|
It means that you are a better, livlier, far more interesting person who is generally more successful in life, better looking, younger looking and far more dynamic generally than the sad, dour, abject failure of the kind of people who would drive something awful like a "SE" which hasn't even got small red inserts on the driver's seat for heaven's sake.
On the otherside, the SE driver probably hasn't got a bad back.
|
It means that you are a better, livlier, far more interesting person who is generally more successful in life, better looking, younger looking and far more dynamic generally than the sad, dour, abject failure of the kind of people who would drive something awful like a "SE" which hasn't even got small red inserts on the driver's seat for heaven's sake.
On the otherside, the SE driver probably hasn't got a bad back.
Some "sports" seats are very good - the Recaro's in my Cavalier SRi were brilliant - a later Astra with leather, got GM sports seats, which were also very supportive.
I am now at an age where SE is my natural choice - and hate it when I get a R-Line as a courtesy car, seats less supportive and suspension too hard.
|
|
|
It means that you are a better, livlier, far more interesting person who is generally more successful in life, better looking, younger looking and far more dynamic generally than the sad, dour, abject failure of the kind of people who would drive something awful like a "SE" which hasn't even got small red inserts on the driver's seat for heaven's sake.
On the otherside, the SE driver probably hasn't got a bad back.
Ha Ha!, made me laugh this did!.
Sums it up perfectly though, 'sport' these days is simply an image thing, for the above. Do yourself a favour, dont follow the 'sheeples', get the SE instead.
|
|
A few years ago, BMW and Audi in particular had gone ridiculously firm on their 'sports-spec' suspension (MSport for BMW, S-line for Audi), which, along with the bigger wheels utterly destroyed ride comfort.
So they introduced a no-cost option when you were speccing your new car : delete sports suspension. So you'd have the more comfortable and supportive seats, but not the rock-hard ride.
One of BMW's worst cars for the ride quality was the short-lived Z4 coupe. Even today, they look absolutely stunning. But they were only available with a 3.0 or full-blown 'M' engine, big wheels and sports suspension.
They tramlined horribly. The steering was ridiculously twitchy on anything other than perfect tarmac, requiring constant input and correction. Road noise from the huge wheels and RFTs made communication with a passenger impossible. You got bounced around continually. Reaching for something like the stereo controls was virtually impossible, because your hand would be bouncing about so much.
What should have been a perfect 'Grand tourer' ended up as undriveable at speed.
|
|
GT! That's another misnomer. GT once meant Grand Tourer, a luxurious, powerful, comfortable car that could soak up swathes of Europe in one go with ease. Drive from London to Milan feeling as relaxed when you arrive as you did when you left.
Not sure who to blame for making a mockery of the GT name and giving it to a hot hatch. Was it VW or Peugeot? Whoever it was, these cars are as far removed from true GT's as it is possible to get.
|
Not sure who to blame for making a mockery of the GT name
Ford with the Mk 1 Cortina.
|
|
Forgotten all about Ford. Escort GT, Cortina GT, Consul GT etc. My Dad had a 1974 3L Consul GT and to be fair it was probably a lot closer to a true GT than the hot hatch offerings that were to come.
|
|
Back in 2000-2004 i worked as a valeter in a VW dealership. It amused me greatly that the then current (and rather flaccid) golf GTI arrived to us on the transporter simply badged (appropriately given the 115bhp on offer) '2.0'. We had to remove these badges and replace them with 'GTI'!.
Image is everything!
|
GT once meant Grand Tourer, a luxurious, powerful, comfortable car that could soak up swathes of Europe in one go with ease. Drive from London to Milan feeling as relaxed when you arrive as you did when you left.
Ah - those were the days when 'motoring' was a pleasure. Did just that 40yrs ago in a rusty old Series 1 XJ6; switch seamlessly from one petrol tank to the other, stop in Luxembourg halfway for cheapest fuel...
Current 'sports' saloon (A8) has as much power again for the front wheels but I doubt could ascend now crowded Alps any faster.
True 'GTs' are rarely badged as such.
|
|
In summary sport means more money and less comfort usually for no more power as well.
|
|
Yep - a 'proper' GT is the type of car I've been looking for: reasonably quick (not overly so like a proper sports car), nicely kitted out inside (but again, not over the top, especially on the gizmos), but above all - COMFORTABLE seats and ride quality, so when you reach your destination (after wafting around, but arriving earlier than you'd planned) you don't have to spend ten minutes stretching you aching back and bemoaning your sore rear end.
Are you hearing me Mr. car manufacturer - I am a professional person, earning a quite nice salary who wants a nice new car, and will pay for quality (especially engineering quality) and reliability. Not perceived quality (Germans), but ACTUAL quality. I only want to see the dealership once a year for the service, at least for the first 5 years or so. I don't want 10in+ wide rubber band tyres that will last 10k miles and that cost £500+ to replace a set, nor do I wish to take it on track days. 16in or (at most) 17in wheel-tyre combinations are more than sufficient for looks. By all means offer idiots who like 18in+ wheels and tyres the option, but give the other two as standard.
The old way of determining the range-topping car was either a proper sports version (like the Cossie) or the most luxurious model (Ghia etc), with a larger engine and better brakes. A shame that so many makes now don't even offer the reduced-size wheel & tyre combos on their Sport models, even though the (normal) excuse of upgraded brakes often doesn't apply (Mazda do this on most Sport models, annoyingly).
|
|
Thinking about this, I'm reminded of a trip I did a few years ago.
North Wales to Thurso - as close to John-o-Groats as makes no difference, in a day.
Left home at 7am. Me driving all the way. It was September, so plenty of daylight.
A coffee and short break in Tebay. A stop about 30 miles south of Glasgow (used to be a really nice truck stop there) for lunch. Another stop just north of Inverness for coffee and fuel.
Arrive at 7:30pm. 540 miles. Four adults in the car, a boot full of dive equipment and luggage (we were diving in Orkney for a week), and bounced out of the drivers seat feeling as fresh as a daisy.
The car : a dead boring 2005 BMW X3, 2.0 diesel, SE spec, manual box. The raised driving position meant I could see over traffic and anticipate better, the 6 speed manual box with cruise control meant it averaged 43mpg. The small wheels and SE suspension meant loads of ride comfort.
The house we were staying in on Orkney, however, was a different matter. The worst mattress in the world. I ended up sleeping on the sofa for the week !
I know what Engineer Andy means though, he means something like the first generation XK8, the original 90s Volvo C70 (which they actually did a GT spec for), those sort of cars.
|
|
This is all educational to me.
I always believed that "Sport" meant you had bought the poverty spec model. Keep fit windows etc.
|
|
If 'S' means sport, then that's certainly true of the Golf S and Octavia S. Audi, on the other hand, start with SE and work up through Sport to S-line.
Generally the sweet spot is the one in the middle, or one down from the top of the range if there are more than three trim levels. The extra bits on the top model are usually cosmetic: Brits are particularly susceptible and that's where the profits are made. The extra cost is way above the actual cost of the additional trim.
|
|
|
