World Cup more important than selling cars.
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Webuyanycar.com, er, no they don't.
Next: Pedestrian injured in hit and run incident(Doug Mode)
From: Silk on 25 Jun 2010 14:08 On 25/06/2010 17:47, Adrian wrote: > Have you looked at the Seat Ibiza ST? I take it that's rhetorical.
From: Mike P on 25 Jun 2010 15:46 On 25 June, 16:31, Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > On 25/06/2010 15:54, Ret. wrote: > > > But it's not 'just' to save money - my wife wont drive the Rover, but > > would drive a smaller car - and a smaller car is simply a lot easier to > > manoeuvre in tight car parks. > > In my experience visibility is more important than size when it comes to > maneuvering as most cars are roughly the same size in as much as if you > can get one car in a space you can usually get another. Yes spot on. Jeep Cherokee - piece of cake to park and manoeuvre about the place. Loads of visibility, good steering lock. Ford Puma. Tiny. Awful visibility, a total pain to park anywhere Mike P
From: Silk on 26 Jun 2010 08:16 On 26/06/2010 08:33, Adrian wrote: > So you've dismissed [Seat] out of hand based on that? Seats are over priced and inpractical. The interiors also look like an 80s ghetto blaster - a bit like the new Audis. They're simply aimed at a different market to Skoda. My local dealer is a combined Seat/Skoda dealer and the differences are immediately obvious when compared side by side. > > Seat's the "value" brand which isn't quite so "hair shirt" as Skoda. So > expect better materials than Skoda, more recent tech, etc. Obviously, the > styling of the two is a matter of preference. There's absolutely nothing about a Seat that's better than a Skoda. The Skoda is more practical and looks classier on the inside and outside, as well as being cheaper to buy. >> and are consistently slated for having an 'uncompromising' ride which, >> as you know, is not my cup of tea. Also the only car in the range that >> has the DSG box is a normally aspirated 1.6 petrol. > > You think I didn't check this? Seat's website is fairly clear that they > offer DSG with the 1.2TSi. > >> The top trim in the Ibiza is the 'Sport' > > <shrug> So look at the SE - all the toys you get with the Labia. Unless > you've got some kind of fixation with it not being the last one on the > spec and price list - in which case, you'd surely be looking at the Fabia > vRS. Everyone knows that the "sporty" models in most car ranges are usually based on one above poverty spec. but with a more powerful engine, "sportier" ride etc. If you want the toys, you you usually have to settle for a more sedate power-plant. This is certainly the case with Skoda where a lot of the toys aren't even available as options on the vRS. > No, you think you know that, despite my regular denials and explanations. > That's because you don't seem able to comprehend "competence", > "involvement", "feedback" and - especially - "character". They're just motoring journalist bullshit.
From: Silk on 26 Jun 2010 08:23 On 25/06/2010 20:46, Mike P wrote: > On 25 June, 16:31, Silk<m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: >> On 25/06/2010 15:54, Ret. wrote: >> >>> But it's not 'just' to save money - my wife wont drive the Rover, but >>> would drive a smaller car - and a smaller car is simply a lot easier to >>> manoeuvre in tight car parks. >> >> In my experience visibility is more important than size when it comes to >> maneuvering as most cars are roughly the same size in as much as if you >> can get one car in a space you can usually get another. > > Yes spot on. Jeep Cherokee - piece of cake to park and manoeuvre about > the place. Loads of visibility, good steering lock. > > Ford Puma. Tiny. Awful visibility, a total pain to park anywhere If I had a Ford Puma, I'd be too ashamed to park it in public.
From: Mike P on 26 Jun 2010 09:23
On 26 June, 13:23, Silk <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > On 25/06/2010 20:46, Mike P wrote: > > > On 25 June, 16:31, Silk<m...(a)privacy.net> wrote: > >> On 25/06/2010 15:54, Ret. wrote: > > >>> But it's not 'just' to save money - my wife wont drive the Rover, but > >>> would drive a smaller car - and a smaller car is simply a lot easier to > >>> manoeuvre in tight car parks. > > >> In my experience visibility is more important than size when it comes to > >> maneuvering as most cars are roughly the same size in as much as if you > >> can get one car in a space you can usually get another. > > > Yes spot on. Jeep Cherokee - piece of cake to park and manoeuvre about > > the place. Loads of visibility, good steering lock. > > > Ford Puma. Tiny. Awful visibility, a total pain to park anywhere > > If I had a Ford Puma, I'd be too ashamed to park it in public. No you wouldn't. You already drive a Skoda. Mike P |