Soldato
I feel honoured just to have not been taken to the slaughterhouse.
New car for other half help us decide
- Thread starter Thebug
- Start date
I feel honoured just to have not been taken to the slaughterhouse.
Caporegime
I fail to see how you can think a ~177bhp car with a book 0-60 figure of 7.5 seconds is too slow for overtaking, that’s hot hatch acceleration figures of not so long back, I get the refinement of the 6 over the 4 pot for sure but not your perception of it being too slow for overtaking....
I wonder if your “overtake technique” is lacking more than the power tbh!
Caporegime
Really, you can't see how a car with 150 more bhp is more suitable for overtaking? It's not about 0-60. It's about 30+ to 60. Which is where the fact that it has nearly TWICE the torque is beneficial.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
As Fox says, of course the more power & torque the merrier but your implying the 520d hasn’t got the grunt for overtaking which is simply wrong.
Caporegime
No. I'm downright stating in some circumstances that it doesn't compared to a 535d. Keep in mind I have previously owned a 320d so I'm aware of the limitations of the engine, especially when you're putting it in a bigger, heavier chassis. I've pointed out on here before how getting stuck behind slow drivers or cyclists could literally double the time it took me to drive to/from work.
Caporegime
I get that, I’m merely pointing out that you didn’t say that in the post I quoted though, you just said the 4 pot doesn’t have the power for overtaking.
Your bringing the larger engines into the discussion after that point.
Anyway, I’ve got some driving to do, hope I don’t have to overtake anything with my 10bhp/ton....
Caporegime
I get that, I’m merely pointing out that you didn’t say that in the post I quoted though, you just said the 4 pot doesn’t have the power for overtaking.
Your bringing the larger engines into the discussion after that point.
Anyway, I’ve got some driving to do, hope I don’t have to overtake anything with my 10bhp/ton....
It didn't have the power in the circumstances I required. Hence why I moved up in power from a 320d (328i then 640d).
We've seen your sort and their 4 mile overtakes!
I wonder how long we can keep going whilst you continue to totally miss the point whilst genuinely trying to argue you require 300bhp for your commute because of cyclists.
You don't, just just prefer it. Which is absolutely fair enough. Guess what, some people prefer being in an SUV...
Caporegime
No, what I preferred was making it to work in a reasonable time. A more powerful engine facilitated that. Had I a different commute a 520d would have been more suitable, although, as I've already pointed out the 6 series had better equipment and a higher level of interior finish not available on the 5.
So more preference stuff then.
Interesting.
So basically you're allowed to exercise personal choice in what you buy but you don't think others can.
You can't sit there with a Porsche on your drive and post with a straight face that nobody needs an SUV and they shouldn't buy them.
I bet less than 5% of this forum drives only what they really needed.
Soldato
Otherwise there would be a lot more fiestas/focus's in the world as if all you look at is needs then those two cars or equivalents would cover 75% of the population!
Caporegime
You're still missing the point. The Porsche does exactly what I need of it. I could have bought a GTS or a 911 but it exceeded my requirements and was therefore pointless. It would have incurred significantly greater running and maintenance costs, drawbacks. To me the Porsche offers a whole host of advantages vs a focus for example which balances out the disadvantages of higher running costs and less flexibility.
In the same vein most of these 'crossovers' and compact SUVs do the same job as a typical hatchback but with major drawbacks. That's the whole point. They offer little in the way of advantage to the majority of people vs a standard hatchback but have significant disadvantages.
Caporegime
Hence why I said the majority of people. Again - higher driving position, it makes no sense. I've already explained the simple psychology behind it. Hatchbacks have a unique look too - they look uniquely like hatchbacks. Would you also believe lorries look uniquely like lorries?
To you it doesn't, it isn't a priority for me either. But some people like it...
Sigh. My point is that some people like how they look.
Caporegime
I'm yet to hear one of those people that like it logically explain it. They look like hatchbacks. Because they are hatchbacks. Just bigger. And you mean to tell me someone somewhere likes the look of the Juke? If so they need committing.
And, since you used the argument I'll point out, I believe I referred to them as a handbag at some point. If they're bought purely on the aesthetic then surely that's just proving me right?
It also harks back to my original argument of I like how trashy blondes look, doesn't mean they're any good though.
Last edited:
Because there isn't necessarily logic in what you like the look of!
I can't explain logically why my favourite look in a car is a saloon with a factory bodykit on.
Soldato
We like the like of the previous Sportage's (the model we have), we don't like the look of the current model. Looks aren't tied to vehicle type or even model in that case.
They're more practical with a higher and fully open boot space with no drop/lip. Roof bars go straight onto the rails and the enlarged door sil allows easier access to roof boxes etc. The higher riding position does make driving easier, even for a confident driver like myself. On that front driving our work van (LWB Vito) is even easier despite it being wider/longer/taller.
Generally they have a bit more space in the back, particularly for the fifth person, and they're easier to unload babies/bags from the back what with higher seats.
On the Sportage front, they're incredibly cheap. Similarly I would say why would you get a hatchback when you can get an SUV for the same price.
All of that aside, people will still like what they like regardless of anything practical, sensible or good.
They're more practical with a higher and fully open boot space with no drop/lip. Roof bars go straight onto the rails and the enlarged door sil allows easier access to roof boxes etc. The higher riding position does make driving easier, even for a confident driver like myself. On that front driving our work van (LWB Vito) is even easier despite it being wider/longer/taller.
Generally they have a bit more space in the back, particularly for the fifth person, and they're easier to unload babies/bags from the back what with higher seats.
On the Sportage front, they're incredibly cheap. Similarly I would say why would you get a hatchback when you can get an SUV for the same price.
All of that aside, people will still like what they like regardless of anything practical, sensible or good.
Caporegime
No, no. Not the look. The mystical higher driving position.