From: Albert T Cone on
Nick Finnigan wrote:
> Mortimer wrote:
>
>> I bet it doesn't have the good low-rpm torque of a diesel so you'll
>> have to change down further when accelerating out of roundabouts.
>> That's the thing that's taken most adjusting to on the rare occasions
>> that I've driven a petrol car - usually a loan car when my diesel is
>> in for servicing.
>>
>> I was once loaned a 1.8 petrol Peugeot 306 when my 2.0 diesel 306 was
>
> I think http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/VAG14TFSi.pdf has as much
> torque as http://www.superchips.co.uk/curves/psahdi90.pdf except between
> 2,200 and 2,700 rpm (ish), but is not measured at really low revs.

Indeed, if you don't go above 3000rpm, then there is very little
difference between them. You would have to be *OLD* to drive like that,
mind, and WOT response isn't likely to be of much relevance..
From: Mike P on
On 16 June, 18:26, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > The 75 is over a decade old - and the sizes of cars, segment-to-segment,
> > have grown hugely in that time.
>
> The quality of cars has also improved hugely. But Kevin has developed
> cellar palate where the car he currently drives is, in his mind, the
> only one that gets it right. His comment on the C-class Merc showed that
> up. The Merc has one major fault, it's ugly as sin. Other than that it's
> a much, much, much better car than the Rover ever was. Kevin however
> could not see past "isn't a Rover".

My dad's just bought a new C-Class. It's a *nice* motor. The shape is
a bit ugly, but it's a damn nice car.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/46854769(a)N06/4708969950/

Mike P
From: Mike P on
On 16 June, 18:26, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:
> Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > The 75 is over a decade old - and the sizes of cars, segment-to-segment,
> > have grown hugely in that time.
>
> The quality of cars has also improved hugely. But Kevin has developed
> cellar palate where the car he currently drives is, in his mind, the
> only one that gets it right. His comment on the C-class Merc showed that
> up. The Merc has one major fault, it's ugly as sin. Other than that it's
> a much, much, much better car than the Rover ever was. Kevin however
> could not see past "isn't a Rover".

My dad's just bought a new C-Class. It's a *nice* motor. The shape is
a bit ugly, but it's a damn nice car.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/46854769(a)N06/4708969950/

Mike P
From: Scott M on
Adrian wrote:

> I had an auto as my daily for ten years - and never bothered with left-
> foot braking, either.
>
> Why would you? It seems to be some kind of attempt to make life more
> complicated for absolutely no benefit whatsoever.

I watched someone once who used their left foot to brake and came to the
conclusion it's the mark of an idiot as, at the time, he was doing a 97
point turn to be able to drive forward into a parking space that would
later require a 43 point turn getting out of it. Reversing into the
space would have been infinitely easier both parking and going.

Conversely I knew someone with an auto that assumed that, if his right
foot wasn't pressing on the brake, it should pressing be on the
accelarator. This made watching low speed manoevuring quite a
jaw-dropping event.

--
Scott

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
From: boltar2003 on
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:23:58 +0100
"Mortimer" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>My main problem with an automatic, as a seasoned manual driver, is gauging
>how much power to apply as I come out of a roundabout, so as to give good
>acceleration but without engaging kickdown into second gear when in a manual

That can be an issue with autos , but if its your own car you eventually
get to know when it'll kickdown and feather the throttle accordingly.

B2003