mr jamez said:
Fox, it must be very hard for you to understand why someone thinks a 'shuv is fun when you have not even driven one.
I think there are very few people in this thread who have driven a Shuv. I guess there is a small possibility that this late 70's city-runabout with a 1.2 litre engine may have been designed purely with driver fun and driver involvement in mind, and not simple as a 70's equivilent of the Corsa, but I would think it's unlikely..
Besides, would it be entirely reasonable for me to go around saying 'ahahahahahha, a Trabant is so much fun to fling than a 205 GTi' safe in the knowledge that nobdy here has driven a Trabant, assuming that they must simply take my word for it and are not allowed to challenge my opinion on that basis?
olv hasn't even got a car, let alone driven a single BMW in his entire life yet nobody is telling him he can't have an opinion - which, IMHO, is reasonable.
Now, I appreciate the Shuv is a laugh - using the analogy I used earlier perhaps in the same way that dodgy falling lift ride in Disneyland is a laugh - but it must be a laugh not because it's a great to drive, perfectly setup drivers car but becuase it's rough, ready and raw not through design but simply by age. You can't say it's fun becuase of its ability - it's simply a byproduct of its old and dodderyness
A 205 GTi is fun becuase it was made that way. An Austin Maxi is fun becuase... well, it'd old, naff and unpredictable. You can't argue with either but you can't use the latter to say its better/preferable to the former, right?
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
