What nonsense...

But a car on decent tyres with a good driver which has DSC and ABS is likely the safest of all...

The arrogance of it...

"Ret." gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

So when did you last drive a c900?

I have *never* driven a c900 - but if you think in an accident it will give you greater protection than a Golf then you are deluding yourself. You are also deluding yourself if you believe that your (self assessed) driving skill and the antiquated capabilities of your car will always get you out of trouble.

And one who doesn't think they're better than all the other drivers.

"Duncan Wood" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

If I thought I was as bad as THAT lot, I'd hang the keys up right now and walk home. Seriously.

The complete and utter lack of any kind of conscious thought or awareness displayed by the average f****it beggars belief.

People who try to park in spaces twice as long as their car and still end up either giving up completely or with one wheel on the kerb and the other a foot away from it.

People who just blithely pull out straight in front of oncoming HGVs.

People who see no issue whatsoever in parking across entrances or double- parking leaving no room for HGVs to manouvre out of loading bays.

People who - despite the prevalence of those - think that their Subaru or Cayenne has to be hammered everywhere, foot flat.

And that's just out of the office window on a typical light industrial road on the edge of town.

Then there's the 45mph-everywhere brigade. Clear, straight NSL or narrow twisty village lane.

8-) I was taught to brake, never to swerve, but I've never had an artic coming at me head-on, that might cause a change of direction, but which way to go is a gamble anyway, I learned that much keeping goal.

You might not have anywhere to swerve, in which case you have eased off the accelerator as you approach.

My daughter had a large truck pull across her path one morning, on a

50mph bypass road. She had nowhere to swerve...

The crumple zone at the front of her car just about saved her from losing an eye, if she had swerved on a wet road she would have taken a side impact..

Well, given the choice of avoiding the accident or plowing into them at a slightly reduced speed.....

Gordon H submitted this idea :

You obviously drive on very different roads to the rest of us.

Gordon H submitted this idea :

If there was nowhere to swerve to, swerving was not an option, but when trying to avoid an accident - you should be aware of all the options available to you, including accelerating, braking and swerving.

Indeed...!

I've driven a MkV Golf (same thing, essentially), in both petrol and diesel forms. Wasn't a huge fan. It's a very competent car, but it's completely devoid of any reason to like it.

Mind you, they are a hell of a lot better than the current Focus, which is what you get when you tell your designer that you want a Golf built for 20% less, but charge 20% more for it in the showroom.

But, anyway, some of us choose our cars because *we* like them, as they're entertaining and have some character - not because magazines tell us they're the most competently boring car in the class.

I even ran the risk of buying an Alfa 156 Selespeed with my company car money because I much preferred the idea of 100k miles in that, rather than yet another 3 years in a Passat.

Bad form, didn't realise you'd rambled on for so long.

'Turbos' doesn't have an apostrophe.

Your point is?

Erm, you haven't driven a C900 Turbo, have you?

The Saab has a lovely burble to it, rather than the dull sewing machine whine of a VAG TSI engine. Your Golf may be more economical, but Adrian didn't pay £15k on sub-prime finance for the Saab, either.

*snort*

I've met Adrian, and kind of know what he does.

I can assure you that he drives his Saab through choice, not through need.

I'm also pretty sure that he wouldn't need to take out kneecap finance if he lost his marbles and wanted to spunk £15k on a rapidly depreciating tub of lard, either.

In message , Harry Bloomfield writes

Probably at different times. I try to avoid those times of day when everyone is in a hurry, or at "school run" times or just after pub closing times. :-)

"Ret." gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Have you _ever_ considered _reading_ the posts you reply to?

Precisely that happened to my mother last year. Her car - 10yo Pug 306 - was written off. But she turned it round in the field, drove it back out of the hole in the hedge and fence, drove it home, and drove it around for the week or so before the assessor came to see it.

Again, you recall _tiny_ fractions which suit you. I don't regard cruise as particularly useful in the UK - else it would be working.

Sorry, it was "What Car?" that you mentioned barely five posts up this subthread, not "Which?". Same difference.

Again - my own direct personal experience of one counts for nothing, I presume? But that's OK. I'm apparently the arrogant one.

Sounds like that's a US (or incompetent) source, then. 155bhp would be a late T8. Mine's a T16.

UK T16s were 175 and 185, just under 8 sec, and about 140mph. Mine's got the highest gearing available, and I'm not a traffic-light GP person in the slightest - I'd far rather use the mid-range torque in 3rd and up. I've not seen it above an indicated 130. But it's a matter of about half an hour with a multimeter to get it to about 220bhp, perfectly reliably.

How often do you even get it to 60?

Really? 70mpg on a motorway cruise? I'd be very impressed. The Golf I had was a diesel - and in a week of commuting on the same route I get 25mpg average on, I got 33mpg from it.

Have I said it's a bad car for your needs? I have not. Unlike, I'd like to add, you of my choice. I've merely said it wouldn't be my choice. And it wouldn't. To that statement, you accused me of "arrogance"...

That was a cut 'n paste from a web-site.

That despite being a 2.0litre turbo - it isn't any faster than my 1.4 turbo.

There is virtually *no* engine noise inside the Mk Vl Golf. It is one of the quietest cars that I have ever driven. I don't get orgasmic over an engine noise...

The Golf will hold its value better than most of its competition. Residuals are very strong.

Yes, and?

F1 is going with 1.6 turbos in 2013. I can assure you that your 1.4 is going to look pretty sick at that point....

Yours is an over-complex dual-charged lump with very much unknown long-term reliability.

The C900 may seem old-tech and under-powered to you, but it's relatively simple engineering which can be maintained with nothing more than a socket set and a hammer.

Oh, yes there is. There is lots of engine noise in a Golf. Perhaps you just haven't driven anything that really insulates you from engine noise?

Given that the engine can be heard, I'd much prefer it to be a 'nice' engine to listen to, rather than a whiny little sewing machine lump.

(The Prius sounds a bit rough when you push it, but settles into a properly near-silent cruise - mind you, it'll drift along on electric power quite often when on flat / slight downhill motorways)

Well, that's still not very good. Not compared with a C900, which will be *appreciating*, so long as it's properly maintained.

"Ret." gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

You seem very sure of a lot of things about a car that you freely admit you've never driven.

Nor would I, after a decade in diesel R75s, now a Golf.

That's nice, dear. My Saab's roughly tripled in value in the three years I've had it.