Why Isn't More Made of the Ever Increasing Width of Motor Vehicles?

[pwa]

In other words a pile of poop
Personally I never understood the attraction of them.

They looked good (to me) and the went around corners like they were on rails.

Same defects as all cars of that era.

I was never a fan of sitting on with my backside a few inches off the road surface,I friend gave me a lift in his Minivan it confirmed all my suspicions about them and I found the way the gearstick juggled about as we went along to be a symptom of something not good
PS,I really liked my 1966 MK1 Contina estate,and the Capri I had after that

I liked my bum being just a few inches off the ground. It seemed sporty, like a go-cart. And with the engine between the front wheels, and such a short wheelbase, it did hold a line better than most cars of that era. It did lack comfort though. In spite of Alex Moulton's efforts with the suspension.

[Cyril Haearn]

Yes, the current Mini isn't mini at all. But though I have fond memories of driving a real mini, I'm not sure I'd buy one today if they still made them. They were uncomfortable, cramped, inclined to rust and needed a lot of tinkering.

The little smart is the equivalent of the mini

It would be quite possible to make reliable simple *old* minis now but what was the payload? Could 4 big muscular cyclists fit in?

It would be possible, but I don't think legal to put them on the road. Crisp packets are now so much bigger than they used to be*, so would likely write off a Mini in a collision.

*Although of course now only contain approx 4 crisps, on average

A mini could easily get *pringled* in an *accident*

That is my attempt to drift the thread towards buckled cycle wheels

[Bonefishblues]

The little smart is the equivalent of the mini

It would be quite possible to make reliable simple *old* minis now but what was the payload? Could 4 big muscular cyclists fit in?

It would be possible, but I don't think legal to put them on the road. Crisp packets are now so much bigger than they used to be*, so would likely write off a Mini in a collision.

*Although of course now only contain approx 4 crisps, on average

A mini could easily get *pringled* in an *accident*

That is my attempt to drift the thread towards buckled cycle wheels

Although with glorious irony it's a thread primarily about motor vehicles

[thirdcrank]

In the early sixties, the publicity for BMC cars - Mini, 1100/1300 and Maxi - in France emphasised the tôles fortes. (Strong body panels.) A cursory inspection of something like a Citroën 2CV would explain why this was so.

[old_windbag]

Don't have a downer on the original mini. It was very clever design at the time. I also liked the concept of the "new" mini when it was launched but it lost its appeal as it's not really in the spirit of the original. It's too big and too popular in the wrong way. I think the countryman version may be bigger again. The ford fiesta on the other hand is dynamically a very good car indeed, and on the whole as much a car as many driving jukes, cashcows, mokka's actually need but chose not to buy.

The tree that killed marc bolan is still alive as it only got 3 years and a driving ban for 2( it's a shrine nowadays ). The driver of the mini, tainted love's gloria jones is also still alive. He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[thirdcrank]

Don't have a downer on the original mini. ...

I for one haven't, having learnt to drive in one in 1965. Or rather in several belonging to the BSM and one belonging to my dear old Dad who let me get the miles in in his. For anybody familiar with the Bob Newhart driving lesson sketch it was just like that except my instructor for the first lesson only was many times more sarcastic. Among various useful features for a learner driver was a rear window set so low that you could see the road surface. When doing the required reverse round a corner, all you had to do was line up the join in the centre of the rubber round the window with the kerb and bingo!

[bigjim]

The original Mini was a great car. Better than much of what was on the road in those days. I remember my Stepfather being loaned a new one from his firm. Five of us piled into it for a day trip to Conway from Manchester. I don't remember any comfort ssues. It was very modern, smooth and efficient for the day. In my late teens after a succession of unreliable British bangers, I bought a minivan for £17. It was the most reliable motor I had ever driven. You can't really compare modern cars to the 60s models. we were quite happy with what we had.
Our small car is now 15yrs old. It drives fine, is totally reliable, comfortable and will sit happily on the motorway all day at much more than the speed limit, if I was stupid enough to do so.I've thought of replacing it, but reality kicks in and I hardly go anywhere anymore as there is no pleasure in driving now. Who goes for a drive? I do less than 3000miles a year. Apart from those who have a long commute, I wonder how many of these giant new vehicles travel very far and it would be better all round to have a small efficient motor?

[Psamathe]

......
Our small car is now 15yrs old. It drives fine, is totally reliable, comfortable and will sit happily on the motorway all day at much more than the speed limit, if I was stupid enough to do so.I've thought of replacing it, but reality kicks in and I hardly go anywhere anymore as there is no pleasure in driving now. Who goes for a drive? I do less than 3000miles a year. Apart from those who have a long commute, I wonder how many of these giant new vehicles travel very far and it would be better all round to have a small efficient motor?

Absolutely and likewise. My small hatchback is "suffering" in irrelevant ways and will continue to get me from A to B reliably for many many more years (central locking is faulty, that sort of trivial "issue").

I'm often surprised at how cars have become much more that what cars are for, how a whole culture, status, ego, etc. thing has grown up around them pushing some to pay out for things that don't meet their transport needs.

I often have a quiet smirk when a Range Rover pulls into the supermarket car park next to me - we both got to the supermarket safely and in adequate comfort and taking the same time, we will both get home with our shopping in adequate comfort taking comparable times yet they have paid more than twice as much for the privilege of nothing (except being laughed at by me) as well as adding more than twice the damage to the environment, etc.. And they expect me to admire them for that?

Ian

[old_windbag]

having learnt to drive in one

Me too, I did my lessons in one circa 1982 model. The trick of the rear window rubber was also told to me, it must have been a common guideline. The rear window rubber had a join that if kept in line with the kerb gave the perfect corner reverse. Also on a hill start when letting clutch out, at the bite point you could see the bonnet rise by an inch or so. Then handbrake off and the mini was stationary on the clutch. A great little car, by todays standards it would be laughed out of town because why drive 700kg when you can drag 1500kg's instead. But in it's day a revolutionary car for many reasons.

yet they have paid more than twice as much for the privilege of nothing

One would like to think the penny would drop eventually but sadly cars are bought in the main as status symbols( or good salesman-ship ) rather than functional transport. I'd bet most people could drop to the next car size down with very little impact on their lives. Many bigger cars bought in the belief they'll carry a huge load at some point when it'd be cheaper just to hire a van for that once a year event and drive a more economical, greener car.


Edit: just from a weight perspective my 1.0l three pot engine makes the weight of a focus drop by 200kg compared to it's diesel version. Now mine is in a smaller body again so my car weighs around 1050kg, about 100kg heavier than its 20yr old ancestor so not bad considering the added safety features. But don't think for one minute that 1.0l is a weakling of an engine, it's turbo'ed and that engine can give from 100bhp( 125ft-lbs torque ) up to close to 200bhp in various states of tune. I think it's time for people to put engine capacity to one side, when electric drives come in they'll have no option torque is more likely the benchmark to use then.

[Bonefishblues]

I often have a quiet smirk when a Range Rover pulls into the supermarket car park next to me - we both got to the supermarket safely and in adequate comfort and taking the same time, we will both get home with our shopping in adequate comfort taking comparable times yet they have paid more than twice as much for the privilege of nothing (except being laughed at by me) as well as adding more than twice the damage to the environment, etc.. And they expect me to admire them for that?

Ian

I expect they don't worry overmuch what you think. You OTOH seem to take an inordinate interest in them

[Bonefishblues]

Edit: just from a weight perspective my 1.0l three pot engine makes the weight of a focus drop by 200kg compared to it's diesel version. Now mine is in a smaller body again so my car weighs around 1050kg, about 100kg heavier than its 20yr old ancestor so not bad considering the added safety features. But don't think for one minute that 1.0l is a weakling of an engine, it's turbo'ed and that engine can give from 100bhp( 125ft-lbs torque ) up to close to 200bhp in various states of tune. I think it's time for people to put engine capacity to one side, when electric drives come in they'll have no option torque is more likely the benchmark to use then.

I didn't think that sounded correct so I checked. It isn't. Current model comparable stats below, based on model & output:

Focus Style 1.0 EcoBoost 99bhp is quoted by Parkers as 1276kg.
Focus Style 1.5 TDCi 103bhp is quoted by Parkers as 1275kg.

[Cyril Haearn]

A decent used motor may be had for under a grand
A chelsea tractor costs much much more than double that

Are the drivers of chelsea tractors people just like us?

[bigjim]

I expect they don't worry overmuch what you think.

I thought the idea of paying a lot of money, for something you will not use to that much, is to impress others.

[old_windbag]

Focus Style 1.0 EcoBoost 99bhp is quoted by Parkers as 1276kg.
Focus Style 1.5 TDCi 103bhp is quoted by Parkers as 1275kg.

I got my figure from a road test when I was looking at second hand cars. I've searched for it but cannot find it, what I am finding are figures like yours from car spec sites that are nearly identical but as the 1.0l engine alone is 40kg lighter than the diesel engine I'd expect at least that to be present in the difference but it isn't. So what is balancing that difference alone, given body spec should be the same like for like.

[bigjim]

Surely the main criteria for any car is "will my bike fit in the back?".