For some definition of the word "better". For example they "saved" Aston too, and now have made more Astons in on year than the entire production of the company before the buyout.
How many different engines do we need in a Taurus chassis, anyway?
No, a real one. 62 or 63 I think.
I lifelong dream has been realized. I've now seen the words "Ford" and "reliability" in the same sentance. (my family is 3 for 3 with the Ford experiment over 40 years. They just don't seem to work for us).
What? She didn't quote JD Power statistics to you? What's wrong with the youth of today?
That's what I said before I found out what it was. :-)
Right.
Wrong.
I don't believe it. Unless it was an old n/a 4-cylinder Esprite and the track was an oval where the Jag's power would make a significant difference, something is wrong with that review. Top Gear is more like automotive entertainment than it is a reliable source for performance data, IMO. They also claimed that some hopped-up version of the WRX STi was faster around a track than a Lamborghini Murciealgo.
It's not 'a' track, but *their* track. Which is not an oval, but a typical small twisty UK club type one. No straights long enough for any car to get near its top speed.
here's my take (996 cabrio driver in Germany)
The BMW Z3 and Z4 are great looking cars, real retro/nuevo looking roadsters. I like 'em plenty. If I had a bunch of cash and a twenty car garage I'd one one of both.
I really don't give a rat's ass about track times, etc.
The other day I was picking my son up from school, and there's this Mercedes Benz, concours, 190 SL cabrio parked in front of me. Wow! Silver paint, lipstick red interior, and a bakelite white steering-wheel. Hello! Sexy! At least as sexy/hot as an E-Type Jaguar of the same vintage. Lots of chrome trim and chrome bumpers that actually did their job back before *park assist* radar.
So, for me, it's not about class, track times, top speed. It's style plus performance. We own a 996 because my good wife always wanted a Porsche cabriolet, and we find ourselves at that point in life where we can afford one as a garage queen.
No, the "real Porsche" crack remains tired since so many uninformed folks keep using it.
I know what you said. The point is, you don't know the car or the driver, and have no basis for suggesting the failure was the result of infrequent oil changes.
See?
I agree with you. I said "it sounds like" not "it's because of".
Brilliant. You said it sounds like infrequent oil changes were the cause of the motor problems on a car that had oil changes at half the intervals recommended by the factory.
Exactly.
So... your point is?
Exactly what it's been all along - you have no knowledge of the service records of the car in question and are in no position to postulate the reason for the engine problem. It's a simple concept.
Absolutely. Maybe he didn't change the oil enough or something.
LOL! Jim, you are taking it too personally. Richard is suggesting a possible cause of early failure, not saying you or your dad actually are negligent in that respect.
I understand your point, but he suggested a cause that would be negligent maintenence without knowing any specifics about the car. Now that he knows the car got oil/filter changes at half the factory recommended intervals, he's still pushing the "didn't change the oil enough or something" BS.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.