mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Why no MGs?

To: "'Paul Root'" <proot@iaces.com>, <mgs@autox.team.net>
Subject: RE: Why no MGs?
From: "Dean T. Lake" <dtlake@erols.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 11:15:01 -0400
Well put Paul!  I have had arguments with other auto enthusiasts about
what constitutes a sports car.  These can be otherwise intelligent and
informed motorheads, yet they have in their minds the concept of "sports
car" with "super car" completely confused.  There is not enough
discussion about handling FEEL - that is, the total driving experience.
There's lots of rambling about how one hp curve compares to the next.  A
sports car used to almost be defined as much by what wasn't there as
much as what was there.  These days, by that criterion, there are no
sports cars.  What defines "sports car" has evolved to include power
windows, cruise control, and ac.  That's OK by me, but it is part of the
allure of older, less cushy cars like our MG's.  Just one correction,
Paul, though one that in no way contradicts your essential point:  with
110 hp you can not out accelerate most other cars, you just choose to
use what you have when they don't, probably because you are actually
enjoying yourself as opposed to just thinking about getting home to
watch reality TV ;-).
 
Dean
 
 
 
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Root [mailto:proot@iaces.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2003 10:45 AM
To: Dean T. Lake
Cc: 'Paul M.'; mgs@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Why no MGs?
 
 
 
Dean T. Lake wrote:
 
> Paul, you mention the 318ti - it was coincidentally the car that I was
> pondering to complement my B roadster when I decided to simply combine
> the two concepts and get a GT.  The ti is such a practical, yet neat
> little car.  The big strike against it from my perspective (besides
BMW
> pricing) was that it needed the straight six (which they could get in
> Europe) to go with the some 2800 pounds.  
 
The big problem, apart from the excessive weight of the 318ti is/was 
that American drivers are too lazy to drive a car. The expect instant 
gratification and are completely unwilling to take any responsibility.
 
Drivers need to get back to driving their cars instead of being a 
passenger that happens to have a steering wheel in front of them.
 
Auto journalists can be partly blamed with things like, "wow, this
is a great car, except, with only 600HP it's not as snappy as it could
be. We need the 800HP engine in it." Ok, maybe no one wrote that, but
words to that effect. Peter Egan was the only writer I saw that said 
that the 1.8l in the Z3 was a good choice, if  you actually drove the
car.
 
Though one magazine did say that the best balance in the new Mazda6 was
the 4 cylinder with the 5 speed. That's an exception.
 
I can out accellerate most drivers on the road with my 626 with 110HP or
so, and something wrong in the dizzy/coil that loads up at 4000. And of 
course, in my B. Because I plan ahead.
 
And no, I'm not a great driver. I'm an average driver. As was shown in 
the Mazda Rev-it-up series over the summer. I guess I get a bit better 
as I get more time in a car
 
We don't need bigger engines, we need brains that are actually on while 
driving.
 
Paul.




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>