don't wanna drive anymore?
- Thread starter ohmygodwhathaveyoudone
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2004
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
AdamW said:
Does the thin metal ssue still hold today? I mean if the metal is galvanised does its gauge have much bearing on rust etc.
AdamW said:
Totally agree...devaluation is much due to perception. Okay, so you get a door on a BMW or Merc that makes a reassuring clunk when it closes, doesn't mean that they don't go t1ts-up when you're stuck in a jam on the M25. I think the reliability of Mercs has declined inexorably. Friend of mine has a ML320 (four wheel drive job): extremely poorly assembled and door mirror shroud decided to pop off at an earth shattering 45mph. Is it 'cos they produce so many more models than ten years ago or more or is it 'cos they amalgamated with Chrysler? Or should neither of these issues matter? Actually I always thought Chryslers to be pretty good vehicles when I was in the US.
AdamW said:
It's weird that a car whose second hand value just capitulates is so difficult to source second hand. Or maybe that is it; perhaps there are canny folk waiting to pounce on the right motor in anticipation of the massive saving on the new price and bang...it's been bought.
AdamW said:Not sure if the 3.5 GTA was built with 4wd, but the Rover 75/MG ZT V8 is rear-wheel drive. There are front-wheel drive 5+ litre V8-powered cars in the US, that would be *ahem* interesting to drive!
Yes, you are quite right about the Rover. What I should have said was that Rover, knowing they were genner bung in a big Detroit spinner abandoned FWD for RWD. Might be that such a big block precludes FWD? Wonder why they didn't go for an engine with a bit more class?
Actually the 5 litre FWD jobs ain't particularly interesting. Most of the vehicles are massively overweight and the engines really quite asthmatic. Bit like the people that drive them.
I would imagine one reason that Rover-MG chose the Ford V8 is because of the amount of tuning equipment already available for it. It is something like 260BHP in the standard 75/ZT, 320BHP in the XPower Coupe thingy. Allegedly if you fit all the MG-approved modifications you can get 960bhp out of it (that includes a massive supercharger by the way, and I suspect a nitrous kit too!)
I have heard different stories about the RWD conversion. First I heard that the 75 uses the same floorpan as the 5-series (presumably the one just gone). The 5-series being rwd, building rwd Rovers was easy.
However I have also heard that it was a unique floorpan and had to be modified extensively for rwd.
Perhaps people saw this coming so didn't bother buying them! Or it could be that people are not willing to trade in their 156s against a new car if the trade-in value is 50% of what the car cost them 12 months ago! And then of course there is the reason that people will snap them up!
I still want one! I reckon they must be pretty stealthy. After all, it doesn't look like a particularly quick car to me, yet with a 0-62 time of 6.2s, it is reasonable to assume that 0-60 takes 6 seconds dead. I would have one just for the "no-one would stand a chance if I cared to race them from the lights" factor.
For such a car, I can see that a "pro" would be, never having that situation when overtaking Mr S. Lowcoach on a long straight, where he has a fit of rage and decides to accelerate thus leaving you on the wrong side of the road for longer than you would like. But, a "con" would be that you may apply your new-found overtaking confidence too liberally and start doing risky manoeuvres. Perhaps I should see about passing my IAM advanced test before getting something hot, for my own sake!
I have heard different stories about the RWD conversion. First I heard that the 75 uses the same floorpan as the 5-series (presumably the one just gone). The 5-series being rwd, building rwd Rovers was easy.
However I have also heard that it was a unique floorpan and had to be modified extensively for rwd.
Perhaps people saw this coming so didn't bother buying them! Or it could be that people are not willing to trade in their 156s against a new car if the trade-in value is 50% of what the car cost them 12 months ago! And then of course there is the reason that people will snap them up!
I still want one! I reckon they must be pretty stealthy. After all, it doesn't look like a particularly quick car to me, yet with a 0-62 time of 6.2s, it is reasonable to assume that 0-60 takes 6 seconds dead. I would have one just for the "no-one would stand a chance if I cared to race them from the lights" factor.
For such a car, I can see that a "pro" would be, never having that situation when overtaking Mr S. Lowcoach on a long straight, where he has a fit of rage and decides to accelerate thus leaving you on the wrong side of the road for longer than you would like. But, a "con" would be that you may apply your new-found overtaking confidence too liberally and start doing risky manoeuvres. Perhaps I should see about passing my IAM advanced test before getting something hot, for my own sake!
Sponsored Links
is it a DIRT BIKE
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2004
- Messages
- 1,061
- Reaction score
- 68
- Country
AdamW said:
Already available for it in the US, do you mean? Are they planning to market this model in the US? Would make sense with as you say a US indigenous engine.
It is a similar idea as was done in a car owned by an ex-boss of mine. He had a motor called a De Tomaso Pantera. Dunno if anyone is familiar with these, but Mr De Tomaso was a Brazilian steel magnate who decided it would be commerciallly viable to buy the then ailing Maserati company (possibly from Citroen, I can't quite remember) and replace complex alloy Maser V8s with straightforward cast-iron pushrod Ford V8s. Change the name to De Tomaso whatever and Roberto's your uncle! This would negate the need for specialist servicing as you could have your car looked after by Cleavis and his spanner in Sickbag, Arkansas. Of course the Masers would continue much as ever for Europe. This idea worked for quite a few years but then DT all went t1ts-up, indeed I believe Mr DT was done for fraud in the end. That said, I don't think DT's were held in very high esteem by the motoring press. The putative view being that the extra weight of the Ford blocks b*ll*cksed up the handling and that they were deemed a style over substance extravagance. Explains why the boss had one.
AdamW said:
I have heard all of these stories, too. Also heard that the 75 diesel is a BMW unit. If so, is it the one that goes in the Range Rover?....heard it's a bit weedy in that, but then it's a whopping great vehicle.
AdamW said:
Maybe it is reasonable to conclude then that Alfa owners, in the knowledge of the ensuing depreciation, the purchase will be for a subsatntially longer period than say a 3 series. Rock solid residuals may attract short termists in the knowledge that they will recoup most of their investment.
The IAM test does evidently have some positive impact on your susequent insurance premiums so is probably well worth doing. Doubt if you will learn anything you don't already know about oversteer though?
ohmygodwhathaveyoudone said:
My father was considering an Evo as his next daily driver, but something drew his eye in the detailed specifications.
Yes, a 0-62 time of 4.4s is quite impressive, as is the fact it will only get about 150 miles out of a 55l tank if driven in a spirited fashion... but look near the bottom, under "Service Intervals". Yes, in these days where a 10k mile interval is now seen as positively unreliable, and 20K is quite common, the Evo VIII has a service interval of... 4,500 miles! Or 6 months, which sooner. As he drives about 20K a year, the Evo has now fallen off the list!
I've a new evo, one of only ten models of that spec in the uk.
Yep the running costs are extortion!
I only have to start the b loody thing and the fuel gauge falls into the red!
I rarely use it and have covered only a very small amount of miles since I got it brand new, but when I feel like scaring myself ****less and p issing off spotty teenagers in saxo's, off comes the dust cover and out she comes.
When I drive it I spend most of my time watching cars reverse out of my rear view mirror, but they pass me when I have to stop half a mile down the road to refill it
Top car, I love it, I know it costs a mortgage to keep it on the road but for pound to pound you will never get a car of such performance and fun factor for the same cash.
It's class!
Yep the running costs are extortion!
I only have to start the b loody thing and the fuel gauge falls into the red!
I rarely use it and have covered only a very small amount of miles since I got it brand new, but when I feel like scaring myself ****less and p issing off spotty teenagers in saxo's, off comes the dust cover and out she comes.
When I drive it I spend most of my time watching cars reverse out of my rear view mirror, but they pass me when I have to stop half a mile down the road to refill it
Top car, I love it, I know it costs a mortgage to keep it on the road but for pound to pound you will never get a car of such performance and fun factor for the same cash.
It's class!
knackers said:
You could probably p*ss off people in M3s and lesser Porsche's too!
Did you see Top Gear last week? They were racing today's cars against those of yesteryear. Mitsy beat an Audi Quattro rally car of the mid-1980s in a timed run around the track, impressive! They didn't say which Evo it was, but I would imagine it was the 350bhp model.
Yep it does beat most of the expensive brands, but then again owning a large purpose built garage specialising in the building, tuning and repairing of top spec rally cars helps a bit on the performance side of things.
I've Hannu Mikkola's ex works £100k Audi at the moment for some work and thats a right flyer indeed.
It doesn't beat the pair of wrc focus we look after though, one is Colin Mcrae's last season car costing £330k+vat and the other one is a brand new 2004 model, a snip at £550k+vat!
Evo's are where we do the most work though and are one of only a handfull of places in the uk that can sort them properly.
Adam as your quite a car junkie if you would like to send me your email addy I'll send some pics over for you m8 to have a look over.
All the best m8
knackers
I've Hannu Mikkola's ex works £100k Audi at the moment for some work and thats a right flyer indeed.
It doesn't beat the pair of wrc focus we look after though, one is Colin Mcrae's last season car costing £330k+vat and the other one is a brand new 2004 model, a snip at £550k+vat!
Evo's are where we do the most work though and are one of only a handfull of places in the uk that can sort them properly.
Adam as your quite a car junkie if you would like to send me your email addy I'll send some pics over for you m8 to have a look over.
All the best m8
knackers
I guess the WRC version handles nothing like the 1.8 and 1.6 Focuses, otherwise they would always end up in a ditch! Sorry, I have an acute case of Focuphobia: in 2002 I made the mistake of believing a motoring journalist who said they handled best in their class... seeing as I drive an Astra I figured the equivalent Focus would therefore handle better but let's just say, it doesn't!
Although to be fair, it is built sturdily, the resulting interraction with a kerb was only noticeable above 50mph however I generally prefer to negotiate roundabouts without bouncing off the kerb! D'oh! I hear the new Focus drives really rather well, it will be interesting to compare and contrast with the outgoing model.
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2005
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
0 to 60 in 6 seconds, wots the point when you cant get were your going and yer always stuck in traffic jams, wasted cash I'd say
Sponsored Links
