So we're sitting there in the Tyntesfield temporary tea tent, when in strides this bloke in combat boots and a utilikilt. I nearly hailed him, since the fellow was the dead spit of
reddragdiva, only with grey hair. Perhaps an uncle. He was accompanied by a fey young woman in a fetching floaty frock
(
Read more... )
Providing you aren't in a desperate hurry to get anywhere, and that you're not carrying several cubic fathoms of passenger/cargo, an underpowered car can be remarkably fuel-efficient and reliable. It just goes horribly wrong when you try to break either of those preconditions for sustained or repeated periods. Furthermore, underpowered is fun. Mel's stupidly over-powered Volvo 440 1.8 injection is certainly fast, and exhillerating on the motorway, but is it any fun on the kinds of B and C roads we have locally? No, it's like trying to steer a stampede of shirehorses. Whereas, my Tonka is more like a happy bouncy kitten, able to dart around corners, never missing grip for a moment, and bounding around unadopted byways with ease (sure, this cat-like spring is only evident with only one or two adults; fill up with more generous passengers and it crawls). Now I don't doubt for a moment that there exist sports cars which combine power with control, but they're generally in the "I could just about afford that, but for the same money I could extend my house to double its size" price-bracket and they seem to spend most of their life being fixed (although I admit this mechanical failure rate could be more down to the driving style of the kind of person who values a sports car above an extra two bedrooms).
Reply
but, Richard's RX8 is *more* fun. power doesn't need to mean handling like a volvo 440. and being able to whip past the traffic like a motorbike, and accelerate hard enough to pin you against the seat is hilarious. having the ability to take 20mph corners at 60 *and* being able to get to 120 in a heartbeat is amazing.
Reply
Leave a comment