Bill Gates

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I don't think we find things such as one hundred thousand million dollars to complicated. Look at our deficit...

Maybe that's the problem?
Someone told Dubya it's four hundred thousand million and he didn't realise that was four hundred billion (to you lot) so he doesn't realise how bad it is?

Notice you didn't deny you find gears and clutches complicated (sorry couldn't resist)

[Jerrek]

I drive a standard. Most people prefer driving automatic, or just don't care. You guys probably drive stick because cars are so expensive over there. All the luxury cars have automatic transmission anyways.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I drive a standard. Most people prefer driving automatic, or just don't care. You guys probably drive stick because cars are so expensive over there. All the luxury cars have automatic transmission anyways.

I actually find automatics really really annoying.
Maybe it's a control thing, or just the great feeling I get from dropping down from sixth to fifth and leaving the bmw on my tail for dust

Luxury cars have an international market, which means selling to the US.
If they were manual, then that would reduce the american market, so it makes more business sense to have auto as default.

[Jerrek]

So only Americans can afford luxury cars?


While I like driving standard, I do find the performance and the sense of a computer calculating optimal efficiency appealing. When I floored the Corvette, the computer automatically took the cue and dropped two gears down in microseconds, far faster than you could have done it by hand.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

So only Americans can afford luxury cars?

OK, let me explain it simply.
The US is the biggest wedge of the luxury car market, and the luxury car market is nowhere near as big as the non-luxury car markey.
Now, the car manufacturers could build automatics specifically for the US market and manual for the rest, increasing production costs.
Or, they could use a bit of business sense and make automatics as default and save the production costs.


It's what mobile phone/PDA manufacturers wish they could do.
At the moment, the US market is more interested in PDA's, the European more for phones.
Consiquently, in europe people are more keen on a phone with some PDA functions, and in the US people are more keen on a PDA with some phone functions.
So, Nokia wants to build a device to sell to both markets, problem is, both markets are different, so Nokia would have to develop two seperate devices and sell them to their respective markets, or risk producing a hybrid on the two market's needs which neither market really takes up.
If the majority of the market wanted a PDA with some phone functions, Nokia could just produce one saving the extra development costs.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I drive a standard. Most people prefer driving automatic, or just don't care. You guys probably drive stick because cars are so expensive over there. All the luxury cars have automatic transmission anyways.

I thought this was more a historic thing. The Europeans did not adopt to them as fuel was more expensive and they were less economical. They only had 3 gears, too.

Nowadays they are more economical, have an equivilant number of gears, smoother shift, computer control, but its a change in mindset, and when they are still often a cost option on what is an expensive purchase you might as well press a clutch.

A good auto box makes for faster driving than a manual box (not faster 0-60) but point to point. The police high speed patrol cars are all auto, its a safety benefit as the driver should not need to be thinking about what gear they are in but just the pursuit and their surroundings. At the premium end of the market they are a prerequisite in both markets, a Merc or Jag with a stick will be about £1-2k cheaper second hand (as with missing leather seats - that'll teach 'em to park in Liverpool).

[Xaccers]

Well the BMW auto I drove had terrible lag when you put your foot down.
The worst auto I ever had the mispleasure of driving was an astra, would get to about 67mph, then decide to change up gear, which caused the revs to drop, so the car would slow, then the gearbox would change down, revs go up, speed back to 67mph, and unless I went downhill I'd be bouncing between the two top gears and not be able to reach 70!

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Well the BMW auto I drove had terrible lag when you put your foot down.
The worst auto I ever had the mispleasure of driving was an astra, would get to about 67mph, then decide to change up gear, which caused the revs to drop, so the car would slow, then the gearbox would change down, revs go up, speed back to 67mph, and unless I went downhill I'd be bouncing between the two top gears and not be able to reach 70!

Even in Sports mode?

What engine did the Astra have, sounds like it was not powerful / torquey enough for an auto box.

The last one I drove (properly) was my Dads BX1.9i Light car, powerful 'nuff engine, that could be driven fast, overtaking was great. Probably not as good as the 9-3 I drive now.

[Steve H]

Didnt know Bill gates was a car model

[Xaccers]

Yup even in sports mode.
I'd put my foot down, and wait, and wait, and whooooosh it would fly, but it just seemed to take an age.
I owned a Xantia 1.9TD so I was used to pretty instant oomph when I put my foot down.

I think the astra had a 1.4 or 1.6, waaaaaay too underpowered.
It was back when I had a company car and if I was unlucky the auto was the only courtesy car they had. In the end I'd ask for their combi van as it had better performance!

[Jerrek]

I have no idea what an astra is. Anyways, why would you want to "accelerate" with a 1.4 or 1.6? That isn't even an engine. My lawnmower has a bigger engine.

With the Corvette it was different. You floor it, and it immediately flipped two gears down, revs at 6,000, going from 120 km/h to 190 km/h in a blink of an eye. Maybe BMW should learn from the Americans.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I have no idea what an astra is. Anyways, why would you want to "accelerate" with a 1.4 or 1.6? That isn't even an engine. My lawnmower has a bigger engine.

With the Corvette it was different. You floor it, and it immediately flipped two gears down, revs at 6,000, going from 120 km/h to 190 km/h in a blink of an eye. Maybe BMW should learn from the Americans.

The astra (made by a company owned by GM) was what I expected, underpowered and pants.
The BMW was the suprise.

[Jerrek]

We don't have Vauxhill here. They make underpowered, dinky cars. No wonder you guys laughed at me when I said I have a GM credit card. Our GM has Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, and other companies.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I have no idea what an astra is. Anyways, why would you want to "accelerate" with a 1.4 or 1.6? That isn't even an engine. My lawnmower has a bigger engine.

With the Corvette it was different. You floor it, and it immediately flipped two gears down, revs at 6,000, going from 120 km/h to 190 km/h in a blink of an eye. Maybe BMW should learn from the Americans.

'bout the same size as a Chrysler Neon. What we in blighty would call a small family car and you would call a compact car!

[Jerrek]

Chrysler Neons have 2.0L engines, right?