Lexus LS400? Luxury everyday or money pit waiting to happen?

Still, at least the passat should be around in 20 yrs time.

I think the main point everyone is making is that if they tell you not to do something and you do it please don't come here bitching about it when it all goes horribly wrong. ; )

Fraser

It never has gone horribly wrong, and quite often I was egged on. It is only the cars I've never bought that I have been put down over.

Youve spent to long on Retro-rides. Back to your lockup.

They were interesting from a "wow, he's in a Metrol cabriolet." Rover 100 / Metro, people still called them Metros. :)

Now the Rover Metro was a tidy little handling machine with any guise, the

1.4 GTa 8 valver was my favourite (not quick, but low gearing meant it was easy to keep on the boil, plus it was flexible). I'm glad I never crashed one mind.

For the rag top, it was noisy at speed, it was cold in the winter, but it was so uncool, it was approaching being cool again. Type thing.

But it's a four cylinder E-class, and must therefore fit into the "wrong" and "should have bought a six cylinder" categories.

A shame really, because they're good machines. I give in what the W blah blah blah means, 'cept we had an early frog eyed E220 CDI on the fleet at Norwich.

It had an great automatic transmission but was the least reliable machine we had...

Won't they all have been exported to Poland by then?

Since when has fair come into the equation?

Nav rallies, lowered/stiffened suspension, tiny car.... anybody else see an issue there? :-)

cheers, clive

What I meant to say was, yes, you're probably right - although the Fiat 1.25 fits in here, as does so I'm led to believe, the Punto GT's 1.4 turbo.

The Cinquecento Sporting I borrowed briefly had a suspension kit and strut brace. It was utterly stupid in the dry, it gripped and gripped and gripped. But in the wet it was an understeery mess. Oh and the ride did its best to break up the interior trim.

Conversely, the Ka on Ford Racing suspension with a brace doesn't have the same level of grip in the dry but it's much, much better in the wet and has a significantly more supple ride too.

You can't drive for toffee, then.

Mine was an over-steering beast in the wet.

I went in a GTi 16v one once - it hit the limiter in 5th at about 130 hehehe :-)

In Dervy's defence here the only figure I can find is from Parkers and says

8.9 seconds (possibly 8.7 I can't quite remember).

Never done one heh - I was just using the machine in question - I assume I'd have sump ripping issues?

Well, I'd argue the Cinq. is more girly anyway... I don't know any dudes that have ever owned a Cinq, but I know 2 girlies that have.

The GTi was mental in later multipoint 103 bhp guise. As a single point, 95 bhp, 16v K-series, it wasn't slow yeah but the multipoint went usefully better.

Dad had a GTa 16v, the cat-equipped, 90 bhp, 1.4i-16. And a bunch of other Metros, too.

The automatics were especially entertaining. You were always in second gear in 'em! :)

My Cinquecento was a metallicy red pink colour, does that count? :-p

Err, no, the set up was too stiff for a bumpy wet track.

Did you raise the rear tyre pressures above standard pressures then?

Absolute bullshit. Mine was dropped as low as you can possibly go - 49mm drop. It wasn't too stiff for Welsh mountain roads.

No.