"Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:rqJ0b.15819$Kx1.247790@newsfep4-glfd.server.ntli.net...
> "Jamesy" <beats@rootmeanTHESPAMMINGsquared.co.CUNTSuk > wrote in
message
> news:bhva7q$in2$1@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
> > "Dan405" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> > news:bhucdd$3e50o$1@ID-165560.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > > > > Yes, about as phenomenal as your spelling. The TT is a piece of
> > > overpriced
> > > > > overstyled excuse for a cut down Golf. Audis worst car of recent
> > times.
> > > > > Should have been shot at the drawing board, with the designer.
> > > >
> > > > >Brrappp<
> > > >
> > > > At least do your research first and get the correct floorpan[1] ;o)
> > > >
> > > > Betcha even think that it's made in Germany..?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure where it was made, but was it designed in a hair salon?

> > >
> >
> > Yes. The one next-door to the wine bar.
>
> This from someone who drives a Volvo with big aftermarket wheels? ;o)
>

....and an almost 300bhp engine.

Yes.

> H1K
>
>

 

> I moved from RWD to AWD (admittedly with a FWD Mini Scamp in the mix there
> somewhere). Like RWD, prefer AWD in most day-to-day circumstances.

day-to-day, unless you're madder than I am (unusual...) front/rear/all makes
little difference. Only when on track or pressing on hard on road will there
be any advantage.


> > On-demand is not, as long as it's at the demand of the driver, not at
the
> > whim of the chassis. RWD is luvverly, which is why the MGTF is more of a
> > sports car than the TT. And probably why I anhialated (sp?) the TT cross
> > country in an MGF.
>
> That sounds more like a driver boast, TBH. I've frequently annihilated
MGFs
> in my old Westfield, and the TT leaves the Westie for dead.

<thanks for the sp> Isn't a Westfield a lightweight Seven type thing with a
V8 motor???

> Nothing to do with handling, I hasten to add - just sheer grunt. Both
> smaller cars have the significant advantage of much less weight, but lose
> out both on track-style late braking (prefer the "safely fast" mantra, but
> let's be honest - the TT stops in a fraction of the distance or either
car)
> and in getting the power down past the apex.

Didn't notice the MGF Trophy (AP brakes as standard) suffering on braking,
or on nailing the power from the apex.

> As you said, the TT's a GT rather than a sports car, but it doesn't stop
it
> being quite rapid when competently driven. If you don't mind being brutal,
> then the TT will have significantly higher entry and exit speeds. As I
said,
> I prefer the smooth approach..

I don't think so. I think entry speeds of the TT are good, but exit crippled
by turbo lag and mass.

> I find it very difficult to believe the bit about speed, unless the TT
> driver was being *very* conservative. As goes the straights.. hmm.. what
> gearchange points during acceleration?

Unsure - I drove the TT hard, probably upchanging at 5-6, the MGF was run to
the redline (7000 iirc) but it's a while ago now!

> http://tinyurl.com/kp89 for a standard engine (note how low they are!),
and
> http://tinyurl.com/kp8b for a chipped.

Heh - chiptuning, the best thing about turbo motors...


> Note that you can only do this with ESP turned off - if you leave it
> switched on, then it'll have something to say about things, and will
> activate brakes and cut power as it sees fit. You /did/ have it turned
off,
> didn't you..?

I'll be honest, yes and no. If owner wasn't around I'd turn it off... But I
think he always left it on.

> As goes bang-for-buck then, yes, of /course/ there are more cost-effective
> cars. Starting with that Mini 850. How fast would an MGF have to go to
beat
> a £150 Mini on a tight-and-twisty? ;o)

heh! I used to love the mini, ours was a 1000 I think. How awfully unrefined
compared to modern stuff though!

> On a more serious note, a four grand Westfield would leave it for dead at
> anything up to about 75mph (where the brick-outhouse aerodynamics come
into
> play). And that's also ten grand cheaper ;o)

Where can I buy a new Westfield for 4 grand?

 

"Tim S Kemp" <news@timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bi2r1v$4bu$1@newsreaderm1.core.theplanet.net. ..
> > I moved from RWD to AWD (admittedly with a FWD Mini Scamp in the mix
there
> > somewhere). Like RWD, prefer AWD in most day-to-day circumstances.
>
> day-to-day, unless you're madder than I am (unusual...) front/rear/all
makes
> little difference. Only when on track or pressing on hard on road will
there
> be any advantage.

Hmm. Wouldn't say that - more of a balance thing. True, there are FWD cars
where it's hard to tell whether you're being pushed or pulled, but it's
usually fairly easy to tell once you start accelerating out of a bend
(thinking chiefly of the ratio of grip between steering and acceleration)

> > > On-demand is not, as long as it's at the demand of the driver, not at
> the
> > > whim of the chassis. RWD is luvverly, which is why the MGTF is more of
a
> > > sports car than the TT. And probably why I anhialated (sp?) the TT
cross
> > > country in an MGF.
> >
> > That sounds more like a driver boast, TBH. I've frequently annihilated
> MGFs
> > in my old Westfield, and the TT leaves the Westie for dead.
>
> <thanks for the sp> Isn't a Westfield a lightweight Seven type thing with
a
> V8 motor???

Yep - a bit too close to the Lotus 7 S3 for Caterham's comfort. The SE was
the result, looking a little bit different and with a better chassis (e.g.
welded rather than brazed) http://tinyurl.com/kqqo is the nearest thing that
I have to a picture on the site.

The SEiGHT is the V8 monster; mine was a lot more circumspect - an SE with a
four-pot developing 128bhp (not that bad for a 29 year old engine ;o) Dry
weight a tad over half a ton, and wet weight not much more (you don't get
far on the "touring" tank ;o) 60 in five seconds dead.

> > Nothing to do with handling, I hasten to add - just sheer grunt. Both
> > smaller cars have the significant advantage of much less weight, but
lose
> > out both on track-style late braking (prefer the "safely fast" mantra,
but
> > let's be honest - the TT stops in a fraction of the distance or either
> car)
> > and in getting the power down past the apex.
>
> Didn't notice the MGF Trophy (AP brakes as standard) suffering on braking,
> or on nailing the power from the apex.

Not suffering.. but not as extreme as the TT, I'd say. IIRC, talking
standard cars, only the a Porsche stops more rapidly (hence it being a
fairly popular mod). More on the power in a minute..

> > As you said, the TT's a GT rather than a sports car, but it doesn't stop
> it
> > being quite rapid when competently driven. If you don't mind being
brutal,
> > then the TT will have significantly higher entry and exit speeds. As I
> said,
> > I prefer the smooth approach..
>
> I don't think so. I think entry speeds of the TT are good, but exit
crippled
> by turbo lag and mass.

Mass, yes, but no turbo lag! On my chipped varient, there's a significant
drop below 3000rpm (I prefer the peakier performance to the fat 'n' lazt
standard approach - reminds me more of a tuned normally-aspirated engine
;o). The close-ratio box means that you have a fairly ample chance of
finding yourself in the right gear, and of finding a more appropriate one if
required.

4000-5500rpm is my preferred range. There's a small (260->250 ft-lb) drop
between second and third (corresponding to about 55mph), but that's about
it.

> > I find it very difficult to believe the bit about speed, unless the TT
> > driver was being *very* conservative. As goes the straights.. hmm.. what
> > gearchange points during acceleration?
>
> Unsure - I drove the TT hard, probably upchanging at 5-6, the MGF was run
to
> the redline (7000 iirc) but it's a while ago now!

Believe it or not, that's a little high - the torque starts tailing quite
rapidly from about 5000rpm (at 6500rpm, f'instance, torque has fallen from a
peak of 220 to 180 ft-lb).

The K-series, of course, will happily have its nuts revved off (always did
like that engine - shame that Rover didn't allow it to develop its promise)

> > Note that you can only do this with ESP turned off - if you leave it
> > switched on, then it'll have something to say about things, and will
> > activate brakes and cut power as it sees fit. You /did/ have it turned
> off,
> > didn't you..?
>
> I'll be honest, yes and no. If owner wasn't around I'd turn it off... But
I
> think he always left it on.

Makes a big difference - I'd also think that probably accounts for the poor
exit speed (on a typical British lane, the bumpy surface would have it
activating brakes and cutting power all over the shop)

> > As goes bang-for-buck then, yes, of /course/ there are more
cost-effective
> > cars. Starting with that Mini 850. How fast would an MGF have to go to
> beat
> > a £150 Mini on a tight-and-twisty? ;o)
>
> heh! I used to love the mini, ours was a 1000 I think. How awfully
unrefined
> compared to modern stuff though!

Oh yes. You only have to drive one to see how far we've come. And, perhaps,
how much we lost on the way (e.g. the current Polo is larger than the
original Golf)

> > On a more serious note, a four grand Westfield would leave it for dead
at
> > anything up to about 75mph (where the brick-outhouse aerodynamics come
> into
> > play). And that's also ten grand cheaper ;o)
>
> Where can I buy a new Westfield for 4 grand?

New, you can't. Second hand, you can. (Yes, I know that we were talking
about /new/ prices, but most kits are owner built). If you're talking new
and unsullied (i.e. less than 500 dry miles), then realistically you're
looking at around £10k for a pristine example (Vauxhall or Zetec), or about
£12,500 for a V8.

(I was planning to drop in a few links, but NTL's DNS seems to have given up
the ghost again & I can't remember the exact site that I used to look at)

H1K

 

> > Didn't notice the MGF Trophy (AP brakes as standard) suffering on
braking,
> > or on nailing the power from the apex.
>
> Not suffering.. but not as extreme as the TT, I'd say. IIRC, talking
> standard cars, only the a Porsche stops more rapidly (hence it being a
> fairly popular mod). More on the power in a minute..

60-0 - Audi TT 2.5, MGTF 135 2.6, MGTF 160 / trophy 160 has bigger brakes
and tyres as standard, can't find figures for it.
Also according Autocar, Jag S type , Renault Laguna, TVR Tuscan, Westfield
FW400 and MG ZT do 2.5, Merc SL500, Porsche Boxster S / 911 Turbo do 2.4.


> Mass, yes, but no turbo lag! On my chipped varient, there's a significant
> drop below 3000rpm (I prefer the peakier performance to the fat 'n' lazt
> standard approach - reminds me more of a tuned normally-aspirated engine
> ;o). The close-ratio box means that you have a fairly ample chance of
> finding yourself in the right gear, and of finding a more appropriate one
if
> required.

Ahhh... chipped....

> > Unsure - I drove the TT hard, probably upchanging at 5-6, the MGF was
run
> to
> > the redline (7000 iirc) but it's a while ago now!
>
> Believe it or not, that's a little high - the torque starts tailing quite
> rapidly from about 5000rpm (at 6500rpm, f'instance, torque has fallen from
a
> peak of 220 to 180 ft-lb).

But it's power that counts with accelleration, where's peak power for the
TT?

> The K-series, of course, will happily have its nuts revved off (always did
> like that engine - shame that Rover didn't allow it to develop its
promise)

K is a cracker of an engine range, small, light, rev-o-matic. I've read
somewhere that the 5 valve head in the VW lump is actually quite
restrictive.

> > I'll be honest, yes and no. If owner wasn't around I'd turn it off...
But
> I
> > think he always left it on.
>
> Makes a big difference - I'd also think that probably accounts for the
poor
> exit speed (on a typical British lane, the bumpy surface would have it
> activating brakes and cutting power all over the shop)

Sign of poor suspension control - if wheel were maintaining contact with the
ground then the ESP would do very little.

 

"Tim S Kemp" <news@timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bi1tlv$pk0$1@newsreaderm1.core.theplanet.net. ..
> > Now you see mate, i was with you up until the above point You flaw
> your
> > entire argument by disagreeing with ever other car enthusiast in the
world
> > and claiming that, for its time, the 205 wasn't the best handling hot
> hatch
> > available.
>
> It was the most dangerous hot hatch available. And French.
>
Only if it was a hairdresser driving it

If you have any sense of how to really drive a car you can use the
'dangerous' handling traits in your favour. Guess you're not quite
experienced enough as a driver. Better stick with your volvo and all its
fancy electronic gubbins.

 

"Tim S Kemp" <news@timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bi2r1v$4bu$1@newsreaderm1.core.theplanet.net. ..
> > I moved from RWD to AWD (admittedly with a FWD Mini Scamp in the mix
there
> > somewhere). Like RWD, prefer AWD in most day-to-day circumstances.
>
> day-to-day, unless you're madder than I am (unusual...) front/rear/all
makes
> little difference. Only when on track or pressing on hard on road will
there
> be any advantage.

eh?

What happens when it becomes slightly slippy when you're coming out of a
corner then?! Although saying that all modern RWD cars seem to be set up to
understeer anyway. I'm itching to get a RWD 'old skool' car, just need some
money

 

> If you have any sense of how to really drive a car you can use the
> 'dangerous' handling traits in your favour. Guess you're not quite
> experienced enough as a driver. Better stick with your volvo and all its
> fancy electronic gubbins.

Hmmmm - XR4x4 owner for three years, I think I qualify.

 

"Tim S Kemp" <news@timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bi7bf0$3ip$1@newsreaderg1.core.theplanet.net. ..
> > What happens when it becomes slightly slippy when you're coming out of a
> > corner then?!
>
> At "normal" road speeds with good tyres bugger all. Drove a 3 series
current
> shape) the other day - totally underwhelming yet ruthlessly effecient.
Very
> quick over ground, but never really felt RWD.


This is both their strength and their weakness. To most people going from a
RWD, the current 3-series feels broadly similar. Now if the driver
concerned isn't an especially keen driver, they'll never ever know what the
differences in handling are _until_ the first wintery frost.

My boss has a nice metallic grey 320d Tourer. He didn't know it was rear
wheel drive (not even the tyre wear gave it away) but was protesting that it
was "all over the place" in the frost, and "the ESP does nothing."

If you're gung-ho, it's possible to get them to behave as old school rear
wheel drive machines, and the bosses diesel estate did give a little
(wonderful diesel charge!) wriggle on a roundabout . . . but that said, they
feel very much diluted.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com

 

"T T" <RAMTT@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:16808-3F43F99B-52@storefull-2214.public.lawson.webtv.net...
> regardless what some of you may think about TT's, I've had my 225
> Quatro coupe for 2 years & I love it. Granted, there are faster cars out
> there, but no matter what you drive, there's always something
> faster.I've owned many 2 seaters ( & yes i'm aware the coupe isn't a 2
> seater so save your wise remarks). not all cars need to be fast to be
> enjoyable & i enjoy mine.


Therein is the point of the TT. It's a car that anybody can feel good in,
providing they like the car and the image.

For the keener driver, they perform well within certain limits, and
certainly if you're law abiding, should be just fine.

For the more enthusiastic of us, and in some respects like the current crop
of BMW and Mercedes Benz equivalents, they feel somewhat castrated.

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com

 

"Hairy One Kenobi" <abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:c5x1b.2152$L15.468@newsfep4-winn.server.ntli.net...
> "Carl Gibbs" <cagmeister@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:bi5e56$5e5qc$1@ID-166528.news.uni-berlin.de...
> >
> > "Tim S Kemp" <news@timkemp.karoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:bi2r1v$4bu$1@newsreaderm1.core.theplanet.net. ..
> > > > I moved from RWD to AWD (admittedly with a FWD Mini Scamp in the mix
> > there
> > > > somewhere). Like RWD, prefer AWD in most day-to-day circumstances.
> > >
> > > day-to-day, unless you're madder than I am (unusual...) front/rear/all
> > makes
> > > little difference. Only when on track or pressing on hard on road will
> > there
> > > be any advantage.
> >
> > eh?
> >
> > What happens when it becomes slightly slippy when you're coming out of a
> > corner then?! Although saying that all modern RWD cars seem to be set
up
> to
> > understeer anyway. I'm itching to get a RWD 'old skool' car, just need
> some
> > money
>
> Four grand.

errrrr, keep going down
>
> Westfield.
>
> ;o)
>
> H1K
>
> (If you want a posh one, then it'll cost more, in my case, replaced a
[new]
> '89 AXGT)
>
Not for a few years yet!