Rover 75 - got one :-)
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Adrian on 27 May 2010 13:31 bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> You tell me. I'm just reporting what I read. I have only every owned >>> one French car - a Pug 309. >> Built in Coventry. > A dog of a car. Not really - just not very exciting, 1.9GTi apart. It's basically just a slightly bigger, heavier 205.
From: bod on 27 May 2010 13:35 Adrian wrote: > bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were > saying: > >>>> You tell me. I'm just reporting what I read. I have only every owned >>>> one French car - a Pug 309. > >>> Built in Coventry. > >> A dog of a car. > > Not really - just not very exciting, 1.9GTi apart. > > It's basically just a slightly bigger, heavier 205. > > Pug....dog. Bod
From: Douglas Payne on 28 May 2010 04:15 Ret. wrote: > Adrian wrote: >> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they >> were saying: >> >>>>> I would class most cars as 'mediocre'. If the person likes an >>>>> average car, that' all that matters. We can't all afford >>>>> Ferraris. >> >>>> Do you really think that the kind of teenage-boy stats better >>>> suited to a game of "Top Trumps" are the only difference between a >>>> mediocre car and a good one? >> >>> No. >> >> So it was a bit of a silly and irrelevant post, then, wasn't it? > > As is your comment that the 75 is mediocre when there is a mass of > evidence in the form of awards won, and glowing professional reviews, to > thoroughly contradict your claim. > > The motoring press are not backward in criticising cars when they are > deserving of criticism. Why do you think that virtually all the reviews > are so positive? I thought you weren't going to get drawn in. You're rubbish. -- Douglas
From: Adrian on 28 May 2010 04:36 Douglas Payne <douggie(a)cheerful.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > Adrian's Saab (if that is what he is still driving) It is > may be an ancient D'you mind? It's the newest of our domestic fleet. > banger but amongst its peers at the time and especially now, it is > certainly not and never has been mediocre. It's also worth pointing out that in the three years I've had it, values have soared to the point where a good example is not only worth more than the (widely unloved and thoroughly mediocre) model which replaced it, but worth about the same as early examples of the (still current, better than it's predecessor but not exactly class-leading) model which replaced that.
From: Ret. on 28 May 2010 06:30
Mike G wrote: > "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:866ogfFs3cU6(a)mid.individual.net... >> bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like >> they were saying: >> >>>>> Not at all. Whatever floats your boat. If you're happy to drive a >>>>> mediocre car, that's your choice. >> >>>> I'm not going to get drawn in. >> >>> I would class most cars as 'mediocre'. If the person likes an >>> average car, that' all that matters. We can't all afford Ferraris. >> >> Do you really think that the kind of teenage-boy stats better suited >> to a game of "Top Trumps" are the only difference between a mediocre >> car and a good one? > > I'd say any car that is reliable is a 'good' car. > The rest is down to personal preference. Spot on. Some people like hard riding sporty cars - and some (like me) like soft riding cruisers. Neither group will like the others choice of car. -- Kev |