They forgot to mention alfa romeos
They forgot to mention alfa romeos
I want to know how this guy defined value.
The XJ220 doesn't belong in this list, value shouldn't ever be a factor in supercars, unless they are really bad, and I think the XJ220 lived up to the supercar name, huge power huge speed huge price. Supercars aren't sposed to be cheap and good value.
I love these sort of threads:
BMW X5
Porsche Cayenne
Mercedes M Class
Hummer H1- H100
Range Rover (Sport in particular)
Lexus RX300
Nissan Murano
and the list goes on and on...
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Man, i would Love and R500 or/and an X-Power SV, i still have a poster of the MG on my wall!!!! I think its glorious.
Just call me Tom
Please visit www.tomranson.com and make me feel loved.
Vector
ok, then add the Edsel to the list, the VW Phatehon, Ford Freestar, Buick Raetta, Chrysler Airflow, Renault Avantime, and Isuzu VehiCROSS.Originally Posted by Esperante
I have found a new love in the form of a tristar.
Woohoo, thought that this is yet another thread by Prius.
Except NONE of those failed as poorly as the ones already mentioned. And the Airflow wasn't a failure. I thought I had explained the concept of cars in the 30's to you before. Reading your posts is like the digital equivelent of being castrated while bricks are smashed on one's head.Originally Posted by Prius
Last edited by Esperante; 10-30-2005 at 09:32 AM.
TOYNBEE IDEA IN KUBRICK 2001 RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPITER
the Edsel wasn't a giant flop?
I have found a new love in the form of a tristar.
The XJ220 didn't live up to anything. It started out as a V12 monster. It ended up a rebodied Metro 6R4 but with the engine sound of a van. And dont even mention turbo-lagOriginally Posted by 2ndclasscitizen
The people were paying £400k for a beautiful killer V12 Jaguar, not a sexy V6 Metro and real world acceleration results that you would compare to a family saloon, not a supercar. Top speed was good ... but not worth £400k alone.
That's a disappointing lot of half truth you have there. Just because it used a development of the V64V engine it doesn't make it a 'rebodied' 6R4, does it? I don't think they made them 4WD....? Or am I mistaken?Originally Posted by :Exige:
And as for 'sexy V6 Metro'...er, the 6R4 could hardly be described as a Metro for these purposes could it??
As for 'real world acceleration figures'...well surely we tend to compare 0-60s don't we? Under 4 seconds? That's a hell of a family saloon.
No, the XJ220 was not the car it could've been, there's no denying that, but that it wasn't is surely down to market forces. I believe the attempts to renage on contracts to buy quoting 'reduced specification' were just speculators realising the bottom had dropped out of that particular market.
The McLaren F1 was a whole new ball game, that's why everyone wanted to bail out!!
The Edsel certainly was a flop, but compare the scale of their unsucessfulness to the unsucessfulness of, say, an Isuzu Piazza.Originally Posted by Prius
You've earned demotion to 'ignore' once again.
TOYNBEE IDEA IN KUBRICK 2001 RESURRECT DEAD ON PLANET JUPITER
All of those cars are a success, and the Range Rover Sport is great value, its cheaper than a proper Range Rover and you'd only see the difference in quality (well.... size) when they are parked next to each other. SUVs in general aren't bad value when the people buying them buy them because they want a big car.Originally Posted by henk4
OK people... there's a difference between a Flop and being Butt ugly. Look at all the retards that bought an Aztek. Further more GM continued to keep it in it's shitty line up.
Before Posting Please Watch This Short Video... URL=http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting.php
I agreeOriginally Posted by aNOBLEman
i'm gonna get a new car one day
(hopefully a good one)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)