http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/art...066293,00.html
It's sexy, does 186mpg and costs £7,500
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/art...066293,00.html
It's sexy, does 186mpg and costs £7,500
Bloody heck, that is amazing.
Sluggish though, 0-62mph takes 20 seconds.
Last edited by XA04; 12-03-2006 at 08:23 PM.
Yup, superb! But then it will get 1 star on the Euro NCAP, they'll have to redesign it with airbags and those bars that are designed to impact the dummy in places it doesn't have impact sensors and then it will weigh a ton and be crap.
Sweet. I'd have a GT, I love the idea of a light, aerodynamic car.
The makers, unsurprisingly, claim it will be as safe as any other car due to its contsruction with straight beams that are able to withstand a greater impact (deatils in the article). They say its a myth that heavier cars are safer.Originally Posted by TeePee
We would all be a lot safer with less school run army waggon sized 4x4's on the road anyway...
Oh, I agree... Lighter cars can brake better and swerve to avoid, etc as well. But to do well in the Euro NCAP test requires a car designed to do well in the test, and it favours heavy cars.
It will still do 250kp/h thoughOriginally Posted by XA04
Wouldnt mind a GT myself. Not out until 2009 thoughOriginally Posted by designer
i'm not convinced - ncap drives cars into a solid, stationary object - a lighter car has less mass pushing forwards thus less deformation of the front of the car - think about it - if you rolled a matchbox car into it at 40 it'd probably be fineOriginally Posted by TeePee
hughlunnon@yahoo.com | I have sigs turned off..
Last edited by SilentDeath; 12-03-2006 at 09:48 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)