Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«10 »
  • Post
  • Reply
InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


VikingSkull posted:

Seeing a TVR in the US is like meeting Jesus.
I think you meant "Driving" and "In the wet" there.

Actually, they're supposed to handle pretty well, but when you stick 420bhp into a 2,500lb RWD car built by people who thing traction control is for poofs, you can be pretty certain that life isn't going to be boring. What always made an impression on me is an old Clarkson video (yes, yes, I know) where he did a comparison drag race of different supercars - the Cerbera cleared a standing mile in thirty seconds.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Throatwarbler posted:

In non-Mustang related Ford news, Ford resurrects the RS500 nameplate.


They pull the motherfucking RS500 designation out of storage to go on a motherfucking FWD Focus. I don't give a poo poo how quick it is, that's sacrilege.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


kimbo305 posted:

I dunno why they couldn't just call it the RS350.
In fairness, they are building 500 of them, so at least they're keeping with the origins of the name, but it's like the stupid girlie-pants excuse for an Escort RS2000 they spat out in the '90s.

Build something "RS500" if you want, but it should be a homologation special - in this case, preferably based on the WRC car. Not a bit of tweaking and a paintjob to upsell "exclusivity". Also, given that they supposedly get this extra power without impacting either emissions of fuel consumption ( ), why can't they just upgrade the standard car, or sell it as a premium pack?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


mobby_6kl posted:

If the acceleration figures are to be trusted, the extra 125hp translate into a 0.5 second advantage over the Sierra, so I'm curious how that would work out in the real world. Also lol it's only 0.1 seconds faster (if that) than the Cossie Escort, though I'm using metric wikipedia numbers as it's impossible to find stock performances anywhere.
There's probably only about five 3-door Sierras left for which standard performance numbers are relevant anyway. The basic ones are easily tuned, and the RS500s are designed to be. As in they come with a second set of injectors plumbed in and ready. 3-doors really don't weigh an awful lot, either.

quote:

[beaten like a fwd econobox with too much power]
Not all RS cars were AWD though, even the "proper" ones. The original Escorts as well as the early Sierras were RWD, IIRC.
All the original Mk1/Mk2 RS 'Scorts are RWD, as are the 3-door and early 4-door Sierras. Later 4-door Sierras and the Escort Cosworths are AWD - the Escort is really a cut-and-shut job on a Sierra floorpan, the first "actual" Escort with AWD being the Mk5 RS2000, which had it as an option.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Re the GX460 oversteer - how come the Land Cruiser's ok? Is it different suspension settings, tyres, drivetrain setup, what?

I'm a little surprised that the stability control wasn't helping much - I thought most modern systems could brake individual wheels, which should let it pull the thing back in.

Either way, I hope someone expands on this test to demonstrate high speed Scandinavian flicks in a full-size SUV, because that sounds awesomely entertaining.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


MrKatharsis posted:

It's a 4-Runner clone, not a Land Cruiser clone. The 4-Runner passed the doriftu test with no problems, leaving software as the primary suspect.
Sorry, translation error here - I'm a Brit, we don't get the 4Runner, but we do get the Land Cruiser Prado, which is also related.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Dolphin posted:

We tried using a Discovery for field research. The door locks have emergency secondary locks that prevent the doors from being unlocked FROM THE INSIDE OF THE VEHICLE.
You mean child locks? Or deadlocks?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


frozenphil posted:

No, it's because it costs $150k for a car that doesn't look better or perform better than a $30k car. It's not like it's even some exotic car people will buy for penis waving because everyone who sees it will think it's a riced out 3 series. The M3 GTS just doesn't make any sense to me.
If you're a real hardcore, must-save-weight, all-about-the-driving experience type looking for the M3, I'd expect you to be buying a real one anyway.

No matter who the manufacturer is, I get a little irritated with the whole "It's a lightweight special, yeah. We stuck a few extra holes in it, made some bits out of carbon fibre and would appreciate you giving us another twenty/thirty grand for the privilege. Don't worry, it's still got a stereo/aircon/traction control/leather/electric windows".

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


FedEx posted:

is the M600 not a hardcore, driver focused evolution of their earlier and much cheaper models?
No. It's a more-than-three-times-the-price, completely-new-design, now-our-customer-base-will-all-buy-Farbios-instead model.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Regarding the Hyundai "don't visit us, we'll visit you", I think it's a fantastic idea. Even though you still want people to be able to visit a showroom to choose their car and look at accessories or whatever, this gives you the opportunity to completely divorce the service department and have it in a crappy industrial complex on the outskirts, while your showroom can be a smaller "boutique" affair that you can site in areas previously not viable (anyone visiting London, check out the setups for high-end dealerships in Park Lane, or Bristol's showroom, for example).

Nowadays, there really is no reason not to run things like this, finally moving away from the early model where you bought cars from a nearby mechanic's garage that evolved into the current style of dealership. The iPad itself is a good example - you go to a big, shiny, high-rent showroom to play with one, buy it, and ask for advice, but should anything actually need physically doing to it, it'll get shipped off somewhere else to be dealt with. No reason why a car should be different, and you can already get this pick up and drop off service from some places anyway.

Hyundai's brand image is a separate issue, but I wouldn't be surprised if it works out just fine after a little time - Skoda, for example, weathered the storm of a (somewhat deserved) poor reputation, but the cars they've been building for the last few years have been very good, and nowadays you really don't hear the brand used as a byword for crappy, basic transport by anybody.

I think they should just keep building good product, and public perceptions will take care of themselves. I can't say the old Pony and its ilk were terribly inspiring, but one of my friends bought a Mk2 Coupe a while back, and it's pretty drat good. I can't say I view their badge with any more disdain than, say, Nissan or Mazda, which is more than can be said for some manufacturer's (Good luck having Chevrolet taken seriously in the UK any time in the next few years).

grover posted:

Per this site, the tax is 10% for cars with 1.0L or smaller engines, and 25% for over 1.0L, and is included in the sticker price of a car. Sounds like a perfect market for turbos!
Older-but-not-ancient cars in the UK (pre-2003, but post-1973) are taxed based on capacity (under the old "encourage more economical vehicles" excuse), with the break at about 1.5L whether it's about $170/yr or about $300/yr. It makes no account of forced induction etc, so even the craziest RX-7 is treated the same as a Festiva, even if it does get evened up by fuel taxation.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Sigma X posted:

"Come to wonderful Brazil, where our women's asses displace more than our car's engines!"
I'm told that vigorous shaking is an indicator that rebalancing is required, C/D?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Seat Safety Switch posted:

What the gently caress is wrong with Dodge?

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/do...nd-the-man-van/
Oh, it's like the Vauxhall/Opel Zafira VXR. Only stupider.

Edit: VXR. I put the wrong random letter into their collection of random letters.

InitialDave fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Jun 25, 2010

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


If it's the 1.6 Zetec-S, it's the same block as the 1.25. Hell, it should be lighter with bigger bores!

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Linedance posted:

I would love to see a Bertone styled city car.
I believe they sold Fiat Stradas in the USA, so find a junkyard somewhere with no rust and knock yourself out.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


PT6A posted:

Bizarrely, the 2011 Mustang is limited at 113mph, yet comes with Z-rated tires. I don't quite see the point, but I assume there is one. Any ideas?
That's a straight up 180kph, so maybe it's a legal thing in a market they sell them in, and it's easier to just have it on all vehicles. Anyone know if this is a Canadian thing?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


kimbo305 posted:

I know it's a principle thing, but are you really going to track your bigass XF or XJ sedan? I suspect the brakes will cook long before you have a chance to bemoan top speed issues.
I recall you being from the US. If you're storming the autobahn, that'd be different.

oh yeah --
I'd say that the two are (almost) mutually exclusive, though - long, high-speed hauls don't really do much to your brakes, whereas even intensive track use in a road car isn't that likely to see you sitting at extremely high speeds.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Kill-9 posted:

If you notice, almost every press photo of the thing(I refuse to call it a Rover) is taken from a very low angle. It is small, very small. Here's a pic with a couple of guys standing next to it.



It's not a Range Rover. Range Rovers are big. This thing is small. It's based on the same chassis as the Freelander. It's far closer to being a crossover than an SUV. I'd bet it is smaller than a Taurus. Looks like Land Rover is headed towards the sedan market.

High belt line low roof. Visibility? Where we're going we don't need to see the other cars around us. I'd imagine it's like driving a tank looking out through those slits.
Ooh, ooh, can I be the one to tell you they're looking at building a 2wd version?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Kill-9 posted:

P.S. One of those articles introduced me to a new phrase: 'Soft-Roaders' WTF?
RAV4s, CR-Vs, that kind of thing. Anything supposedly a 4x4 that wouldn't really be the best thing to take off-road. The definition gets stretched a bit depending who you talk to, but if it's got regular road gearing, a viscous-coupling AWD system, zero underbody protection and so on, that's what they mean.

People lump the original Panda 4x4s in with the grouping, which makes me go . They're actually quite good.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


sacre posted:

How relevent is that now? I was under the impression these test mule cars were driven around with the main purpose of getting attention and free press. Besides, I can't see how that camo is hiding much of the cars shape except for some finer details like part of the headlight.
No matter what you've got access to, you still need to take cars out on the public road or non-proprietary test track, probably before you want anyone seeing the final article. There's almost no way round it.

Land Rover actually hid a Freelander under an entire Maestro Van shell at one point.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Lazareth posted:

I know it's been mentioned before, but I really want a Toyota FT-86. They should be rolling off the assembly line in 2012, right around the time I graduate from college and get a real job.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebLu0-wg54

It's a rear-wheel drive coupe, and should make about 200hp for the base model.
Although they keep saying it's a spiritual successor to the AE-86, it always seems a lot more 2000GT-like to me.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Oh, spool means turbocharger, not differential replacement? I thought that sounded weird.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


kill me now posted:

Saying stuff like this are like all the HURRRRR BETTER KEEP AN EYE ON YOUR MIRRORS FOR THE GOOD DRIVER IN A MIATA poo poo I get bombarded with when I run with certain organizations. Power makes a substantial difference on nearly any track that isn't Autocross sized.
In one of Carroll Smith's books, he states something along the lines of the main aim of a car builder being to ensure that a driver has no complaints other than wanting more power.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


kimbo305 posted:

Hey, who likes lots of front overhang?:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straigh...new-beetle.html
They made it worse? I'm genuinely impressed.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Coredump posted:

You know, I wonder if car consumers wouldn't go for a cheap no frills car if all the car review media didn't immediately poo poo on the car. I think for the most part, once people are shopping for a cheap car their number one concern is reliability. Their are plenty of cheap no frills reliable cars that have come and gone that may have not done that great BUT the thing is when the average shopper of a car starts to try and research one of this stripped out models only thing they're going to see is "this car sucks omg" and they will stop there. They won't bother reading further to find out the reviewer says the car sucks because it still has crank windows. In my own world that is.
On this side of the pond, we get things like the Toyota Aygo and similar, which is exactly what you're looking for.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


japtor posted:

It's not cab-forward or boxy enough, just copy the VW minibus
Yeah, like VW did themselves for a concept. A decade ago.



Although I still find the micro-microbus bodykits for Japanese vans to be very :

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


I don't care much for the Juke - I think the Range Rover Evoque looks much better on the "build something that looks like a concept car" front (the Isuzu Vehicross and Toyota FJ Cruiser too, actually).



However, like the Juke, I'm not convinced by some of the drivetrain choices.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


japtor posted:

Yeah, or any of the other ones mentioned. Isn't the Juke around the same size as the Countryman?...which I think is around the same size as a Golf.
Leaving aside the fact that that, in itself, is a loving joke, I was more saying that from a styling point of view, I think the Evoque does a better job of what seems to be a roughly similar idea.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


There's some photos up on Jay Leno's site of the Rossi 66. Normally, I don't like the "classic rebodied" Corvette thing, but this actually looks kind of cool:



Reminds me of the Alfa Romeo Montreal as much as anything.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


travisray2004 posted:

Goddamn, why isn't this car AWD?!?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Indeed, I would happily send my daughter to a Finnishing school.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


I haven't driven a Focus RS, and so can't comment, but by all accounts Ford's revo-knuckles (or whatever they call them) quell powerful-fwd-car handling bolshiness rather well.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


IOwnCalculus posted:

If they ever slap a turbo on it, or even a 2.0/2.3 NA, I'd loving buy it in a heartbeat.
Never say never. You've got the 500 Abarth, and the Corsa is available with nearly 200bhp, so there's definitely a market for it.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Morphix posted:

Why? It's a 6-figure automobile that I absolutely love the outside of, but whenever I actually look at it closer or compare it to say a Range Rover, it's loving atrocious what MB is trying to sell in terms of features. Or are you upset because the G-Wagon is supposed to be some ubar-utilitarian man vehicle and the idea of someone making fun of a terrible design decision is an affront to the cars manliness factor?
I don't think a G-Wagen needs stupid bodykits or bling wheels, true enough. I'd view the sweet spot as being the mechanicals and exterior of a challenge truck combined with the full-luxury interior accoutrements.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Dr JonboyG posted:

They say the new Range Rover is actually a better off roader now than a Defender, on the same tyres.
The trouble is, that's one of those "it depends" statements. On certain terrain it's true, but given a different scenario, it's not.

I'd disagree now that the Defender has traction control and anti-stall, but there's no way a Defender could also combine tarmac performance, comfort and ease of use.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


If they're going to be so smug about the "real cars for real drivers" attitude they've got going on there, let's see the manual shifter in the thing.

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Dr JonboyG posted:

Has anyone linked Chris Harris' epic anti-Ferrari rant yet?

http://jalopnik.com/!5760248
For Jalopnik links, if you use http://ca.jalopnik.com/, it displays as the old layout, so for example the Ferrari rant is http://ca.jalopnik.com/5760248

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


Not a new car per se, but something equally interesting and relevant. The Gadget Show just had a short feature on these guys:

http://www.haloipt.com/

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


anonumos posted:

Who designed the doors?
Jim Morrison. What are they teaching in schools these days?

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


A lot of the time, when you see an advert for something (say, insurance, or breakdown cover), they obscure the grille and emblems on the cars to avoid identifying any particular brand - sometimes it makes the cars so drat generic they're almost impossible to work out, particularly if it's a model you're not specifically aware of.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

InitialDave
Jun 14, 2007

I Want To Believe.


el topo posted:

That's the "we tried to make the carmaker give us money for the publicity but were not successful" look. It's also often used to mask Apple laptops in various shows/ads.
I think it's more the "We decided showing [BRAND] breaking down would land us in a heap of poo poo" look.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«10 »