Seek info about road tax

#21

"Zathras" <webnewsgroup (AT) nospamthanks (DOT) hotmail.com> wrote

Quote:

On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:23:40 +0100, Conor <conor (AT) gmx (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

In article <3qrjd5d4fudlbkngrkflpifkqcdig3r7vp (AT) 4ax (DOT) com>, Zathras says...

IIRC, the 4G63 engined Mitsubishi Evo was 1997cc! You have something
more potent up your driveway then? ;-)

1997cc is classed as 2L...

pedant
When I was at school I was told that 1997 was less than 2000? 1997cc
is still less that 2L to me (regardless of the rounding conventions of
others).
/pedant

Just curious but, why is having a big, heavy engine a sign that
someone cares about motoring? I have a 2993cc..er..sorry 3L
engine..does that mean I must care a lot or just a little?

I think it's a willy-waving type of situation.

If yours is smaller you can't possible care , or some such nonsense
--
Alex

"I laugh in the face of danger , then I hide until it goes away"

#22

Dr Zoidberg wrote:

Quote:

"Zathras" <webnewsgroup (AT) nospamthanks (DOT) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ltfkd5dh3pdi0sm0sttt42g73eickn2e05 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com...
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009 18:23:40 +0100, Conor <conor (AT) gmx (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

In article <3qrjd5d4fudlbkngrkflpifkqcdig3r7vp (AT) 4ax (DOT) com>, Zathras says...

IIRC, the 4G63 engined Mitsubishi Evo was 1997cc! You have something
more potent up your driveway then? ;-)

1997cc is classed as 2L...

Just curious but, why is having a big, heavy engine a sign that
someone cares about motoring? I have a 2993cc..er..sorry 3L
engine..does that mean I must care a lot or just a little?

I think it's a willy-waving type of situation.

If yours is smaller you can't possible care , or some such nonsense

Once you've spent a lot of time driving larger petrol engined cars the
smaller capacity engines lose a lot of their appeal.

That's not to say that smaller engines can't be very good indeed, but
I'm a fan of the bigger stuff. I don't like 99.9% of diesels either.

--
Pete M - OMF#9

'62 Rover P4 100
'61 Rover P5 3 litre
'78 Escort 1300 Sport
'99 Audi A6 V6 Quattro Avant

"It's an Alfa, it will go wrong, it will piss you off, why should your
Alfa experience be different from everyone else's.
Now get back out there and swear at it before something else breaks."

#23

On Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:40:01 +0100, Pete M
<pete.murray (AT) SPAMFREEblueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Quote:

Dr Zoidberg wrote:
I don't like 99.9% of diesels either.

The current BMW 3 litre diesel must be present in more than 0.1% of
diesels - what's wrong with that one?

--
Z

#24

Zathras <webnewsgroup (AT) nospamthanks (DOT) hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

Quote:

I don't like 99.9% of diesels either.

The current BMW 3 litre diesel must be present in more than 0.1% of
diesels - what's wrong with that one?

Which version? x25d, x30d or x35d? They're all "the current BMW 3 litre
diesel", but very different to drive.

#25

Halmyre wrote:

Quote:

In article <MPG.2543e7431b625f0098981e (AT) news (DOT) eternal-september.org>,
conor (AT) gmx (DOT) co.uk says...
In article <hbch2t$9q9$1 (AT) news (DOT) eternal-september.org>, Pete M says...

Unless the engine is below 1450cc or thereabouts, when the single tax
bracket suddenly isn't so single.
Didn't know. Haven't had an engine that small for about 2 decades.
Anything below 2L is driven by people who don't care about driving.

Hang on, that excludes Mini drivers, MX5 drivers, Lotus Elan drivers,
Caterham drivers, Alfa Duetto drivers, in fact a lot of Alfa drivers, etc.,
etc...

And implies that people who choose Diesel Mondeos, Passats, Kia
Magentii, SsanYong Rodiuses and Rover 75s of their own accord can
possibly enjoy driving, which quite clearly isn't the case.

--
Douglas

#26

On 18 Oct 2009 20:12:03 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

Zathras <webnewsgroup (AT) nospamthanks (DOT) hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

I don't like 99.9% of diesels either.

The current BMW 3 litre diesel must be present in more than 0.1% of
diesels - what's wrong with that one?

Which version? x25d, x30d or x35d? They're all "the current BMW 3 litre
diesel", but very different to drive.

What's wrong with any of them other than the x35d often being attached
to an auto box?

--
Z

#27

Zathras wrote:

Quote:

On 18 Oct 2009 20:12:03 GMT, Adrian <toomany2cvs (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Zathras <webnewsgroup (AT) nospamthanks (DOT) hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

I don't like 99.9% of diesels either.
The current BMW 3 litre diesel must be present in more than 0.1% of
diesels - what's wrong with that one?
Which version? x25d, x30d or x35d? They're all "the current BMW 3 litre
diesel", but very different to drive.

What's wrong with any of them other than the x35d often being attached
to an auto box?

They're diesels.

(And auto transmission is quite often the only way to make diesels
almost tolerable, don't have to row the autos along with the gearlever..)

--
Pete M - OMF#9

'62 Rover P4 100
'61 Rover P5 3 litre
'78 Escort 1300 Sport
'99 Audi A6 V6 Quattro Avant

"It's an Alfa, it will go wrong, it will piss you off, why should your
Alfa experience be different from everyone else's.
Now get back out there and swear at it before something else breaks."

#28

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:39:40 +0100, Pete M
<pete.murray (AT) SPAMFREEblueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Quote:

Zathras wrote:
What's wrong with any of them other than the x35d often being attached
to an auto box?

They're diesels.

Sorry I don't understand. Taking a middle of the road variant from my
list, what's wrong with the engine in a 2009 330d? Too slow? Too
noisy? Too smoky? Too unrefined?

Quote:

(And auto transmission is quite often the only way to make diesels
almost tolerable, don't have to row the autos along with the gearlever..)

Why would you 'row' a 2009 330d? With the available performance, it's
trivial to block change and chop the rowing by half. I do concede that
6 gears is nonsense for that engine and can lead to rowing if you're
an unskilled driver who doesn't block shift.

However, I don't see the point of having a sporty car with a standard
auto box. If you wanted a lazy-driving settee on wheels then fair
enough but I've not often heard of BMWs described as soft and supple
enough for that. More often it's complaints of the opposite.

--
Z

#29

Zathras wrote:

Quote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:39:40 +0100, Pete M
pete.murray (AT) SPAMFREEblueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Zathras wrote:
What's wrong with any of them other than the x35d often being attached
to an auto box?

They're diesels.

Sorry I don't understand. Taking a middle of the road variant from my
list, what's wrong with the engine in a 2009 330d? Too slow? Too
noisy? Too smoky? Too unrefined?

(And auto transmission is quite often the only way to make diesels
almost tolerable, don't have to row the autos along with the gearlever..)

Why would you 'row' a 2009 330d? With the available performance, it's
trivial to block change and chop the rowing by half. I do concede that
6 gears is nonsense for that engine and can lead to rowing if you're
an unskilled driver who doesn't block shift.

We've been through this a million times. Turbo Diesels have very narrow
useable torque 'bands', so to get decent progress you have to change
gear a lot. In the better modern turbodieseasels with their 7 speed
autoboxes diesels inherent and unavoidable drawbacks are not as obvious
they are in a manual diesel.

The apologists who go on about modern car diesel engines having loads of
torque obviously haven't driven anything that has proper 'always
available' torque. Try a Bentley Turbo R back to back with a Merc diesel
and you'll be shocked at how agricultural the diesel engines power
delivery is - even compared to a 20 odd year old petrol.

Of course, if you're an inexperienced driver you're not going to know
what is good and what is hype.

Quote:

However, I don't see the point of having a sporty car with a standard
auto box. If you wanted a lazy-driving settee on wheels then fair
enough but I've not often heard of BMWs described as soft and supple
enough for that. More often it's complaints of the opposite.

I don't see the point in having a car with a diesel engine other than
cheapskatery.

Having owned over 200 cars, and having driven what must easily be 5000
by now, I know what I like and it's not diesel engined.

--
Pete M - OMF#9

'62 Rover P4 100
'61 Rover P5 3 litre
'78 Escort 1300 Sport
'99 Audi A6 V6 Quattro Avant

"It's an Alfa, it will go wrong, it will piss you off, why should your
Alfa experience be different from everyone else's.
Now get back out there and swear at it before something else breaks."

#30

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 23:25:40 +0100, Pete M
<pete.murray (AT) spamfreeblueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Quote:

Zathras wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 01:39:40 +0100, Pete M
pete.murray (AT) SPAMFREEblueyonder (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Zathras wrote:
What's wrong with any of them other than the x35d often being attached
to an auto box?

They're diesels.
Sorry I don't understand. Taking a middle of the road variant from my
list, what's wrong with the engine in a 2009 330d? Too slow? Too
noisy? Too smoky? Too unrefined?

(And auto transmission is quite often the only way to make diesels
almost tolerable, don't have to row the autos along with the
gearlever..)
Why would you 'row' a 2009 330d? With the available performance, it's
trivial to block change and chop the rowing by half. I do concede that
6 gears is nonsense for that engine and can lead to rowing if you're
an unskilled driver who doesn't block shift.

We've been through this a million times. Turbo Diesels have very narrow
useable torque 'bands', so to get decent progress you have to change
gear a lot. In the better modern turbodieseasels with their 7 speed
autoboxes diesels inherent and unavoidable drawbacks are not as obvious
they are in a manual diesel.

The apologists who go on about modern car diesel engines having loads of
torque obviously haven't driven anything that has proper 'always
available' torque. Try a Bentley Turbo R back to back with a Merc diesel
and you'll be shocked at how agricultural the diesel engines power
delivery is - even compared to a 20 odd year old petrol.

Of course, if you're an inexperienced driver you're not going to know
what is good and what is hype.
However, I don't see the point of having a sporty car with a standard
auto box. If you wanted a lazy-driving settee on wheels then fair
enough but I've not often heard of BMWs described as soft and supple
enough for that. More often it's complaints of the opposite.

I don't see the point in having a car with a diesel engine other than
cheapskatery.

Having owned over 200 cars, and having driven what must easily be 5000
by now, I know what I like and it's not diesel engined.

So why didn't you buy the V8 A6?