28.1mpg.....

Nope. Alloy head with Inserts, since the early days of the 900 (started in 1979) the 900 and later 99's had a green petrol cap to indicate that they were unleaded ready. I can understand a Saab turbo wanting it if it was common in Sweden at that rating, as the APC uses the knock sensor to bleed off boost so higher octane fuel would help (it can be run as low as 92RON), especially (for a turbo) with the fairly high 9:1 Static compression, but was a bit surprised about the Volvo myself.

Big alloys with tiny disks hiding behind 'em are worse surely ;)

I think I know the ones you mean - got a picture?

Peter

Nope, defintaely designed for unleaded (in the case of the Ovolov anyway)

Scorpio here, lots of toys, very, very comfortable (easily the best I've driven for comfort.)

People say it is ugly. And their point is?

I don't get good mpg though. ;) Each to his own, I say.

Absolute tosh, in my humble opinion.

There's very little point in having bigger rims than you need for your brakes.

Worse still, modern alloys are heavy, so the unsprung weight is higher, which is detrimental to performance and fuel consumption. The Ka is slightly quicker and uses less motion lotion on 13s rather than 14s.

Yes... but not on the website yes.

Heheh, you're right, except it looks surprisingly in perspective.

Because the ride is harsh. Performance is dulled. And they're more expensive.

And still 25mpg. Damnit.

You havn't got a rubber band gearbox one and not told anyone have you?

Or are you just driving like it wasn't yours and forgetting its not a turbot diesel?

Douglas

Noticeably?

ROFL :)

Stop being a pikey :)

A Ka is hardly refined in the first place, so it can't make it much worse.

Heh. It's all relative, innit?

You're talking to the bloke who keeps a fuel log for his car...... the day I feel the need to do that is the day I drive off Beachy Head.

A while back my Dad suggested that I do the same - set up a spreadsheet and each time I fill up, record the number of miles/litres used, as his old flatmate used to do it and just by glancing at a graph he could easily tell if anything was amiss. I said that I can do exactly the same thing by just knowing how many mpg I should be getting, and quickly calculating it from each fillup (or using the trip computer) - if it deviates a massive amount from that, then something's wrong. No need for graphs, just a bit of common sense.

Peter

Clearly not.

Of course there is - they look nice !

Either leave your wheels alone, or put bigger ones on. Cars with non-standard small wheels, look ridiculous.

Yep. If you don't want that, then leave your standard wheels on there !

...but it looks like a steaming pile of turd :(

I just zero the trip-counter each time I fill up - average is about 250 miles per tank. It'd be very obvious if it suddenly varied.

Not with silly diddy brakes behind there. So before you know it, you've some 16s and some Mondeo V6 brakes... neither of which have really improved the driving experience unless you've a much more powerful engine... so you go out and get yourself a ZVH 2.0... then turbocharge it...

Part of my point is that the standard wheels are heavier than these replacements!

Your argument is flawed, because if I was really truly bothered about how the Ka looked, would I have one?

But in fairness,

You have spent silly amounts of money trying to make it look / perform better than the s**te heap that it is as standard, though.

Yes - 45 profile tyres are hard riding. 60 profiles remarkably less so.

Hehehe!

Some peeps on here use a lot of knowledge and a little bit of bias. You use a lot of bias and not much else.

Presumably you've tried many small cars back to back to compare the ride? Perhaps you too have logged approximately 3,000 miles in other small cars just to compare the ride.

Or you're just banging the no-Ford drum. Rich from one who bangs the Alfa drum... then buys something else for a commute.