No prizes then Sean?
;-)
Thought not!
*My god, I'm even beginning to write like you!*
--
groups.msn.com/honestjohn - Pictures say a thousand words.....
|
DD will probably delete this, as it adds little value to the site or newbies coming here.
I joined this club about 30 weeks ago.
I was most disrespectful of Italian cars, having experienced their bikes.
People like these, posting here, have kept my feet on the ground.
I have been in Europe for many months.
There is nothing like this site there.
VERY MANY THANKS, HJ.
Absolute respect to you.
|
|
I love it. Tony Bee calls 218 bhp at 4000 ?huge???!?! Yet at the same time clams Clarkson does not even say anything that is not written for him. Then you have Andrew T and Hillman assaulting Clarkson head on, not his would be writers. So who is it that is to blame? Clarkson or these possible writers? I personally am not very impressed by 218BHP at 400 coming from a BMW. I also think Clarkson has driven more cars than every person on this board combined!! And he didn?t just drive them cautiously down the street under the watchful eye of the dealer?s salesman. He drove the hell out of them on streets and tracks alike!!! Sorry but I will tend to believe Clarkson?s opinion about diesels, BMW, and everything else over people that have probably not even driven the car!
|
I like Clarkson but he says it all for the crack.
I can imagine him going to his producer saying "I've been working on a killer line all week and come up with...comparing it with anything fuelled with petrol is as stupid as comparing a typewriter to your computer.
He then asks "Are we getting any cars in to fit the line...BMW diesel...OK fine, that'll needle the mug punters".
M.M
|
I think his review is largely spot on, having seen the boss' new 5 and sat in it, the interior for such an expensive car is not great. I preferred the old 5, it had more presence inside and it just looked right in matt black. This dash looks like something out of Blake's 7, I'm sure it's very well screwed together but it just doesnt' look it or inspire confidence. As for the styling, well, I don't get it and I could certainly describe my tastes are verging more on the Bohemian but that car is simply ugly, the lines are totally wrong, completely and utterly wrong, a 1960s tower block is more appealing to the eye. Maybe JC is only saying what more fawning journos looking for 'long-term ownership tests' would say. If anyone was watching TG last night and his remarks about 'Ford' that was rather cutting.
But I don't understand his opinion about the diesel engine, surely he must know how to drive one right in the middle of the torque band rather than topping out in each gear. I can't see how almost 220Bhp and 370Lbft is not enough for a car that size. He drove that little diesel Lupo around the M25 and was impressed.
JC is an incredibly talented person after watching his 'Greatest Britons' slot about Brunel, I consider that as one of the best one hour's of TV ever made. TG for all its faults is all the better for him fronting it.
And that Toyota was simply amazing....
|
Personally I'd rather make my own mind up about somethings worth. However when I listen to someones opinion I base their opinions on what I know about them and how similar their expectations are to mine. I suppose that's why whatever Jeremy says I assume I will find the opposite to be true for me within reason.
Steve.
|
I tend to prefer an obviously partisan and opionated personal view to bland platitudes.
Clarkson's always readable, and even when you disagreee with him is rarely completely wrong.
|
My little diesel car regularly leaves petrol BMWs and Mercs struggling to keep up, yet still gives me 50 mpg.
Happy with that? You bet I am.
I do hope diesels don't get too popular or Mr Brown will jack up the tax on them.
|
|
He already has - Diesels cheaper than petrol on the continent
|
|
Excuse me, very sorry to be pedantic BaseRSXmanual,
but where do I call 218 bhp at 4000 "huge" in my message?
|
|
You don't, but I would consider 368lb/ft of torque @ 2,000 rpm quite huge. Sadly, not many people consider the torque output, and choose to focus on HP instead.
|
You don't, but I would consider 368lb/ft of torque @ 2,000 rpm quite huge. Sadly, not many people consider the torque output, and choose to focus on HP instead.
Thats because peak torque output is irrelevant, what matters is peak HP and the SPREAD of torque.
|
|
You'd need to see the torque curve, but peaking at 2000 rpm seems pretty spreadable to me.
|
You'd need to see the torque curve, but peaking at 2000 rpm seems pretty spreadable to me.
Only if its flat all the way to 5-6krpm (which it isn't), most TDs tend to start getting weezy at about 3.5-4 krpm - I've seen 2-strokes with wider power bands!
|
|
|
|
Tony N,
"Thats because peak torque output is irrelevant, what matters is peak HP and the SPREAD of torque."
The above is exactly the observation that JC makes in his article. To quote him:-
"can we please stop trying to pretend that the superior torque offered by a diesel in any way compensates for the lack of brake horsepower. When you accelerate in a modern diesel there's a satisfying urge, for sure, but it's over in a moment. And there is no power to carry the momentum. Time and time again I put my foot down in that Beemer, pulled out to overtake the Rover, and then when I was on the wrong side of the road simply ran out of oomph."
C
|
>when I was on the wrong side of the road simply ran out of oomph.
He's crazy. My modern TD pulls hard from 1700 revs (about 50-55mph in 5th) and is still pulling hard past 3000 revs (90mph is about 3200 revs). What more do you want? He's either changing down to accelerate (typical ignorant petrolhead technique looking for the power in the screaming range) or the car is short geared because the whole point with a diesel is that the speed increases but the rev counter hardly moves.
|
Much comment here criticising diesel engines, some of it fair, some of it a little OTT.
For instance, from some of the comments about diesel turbo lag, you would imagine it to be measurable in minutes, and that accelerating in a turbodiesel were more akin to ringing down to the engine room for more steam than pressing a pedal. Seem to recall that you get turbo lag in petrol-engined cars too - let's be reasonable, now.
The answer seems simple to me:
Let those who like diesels, drive diesels; let those who like petrol-engined cars, drive petrol-engined cars. They each have their good and bad points.
Then we're all happy, aren't we? :-)
|
|
Sorry, meant to add - and let's face the fact that Mr Clarkson is unlikely ever to have anything good to say about diesels, because he simply doesn't like the way any of them drive. Fair play to the man - I may not agree with him, but at least he's honest!
|
|
paulB: thats right. it requires a different technique for diesel. Revving above 4000 is unnecessary, but you only have to change UP, at about 3500 -4000 to be back in the responsive area. If the BMW referred to by JC won't overtake, it's pilot error, not the fault of the type of engine!
|
"Let those who like diesels, drive diesels........Then we're all happy, aren't we?"
No. When the diesel ahead accelerates, it showers black soot all over my car! ;-)
|
|
Gah!! Burn the heretic!! (In petrol) ;)
|
|
|
|
|
|
