solstice-c.jpg)
(http://www.carbodydesign.com/concept-cars/2005/10-27-pontiac-solstice-weekend-club-racer/2006%20Pontiac%20Solstice.jpg)
Doesn't it seem like he should have put something like this against the Lotus? Granted, the Lotus probably would have still won but his comparisons were just a farce...
edit: holy crap that thing's huge!
-
yes they are but... they can be very practical. My elky is, after all.... somewhat a pickup. I can load a big screen TV into it or a fridge or.. bring home a V8 and transmission in the back... it will cruise on the freeway at 70mph at two thousand rpm all day long or..100 mph at less than 3 thousand. it has air conditioning and a huge interior... it has brake and suspension upgrades and handles well.
My Healey is a monster.. it wears you out.. the windshield folds flat and you get every bit as tired and grimy as on a motorcycle. your hair gets all tangled up just like the old days on Harleys and you get bugs in your face. It will run low 12 sec quarter miles. You will be tired and sunburned and partially deaf after a long drive in it.
My Lincoln town car is comfy beyond any BMW or mercedes I have driven and has a huge interior and trunk and a satalite radio... great for trips or the girlfriend or grand daughter.
My bike is an old BMW 750 my son gave me but with the helmet laws here I just don't enjoy riding it like the old days.
I have ridden the kawa sport bikes and the new screwedzuki 1200 plastic thingie that one of my men at work has. it is the stupidest looking bike I have ever seen and also the fastest. I would not enjoy riding it and would not like to be seen on it.
lazs
-
wondering about could I afford to run these cars in the UK been doing some research: (no i couldn't afford either unless i got them on credit)
did a quick search on autotrader for local sales for the cars:
2006 lotus Exige S = £33,995
manufacturers spec sheet = 24 mpg city / 29 mpg highway
Price (ish) per Mile =16p city / 14p highway
2006 Mustang GT V8 = £24,800 second hand uk
manufacturers spec sheet = 17 mpg city / 25 mpg highway
Price(ish) per Mile = 23p city / 16p highway
Fuel Prices:
1 uk Gallon = 4.54 L = £3.98 or $7.65
(Average fuel price locally = 87.6p per L)
so in city driving over 1 year doing 10k miles the mustang will cost a whopping £700 more to run. (thats 4 pints of beer a week more)
well thats not much unless the manufacturers are lying about the MPG of the cars.
Now insurance:
Lotus Exige S = £1053 per year fully comprehensive for me, not to bad (ish)
cant find an online quote for the mustang though, but an AC Cobra 4L was £1,116 a year, so mustang prob around the 1k mark as well.
So basically, not much in it really.
I wonder what real world driving would do for fuel MPG though, would the Mustang drink more with slow-fast-slow-fast driving than the lotus or the other way round?
anyone have any real world experience in either of these?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
My grandfather came from Scotland... a step up from england but just barely... I went back there and couldn't understand a word they said. Much like england... they laughed at my "accent".
I pointed out that I had no accent but that they did. More laughter... I pointed out that if I were wrong... How was it that they could understand every word that I was saying while they were all but unintelligable to me?
Because you talk more than you listen?
-
Originally posted by moot
Vike, how much of the US have you experienced first-hand?
Can we throw that question to the floor please...
How many Americans commenting here have any significant European driving experience? Likewise, how many Euro's have significant US driving experience?
I'm guessing more Europeans have been to America, simply because they get more vacation, but for the sake of this argument, can we assume 2 weeks driving a rented Chevy Malibu around Florida theme parks doesn't count as 'significant'. Equally, tootling round London in a rented Fiat is not 'significant'.
-
Originally posted by wooley
Can we throw that question to the floor please...
How many Americans commenting here have any significant European driving experience? Likewise, how many Euro's have significant US driving experience?
I'm guessing more Europeans have been to America, simply because they get more vacation, but for the sake of this argument, can we assume 2 weeks driving a rented Chevy Malibu around Florida theme parks doesn't count as 'significant'. Equally, tootling round London in a rented Fiat is not 'significant'.
How about 4 weeks in Ireland .
Almost everywhere but the northern counties.
I know that on some of those roads. I wouldn't want a car bigger than a mustang. Not much more than a paved cow path.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Excel1
Sorry, but I can’t see what’s to like about the Fiat 500. It looks like it was designed by a smurf.
I've never owned a Fiat but one of my brothers had a Fiat 127 as his first car. At first when he told me he had bought a Fiat I had an expectation of Euro sophistication of a poor mans Ferrari. But when he told me he had only paid $200 for it I had my doubts; until the first time I saw it... it turned out to be a 900cc micro hatch chitbox. At the time it was only about 10 years old but it was so riddled with tin worm that the only thing holding the body together was the paint. It was crude and unreliable, and as my brothers unpaid mechanic I had to get intimate with the damn thing. I prolly spent more time working on it than he did driving it. It was easily the worst car I have had anything to do with and I have had a few cheap and nasty cars over the years.
Like I said, I hate myself, that’s why I drove Fiats (but only as a second car, you can’t count on them as a primary). They all sucked and I also spent more time fixing them than driving them. I also have a good sense of humor which is why I liked the 500.
-
bronk... I would say that a couple of weeks driving in any country of any size is not much. I would have to say tho that I did put 1200 miles on the car in england and Scotland. This amounted to seeing a whole lot of the country and driving a lot of roads. It is a really tiny little island.
I would say that if you spent 2 weeks driving Hawaii you would probly have a decent idea of what it was like to drive there..... not so much russia or North America.
Size of country is relevant.
lazs
-
man...the cheeky guy is an entertaining smacktard, he can pull his counterparts out of the fold.
who didn't like big cars as teenager...mobile bedroom...what's not to like?
-
Originally posted by moot
Then you'll understand that a picture of a random car and a random road doesn't tell the whole story.
e.g. The Utah salt flats.
Of course not ... it's a stereotype. But the thing about stereotypes is that they wouldn't exist if they weren't for the most part true. The road networks and cities of our two respective continents have been the major influence of our rather different approach to car design. While Europe's cities and roads sometimes dates back to the Roman Empire with narrow streets and tight bends designed for nothing less maneuverable than a horse; American cities and roads are mostly built after the introduction of the motor vehicle.
So in essence you can say that while in America the roads are built for cars, in Europe the cars are built for the roads.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
It's OK moot. Viking is going out of his way to avoid any reality based assessments and stick to stereotypes as much as possible. It's always been his way, thus multiple handles.
Take that chevelle he linked. It's lighter and has twice the horse power of that 633csi, but he'll swear the BMW is better based on his vast understanding of everything he's seen on tv.
I did not proclaim that the BMW was better than the Chevelle. I only illustrated the connection between our different car designs and our roads. But by all means don't let that stop you from making a stereotype of me.
-
That 633 you show is nearly as big as that chevelle and weighs more. You tell me how that correlates to the road pictures you show? There's a reason they had an elise and an atom on that show and not an 80s 633.
-
the Romans built straight roads, it's you euros that made roads wiggly. In america not all roads are arrow straight interstates, in the mountains the roads follow the animal trails.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
That 633 you show is nearly as big as that chevelle and weighs more. You tell me how that correlates to the road pictures you show? There's a reason they had an elise and an atom on that show and not an 80s 633.
The BMW 6 can corner a lot better than the Chevelle. The Chevelle otoh is a lot faster in a drag race.
Oh, and the BMW does not weigh more than the Chevelle. It weighs 300 lbs less.
-
Originally posted by john9001
In america not all roads are arrow straight interstates, in the mountains the roads follow the animal trails.
Not all ... that indicates that most are.
-
Originally posted by Viking
The BMW 6 can corner a lot better than the Chevelle. The Chevelle otoh is a lot faster in a drag race.
Oh, and the BMW does not weigh more than the Chevelle. It weighs 300 lbs less.
300 lbs in a car makes a HUGE diff.
Hell full tank makes a diff in a drag race.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
300 lbs in a car makes a HUGE diff.
Hell full tank makes a diff in a drag race.
Bronk
I'm sure it does. Just to make myself clear incase my previous post could be misinterpreted: the BMW weighs 300 lbs less than the Chevelle.
-
However I think the BMW's lower weight would not matter much in a drag race. The Chavelle got a lot more power. While the BMW's lower weight and 50/50 weight distribution would make it much better in the corners. This perhaps makes these two cars the perfect stereotypes of American and European affordable sports cars. These days however the classical stereotypes are getting washed out as cars from all over the world are getting more and more similar.
-
Originally posted by Viking
The BMW 6 can corner a lot better than the Chevelle. The Chevelle otoh is a lot faster in a drag race.
Oh, and the BMW does not weigh more than the Chevelle. It weighs 300 lbs less.
66 Chevelle with a V8 (4-door, the heaviest): 3251 lbs. 83 633csi (only one I could find here (http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z12138/BMW_633CSi/default.aspx)): 3345.
Now... I supposed you could shave some weight off that, but you aren't even trying to say the 633 only weighs 2900 lbs are you? Cause, I think we've already got that "liar" thing out of the way.
The overall length of the car is a scant 2" less than the Chevelle with a 12" SHORTER wheel base and a 12" NARROWER wheel base. Now, I suppose in some grand european justification, that would translate to better groundwork for handling, but not anywhere else. The Chevelle would need a little work to stiffen it up, but you could buy a complete suspension set for it that would meet virtually any performance conditions your looking for for less than it would cost to change the clutch in that BMW. The only thing you're sacrificing is no IRS.
Now, go ahead and stick to your guns and insist the 633 handles "better" based on... um... you saying so. You seriously know nothing about the subject and really just should shut up. Hell... I don't know much on it myself and I can see you're full of ****.
-
This site says the 1982 BMW 633 weighs in at 3220 lbs.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z8211/BMW_633/default.aspx
This site says the 1968 Chevelle weights in at 3520 lbs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Chevelle
This site says the 1973 Chevelle weighs in at 3479 lbs.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z12097/default.aspx
I'm not saying the BMW is a better car than the Chevelle, just different. You're the one displaying blatant nationalism and rater rude behavior.
But if you insist on this dick measuring contest, I'll bet the BMW has better brakes, better suspension, better (or rather perfect) weight distribution, lower centre of gravity and more accurate steering.
-
Originally posted by Viking
This site says the 1982 BMW 633 weighs in at 3220 lbs.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z8211/BMW_633/default.aspx
OK.This site says the 1968 Chevelle weights in at 3520 lbs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Chevelle
Yeah? You know that the car you have pictured is a 66 chevelle.... right? Try looking up the weight for that since the discussion WAS ON THE CARS YOU HAVE PICTURED... not something else that better fits your argument.I'm not saying the BMW is a better car than the Chavelle, just different. You're the one displaying blatant nationalism and rater rude behavior.
Oh really? I'm not the one trying to smooth numbers to try to make a point after bungling up several times already in this thread.
Don't give me this nationalism crap. I know more about that BMW than you do about that Chevelle. This much is readily apparent. I have not commented it on anything other than numbers. Nationality has nothing to do with it. You're the one posting a picture that you think personifies something no matter how incorrect your assumptions about both the roads and the car might be. Do you even read the bile you spew?
-
Originally posted by Viking
This site says the 1982 BMW 633 weighs in at 3220 lbs.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z8211/BMW_633/default.aspx
This site says the 1968 Chevelle weights in at 3520 lbs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Chevelle
This site says the 1973 Chevelle weighs in at 3479 lbs.
http://www.conceptcarz.com/vehicle/z12097/default.aspx
I'm not saying the BMW is a better car than the Chevelle, just different. You're the one displaying blatant nationalism and rater rude behavior.
But if you insist on this dick measuring contest, I'll bet the BMW has better brakes, better suspension, better (or rather perfect) weight distribution, lower centre of gravity and more accurate steering.
The early 60s A-bodies (Chevelles, gtos, 442s, skylarks) were light in mid 60s and gained weight every year.
68 and 73 are NOT a way to prove your point and really shows your ingorance on the basics of 60s muscle.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
OK.Yeah? You know that the car you have pictured is a 66 chevelle.... right?
Ok, can we then agree that the two cars are fairly equal in weight then?
Originally posted by Mini D
Try looking up the weight for that since the discussion WAS ON THE CARS YOU HAVE PICTURED... not something else that better fits your argument.
Actually the discussion wasn't about these two cars at all. They are just two pictures of cars I found on Google Images that I think personifies classic American and European sports coupes. I didn't even mention the weight or performance of either car until you started this pissing contest. You started this, not I.
Originally posted by Mini D
Don't give me this nationalism crap. I know more about that BMW than you do about that Chevelle. This much is readily apparent. I have not commented it on anything other than numbers. Nationality has nothing to do with it. You're the one posting a picture that you think personifies something no matter how incorrect your assumptions about both the roads and the car might be.
So you really think a stock Chevelle (whatever model) handles better then a BMW 6 series in corners? Who do you think would be the fastest around the Nürburgring?
If you are so informed on these two vehicles as you claim you wouldn't mind informing the rest of us about the differences in brakes, weight distribution, centre of gravity, rear differential and seering?
I await your answer with the utmost respect and humility for your superior knowledge on the subject.
Originally posted by Mini D
Do you even read the bile you spew?
I'm afraid I'm not the one "spewing bile". You however are lending credibility to another stereotype … that of the rude American.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
That 633 you show is nearly as big as that chevelle and weighs more. You tell me how that correlates to the road pictures you show? There's a reason they had an elise and an atom on that show and not an 80s 633.
Originally posted by Viking
Actually the discussion wasn't about these two cars at all. They are just two pictures of cars I found on Google Images that I think personifies classic American and European sports coupes. I didn't even mention the weight or performance of either car until you started this pissing contest. You started this, not I.
Now... you're getting preachy and making huge incorrect leaps. You argue a statement that I make with incorrect information and lies (none of those chevelles are 300 lbs more now are they... and I'll bet that 633 wasn't made in NC) and then you pretend that's not what it was all about as if you were right and you're doing me a favor by letting it go. You were wrong with the pictures and the information you posted to "refute my statement" afterwards. Just admit it and stop trying to call it a draw ("then we can agree they were about the same weight?").
The 2 door chevelle you have pictured is lighter than that 633. That 633 is pretty much the same size as the car. It is 20 years newer with an independent rearend. It is underpowered (all 80's cars are with few exceptions) and might take a corner well, but if that's it's only strength then a $3000 investment in that chevelle will have it kicking that 633's bellybutton at any track.
People get cocky at the current state of vehicles and technology as if they are engineering marvels. Doing more with less is an engineering marvel. A car with no computers beating the **** out of a car with 47 is an engineering marvel. The average consumer being able to work on his own car is an engineering marvel. We've created a new set of standards to try and justify newer cars. None of them are relevant as cars haven't really offered anything new other than a false sense of security for the last 40 years.
So Porsche finally figured how to engineer out the horrible oversteer in the 911. Woopdeedoo. The car is still inherantly unstable and requires computer assistance to drive. I cringed when he talked about the "ABS kicking in waaaaaay too early" on a track. If this story is about being able to build a vehicle.... nobody is doing a good job at it right now. That era you're mocking was one of the best ever and it's not a good thing that we're moving so far away from it.
And just so you know... things on the American Muscle Car scene started going downhill in 1968. Try to avoid using cars from that late and on to define it. It, once again, only shows your ignorance.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Now... you're getting preachy and making huge incorrect leaps. You argue a statement that I make with incorrect information and lies (none of those chevelles are 300 lbs more now are they...
Well, yes they were according to the sites I posted. 3520 lbs 1968 Chevelle vs. 3220 lbs 1982 BMW, that's a difference of 300 lbs. Admittedly it wasn't the model Chevelle I posted a picture of for which I didn't know what model it was until you told me; nor did I care.
Originally posted by Mini D
… and then you pretend that's not what it was all about as if you were right and you're doing me a favor by letting it go.
The weight of the two cars are close enough that it is irrelevant, but if you insist on this line of argument; go right ahead. What difference does it make?
Originally posted by Mini D
The 2 door chevelle you have pictured is lighter than that 633.
Ok I can accept that if it makes you happy. The difference be it 300 pounds heavier or somewhat lighter (you have not quantified that claim), makes little or no difference.
Originally posted by Mini D
That 633 is pretty much the same size as the car. It is 20 years newer with an independent rearend. It is underpowered (all 80's cars are with few exceptions) and might take a corner well, but if that's it's only strength then a $3000 investment in that chevelle will have it kicking that 633's bellybutton at any track.
There you have it. You actually admit you'd have to modify the Chevelle with $3000 worth of parts to make it better than the stock BMW. Thank you.
For $3000 you could also put a turbo or blower in the BMW, lower it and give it better wheels for racing. Whatever you do to the Chevelle it will be difficult to fix that heavy front weight imbalance, and anything you bolt onto the motor will only exasperate the problem.
Originally posted by Mini D
People get cocky at the current state of vehicles and technology as if they are engineering marvels. Doing more with less is an engineering marvel. A car with no computers beating the **** out of a car with 47 is an engineering marvel. The average consumer being able to work on his own car is an engineering marvel. We've created a new set of standards to try and justify newer cars. None of them are relevant as cars haven't really offered anything new other than a false sense of security for the last 40 years.
I don't think seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, reinforced doors and pillars, collapsible steering columns, anti-lock brakes, and many more safety improvements that I fail recollect offers a false sense of security. These features do save lives. The compromise in performance by adding weight and regulatory limits on chassis design is a fair price to pay IMHO.
Originally posted by Mini D
So Porsche finally figured how to engineer out the horrible oversteer in the 911. Woopdeedoo. The car is still inherantly unstable and requires computer assistance to drive.
Now you're bringing Porsche into this?
Originally posted by Mini D
I cringed when he talked about the "ABS kicking in waaaaaay too early" on a track. If this story is about being able to build a vehicle.... nobody is doing a good job at it right now. That era you're mocking was one of the best ever and it's not a good thing that we're moving so far away from it.
I'm not mocking anything. I think the Chevelle is an awesome car. That's why I chose it.
Originally posted by Mini D
And just so you know... things on the American Muscle Car scene started going downhill in 1968. Try to avoid using cars from that late and on to define it. It, once again, only shows your ignorance.
Since I chose a 1966 Chavelle it seems that by sheer accident I didn't show my ignorance.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Well, yes they were according to the sites I posted. 3520 lbs 1968 Chevelle vs. 3220 lbs 1982 BMW, that's a difference of 300 lbs. Admittedly it wasn't the model Chevelle I posted a picture of for which I didn't know what model it was until you told me; nor did I care.
Of course you care. That's why you went to the trouble to find the lightest 633 you could and to find the heaviest chevelle you could. I simply looked at the pictures and got the right data because I actually knew what I was looking at.
You're trying to make some statement about the state of the U.S. auto industry by posting pictures of some of the best cars (US) ever made as if they're let downs to foreign (european) cars made 20 years later. That's what is called nationalism. That's what you accused me of because you simply don't realize you're doing it. You don't realize anything the way you've been arguing, losing, changing tactics, pretending you weren't incredibly mistaken, then trying yet another aproach all the way through this thread.
I'm done with you, viking. You've lost and you don't even realize it.
-
PS: Throwing $3k into that car for bolt-on parts doesn't put it anywhere near the pricerange of that 633.
-
Originally posted by Mini D
You're trying to make some statement about the state of the U.S. auto industry by posting pictures of some of the best cars (US) ever made as if they're let downs to foreign (european) cars made 20 years later. That's what is called nationalism.
I've done nothing of the sort, I think you're reading too much into what I'm posting. How can I be nationalistic about a BMW? I'm not German.
You have been nothing but rude and confrontational, while I have tried to be courteous and fair at every opportunity. I think your hostility towards me has nothing to do with my posts in this thread, but more to do with some deep seeded dislike towards me in general. In any case I'm not bothered. Carry on as you please.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Of course not ... it's a stereotype. But the thing about stereotypes is that they wouldn't exist if they weren't for the most part true. The road networks and cities of our two respective continents have been the major influence of our rather different approach to car design. While Europe's cities and roads sometimes dates back to the Roman Empire with narrow streets and tight bends designed for nothing less maneuverable than a horse; American cities and roads are mostly built after the introduction of the motor vehicle.
So in essence you can say that while in America the roads are built for cars, in Europe the cars are built for the roads.
Stereotypes may be true, but like I said, they don't tell the whole story.
Louis XIV, and everyday romantique Parisian dweebs are both "true" stereotypes of the French, despite being quite different: one's a stinking (under the tons of perfume etc) patriarch who died of gangrene (more or less), the other is a simple guy who lives on bread, water, and romance.
Neither one, nor both together, tell much more than a relatively small facet of the complete story.
It's the same with automotive experience in the US, or in Europe, or anywhere else..
Transportation and automotion only have in common their physical medium. You really can't tie together the two, much more than you can tie together the means and ends of Louis the 14th and said dweeb.
I think this (comparing apples and oranges as is comparing US and EU or even JP cars) is pretty similar to guns or plants and animals - adapting to their environment.
Look at Clarkson's review of the old and new supercars: he prefered the F40 because it was, in his opinion, what a supercar was supposed to be, specificaly, "ass-seat-road", no gimmicks.
That's a few layers of interpretation, taste and arbitrary judgement: "prefered", "in his opinion", "supposed to be", etc.
Design with a capital D will always tend towards specialization, towards perfection. The efficiency and accuracy of this is rational, and therefore measurable.
Taste is not bound by reason.
What is gimmicky in european cars, to some people, might be an essential and yet intangible part of a good car.
Look at Lazs' interpretation of "comfort": a TownCar. Others might say it is not comfortable, so much as a big barge that wallows over the ground instead of (like say a luxury AMG) adaptively gluing to almost any road like a gecko, firmly and precisely absorbing everything under it.
Clarkson only keeps the audience's attention because he manages to present some facts said audience may not have thought of, whether by the means of comic or emotional or any other appeals.
Imagine if he reviewed WWII warbirds instead of cars, the same way he does on TopGear.. it would still make for some comic relief, but not much more. It's just stand up comedy with some facts as supporting skeleton.
It's just TV, just entertainment, showcasing. TV doesn't tell you what you like, you do.
Function and fashion are, in my opinion, two different manifestations of the same thing.
-
Moot, I can agree with that wholeheartedly.
-
Right now you're siding with "Europe"... pretty much because GB doesn't have anything at all that can compete with the Chevelle until you hit the 90's.
You have not been respectfull in regards to anything gscholz... quit pretending otherwise. "To each his own" is a rollyeyes thing. The "that's because it was built in the U.S. to lower standards" line is pure bile and ignorance. You make incredibly insulting statements towards the U.S. in general and get pissy when someone throws them back at you specifically. Being vague has it's advantages (I guess).
You liked the show because it bashed the U.S. auto industry which you feel is inferior to BMW in every way because you were lucky enough to own a 91 that survived. I'm not stereotyping Europeans when I say that, I'm describing you. That show was designed to apeal to people just as ignorant about the U.S. and it's cars as you are. Thanks for a) proving your ignorance and b) failing to get anything posted.
Notice how many generalizations I've made about Europeans and their choice of cars? None. You make the generalizations and broad statements and then balk at people correcting your ignorance as if their insulting all Europeans.
-
I meant to bring this back to arguing cars rather than bickering.
I do think Clarkson just fiddles with the target audience.
-
I thought you were done with me Mini D? I'm not from Great Britain either. What "incredibly insulting statements" have I made? Yes I think the show was funny because it made fun at you Americans, but then I think it's fun when they make fun at the Germans and the British and the French and even the Norwegians. Norwegian comedians are experts at poking fun at Norway, and I don't find it one bit insulting no matter who is doing it. I feel sorry for you; must be awful not having a sense of humor.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Like I said, I hate myself, that’s why I drove Fiats (but only as a second car, you can’t count on them as a primary). They all sucked and I also spent more time fixing them than driving them. I also have a good sense of humor which is why I liked the 500.
No problem eskimo, I understand your Fiat hobby, with me it was old English Fords and Vauxhalls... some of them good, some not so good and some just out right punishing to own. But I liked them all. I've still got a 39 year old high maintenance gas guzzling Ford that I'm keeping because I refuse to believe that the 1970s are over, and also it's fun to drive. :)
-
Originally posted by lazs2
yes they are but... they can be very practical. My elky is, after all.... somewhat a pickup. I can load a big screen TV into it or a fridge or.. bring home a V8 and transmission in the back... it will cruise on the freeway at 70mph at two thousand rpm all day long or..100 mph at less than 3 thousand. it has air conditioning and a huge interior... it has brake and suspension upgrades and handles well.
But Lazs2, many of those new Euro turbo diesels - even ones made by Fiat LOL - have similar gearing, and will therefore cruise all day at 70mph at 2000rpm... or 100mph at less than 3000rpm. They have air conditioning too. And they handle very well - even without brake and suspension upgrades. The difference between them and you're elky is that they can go about four times as far on the same amount of fuel.
Now that the Porsche 911 has crept into this thread, I knew a guy who had a 1977 Carrera 3.0 - one of the air cooled ones. He's a very good driver and said it needed absolute concentration to drive it, something which not everyone has.
-
The oil burners my be getting quicker but I can only imagine owning one as like getting socks for Xmas.
Drop a 351c and an AOD tranny into a 1960s era English MK4 Zephyr with a 3.7:1 diff ratio shod with 14" rims and it'll lope along all day at 70mph at 2,000rpm.
But it won’t do 100mph at 3,000rpm, the tranny kicks down to 3rd at 90mph. But that’s not a problem, at a 100mph it's making 5,000rpm of Clevo music, sounding like an engine should, and not a hopped-up tractor
-
lot's of apples and oranges... what clarkson misses is the real automotive scene in America.
For most of us, cars are just raw material. I never have bought a new car and have never seen more than one model from either your-up or America at a time that looked like something I would buy... well maybe a couple of American ones right now intrigue me.
The chevelle and BMW comparrisson is strange.. the chevelle is 60's tech and the bimmer is 80's tech... upgrade the chevelle to 80's suspension and drivetrain and it will beat the bimmer in everything. Park both cars and no one will even look at the bimmer.
clarkson is for automobiles that he can purchase... he is a ruling class kind of guy that thinks only the well off.. the better people should have supercars. That is what makes him so...so... your-0-peeean and... so wrong.
Fastfwrd.. my elky may cruise at 2 grand but it will rev to over 6 grand through the gears and probly over 5 grand in 6th.. do the math. Do those diesels rev to 6 grand?
moot... the Lincoln does not really wallow.. in fact.. it gets around corners pretty fast.. it is perfect for most roads.. I have never had trouble following anyone around twisty roads... it is also, like I said, the most comfortable car I have ever driven. It is very roomy. It is also pretty boring to drive.
It would be perfect with a little better shocks and a blown 400 hp mustang motor for a little kick now and then. I paid like 12 grand for the car used. I have put 50k on it with no trouble at all. What could I possibly buy here that would compete with that?
I don't know what parts for your-0-peean cars cost over there but here... they are ridiculous... you can't even afford stock parts for em much less hot rod stuff.
The euro trash cars are already high strung.. not much left in em for the garage guy.
The main difference is.. cars are a fun sport here SEMA is a multi billion dollar a year industry catering to hot rod parts for cars... that would and could not exist in your-up with the raw material you have available.
The closest thing to the American car scene for the average hot rodder is Australia and... they drive on the wrong side of the road but... other than that... they get it.
To most of us the euro scene is just a bunch of class warfare with boring crap boxes on one end and the lords car on the other and no real way to do anything else.
lazs
-
Clarkson is a ruling class kind of guy? You really are clueless about our country and the other "euro-peons."
-
Originally posted by lazs2
lot's of apples and oranges... what clarkson misses is the real automotive scene in America.
No doubt … but that's not the point of the show. Discovery does shows like that. With the exception of one episode Top Gear and Clarkson have always been about the new standard cars that people can buy (and some they can't). The modding scene has never been one of his features.
Originally posted by lazs2
The chevelle and BMW comparrisson is strange.. the chevelle is 60's tech and the bimmer is 80's tech... upgrade the chevelle to 80's suspension and drivetrain and it will beat the bimmer in everything. Park both cars and no one will even look at the bimmer.
Actually the BMW is 1970's tech. That the picture is of an '80s example is incidental. You may compare it to '70s American cars if you like, but if I understand Mini D correctly pre-1968 is preferable.
Originally posted by lazs2
clarkson is for automobiles that he can purchase... he is a ruling class kind of guy that thinks only the well off.. the better people should have supercars. That is what makes him so...so... your-0-peeean and... so wrong.
Clearly you don't know him. Most of the cars that are tested on Top Gear are affordable for the majority of Europeans (Western Europe anyway).
Originally posted by lazs2
I don't know what parts for your-0-peean cars cost over there but here... they are ridiculous... you can't even afford stock parts for em much less hot rod stuff.
Depends on the car and what parts. There is a large market for after-market parts here. My BMW is lowered, stiffened, upgraded suspension parts (sway bar, shocks), sports exhaust and the engine is chipped and tuned for a modest increase in HP. For that I've spent about $1500, perhaps $2000 in parts. Another $1200 for new wheels with high-performance tires. I don't know if that is considered expensive where you are.
Originally posted by lazs2
To most of us the euro scene is just a bunch of class warfare with boring crap boxes on one end and the lords car on the other and no real way to do anything else.
I'm sure that's all you see, but I think you might be overlooking something. While there is little or no hotrod scene in Europe, the "euro scene" as you call it is known as the streetcar scene … you know, the kids with their noz-ed up ricers and VWs with outrageous body kits and paint. If you hadn't been older than dirt you would have gathered that the streetcar is the hotrod of today, and many of these "crap boxes" will out race any old school hotrod you care to mention.
A few pictures so you can see how out of touch you are: ;)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/show2_usc06dj.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/burnout_usc06dj.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/fiat_usc06dj.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/civic_usc06rick.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/flame_usc06dj.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/flame_usc06rick.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/extreme_usc06dj.jpg)
(http://www.ultimatestreetcar.co.uk/images/2006photos/inside_usc06dj.jpg)
There's even a small Fiat there for Eskimo to enjoy. These kids spend a lot and work a lot on their hobby, and I'm sure they enjoy their cars as much as you did and do with your old geezermobil. :)
-
Here's a Swedish streetcar. A completely insane 1971 Opel Manta with a Volvo 4-banger turboed and intercooled to 500+ hp. Mostly home built modifications.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5064355047013688839&q=opel+manta
Awesome!
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Fastfwrd.. my elky may cruise at 2 grand but it will rev to over 6 grand through the gears and probly over 5 grand in 6th.. do the math. Do those diesels rev to 6 grand?
Probably not, but do they need to? A gasoline powered engine reaches max torque somewhere around 3300rpm. A typical diesel might red line at 4500rpm, but will deliver max torque as low as 1800rpm. So from max torque to red line is about the same for both types of engine - about 2700rpm difference in each case.
I'm just reading about some of these eurodiesels - one German maker now has a 4.2 liter V8 turbo diesel which can reach 60mph in less than 6 secs and is speed limited to 155mph - which probably means it could go faster still. And - overall fuel consumption is 30mpg. What gas mileage do you get in the elky?
-
LOL 0-60 in 1.64 sec. :eek: (Edit: The Opel I mean.)
-
Here's a Norwegian old early 1990s BMW M5 with a 1000+ hp and 1000+ nm of torque. Also a lot of other "streetcars" on the circuit.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8071895731410147277
-
That BMW had real problems getting all those horses on to the road with only rear wheel drive. Really need 4x4 for a 1000 hp.
-
ok... gshlotz... so you admit that there is no hot rod scene and then you show some pics of econboxes modified and drag racing... we have those two... they are just a small part of our multi billion dollar industry.. I think we know a little more about it than you guys.
We can have a 1000 or more hp motor delivered to our homes or build on in the garage. Most don't but it is nothing to see 500 hp cars that guys making walmart wages own. You can buy a 500 hp crate motor for less than 5 grand.
excel gets it (like I said.. the aussies get it) they have been building real hot rods all along.
gshlotz (viking) points to a few euro hot rods and acts like it is a big deal... for every one he can find I can find 100 or more better performing American Hot Rods.
I may be wrong about the top gear guy... don't watch the show and have only seen the utube ones and every one had very expensive cars being shown.
fstfwrd... again..you missed the point... if both cars cruise at 2 grand... but one runs out of gas at 4500 and the other at 6500... which will have the higher top speed?
lazs
-
I haven't pointed to any "euro hotrods". I've shown you a few streetcars. 500 hp crate engines you say. Apt name for them since they weigh half a ton. Europeans can get 500 hp out of a vacuum cleaner, and so can the Nippons. ;) Did you see that Norwegian BMW? 1033 bhp from a 3.8 liter inline 6. That's engineering.
-
The Link is Dead
-
Originally posted by lazs2
fstfwrd... again..you missed the point... if both cars cruise at 2 grand... but one runs out of gas at 4500 and the other at 6500... which will have the higher top speed?
Oh, there was a point? Well you must be right, because I didn't see one.
I mentioned that a german automaker has a 4.2 liter tdi - I think it might only be 4.0 liter. But it doesn't matter. It is speed limited to 155mph, which means it could do more if they let it. I think that would be fast enough for 99.999% of the population.
As for your question - you said yourself earlier that your elky cannot make 6500rpm in top gear.
-
Originally posted by Choocha
The Link is Dead
The BMW one? It works fine for me. Try this one:
http://video.google.com/url?vidurl=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.google.com%2Fvideoplay%3Fdocid%3D-8071895731410147277&docid=-8071895731410147277&ev=v&esrc=gvpl&usg=AL29H21VoydULy4C7loh0k8GnoKTtEf6zQ
Or try opening Google Video and search for:
V.S Motor BMW E34 M5 1033bhp
-
I'm sorry the early E34 M5's had a 3.6 liter inline 6. Later they got a 3.8 liter V8. That M5 is probably the V8. My mistake.
Edit: No, I'm mistaken again. The 3.8 liter is also an i6.
-
My take on this thread:
So far Viking is in the lead with 50 post.
Bronk is a bit behind with 33,
Mini D is right on his tail with 27 posts,
lazs2 has 12,
and Neubob & FastFwd are tied at 11
-
:lol
-
Originally posted by Viking
I haven't pointed to any "euro hotrods". I've shown you a few streetcars. 500 hp crate engines you say. Apt name for them since they weigh half a ton. Europeans can get 500 hp out of a vacuum cleaner, and so can the Nippons. ;) Did you see that Norwegian BMW? 1033 bhp from a 3.8 liter inline 6. That's engineering.
The RB26DETT from Nissan Skyline GTR can make as much as 1000 horsepower... with just 2.6 liter engine + twin turbos. It is an everyday super car (yeah Japan loves to compete with their tuned $50,000 Supras, RX-7s, and Skylines against $500,000 euro supercars:p ). Skyline's 4WD system can make newbie drivers intro experts if you put them on the twisty roads. The 4WD ATTESSA system makes this the SAFEST sports car (err super car!) in the road today.
JUN Tuned R-33 GTR
Performance
0-60 mph: 2.8 sec
0-190 mph: 12 sec
TOP SPEED: 234 mph!!!
Sale Price: 50,000 pounds
Cost to built by JUN Tuners: 150,000 pounds
My friends... This is the DEFINITION of muscle car and hot rod for the 21st century!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=bdzTXJLxjaY
-
Yes the Skyline is awesome! Posted a nice picture of a black one above, with flames coming out of the exhaust. Pity the Nippons don't make it anymore. Edit: Oh wait! They do! :)
-
Originally posted by Viking
Europeans can get 500 hp out of a vacuum cleaner, and so can the Nippons.
i will call shenanigans. note: there is no "smiley"
-
There was one in my post.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Yes the Skyline is awesome! Posted a nice picture of a black one above, with flames coming out of the exhaust. Pity the Nippons don't make it anymore. Edit: Oh wait! They do! :)
Notice that the flames on the exhaust only come out when it shifts or down shifts. That must be the twin turbos doing the work.
The new Skyline (R-35) GTR will go on sale in 2009. I know the prototype R-35 GTR is smurfy but the production model will look very different. R-35 GTR will be sold as a Nissan around the world. The price is ~$70,000. Most people here will say "why the **** would i buy a $70,000 Nissan!?". They are missing the point. Nissan is making a car that will destroy other cars on the track that cost 3 times as much. I also suspect that the engine power will be low (just only around mid 400hp for a twin turbo V-6 or Inline 6) so that Tuners companies can have the option to tune this car safely up to ~1000hp
-
Originally posted by Viking
There was one in my post.
53
-
Lazs, that's what I meant.
Unless there is a rational basis to these comparisons, it will come down to taste, and as we can see, subtle differences in suspension character are almost enough to tip the scales for many of us.
Blonde, albino, brunette, bald, or redhead?
-
Lazs on a European-styled roundabout (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=16383fca22)
-
This is silly.. they have guys here selling 1200 to 1400 hp crate engines... we probly have more 500 hp motors built here than they have cars built in england in 10 years.
It is simply easier and cheaper to get gut wrenching Hp out of American cars and easier to drive and maintain and pay for em here once you do. The aberations viking/shlotz/luftwhiner shows and and others are so odd and rare that they are allmost nonexistent. Every city here has a booming performance industry and.... as I said... SEMA is a multibillion dollar industry.
If you can make 1000 hp with at twin turbo crap box... we can make 2000 with a real motor on twin turbos.
The aussies get it... nothing like the torque and sound of a V8
and fasfwd... why would I want a smelly little crapbox that my elky can do everything better at costing half as much to build and.... I can find it in a parking lot and... smelly diesel is more than gas here per gallon. gonna get worse too as the newest regs kick in.
viking/shlots/naziboy... hot rods are street cars.
neubob... that is funny... in aptos I did that around one in my elky and I "drift" onto the freeway from the on ramp a lot. It is an old old American tradition... In england I hated the roundabouts... I would try to find a gear in the crappy fiat that I could stay in (so I didn't have to shift) and dive into the thing while trying to read the signs and figure out what all the white markings (looked like alien crop circles) painted on the street meant.
lazs
-
so all you brits and your-0-peeans replying to this thread... what is your hot rod (street car) and what have you done to it? quarter mile times and 0-60? My guess is that most of you don't even know how to change the oil.
Come on.... what do you really drive? How many of you have a power to weight ratio of 10/1? 8/1? 6/1?
Check out what your car weighs... a lot of the little jap cars here are getting real close to 4000 lbs.
lazs
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
The aussies get it... nothing like the torque and sound of a V8
and fasfwd... why would I want a smelly little crapbox that my elky can do everything better at costing half as much to build and.... I can find it in a parking lot and... smelly diesel is more than gas here per gallon. gonna get worse too as the newest regs kick in.
Well LOL - that eurodiesel I spoke of IS a V8! And it's no little crapbox. Top speed is "only" 155mph, and that's not because it cannot rev to 6000, but because it's speed limited. Just sayin'...
-
Area I live UK, South Devon (Rural Tourist Area) i got a crappy 1.4 astra cheap banger, mainly because my old Renault Clio 1.8i Rsi got written off by somebody with no insurance whilst parked outside my house a few years back Grrrr!!!
But now I built my No Claims bonuses back up and cant afford to insure faster cars again I'll hopefully have a Subaru Impreza WRX Sportwagon soon as its fast, fun and practical for around here and not to expensive either for used ones. (and I just got a nice pay rise this year YAYYY!!)
Reasons why:
considering I live in South Devon and most my travel, either to visit my parents, or go to the beach for example will involve a road like this or narrower 80% of the time:
http://www.slowtrav.com/photos/showphoto.php?photo=1799&cat=621
add to this its probably damp for 8 moths of the year, so very slippy, damp becomes black ice during the night for 3 months, and when it is eventually dry, all the water has washed mud onto the roads over the winter which then becomes slippy dust.
So as you can see there is no place in my life for a 8ft wide 1000hp muscle car anyway, as you'd never get the power down anyway and even a little slide to the side would put you in the hedge (though i'd be keen to give one a go for a laugh.)
during the summer we get crap driving tourists that cant drive backwards in brand new cars they dont want to scratch and we end up with a very stop start, go, reverse, go, stop, swear, gesticulate at crap driver to go through the gap you've made by half driving into a hedge, then reverse again as the London bmw driver doesn't want to scratch his precious car, GRrrrrr
So the most practical and fun types of cars for this kinda area are the 4x4 Rally bred cars, or small hot hatches, small fast nimble quick breaking as you need to make that 50-200 yards to the next corner or passing place before the crappy tourist drives past it and cant reverse.
So If you tried to get a good 1/4 mile time here it would take a while as you'd spend half of it reversing back to a passing place anyway :-D
-
If I could afford one I'd own an M5. That being said I think Pontiac could probably build something comparable for less than half the price, which I would choose over the M5 even if I could afford the M5.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
It is simply easier and cheaper to get gut wrenching Hp out of American cars…
You know, you almost sound like you've actually tried it.
Originally posted by lazs2
The aberations viking/shlotz/luftwhiner shows and and others are so odd and rare that they are allmost nonexistent
Horse exhaust.
Originally posted by lazs2
Every city here has a booming performance industry…
Same here.
Originally posted by lazs2
If you can make 1000 hp with at twin turbo crap box... we can make 2000 with a real motor on twin turbos.
Lol, yeah. That must be why there are so many 2000 hp cars in America … wait, there aren't!
If production cars are any indicator then America eats Europe's dust. In 2005 the most powerful American production car, the Saleen S7 was on 25th place. There was even a Volkswagen more powerful than ANY American production car.
The 100 most powerful production cars in the world (up to 2005). What, 97 of them are European? Only 3 American? And the list includes the old muscle cars as well.
1. Bugatti EB 16.4 Veyron (2005) 1001
2. Porsche 962 Dauer (1992-1993) 730
3. Monte Carlo Centenaire GTB (1991-1992) 720
4. Edonis (2001) 715
5. McLaren F1 LM (1997-1997) 668
6. Ferrari Enzo (2003) 660
7. Koenigsegg CC8 S (2002) 655
8. McLaren F1 GTR (1996-1996) 636
9. McLaren F1 (1994-1997) 627
10. Mercedes Benz SLR (2004) 626
11. Mercedes Benz CLK GTR (1998-1998) 612
Porsche Carrera GT (2003) 612
Mercedes Benz W220 S65 AMG (2003) 612
Mercedes Benz C215 CL65 AMG (2004) 612
15. Bugatti EB 110 Supersport (1993-1995) 611
16. Ferrari F50 GT (1996-1996) 600
Volkswagen Nardo W12 (2002-2002) 600
Laraki Fulgura (2004) 600
19. Lamborghini Murcielago (2002) 580
20. Lamborghini Diablo GT (1999-2000) 575
21. Bugatti EB 110 (1992-1995) 560
22. Aston Martin Virage Vantage (1992-1999) 557
23. Pagani Zonda C12 S (2002) 555
Pagani Zonda Roadster (2003-2003) 555
25. Lamborghini Diablo 6.0 (2000-2001) 550
Pagani Zonda C12 S (2000-2001) 550
Maybach 57 (2002) 550
Maybach 62 (2002) 550
Bentley Continental GT (2003) 550
Saleen S7 (2002) 550
31. Jaguar XJ 220 (1992-1994) 549
32. Porsche 911 GT1 (1997-1998) 544
33. Lamborghini Diablo SV (1998-1999) 530
Lamborghini Diablo SV Roadster (1998-1999) 530
Lamborghini Diablo VT (1998-1999) 530
Lamborghini Diablo VT Roadster (1998-1999) 530
37. Mercedes Benz R129 SL73 AMG (1998-2001) 525
Lamborghini Diablo SE (1994-1996) 525
39. Ferrari F50 (1995-1996) 520
40. Lamborghini Diablo SV (1996-1998) 519
41. Ferrari 575M Maranello (2002) 515
Ferrari 575M Maranello F1 (2002) 515
43. Mercedes Benz W220 S55 AMG (2002) 500
Mercedes Benz W220 S55 AMG Limousine (2002) 500
Mercedes Benz W220 S600 Limousine (2002) 500
Lamborghini Gallardo (2003) 500
Dodge Viper SRT 10 (2003) 500
BMW E60 M5 (2005) 500
49. Lamborghini Diablo (1990-1998) 492
Lamborghini Diablo VT (1992-1998) 492
Lamborghini Diablo VT Roadster (1995-1998) 492
52. Ferrari 550 Maranello (1996-2002) 485
Ferrari 550 Barchetta Pininfarina (2000-2000) 485
54. Ferrari F40 (1987-1991) 478
55. Mercedes Benz R230 SL55 AMG (2002) 476
Mercedes Benz W211 E55 AMG (2003) 476
57. Aston Martin Virage 6.3 (1991-1991) 465
58. Porsche 911 GT2 (2001) 462
59. Rolls Royce Phantom (2003) 460
60. Lamborghini LM 002 (1984-1991) 455
Lamborghini Countach Quattrovalvole (1987-1989) 455
Lamborghini Countach SE 25 (1989-1990) 455
63. Porsche 911 Turbo S (1998-1998) 450
Porsche 959 (1986-1988) 450
Aston Martin Vanquish (2002) 450
Bentley Arnage T (2002) 450
Jaguar XJR 15 (1991-1991) 450
Audi A6 1997 RS6 (2002-2003) 450
Porsche Cayenne Turbo (2003) 450
Aston Martin DB9 (2004) 450
71. Ferrari 456 GT (1992-1997) 442
Ferrari 456 GTA (1996-1997) 442
Ferrari 456 M GT (1998-2003) 442
Ferrari 456 M GTA (1998-2003) 442
75. Ferrari F512 M (1994-1996) 440
Aston Martin DB7 GT (2003) 440
77. Aston Martin Zagato (1986-1988) 432
78. Porsche 911 GT2 (1995-1997) 430
79. Ferrari 512 tr (1992-1994) 428
80. Bentley Continental T (1996-2002) 426
Bentley Azure Mulliner (1999-2003) 426
Bentley Continental R Mulliner (1999-2002) 426
Bentley Continental T Mulliner (1996-2002) 426
Bentley Continental SC Mulliner (1998-2000) 426
85. Dodge Charger 426ci Hemi (1966-1967) 425
Dodge Charger 426ci Hemi (1968-1971) 425
87. Porsche 911 Turbo (2000) 420
Audi A8 1992 6.0 (2001-2002) 420
Audi A8 1992 L 6.0 (2001-2002) 420
Volkswagen Phaeton W12 (2002) 420
Aston Martin DB7 Vantage Volante (1999) 420
Aston Martin DB7 Vantage (1999) 420
93. TVR Cerbera 4.5 (1997) 414
94. Porsche 911 Turbo (1995-1998) 408
Venturi 400 GT (1993-2000) 408
Aston Martin V8 Vantage Volante (1983-1989) 408
Aston Martin V8 Vantage (1983-1989) 408
Mercedes Benz W140 600 SE (1991-1993) 408
Mercedes Benz W140 600 SEL (1991-1993) 408
Isdera Commendatore 112i (1993-1994) 408
Originally posted by lazs2
viking/shlots/naziboy... hot rods are street cars.
Lol yes of course they are you old-timer, but they are not "streetcars". Ask the kids in town with the tricked out ricers what a "streetcar" is.
Calling me a Nazi now? You must be getting desperate. :)
-
Man that list has some serious holes in it...
-
Originally posted by sluggish
Man that list has some serious holes in it...
Like what? Feel free to plug the holes.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Like what? Feel free to plug the holes.
The current saleen s7 is a 750 hp twin turbo.
link (http://www.rsportscars.com/eng/cars/saleen_s7.asp)
Better power to wieght ratio that the Veyron.
-
Yes I know. The list is from 2005. Now there would have been a couple more American cars on it like the new S7, Viper and Corvette z06.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Like what? Feel free to plug the holes.
Well for starters there's the1969 Corvette L88 with 460 hp, the 1971 Chevelle SS 454 with 450 hp and the 2007 Corvette Z06 with 500 hp. That's just off the top of my head. There should be at least 25 more American cors on that list. Caddy made a car with over 500 hp back in the day (I'm sure Laz knows what it is).
-
Like I said the list only goes to 2005, and only production cars too (minimum 100 made).
-
Production cars are really not a good indicator. The U.S. auto manufacturers are taxed based on thier average corporate gas mileage. There are no European auto makers who are taxed like that.
The U.S. automakers have plenty of incentive to product low power cars in order to keep thier average gas mileage high enough to not pay enormous federal taxes. It is this tax that drives the aftermarket. And drives it very well.
When a U.S. maker does do a high power car, it will typically limit its production so as not to upset its CAFE rating. The Ford GT and Shelby GT500 are good examples. Same with the Corvette Z06.
So, you cannot do an apples to apples comparison between the European production and the U.S. production when looking for who *can* produce the highest horsepower engines. The list really is only valid to those who do not want to tweak thier vehicles.
-
that list kinda proves lazs's point...all those cars are prohibitivly expensive.
a match to lazs's 69 el camino can be had for under 20 000 dollars.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Production cars are really not a good indicator. The U.S. auto manufacturers are taxed based on thier average corporate gas mileage.
Skuzzy - you are partially correct. In many parts of Europe, drivers are taxed based on the emission level (usually CO2) of their cars, therefore manufacturers are compelled to produce cars that meet certain emission standards and that usually mean lower power.
By the way, lets keep this argument in perspective. Lazs would have you believe that huge percentages of Americans are modifying their cars to have 500hp plus. They aren't. They are buying Toyota Camries and happy to leave the oily bits to their local stealership. Just like the European with his Renault Megane.
For 99% of people there's next to no difference between the reality of driving in America and driving in Europe. Other than Americans incorrectly believing sedans look better than hatchbacks ;)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
The U.S. auto manufacturers are taxed based on thier average corporate gas mileage. There are no European auto makers who are taxed like that.
Yes, that's probably because with Euro gas prices, the problem resolves itself, by which I mean that very few people can afford to run 10mpg cars, whereas in America with cheap(er) gas more people can.
Some years ago, the British company Jaguar was fined heavily by an American court - because the average gas mileage of their cars was too low to meet these US requirements. Jaguar paid up - it was better to pay the fine than to tarnish their image by producing say a 3-dr hatchback to improve the overall average gas mileage of their fleet of cars offered for sale. Maybe they could have built a hatchback under a different name, just as Lexus = Toyota, Accura = Honda etc.
-
This is really getting silly... as was pointed out, you can get twin turbo Mustangs right from the dealer... you can have your Z06 with a huffer on it and a factory warranty and have about 600 hp... both of those cars are affordable.... looks ast viking/schlotzs list of euro supercars.... the who's who of the ruling class are the only ones who can afford em.
You can build a car here with more hp than the most powerful euro supercar on the list for a tenth and..... you will be able to afford to drive it.
It is even more laughable to compare the euro modified scene for sheer size and money generated per year with Americas multi billion dollar one.
Some of you may not believe that there are a lot of 500 hp cars running around you but you are mistaken... sure.. there are a lot of metrosexuals driving camrays and such but somebody is buying all those billions of dollars worth of performance parts.
But then... no one answered my question.... How many of you who watch the show or who are talking about this stuff even change your own oil much less build a drivetrain or suspension?
lazs
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Production cars are really not a good indicator. The U.S. auto manufacturers are taxed based on thier average corporate gas mileage. There are no European auto makers who are taxed like that.
That's interesting, I didn't know that. In my country the consumers are taxed (at purchase). How much tax is determined mostly by engine displacement, HP and CO2 emissions. There is a big increase in tax for engines above 2 liters which explains why so many Euroboxes are only 2 liter or smaller. For most of the bigger/faster cars the tax can in fact be more than what the actual car costs … which I think is completely unreasonable and insane!
To give you an example: In 1991 I bought a BMW 525Ia (which I still got). I don't know how much you guys had to pay for one, but I paid $83,000 for mine. Insanity!
I love the car though.
Edit: Mind you I was talking about Norway, not Europe. Other European countries are far more reasonable.
-
Lol yes of course they are you old-timer, but they are not "streetcars". Ask the kids in town with the tricked out ricers what a "streetcar" is.
Well, honestly, can you just come out and say what you think the right definition is?
I don't know that mine is the correct one, but take what lazs is saying at face value: cheap, street legal cars that you can build yourself, that match the performance of european cars many times their price. How's that not a street car?
Are Caterhams not street cars?
-
Muscle car = focus on horsepower.
Sports car = a balance of power & handling and not much else.
-
Originally posted by moot
Well, honestly, can you just come out and say what you think the right definition is?
I don't know that mine is the correct one, but take what lazs is saying at face value: cheap, street legal cars that you can build yourself, that match the performance of european cars many times their price. How's that not a street car?
Are Caterhams not street cars?
MY definition of a street car is one that could be driven on the street legaly. In other words, it meets all the minimum standards required to be driven on public roads. This would be opposite a track car that could only be legaly driven on a race track.
Mark
-
Originally posted by moot
Well, honestly, can you just come out and say what you think the right definition is?
I don't know that mine is the correct one, but take what lazs is saying at face value: cheap, street legal cars that you can build yourself, that match the performance of european cars many times their price. How's that not a street car?
Are Caterhams not street cars?
Of course all street legal cars are street cars, but in this context the street scene is not normally connected with hotrods. At least not hereabouts. It may be a misinterpretation on my part with regard for what you consider a hotrod. Do you consider all tuned cars to be hotrods?
Here are a typical magazine that covers the "street scene":
(http://superstreetonline.com/toc/130_0702_toc_image.jpg)
These kinds of magazines do not normally include what I consider hotrods, but that may be the problem. What exactly is the definition of a hotrod? At least the local street car club people do not call their cars hotrods, but the AmCar club people sometimes do. Perhaps that's the difference; hotrods are the American "street scene"?
-
Viking,
I think it's a matter of symantics. I consider a hotrod any car that has been modified to perform much better than stock. Whether or not it's a street legal car or not doesn't matter. It has been modified in some form to make it faster, handle better, etc.
That is my interpretation of hotrod. Your mileage may vary :)
-
That's the thing, customizing your car to your ends is not about semantics, it is about function, or fashion, or both.
"The scene" could just as well be, instead of a car show audience, just you getting a kick out of 500hp crunching off slabs of road behind you, on your favorite echoing canyon roads in the middle of nowhere.
That's not something you can do so much, in europe, with european cars, on the same budget (etc) as in the US.
From what I've seen, anyway.
-
Ok. Then it's just a matter of old slang vs. new slang for the same thing. :)
-
Originally posted by moot
That's not something you can do so much, in europe, with european cars, on the same budget (etc) as in the US.
In your opinion why is that?
-
My impression is that it's just cheaper. Why it's cheaper, if it is, in fact, is another matter.. It will depend on at least the automotive industry as a whole.
But just considering the end product, american cars in general, they don't have the extra cost of miniaturization nor as much hand-made-quality luxury.
What I'm sure of is that it's not much of a contest between european and american performance/capita.
That's excluding the population bias of people who buy cars solely as transportation.
-
Muscle car on the left, a true "hotrod" on the right:
(http://www.petalumabgc.org/images/images/web-ctb-ag-cars%20at%20outlets.jpg)
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
Muscle car on the left, a true "hotrod" on the right:
(http://www.petalumabgc.org/images/images/web-ctb-ag-cars%20at%20outlets.jpg)
I will agree that I normaly envision a hotrod as being a '32 coupe or some such car of that era. The term is used also for a modified car, similar to the '55 Chevy though. I suppose it would depend a lot on the crowd you run around with. Muscle car makes me think more of the '60s and early '70s big engined factory cars. Modified or not.
But that's just me :D
Mark
-
Actually, the '55 would be considered a "street rod" rather than a hot rod.
But yeah, I more or less agree with ya Mark.
Hey, I'm with the "pony car" crowd:
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/P1000862.jpg)
-
That's a brilliant looking car Diablo! Only thing I would have changed is the wheels. I like them bigger.
Here's my old Bimmer:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1022_1168666452_bmw800x600.jpg)
Picture is two years old and the car wasn't lowered back then, and I've got new rear lights on it now (come spring I'll have to take some new pictures).
The one thing that amazes me is that with the exception of the rear wings that is the original 1991 paint. The car has never been in a garage, not even during our harsh winters.
I love that car ... but it has been expensive in speeding tickets. :)
-
DiabloTX, and for the uninitiated, that 55 Chevy in the photo is NOT a "muscle car".
The phrase "muscle car" has its roots in the early 60's, when Pontiac dropped a big block engine into, what was then, a small car. Thus any smallish car, with a big block motor is a "muscle car".
"Pony car" is your basic 2 door hardtop, which only has a backseat to fill the gap between the back of the front seats and the trunk. Typically the back seat is useless, unless it can be folded down. Horsepower is a bit irrelevant in this definition. This phrase came about more for the need to differentiate from "sports cars". In Europe, the auto purist would come unglued if he had to refer to a Mustang or Camaro as a "sports car".
"Hot rod", in the traditional sense, is an open wheel roadster, but has been used since those days to describe a car which has been modified from stock to include, but not neccessarily require, more horspower and/or better suspension.
All the above are designators for street cars. None apply to race cars. In this context, "race cars" are cars which cannot be legally driven on the street. All the above can be legally driven on the street.
Now Diablo, the 55 Chevy in your photo, is a hot rod. It's not a small car, scratch "muscle car". It has a practical back seat, scratch "pony car". It certainly is not a "sports car". Thus, it is a "hot rod".
"Street Rod", is one of the newer terms (all things being relative) in hot rodding and it really is the same as "hot rod", but considered a sub-category of "hot rod", for those who get confused about street legal cars versus race cars, or near-race cars.
-
Originally posted by Viking
That's a brilliant looking car Diablo!
There's a car in that picture?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by lazs2
This is really getting silly... as was pointed out, you can get twin turbo Mustangs right from the dealer... you can have your Z06 with a huffer on it and a factory warranty and have about 600 hp... both of those cars are affordable.... looks ast viking/schlotzs list of euro supercars.... the who's who of the ruling class are the only ones who can afford em.
You can build a car here with more hp than the most powerful euro supercar on the list for a tenth and..... you will be able to afford to drive it.
It is even more laughable to compare the euro modified scene for sheer size and money generated per year with Americas multi billion dollar one.
Some of you may not believe that there are a lot of 500 hp cars running around you but you are mistaken... sure.. there are a lot of metrosexuals driving camrays and such but somebody is buying all those billions of dollars worth of performance parts.
But then... no one answered my question.... How many of you who watch the show or who are talking about this stuff even change your own oil much less build a drivetrain or suspension?
lazs
I totally agree with you Lazs
I watch the show on tv when ever I can even though most of the cars reviewed don't have much relevance to me, through them being either too expensive or just too smurfy. My interests in cars generally lie elsewhere, but Top Gear is still interesting, often funny and good entertainment value.
Disposable income often has a lot to do with the amount of wrenching a person is prepared to do on their cars. Someone young and who is financial enough not to have to fix their own car when it breaks; or someone older and more affluent who wants the performance of a modified car can pay the pros to do the work for them, or they could just buy a factory car with the level of performance they want. But that's a generalization and not a rule. Myself and most of the petrol heads that I know do as much of the work on our cars as we can not so much to save money(although that is a benefit) but for the sheer enjoyment of it. It gets in your blood from the time you only could afford a pos clunker that you had to fix just to get from A to B.
The last car I worked on was my cousins HQ Holden (a legendary down under 1970s Aussie sedan) He swapped out the straight 6 drive train for a 383 Chev- TH350- 9 inch combination. The car was stripped back to the bare shell and completely rebuilt by my cousin myself and two mates. The only work we didn't do was the machining of the block and heads, everything else was done in his garage over 4 months of weekends mostly. These kind of builds can be a bit of a grind now and then when things don’t fit but overall it's a ton of fun and there's plenty of satisfaction when a 400+ hp cruiser built for not a lot of money rumbles out of the garage for the first time under it's own power.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
DiabloTX, and for the uninitiated, that 55 Chevy in the photo is NOT a "muscle car".
The phrase "muscle car" has its roots in the early 60's, when Pontiac dropped a big block engine into, what was then, a small car. Thus any smallish car, with a big block motor is a "muscle car".
"Pony car" is your basic 2 door hardtop, which only has a backseat to fill the gap between the back of the front seats and the trunk. Typically the back seat is useless, unless it can be folded down. Horsepower is a bit irrelevant in this definition. This phrase came about more for the need to differentiate from "sports cars". In Europe, the auto purist would come unglued if he had to refer to a Mustang or Camaro as a "sports car".
"Hot rod", in the traditional sense, is an open wheel roadster, but has been used since those days to describe a car which has been modified from stock to include, but not neccessarily require, more horspower and/or better suspension.
All the above are designators for street cars. None apply to race cars. In this context, "race cars" are cars which cannot be legally driven on the street. All the above can be legally driven on the street.
Now Diablo, the 55 Chevy in your photo, is a hot rod. It's not a small car, scratch "muscle car". It has a practical back seat, scratch "pony car". It certainly is not a "sports car". Thus, it is a "hot rod".
"Street Rod", is one of the newer terms (all things being relative) in hot rodding and it really is the same as "hot rod", but considered a sub-category of "hot rod", for those who get confused about street legal cars versus race cars, or near-race cars.
There you have it I guess. Tricked out euroboxes or ricers are apparently not hot rods.
-
Muscle Car-
(http://www.firsttraderegistry.com/forsale/pre80/chevy/71chevelle7/1971%20Chevelle%20SS%20Viper%20Blus%20014.jpg)
Pony Car-
(http://www.redwagonantiques.com/webphoto/64mustang.jpg)
Hot Rod-
(http://www.legendscarclub.com/MEMBER%20CARS/thomas_25_t_bucket.JPG)
-
Bald Rod
(http://newlondonjournal.blogspot.com/link.rod.steiger%5B1%5D.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Viking
There you have it I guess. Tricked out euroboxes or ricers are apparently not hot rods.
All those terms, except "sports car" were created in the U.S. for U.S. cars. And most of those terms were born in the 50's and 60's.
The cars from Europe which come close to fitting any of those terms are the BMW M-series, and the MB AMG's. But, to be honest, they really are too polished to wear the term 'hot rod' or 'muscle car'.
If you were an American and grew up with those terms, you would understand there are more visceral feelings equated with those terms. It's not just the car, or the engine, or the suspension. Most hot rods or muscle cars are rough around the edges. Put together on a budget. Somewhere under the hood is bailing wire, holding something on.
But there is also pride. I really do not think it is possible for anyone outside of the U.S. to really come to grips with the terms we have lavished on our cars and what those terms mean to us.
No offense to anyone outside of the U.S. intended, but these terms are truly meant for our sloppy, shaky, rattling, squeaky cars who can cover the 1/4 mile in under 12 seconds (or better). That is another thing. The 12 second barrier means something. If your car can break it, in street trim, then you have something to grin about.
Yes, there are many European and Japanese cars which can go faster than greased lightning. But none of them can do it with the audacity, panache, and disrespect of our big steel boxes on wheels.
-
Don't forget sport sedans.
Such as.
(http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/tb_mercury-lg.jpg)
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Viking
There you have it I guess. Tricked out euroboxes or ricers are apparently not hot rods.
I like how Skuzzy explained it. It makes sense and was put in a way I really hadn't thought of before.
Personaly, I consider the euroboxes and ricers as "hotrods" but they still are "different", not quite the same as the hopped up american iron.
Mark
-
What Skuzzy said.
Also, if you want a graphic example of why muscle cars are so much different than the imports, just bear through The Fast And The Furious when the Charger does a wheelie at the end of the movie on it's launch. It's not only ****in' cool lookin', it also has a purpose; weight transfer.
-
Dammit Skuzzy you're trying to end a marathon thread by making sensible and relevant points. Not fair:t But it just so happens I have an inkling of what makes American cars so fascinating. Someone round where I came from has an old tricked out yellow Chevy, probably a 57. He would pass the back of the house on the way home with that big old V8 growling. There is some kind of hollow spot in the laneway which amplifies the sound. The house virtually vibrates. You can feel it in your guts. When his friends are with him in their big American gas guzzlers. It's like an armoured division is passing. Incredible.
-
Ok.. the viking shlotzie guy doesn't get it.. his $82,000 bmw is proof of that... the clarkson show is perfect for his brand of people who don't get it.
Skuzzy, excel, cpxx , mark and a few others do get it.
The scene flourishes here and we are very lucky.. it flourishes here because it is an affordable thing.. we are lucky...
If Shelby would have built only a half dozen cobras then clarkson would have ignored em.
The show is perfect for people who don't know any better... for people who are only concerned about what they can buy with enough money and hope to gawd they never have to change the oil themselves.
There are dozens of shows that in the U.S. that would be boring to most people who care only about cars like they care about suits and shoes... They are very technical and hot rod oriented.
The defenition of hot rod is, and allways has been, morphing. Mostly tho.. I have no problem calling anything the owner modified to perform better a "hot rod". Their are limitiations of course... if more is spent on looks and comfort it is probly what we here call a "custom". I also don't mind the term....
Factory hot rod... this would cover some of the clarkson cars but especially the amg, roush and blown z06's running around.
That doesn't change the fact that gshlotz/viking is clueless and no fun to talk to about the scene.
Another thing that makes hot rods so cool is that there is always people that are around em in a parking lot.. they ignore cars costing 3 times as much to look at your hot rod... they smile when you fire it up and give you the thumbs up... you can tell they wish they could drive it or even ride in it.
I know the last is intangible but it is a big part of it.
lazs
-
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/b/b6/250px-Vector.jpg)
I'm surprised that this was never mentioned.
Or this:
(http://magicd.dk/images/vector%20wx3.jpg)
Old news, but still noteworthy.
-
Neubob, wasn't the W12 that preceded that one even more crazy?
Lazs, I think one of the things missed about the hot rod experience is the craftsmanship. Buying an AMG is like shopping for plastic-wrapped Ikea furniture online.. you don't even have a hand in creating what you're going to drive.
It's like choosing someone else's painting to hang in your home, rather than painting it yourself to fit perfectly with the rest of the surroundings.
Craftsmanship of that kind doesnt seem as widespread in Europe, but it's not inexistant either.
http://www.ducati-999.com
-
I'm not sure about the w12, moot.
According to this site, however, the Turbo V8 WX3 boasted 1000 HP. Seems a bit absurd, and it's certainly not the prettiest of the superexotics.
Vector (http://www.cartype.com/page.cfm?id=204&alph=ALL&dec=ALL)
-
The W8 is the one I was thinking of. I had confused the WX3's 1000hp and the W8's squarish bodywork into one car.
It's strange they both have published top speeds only 1mph apart, despite the 400hp difference. You'd think the WX would be a lot more efficient being curvier and almost twice as powerful..
-
I don't know a whole lot about drag coeffecients, so I can't tell you much about how one compares to the other aerodynamically. I do know that often, what you'd think is better ends up not being so.
The biggest difference, I suspect, is a combination of weight and gearing, though. Notice the 0-60 times for the W8 as compared to the WX3. ALmost a second off.
Either that or the stats on the site are way off--which is possible. I've heard drastically-differing top speeds quoted by varying sources for the elite super exotics.
-
Lol, here's a real economy car:
2700 lbs, 1180 HP
They're quoting a potential top speed of 273!!!
We're gonna have to wait until May to find out for sure.
ssc Aero (http://www.cartype.com/page.cfm?id=1886&alph=ALL&dec=ALL)
-
If there's one American car that could out perform any Euro-car, this is it:
(http://www.hollywood-diecast.com/MCCC%20batmobile.jpg)
-
Hey guys checkout the Top Gear footage of Roush Mustang.
JC loved it :D
http://youtube.com/watch?v=iq06eUNlyzI
-
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/CarmenCamaro.jpg)
-
That new Camaro looks so good I don't care what they put in it. I wan't one bad!
-
Originally posted by 1K3
Hey guys checkout the Top Gear footage of Roush Mustang.
JC loved it :D
http://youtube.com/watch?v=iq06eUNlyzI
That's not from Top Gear. It's from the Clarkson show that bears this thread's name.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
(http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g308/txflood77598/CarmenCamaro.jpg)
that is one good looking car
-
Originally posted by Viking
That new Camaro looks so good I don't care what they put in it. I wan't one bad!
I've been saying that about the Camaro/Firebird since 1977...when I was 10 years old.
Carmen Electra ain't bad either!
As a personal annecdote, my father told me that back then I would count the number of Camaros/Firebirds I saw no matter where we went. He said he got really tired of it but understood my passion. Here I am, about to turn 40, and I still am a fan. I guess that's brand loyalty for ya.
-
Hmmm... seems unlikely that eurocar and ricer makers would strive for such tags as "muscle car" or "hot rod", for various reasons
- those traits would be known as something else in their language(s) and there would be no exact translation
- why would they want to build a car designed for an American market when it's to be sold in their own country?
The Euros have said it, and shown evidence of their twisting roads. The American muscle car would not be much use on roads like those, especially with japanese/euro fuel prices.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
The Euros have said it, and shown evidence of their twisting roads. The American muscle car would not be much use on roads like those, especially with japanese/euro fuel prices.
autobahn?
-
Originally posted by john9001
autobahn?
What, Germany? They have no speed limit in many places, and there are plenty of German cars (eg. Merc, BMW) that can do 150+ mph. I was explaining to Lazs2 further up ^ that these high spec euro cars are speed limited to 155, but could do more... Even 3.0 V6 eurodiesels can nudge 150. A 4.0 V8 will romp past 150 and then top out at 155.
The difference is that these cars can average ~35mpg. How many American muscle cars/hot rods can average that? How many can average even 20mpg?
Oh yeah, then there's "chipping". Chipping is a process in which an engine is connected to a computer (a normal PC) through its diagnostic port. The computer "reprograms" or "remaps" the engine management chip to optimize performance. I knew someone who had this done, and he said the PC beeped 3 times - job done! His car instantly had an extra 25% hp. That was a gasoline car - he figures the boost for diesels can be 30% with a cut in fuel consumption thrown in. OK, maybe not the kind of engine mods that guys like Lazs2 do, but this is 2007...
-
ftfwd... the zo6 will do about 200mph and gets 26 mpg.. it is the champ.
most of the 150 mph cars here will get in the mid twenties.
But... what do you drive? You seem to have strong opinions. What is it that you like to drive on a daily basis?
many cars if not the majority here are limited by the computer. If you knew anything about the scene you would know that chips are a big seller. We have hot rod diesels here too but most are trucks.
diesel costs more than premium here and would in your-up if they cared about pollution... our standards for sulfur are way lower now. soon..... smog control devices will be required for diesel rigs and have to be inspected every 2 years... free ride is over for diesels for a while.
but fwd... what do you drive? what are you basing all your opinion on? I bet you have never driven or ridden in a pumped up big block vette or chevelle with hotchkiss or global west suspension... I bet you have never wrenched on a 30's ford roadster or hot rod.
Hell... I bet you don't even own one of those high dollar eurotrash supercars.
I bet you are just trying to justify driving a civic or prius.
lazs
-
Uhmm,..who gives a rat's tush about the gas mileage of a muscle car or hot rod anyway. I do not know any wrench-heads who even think about the gas mileage (including myself) when tweaking up thier ride.
And tweaking an engine with a computer is pretty easy, but a lot less fun than the old fashion way. And it is also less about the mechanic/driver as well. Today's engines and all the micro-managment with the various computers have really removed the mechanic from the equation and a large part of the *mystique* in tweaking an engine.
Now, anyone with enough money can buy thier horsepower in a nice tidy package. That's not hot-rodding, in the traditional sense.
-
I like the Ford GT bit.
The best the US has to offer is European in all but name. :aok
P.S. I don't think you are meant to take Jeremy Clarkson so seriously. And he does make a point about the differences between US and European roads. My drive to work is like a rally stage and alot of fun. How many Americans can say the same? My little supercharged 1.6l engine is all I need and would beat any leaf-sprung, under-engineered muscle car on my particular route.
As they say, it is horses for courses.
-
And conversely Dowding, your 1.6L super charged engine would get mauled on our open roads by any number of muscle cars and/or hot rods. Keep in mind, most muscle cars and hot rods here are not production vehicles.
-
My point exactly.
I see American muscle cars over here occasionally. They just look silly and out of place, clumsy and cumbersome.
However, if I lived in the States I wouldn't feel the same way and would probably try and own one. They are a good 'fit' on your side.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Uhmm,..who gives a rat's tush about the gas mileage of a muscle car or hot rod anyway. I do not know any wrench-heads who even think about the gas mileage (including myself) when tweaking up thier ride.
The answer to that is - people who, perhaps unlike yourself, have to pay around $7/gal for gasoline. Like many things being discussed in this thread, the various factors of vehicle ownership differ widely in different parts of the world.
And tweaking an engine with a computer is pretty easy, but a lot less fun than the old fashion way. And it is also less about the mechanic/driver as well. Today's engines and all the micro-managment with the various computers have really removed the mechanic from the equation and a large part of the *mystique* in tweaking an engine. Now, anyone with enough money can buy thier horsepower in a nice tidy package. That's not hot-rodding, in the traditional sense.
It's called progress. I guess there are still some drivers alive today who miss adjusting the ignition timing as they drive along.
-
And where in the U.S. do you pay $7 a gallon for gas?
I though we were talking about muscle cars and hot rods?
You can call it whatever you like to call it. It is not traditaional hot rodding when you hook a computer up and let it decide what is best for your car.
I am not opposed to technology. All I said was it is not traditional hot rodding and it takes away the mystique about it. There is a price for progress and in this particular niche, it happens to remove the man from the machine, which saddens me.
When I was racing my hot rods, I had several little things I did to my cars to help get a little more out of them. Those things cannot be done today. I miss them as they allowed me to put a little more *me* into the car.
I do not expect anyone who never had the chance to do that to understand.
-
That's the big problem about getting into cars so "late." I'm too young to appreciate the time and effort that went into the classic hot rods. I love working on my car, but a modern engine is an entirely different beast than the old iron. I can pull apart and rebuild an Ecotec, but I doubt I could do the same with the big block mucsle I love.
THe curse of growing up in a modern age. :cry
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
And where in the U.S. do you pay $7 a gallon for gas?
I though we were talking about muscle cars and hot rods?
Oh really? I thought we were talking about a TV programme produced by Jeremy Clarkson, which compares various Euro cars against American cars including "muscle cars" and "hot rods". I watched the video, and I must admit to being amazed when the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige beat the Roush Mustang muscle car.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Oh really? I thought we were talking about a TV programme produced by Jeremy Clarkson, which compares various Euro cars against American cars including "muscle cars" and "hot rods". I watched the video, and I must admit to being amazed when the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige beat the Roush Mustang muscle car.
Yea shame he didn't let Stig do laps in each car.
Would have been interesting lap times I bet.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
I watched the video, and I must admit to being amazed when the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige beat the Roush Mustang muscle car.
I'm not amazed. Mustang and Lutos are NOT the same class. That lotus is a 1000lb go-kart. That Roush Mustang belongs to the BMW M3 class. That Lotus should only compete with other go-karts such as the Toyota MR2, Honda S2000, and Porche Boxter. JC should have compared the Roush Mustang with the BMW M3 or the Mercedes AMG equivalent of the BMW M3/ I repeat, LOTUS and MUSTANG are not the same CLASS.
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Yea shame he didn't let Stig do laps in each car.
Would have been interesting lap times I bet.
Bronk
Repeat with me slooowly
Roush Mustang
and
Lotus
ARE NOT THE SAME CLASS
-
Quite correct - the Lotus outclassed the Roush Mustang - on that test.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
Repeat with me slooowly
Roush Mustang
and
Lotus
ARE NOT THE SAME CLASS
And it still would have been interesting to see the lap times done by the same driver.
That would have told a story of how good the Roush stang realy is.
Thats what YOU fail to comprehend.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Quite correct - the Lotus outclassed the Roush Mustang - on that test.
No the driver was outclassed.
Real test of lap times by the same driver would have told a story.
I'll bet he did that also, just like the BMW vs Viper with lap times.
But since that wouldn't make for good US bashing TV we'll just omit that part.
You guys are funny.
Bronk
-
The point is LUTOS and that ROUCH don't belong in the same class.
For a fair match, Lotus Estige should race a 1986 Toyota Corolla AE86 (hachi-roku). The Rouch Mustang should race the Skyline GTR.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EFvI8B6nU84
-
Originally posted by 1K3
The point is LUTOS and that ROUCH don't belong in the same class.
For a fair match, Lotus Estige should race a 1986 Toyota Corolla AE86 (hachi-roku). The Rouch Mustang should race the Skyline GTR.
1K3 I understand the class difference .
But since JC thinks they are, wouldn't single lap times be interesting?
Hmmmmm
Keep dancing around and not answer.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
Oh really? I thought we were talking about a TV programme produced by Jeremy Clarkson, which compares various Euro cars against American cars including "muscle cars" and "hot rods". I watched the video, and I must admit to being amazed when the 1.8 liter Lotus Exige beat the Roush Mustang muscle car.
That is how it started, but the current trend of the thread had changed. No surprise there. This is the O'Club.
Why would anyone be surprised a Lotus beat a Mustang? Why would they even be compared is the real question. There is not an American car made which qualifies to run against a Lotus.
Anyway. Comparing an American muscle car or hot rod to anything from Europe is cheesy. Nothing from Europe fits in the muscle car or hot rod class. And nothing from the U.S. fits the high strung nature of the exotic automobiles from Europe.
They both are there for different reasons and for different types of driving.
-
Originally posted by 1K3
The point is LUTOS and that ROUCH don't belong in the same class.
For a fair match, Lotus Estige should race a 1986 Toyota Corolla AE86 (hachi-roku). The Rouch Mustang should race the Skyline GTR.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EFvI8B6nU84
Nice video about the Roush Mustangs and that Skyline vs Corolla.
I learned something though, power alone is not the only indicator of how good the car can perform on track.
-
Bronk heres from the Tog Gear Series, each week, they give the cars to the Stig, on the same track, and see what he can do.
the Roush Mustangs not there unfortunatley, but many others:
http://www.topgear.com/content/tgonbbc2/laptimes/thestig/
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Anyway. Comparing an American muscle car or hot rod to anything from Europe is cheesy. Nothing from Europe fits in the muscle car or hot rod class. And nothing from the U.S. fits the high strung nature of the exotic automobiles from Europe.
They both are there for different reasons and for different types of driving.
Bingo! I knew we'd get there - in the end.
-
Originally posted by Blank
Bronk heres from the Tog Gear Series, each week, they give the cars to the Stig, on the same track, and see what he can do.
the Roush Mustangs not there unfortunatley, but many others:
http://www.topgear.com/content/tgonbbc2/laptimes/thestig/
Thanx Blank , wouldn't you be interested in what the Stig could do with it.
Especially since JC liked the car?
Bronk
-
This thread's starting to get a bit boring. It's basically US vs Euro car chauvinism. Let's mix in the Japanese cars. After all, Japanese cars trump them all :aok
(runs and hides)
-
And you still have no answer.
Did you take tap classes?
Bronk
-
how about some hard numbers?
http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/results.cgi?28/09/2003.ARDC.R3
Pos Car Entrant Driver Vehicle Cap CL Laps Race.Time Fastest...Lap
1 5 AUTOHAUS HAMILTON Bill Pye (NSW) Porsche 996 GT3 3600 A 5 8:24.1670 4 1:38.5196R
2 18 TATTERSALL'S William Adams (NSW) Robnell Cobra 302SC 5100 A 5 8:26.9265 4 1:39.2996r
3 43 CELERITY RACING Stephen Borness (NSW) Porsche 911 GT3 3598 A 5 8:27.6662 4 1:38.6101r
15 71 BRUGGONE MOTORSPORT Chris Van Bruggle (NSW) Lotus Exige 1800 B 5 9:24.1032 5 1:48.5260
looks like the mustang cobra 302SC finished second with a fastest lap of 1:38, the exige finished 15th , fastest lap of 1:48
-
Originally posted by Bronk
And you still have no answer.
Did you take tap classes?
Bronk
Geeez I think I already answered you, it would be interesting you ask me a new question:)
-
1K3 you answered with there in a different class.
I asked wouldn't lap times by the same driver be interesting (in a round about way)?
I don't care what race class they would be in.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
I asked wouldn't lap times by the same driver be interesting (in a round about way)?
Yeah it would be interesting, but to make it more "eyecandy" for the audience, they decided to race that Roush and Lotus similar to the Skyline vs Corolla video that i posted 10 posts above. It should not be a surprise that a go-kart Lotus will finish a lap earlier.
I've watched some 10 and 20+ year old Top Gear episodes on Youtube. The Top Gear in the past was 100% car review (and most would find it boring zzzzz). The new Top Gear is more like MTV's "Pimp My Ride".
-
Originally posted by 1K3
Yeah it would be interesting, but to make it more "eyecandy" for the audience, they decided to race that Roush and Lotus similar to the Skyline vs Corolla video that i posted 10 posts above. It should not be a surprise that a go-kart Lotus will finish a lap earlier.
I've watched some 10 and 20+ year old Top Gear episodes on Youtube. The Top Gear in the past was 100% car review (and most would find it boring zzzzz). The new Top Gear is more like MTV's "Pimp My Ride".
But 1K3 why was JC so quick to point out how the bmw and viper did solo?
Then not do the same of the roush and lotus?
I'll say it again, they did. But when the US ride did well we cant show em that now can we ?
Waiting for your next tap dance session.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by 1K3
Let's mix in the Japanese cars. After all, Japanese cars trump them all :aok
Not down here they don't :-)
(http://www.dragmasters.co.nz/images/01.jpg)
Drag Masters is American and Aussie V8s plus Brit V8 conversions versus the ricers in heads-up teams racing.
In the inaugural event last year the V8s stomped on the ricers 44 points to 7
This year the ricers were a little more reliable and didn't drop so much oil on the track but the V8s still won 30 to 25 :-)
linky to the elimination results:
http://championdragway.co.nz/id-8/item-73/file-C11EDAT.TXT
-
now THIS is interesting.
I like that photo, huge ram air-intake vs huge turbos :D
-
yawn
-
Originally posted by Excel1
(http://www.dragmasters.co.nz/images/01.jpg)
Are they humping their cars?
-
fastfwd... you never did tell us what cars you drive.
as for adjusting the timing and such while driving..you can do that with any car or....not. you can do it with a mechanical means or an electronic or a combination... what was your point?
I get the impression that you are disapointed that we don't have $7 a gallon gas.
Oh.. and any decent hot rod shop can make a car that will beat the lotus on any track you choose for less than half what the lotus costs.
Gas is cheap... that doesn't mean we can't squeeze hp out of small motors.. the cobalt 4 of GM is under development by hot rod guys and GM itself... it has made upwards to 2000 hp.
Hot Rod mag worked with GM to put a ls6 427 in a solstice... don't be surprised if you don't see one. I doubt that many cars can keep up with it on most tracks.
soooo... fastfwd... what do you drive... what really gets your blood pumping in a day to day driver?
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
as for adjusting the timing and such while driving..you can do that with any car or....not. you can do it with a mechanical means or an electronic or a combination... what was your point?
Well, skuzzy and perhaps yourself were harking back to the days when you could do much more maintainance on a car than you can on modern designs. I agree that this is true, and described it as "progress". Back in the 1920s some cars had manual advance/retard of the ignition, but I don't think you'd want to go back to that. The point is that technology has moved on. How sensitive you are to this depends on how old you are or how long you have been driving. You'd think it screwy to want to manually control the ignition timing, but younger drivers would think that your kind of maintainance was old hat.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
[B
soooo... fastfwd... what do you drive... what really gets your blood pumping in a day to day driver?
lazs [/B]
I see FF is another tap dancer.
Its a simple question why don't you answer.
Bronk
-
The thread is about (or at least began as) a discussion of Jeremy Clarkson's video, and a comparison between cars from different parts of the world. What I personally drive is not relevant to that discussion.
-
Because it provides insight to your reasoning.
What someone drive can in some cases tell a bit about them.
Last 3 cars. Mercury XR-5 , Taurus SHO, Buick Regal (with a V6).
Also have a Triumph TT 600 for summer use.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Because it provides insight to your reasoning.
What someone drive can in some cases tell a bit about them.
I think it has more to do with you and Lazs2 fishing for something to try to discredit what I've said.
-
fstfwd... I just believe that you have no experiance with any of the types of cars being discussed. Your remarks about the timing thing are pretty much proof of that. We have sophisticated distributors for hot rods that retard timing under boost for instance.
My guess is that you drive a prius.
lazs
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
The thread is about (or at least began as) a discussion of Jeremy Clarkson's video, and a comparison between cars from different parts of the world. What I personally drive is not relevant to that discussion.
Sure it is. There's no need to be ashamed of it.
But, it's not only what you drive... it's what you do. Do you work on cars? Do you repair your own cars? Do you try to get more performance out of your car with a wrench? Hell.. do you even have a garage that is actually bigger than your car?
It is normal to build cars into what you want in the U.S. It's been that way for some 60 years. The car itself is just a shell that you can do anything with. If I bought a 60's muscle car, I could do virtually anything I wanted to it with bolt on parts that are readily available. I could buy an 800 hp engine right off the shelf and drop it in and then build a rear end that would glue it to a 1/4 mile strip like nothing you could buy off of a showroom or I could buy a tubular suspension system that would stick it to a track with the best on the market today... all for a fraction of the cost of your average new (non-performance even) car. That's what we're used to over here. If you like windy roads, you build a car for them and go drive them (they're everywhere over here too... except in the deserts). If you want something that would tear across texas at 180, then you go build that. If you don't particularly care about either, then you just buy what you like and stick with it.
There is no glamorous cookie cutter car. There is no spectacular vehicle that is the end-all be-all of automotive engineering. There is only loose justification for overpriced metal.
-
yep.. that kinda distills it down.. Let's just say that clarksons lotus would do very badly in a baja or desert race. Let's just say that we have tons of raw material and a myriad of aftermarket parts that could build a very good baja race car in our garage. none of em will fit on the lotus tho.
lazs
-
Most people don't drive the car they want. They drive the car they need, or some compromise of the two. What people drive does not lend credit to their opinion, or detract from it. Not in my opinion anyway.
I've driven many American cars, and my favorite was my father's 1976 Trans-Am Firebird 400 ci, blown and nitroed to 600+ hp. Smoked the cops once in that car when I was 19 and immortal (read: stupid). Well, the cops drove a Volvo 245 so it didn't require much effort. The worst American car I've driven was my father's 1991 Ford Taurus station wagon (my father is an AmCar enthusiast you see). It was horrible, and after a couple of years the clear coat started flaking off so the car looked like it had a bad case of psoriasis. After that he turned to Mercedes for a few years, but his latest car is a Grand Voyager (Chrysler brand in Europe) which is an ok people mover, but again there are quality issues especially with the electrics.
I didn't buy the BMW because it was my dream car, but it was a nice compromise that I could afford at the time. My Isuzu pick-up truck certainly isn't my idea of a great car, but it get's the job done (the ones I don't want to put the Bimmer through).
Does that lend credit to my opinions? No. Nor does it detract from them. IMHO of course.
-
But viking you could easily afford a ladda and yet you own the BMW.
You buy what you like that is in your price range.
And it reflects your taste in auto. Not to mention if you do your own work.
I highly doubt you wrench any repairs or maintenance on that bimmer.
While I have made repairs on ALL of mine. Including the Triumph.
If I miss judged you on this my apologies. But I highly doubt it's needed.
Bronk
-
Better example buddy of mine is restoring a '78 formula 400.
He has no experience fixing body rot so he is paying to have it done.
But when It comes to suspension/drive train he is doing the work himself.
He could easily afford to have that done also.
Why doesn't he? Because he is a car guy.
Ohh his other 2 rides '68 GTO , and Dodge Dakota for a daily driver.
Why he has the GTO is self explanatory.
The Dakota is uses as a parts hauler/trailer puller.
The man is practical that way.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
But viking you could easily afford a ladda and yet you own the BMW.
You buy what you like that is in your price range.
In my case I had to buy two cars to satisfy my needs. Most people only buy one car. If I had to choose between the Bimmer and the Isuzu, I'd have to choose the Isuzu because of its practicality. I think you will find that in families most peple buy the car the wife wants. ;)
Originally posted by Bronk
I highly doubt you wrench any repairs or maintenance on that bimmer.
I don't have a garage and the weather here is very unstable, so I cannot embark on major repairs on my own. As for maintenance I do everything myself, with the notable exception of regular service/inspections, which I get done at the local BMW dealer. Having a certified BMW garage do the service is very important for the re-sell value here (although that is becoming less and less relevant now with the age of the car). The only major repair I've had to get done on the Bimmer is the transmission. Even the dealer had to send it to a specialist shop to get it fixed/serviced.
I'd love to do more of the work myself, but with no suitable place to work it is difficult. If I have to rent a place I can just as well use the same money to get someone professional to fix it.
Originally posted by Bronk
If I miss judged you on this my apologies.
No need to apologize either way. I see no shame in not having to work on my cars. Also whether or not a person works on his own car or not I find irrelevant, unless it is that person's car we are discussing. That you have worked on your Triumph hardly lends you any credit in a discussion about a Lotus vs. a Mustang (for example). IMHO.
-
Originally posted by Viking
I see no shame in not having to work on my cars. Also whether or not a person works on his own car or not I find irrelevant, unless it is that person's car we are discussing. That you have worked on your Triumph hardly lends you any credit in a discussion about a Lotus vs. a Mustang (for example). IMHO.
I agree with you entirely, Viking. This thread is about the Clarkson programme, and his comparison between various cars produced from different places around the world. I fail to see what I (or you, or anyone else) drive to be relevant to that discussion.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Are they humping their cars?
Definately not. They're phalli.. err cars, not sheep ;)
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
I agree with you entirely, Viking. This thread is about the Clarkson programme, and his comparison between various cars produced from different places around the world. I fail to see what I (or you, or anyone else) drive to be relevant to that discussion.
Then you haven't read many of viking's posts. Taking pride in never turning a wrench now? BWAHAHAHAHAHA! I bet he at least had to turn a screwedriver to get those tinted turnsignal lenses onto his car.
Clarkson's show was about stereotyping and trying to highlight those stereotypes. Does your choice in autos support those stereotypes? Do you own an engineering marvel that requires zero maintenance and outperforms anything made in America? Is your car tailored for EVERY road and does everything better than the cars made stateside? Well... what exactly do you own that supports Clarkson's findings, assumptions and exploitations? Is refusing to turn a wrench a typical European car owner stereotype?
Amazing how many things you completely ingore in leu of throwing the "original topic" back in as if it were some kind of defense.
-
To me it's not a matter of societal standing what car one drives. It does tell me something about a person if they work on it themselves enough to understand what makes cars tick. What modification will accomplish what item in the overall performance of their vehicle. Some of this is really very basic stuff but if you never work on a car you don't really have a grasp about what it's all about.
This thread started when someone posted a link to what I thought was a cool video of an individual comparing some cars and what He thought about them. To agree or disagree with what he says requires some knowledge of what he speaks of. We all drive cars and some of us drive some pretty nice stuff, but if you don't know what makes it tick then how can you make an intelligent statement about it? It would be like me making an intelligent statement about astronomy or physics, I have'nt worked in those areas so really don't have a clue. I have made my living working on cars and have modified mine to suit me. I have an idea of what makes cars tick.
Now...as a disclaimer: I rarely work on them anymore. The fun is out of it for me now. I essentialy got burned out of it when I made my living out of my hobby.
Mark
-
Even people who do not work on cars are still entitled to hold an opinion about what's the best car - for them. It's called freedom of choice.
Few people know how cell phones work, much less how to build or repair one. MiniD's argument is like saying that the vast majority of cell phone users are not entitled to voice an opinion about which they think is the best model - for them.
-
That is why there are qualified opinions, and unqualified opinions. It appears yours is an unqualified opinion, by choice.
-
Ooooh! Skuzzy from the top rope!
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
MiniD's argument is like saying that the vast majority of cell phone users are not entitled to voice an opinion about which they think is the best model - for them.
Actually, it's nothing like that.
The fact that you even equate automobiles to something as disposable as a cell phone shows what you actually think about automobiles. I suppose it's conditioning.
-
LOL.. won't even say what you drive fastfwd? come on... don't be a wuss.. you certainly can't use the excuse that it would diminish your opinion.. I don't think anyone puts much weight in your opinion at this point.
So tell us... what do you drive? A guy at work has a VW something turbo whatever.. he knows it is fast cause he has read all the reports on it.. he doesn't know how to open the hood on it tho. I proved to him the other day that he doesn't know what "fast" is. Another guy from these boards came to visit me in a subaru turbo thingie with the same attitude. I let him drive my car. It was "enlightening" for him. I can slam your head into the passenger window in a turn and keep it there. the car handles fine... better than you or I can use. some race car drivers here could point out the flaws but you would never notice...
you have no experiance.
viking/sclotzie.... I guess it is a matter of priorities.. Your priority is to spend 80 grand on a bmw and not have a home with a garage... mine would be a 10 k car and a home with a garage.. It does make a good excuse for doing nothing yourself past glancing under the hood from time to time or talking to mechanics or.... getting the old screwdriver out of the junk drawer in the kitchen and crossthreading and buggering the screws on some tinted turn signal lenses...
you say you get what the wife wants.. I say.. the wife gets what I tell her. She knows about as much about cars as you do... why should I let her pick one out? Like you.. she shouldn't even get out of the kitchen with a screwdriver.
She wants a car? for the women I always got late model mustangs or used cop cars with new paint and bilstiens. Safe and fast cars. For me... whatever I wanted or could afford at the time for raw material.... mostly el caminos tho since they did have a sorta truck bed. Healey to blast around in... Maybe a Harley or bmw motorcycle.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
That is why there are qualified opinions, and unqualified opinions. It appears yours is an unqualified opinion, by choice.
When it comes to Lotus vs. Roush Mustang or any of the other comparisons Clarkson made I bet most if not all posts in this thread express unqualified opinions.
Originally posted by lazs2
you say you get what the wife wants.. I say.. the wife gets what I tell her
Yes Lazs, we all know you're a caveman. No need to repeat yourself. ;)
-
Originally posted by Viking
When it comes to Lotus vs. Roush Mustang or any of the other comparisons Clarkson made I bet most if not all posts in this thread express unqualified opinions.
Yes Lazs, we all know you're a caveman. No need to repeat yourself. ;)
OK, since your stuck on the whole mustang thing. 17 years back I built an '82 GT mustang from 2 wrecked cars. It was a real project. The car was clipped that is to say front half from one,back half from another. My boss at the time had lots of experience at it so I worked under his supervision. I cut every spot weld and welded everything back myself.
I rebuilt the engine and most of the drive line. I rebuilt the suspension.
The platform now is a little different but no so much I couldn't do it again. If i had the resources.
I know what it takes to make a mustang go like stink. Not just in a straight line too.
So any time you wanna talk about what part you need to do it just ask.
:aok
Bronk
Edit: And that mustang because it had a salvage title . Went through a rigorous State inspection for safety. The Inspector at the time commented on the repairs as looking very professional . All done by a green 20 year old.
-
Originally posted by Viking
When it comes to Lotus vs. Roush Mustang or any of the other comparisons Clarkson made I bet most if not all posts in this thread express unqualified opinions.
In that specific context, it is probably true. The only Lotus I have raced was an Elise. And I only have time behind the wheel of a couple of project Mustangs, as well as a Mustang I built way back when (hmmm 1970, 71 maybe).
Nothing wrong with having an unqualified opinion. It is just a matter of placing it all in context.
-
Skuzzy wouldn't you say there are different degrees of "qualified opinion"?
Thats is to say general knowledge of the subject right down to the fine details of it?
Or in this case "I drive a car so I think X." to "I design and build project cars and this is how x works.".
Each of us can draw from personal experience and relate an knowledgeable opinion.
As far as the Roush VS Lotus goes.
Strip some of the fat off the Roush. IE AC, sound deadlining materials , Power everything. I know the lotus has none of that.
That Lotus would have it's hands full.
Certainly would make the cars more comparable .
But I'd still bet the stang is more friendly a daily driver than the lotus.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by lazs2
LOL.. won't even say what you drive fastfwd? come on... don't be a wuss.. you certainly can't use the excuse that it would diminish your opinion.. I don't think anyone puts much weight in your opinion at this point.
So true. It is funny when someone thinks avoiding a question like that makes them look anyting but silly.
I am betting prenus as well.
-
Bronk, I think you might have it backwards. As long as someone is providing thier opinion while staying in the realm of thier knowledge, then they are making a potentially qualified opinion.
I say 'potentially', as the basis or knowledge drawn on to make the opinion can be flawed.
There have been people on this board who state things in a manner to lead you to believe they are experts in the field. Then later on, you find they are anything but experts. They usually tip thier hand when confronted with a fact, they presume to be an opinion.
Fortunately, most people stay within thier realm of knowledge, for the most part. And that usually can lead to a fair exchange of ideas and opinions, where everyone learns something.
-
:aok
Kinda like a driver says "x car handles better than y.".
The engineer/designer says "x car handles better than Y and here is why. Blah blah blah .".
Both stay within their realm of knowledge.
Just trying to make sure I understand your way of thinking.
Bronk
-
Here's an example:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6152174861803588978
Clarkson starts off by looking at it from an engineer's point of view, then goes on to the driver's POV. :)
-
cost 300,000 pounds and they still havn't fixed the porsche oversteer problem.
-
What? Fix one of the most charming traditional characteristics of a Porsche? ;)
-
I thought understeer was its problem..
-
Naw. Porsche's traditional rear mounted engine makes them heavy in the arse, so said arse have a tendency to want to come out and play in the corners. That is preferable to under steering though.
-
Driving it like an FR (letting the fronts do the work, rather than playing with the rear's weight transfer to rotate into the bend) at corner entry tends to induce understeer, from what I've heard and semi-experienced.
Mid corner and past the apex are another story..
-
Originally posted by Mini D
Actually, it's nothing like that. The fact that you even equate automobiles to something as disposable as a cell phone shows what you actually think about automobiles. I suppose it's conditioning.
u shoudlant just throw away cel fones
it is littaring:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
-
Originally posted by Viking
Naw. Porsche's traditional rear mounted engine makes them heavy in the arse, so said arse have a tendency to want to come out and play in the corners. That is preferable to under steering though.
Oversteer is preferable to understeer, but Porsche suffers from a snap oversteer. The rear comes around almost instantly. This has always been the case. The 4wd cars reduce it, but the tendancy is still there.
Take the video, for example. You don't have 10-15 tries to get a corner right on the road.
If this were the Corvette, he'd be saying "Incredible track car, horrible for the roads... Americans just can't get it right" and you'd be loving it even more.
-
moot is not that far off...porche suffers from initial understeer changing to a rapid and uncontrollable oversteer. It makes some say the car is not drivable at the limits and others to say it is a "professionals" car.
So what do you drive fstfwd? It is a prius isn't it?
lazs
-
I dunno about profesional's, but you surely can't lead foot it as much as average cars, near the limit.
I agree though, that although you either like it, or don't, it's (rear engined, rear wheel drive as well made as Porsche's) definitely a staple of automotion.
I speculate FastFwd drives a pretty nondescript car.
-
Didn't he say some thing similar about the viper?
Tons of grip but till it lets go. The viper gives little to no warning when it does.
Sounds a bit like the Porsche.
Bronk
-
A European "axe murderer" perhaps. ;)
-
Originally posted by Viking
A European "axe murderer" perhaps. ;)
So why is the Viper an ax murder, but the Porsche a drivers car?
Bronk
-
Who said the Porsche was a "driver's car" (whatever that means)?
-
Originally posted by Viking
Who said the Porsche was a "driver's car" (whatever that means)?
Way to nit pick. JC nothing but praise for the Porsche. Even though it takes a high level of skill to ride it on the edge.
Yet the viper is an "ax murder" for the same traits.
Lemme guess you like to argue the definition of "IS".
A "driver's car" is one that that has the capabilities to go fast, either in a straight line or around corners. But this car requires a highly skilled driver to get that performance out of it.
Basically a car that has no computer assist driving aids. IE traction control stability control and the like.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Viking
Who said the Porsche was a "driver's car" (whatever that means)?
must be something like a "german road car" with "teutonic engineering".
-
That a German road car is Teutonic engineering is sort of a given. To me "driver's car" means the company wants to sell more of its new crap box's by making it sound sporty.
-
Originally posted by FastFwd
US cars = crap.
Sticking with my 1998 Honda.
Found this in another thread. Not sure why he would be happy to post what he drove in that thread and then not be so forthcoming in this thread. Odd that.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Found this in another thread. Not sure why he would be happy to post what he drove in that thread and then not be so forthcoming in this thread. Odd that.
lol thats almost a prenus.
-
Well I don't agree with his belief that US Cars = Crap but the '98 Honda is a good car. I wonder which model it is.
Mark
-
Originally posted by Viking
That a German road car is Teutonic engineering is sort of a given. To me "driver's car" means the company wants to sell more of its new crap box's by making it sound sporty.
Bronk's description of a drivers car is the description I'm familiar with.
It's the type of car that is harder to drive and requires more concentration and experience when it's driven hard, or maybe not even near ten/tenths, it depends on the car. Its usualy, but doesn't necessarily have to be a high performance machine . An inexperienced driver or unwary day dreamer is more likely to get caught out by a performance characteristic that is outside of what is considered normal.
-
I dunno, that would make the spin-happy testarossa a driver's car...
A driver's car sound like something focused on.. driving, aka the opposite of "people mover". Something that is built around an efficient compromise between power and handling.
I'm pretty sure there are a few outstanding examples of this sort of car, that are almost anemic in outright performance, but really do fit the bill.. I can't recall which one(s) it is at the moment, though.
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
Well I don't agree with his belief that US Cars = Crap but the '98 Honda is a good car. I wonder which model it is.
Mark
Compare to its contemporaries Honda accord (I-4/V-6 models) is the best out there. Accord was always on the top 10 for 20 years.
--------------------------
US cars may not be 100% crap but it's 66% crap because of GM and Daimler/Chrysler making pointless P.O.S. models. GM should downsize their division by getting rid of Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, SAAB, GMC, and Oldsmobile.
I like Ford's new strategy because they are trimming down the number of car models and increasing the quality at the same time. Check out the Ford Fusion. Fusion is head-2-head with Accord and Camry in quality.
-
Big corps should be left to make the cookie-cutter management board-designed people movers, and the rest of the brands should concentrate on their trademarks.
Triumph can't compete in sales numbers with Japanese mass-produced bikes, and yet they've made a big splash with "underdog" designs like their triple-powered 1050 S3, 675 sportbike, and RocketIII cruiser.
Fire the unions or whatever, and let the brands be true to themselves. Look at how small Ducati is.. compare the passion they light up in their fans compared to.. GM or Citroen.
Anyone heard of Citroen road cars worth mortgaging your house for?
-
Originally posted by moot
I dunno, that would make the spin-happy testarossa a driver's car...
A driver's car sound like something focused on.. driving, aka the opposite of "people mover". Something that is built around an efficient compromise between power and handling.
I'm pretty sure there are a few outstanding examples of this sort of car, that are almost anemic in outright performance, but really do fit the bill.. I can't recall which one(s) it is at the moment, though.
I don't disagree that a car that's designed from the drawing board with a good balance of power, handling and braking and has the emphasis on pure driving pleasure rather than people moving is by definition a drivers car.
But imo a true drivers car is one that’s not up to scratch by todays high standards in braking or has handling quirks or whatever and needs a higher level of driver expertise than a more balanced car to keep it shiny side up
If I was to pick out one car in the JC's video (thread title) that I consider to be a good example of a drivers car it would be the drum braked 1968 Mustang 390GT
-
I wonder if fastfwrd knows if his honda is front or rear wheel drive? Bet he has never changed the oil in it and I bet the person he sells it to won't think it's such a great car.
My whole point is that if you drive a honda around then maybe your opinions on performance cars and the whole performance car scene might not be to.... ah.. hands on?
It is even more certain that you would know nothing of the American hot rod scene other than to shake your fist impotently at them from the cramped little cabin of your honda as they roar by making your rear view mirror shake and fall down. I have nothing but contempt for such a persons opinion on the American modified vehicle scene.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I have nothing but contempt for such a persons opinion on the American modified vehicle scene.
You're contemptuous toward the opinions of others? Then why do you even care to read these forums, let alone post in this thread?
-
Originally posted by moot
I dunno, that would make the spin-happy testarossa a driver's car...
A driver's car sound like something focused on.. driving, aka the opposite of "people mover". Something that is built around an efficient compromise between power and handling.
I'm pretty sure there are a few outstanding examples of this sort of car, that are almost anemic in outright performance, but really do fit the bill.. I can't recall which one(s) it is at the moment, though.
Like I said Moot doesn't have to be any balance of power:handling.
You take a '64 Tbolt , this was a 10 second car from the factory.
Now your average joe he might be able to get it into the 12-13 second range.
Take the same guy and put him in one of these "supercars' and he will get much closer to the advertised 1/4 mile times.
The reason being all the driver assist. All the guy has to to is mash the throttle and hang on.
If a tire starts to spin traction control takes over. with no tire spin he doesn't have to worry about the car getting side ways.
If you were to try that in a Tbolt. The car would be sideways before you foot made it to the floor.
Bronk
-
viking /sclotzie... I did not say that I was contemptuous of the opinions of others...
I said that I had nothing but contempt for the opinion of someone who drove a honda and never turned a wrench when it came to performance and modified cars. He is tits on a boar in any such conversation... he shouldn't be giving his opinion he should be listening to others who have the experiance.
I would say you fit in this category as well. Nothing wrong with asking questions and saying what you might have heard or participating but to say that the people who have the real experiance are wrong is just plain stupid.
To talk about what hot rods are and what they can do..when you have never even ridden in one... is lame.
To talk about the modified scene when you don't even have a garage or any tools that don't fit in the siverware drawer is lame.
I don't know much about BMW's for instance but have driven a dozen or so and had to help change a $350 starter on one. My son owns a tire and suspension store and says the BMW stuff is pretty much overpriced junk and that even a mustang has longer lasting suspension parts... I have looked at what he is talking about on the rack.
I don't have a lot of experiance in this case so have refrained from talking about BMW's but.... I at least have some... probly more than a whole lot of BMW owners.
I have street raced and autocrossed and drag raced but don't pretend to know as much about racing as some of the experianced guys here do.
but to hear the opinions of some honda driver or some BMW owner who changed out his turn signal lenses...
puleeeese.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Viking
Then why do you even care to read these forums, let alone post in this thread?
Because if and when he runs into another car nut. They can discus the pro/con with someone knowledgeable on the topic.
FF has no business poking his nose into a topic he knows little about. If the man drives a honda and starts spouting off about performance cars. Especialyafter stating
US cars = crap.
Sticking with my 1998 Honda.
And I highly doubt he has all the ricer mods on that honda.
At least some of those guys have a clue about what it takes to "go fast".
FF is more worried about his gas mileage and saving the trees. He sounds POed Americans don't pay $7 a gallon for gas.
At least that's how he appears.
Bronk
-
well said bronk... about the old muscle cars and about your perception of fastfwds motives. It takes a different kind of driver to get a good quarter mile out of a standard trans car with a lot of HP and torque and no traction control compared to a slush box traction control one.
He seems to be a your-0-peean wanna be. He would love to see $7 a gallon gas so that more people were forced to drive the boring cars he is somehow forced to drive or.... chooses to drive.
I just think he hates individuals who thwart socialist utopian plans with their selfish ways.
lazs
-
They are still scratching there head on the 64 Tbolt. :D
Quik use the google force.
Bronk
-
Not the same but my cousin had a gallaxie with the 427 dual quad motor and 4 speed with 4.11 gears. was real fun on skinny old bias plys.
lazs
-
My uncle had the same car. He bought it when he got back from nam.
He said he spent more $ on rear tires than he did gas. My dad would borrow it and have to get tires before he brought it back. He said the car was insane, would break the tires loose at almost any speed.
Does this sound similar to your cousin's?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I would say you fit in this category as well. Nothing wrong with asking questions and saying what you might have heard or participating but to say that the people who have the real experiance are wrong is just plain stupid.
Now where have I done that in this thread?
Originally posted by lazs2
To talk about what hot rods are and what they can do..when you have never even ridden in one... is lame.
You presume to tell me what cars I've ridden in?
Originally posted by lazs2
To talk about the modified scene when you don't even have a garage or any tools that don't fit in the siverware drawer is lame.
You presume I don't have tools that won't fit "in the silverware drawer"?
You presume too much.
Originally posted by lazs2
but to hear the opinions of some honda driver or some BMW owner who changed out his turn signal lenses...
puleeeese.
Then why do you do it? You don't have to you know.
-
Originally posted by Viking
Then why do you do it? You don't have to you know.
OT
Yea lazs, be like Viking here and squelch opinions you don't like.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
OT
Yea lazs, be like Viking here and squelch opinions you don't like.
Bronk
Exactly, but be civil about it and let the person know.
-
Ahhh... that is what viking/gshlotz is doing.... being civilized? just seemed kinda pouty to me... sorta dishonest like coming here with a new handle..
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. It is nice to be able to put their opinion into perspective tho... their experiance and what they are currently doing plays heavily into this.
A honda driver talking about performance cars loses some credibility... a guy with a shop modified BMW and no garage talking about the modified scene loses at least as much.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Ahhh... that is what viking/gshlotz is doing.... being civilized? just seemed kinda pouty to me... sorta dishonest like coming here with a new handle..
lazs
OT
Kinda has to with the PNG gshlwahtever got. Since he has already proven he can't be civil enough to not be PNGed. I find it amusing he gives out tips on how to be. His ignore list is the equivalent of a kid sticking his fingers in his ears and yelling "I CAN"T HEAR YOU !!!".
Strange how fastfwd left the conversation once he was outed as a Honda driver.
Hopefully he figured out knowledge of econoboxes has no place in a high performance car discussion.
Bronk
-
I have never understood the ignore list....
Hard as it is to believe... there are people here who dislike what I say and say mean and insensitive things to me!
I pretty much know who and pretty much expect it... I can skim or read what they say... heck... sometimes they even have a point. Why would I need to put them on an ignore list? If nothing else... I can ignore them without a list.
lazs
-
lazs,
Regarding the ignore list, there are a couple of people who post here that are fairly painful to read. For example, anyone who habitually posts gratuitous mis-spelling, deliberately leaves out all punctuation, or otherwise makes it frankly difficult to even read what they're posting, gets ignored by me. If they can't take the time to even attempt to communicate intelligently, then it's a waste of my time trying to understand what they're saying. If I want to listen to gibberish, I'll volunteer to babysit infants.
Then there are the broken records. Those who beat their personal political drum to the absolute exclusion of any kind of logic or reason. I have only put one or two of these types on my ignore list, and that is only because after reading their posts for years, I've realized that they truly have nothing interesting or original to say. Again, there are only one or two people that I think fit this category... *cough*nash*cough*
So basically I disagree and think the ignore list has it's uses... It's a filtering tool, no different than adjusting the volume on your radio, changing the channel on the tv/radio, or using earplugs when working with power tools. Some stuff here is nothing more than noise, plain and simple.
-
You guys have no idea how much I envy you being able to use the ignore list.
-
You CAN use the ignore list skuzzy... You just won't get paid for reading the forums anymore, that's all :)
-
See Rule #5 (ok, let's stop beating that dead horse, thank you).
-
I'll let lazs and viking speak for themselves, but...
1. I personally feel no compulsion to tell someone I've squelched them. I'll probably attempt to inform the person of what I see as a flaw in how they present themselves before I squelch them, but I don't think that's really necessary.
2. My read on what viking said is basically that when you think you've reached an impasse in a discussion with someone, it is courteous to inform them that you don't think there is any point to continuing the discussion/argument. In my opinion though, the only time this really leads to an ignore situation is if you find that you never ever have a productive discussion with that person, or if that person is a one-topic sort of person and you find the topic boring or have already reached that impasse with that person on the topic they keep returning to.
Lazs has been one of the more consistent and contributory posters here, and although he and I don't see eye to eye on some topics, he certainly does not present himself as an irrational one-topic internet persona so I wouldn't dream of squelching lazs over something so trivial as a simple disagreement. I think that was lazs' point.
Er....
Doh! (the post I was replying to got skuzzified!)
-
Originally posted by eagl
You CAN use the ignore list skuzzy... You just won't get paid for reading the forums anymore, that's all :)
Almost got it. If I used the ignore list, I would no longer be employed at HTC. :)
-
Yea, you got it ;)
-
Why the ignore sub-topic is actually ON topic...
The original thread is about some a tv personality who plays up anti-american sentiment to make his auto review tv show more popular in the UK. The idea that his opinion is worth less, possibly to the point of ignoring him entirely, is relevant. By extension, that's pretty much what we're talking about with forum ignores.
No, this isn't back-seat moderation :) I'm just saying...
-
Lucidity is such a curse, huh ?
Bronk, "efficient" was the key word.
Were a car's design such that extracting performance from it was not only counter-intuitive (which proper pilot-craft takes care of), but counter-productive, it would make for a pretty odd "driver's car".
e.g. a well-handling mini-car on a fast, sweeping road, or a TVR Speed12 in Monaco or San Francisco.
A realistic example for me, is powerful FF cars, but that's just me.
-
eagl... I guess it was the informing everyone in your sig thing that got me.. I see nothing wrong with ignoring someone but... nothing right about it either.
I mean... I can see who is posting.. I can skim through it in a sec. There might be a neat pic or cartoon or link... why not check it out?
Thank you for reading what I have to say from time to time. I admit that I am somewhat pragmatic and tend to distill things to their basic black and white. It just works for me.
I do tend to get a little angry with the academics who talk about gun control from a position of thousands of miles away from here and as a subject of some ancient royalty system.... or people talking about cars who drive a honda or whatever... telling me that I don't know what is good for me or that my experiance is less worthy than their research.
They have never been in a situation where a gun saved them or someone around em.. One time and it all becomes crystal clear what it is all about...
they have never drifted a muscle car unto the freeway sideways at 70 mph... they have never rode in a 32 ford with a big block in it. till you have... you don't know what is meant when we talk about the experiance... till you built one... you can't talk to me about the modified scene here. we can discuss it but... gonna have to take the word of the people who have done it on what it is all about.
Maybe it is smug to say that living 5 decades gives you some perspective on what it was like when people minded their own business more and whether that was good or not... on whether it is evil to have creeping socialism and the loss of indivduality...
oh... I admit that my spelling and punctuation is just plain terrible. Hopefully.. enough gets through that I make my point.
lazs