Car production line stolen!!

[miro]

What's so wrong with the Blenheim? I can think of plenty of worse looking cars......

Where did you find a colour photo of this classic.

 

[miro]

But they're a niche car, for eccentrics who don't see cars as a statement, so normal ideas about value and looks don't count. There appears to be enough drivers who like the idea of simplicity, a separate chassis and coachbuilt body to keep them in business. Same goes for Morgans - it makes no sense to some to buy a wooden-chassis car with rigid axle and antiquated ride and handling, but that's what some drivers want. Long may they continue. These sort of cars cannot be compared to mass-produced cars in terms of price and spec.
I think the McLaren SLR is ugly.....I'd rather have one of these - 0-60 in 3.5 secs, and 225 mph at 4500rpm? Now that's eccentric...

It's all fun till someone gets killed and then they drag the head engineer into the courts to explain why he was using the Rosetta Stone as a guide to car design. Rubbish is rubbish. What they value most is this myth of being the most reliable car ever made and they intend to maintain that position by avoiding anything which is known to have a limited shelf life. Most of us can bear the thought of keeping the car in running order.

 

[Howard]

Where did you find a colour photo of this classic.

Ah AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAHHHHAHAHA !!!

So subtle !! Quality ....

 

[MBManInKen]

But they're a niche car, for eccentrics who don't see cars as a statement, so normal ideas about value and looks don't count.

There is eccentricity and then there is stupidity. If some fool wants to pay over 150 grand for some old technology and looks of the 70s, that is their business, but the existence of such people does not imply that (a) such cars are "better" or (b) more "prestigious" IMHO.

I'm not too keen on having cars on the roads that don't even have the most basic safety features, it's not just the eccentrics that drive them that are put at danger (their problem really), but other road users as well. I can understand that economicaly perhaps it is not yet possible to have all new cars fitted with such essentials (in my view) as abs, brake assist or esp and I can understand that there is a legacy of existing cars without those features, but building new cars of 150K without such provisions is in my view irresponsible and should just not be allowed anymore.

Relics are good and well, but they should be in the relics cupboard, not on the public roads. Note that because of the very small number of cars they make, they are also excempt from crash testing their cars. I wonder if they tell their clientele that?

These sort of cars cannot be compared to mass-produced cars in terms of price and spec.

Why not? They come at a premium price and aspire to be exclusive. Shouldn't the "exclusive" label put them ahead of the mass-market produce, rather than way back?

I think the McLaren SLR is ugly.....

Oh, don't worry, I agree with that .

I'd rather have one of these - 0-60 in 3.5 secs, and 225 mph at 4500rpm? Now that's eccentric...

No thanks, not for me, I value my comfort (and the health of my back ) too much .

 

[Dave Lewis]

Where did you find a colour photo of this classic.

Here's another (in colour!): 2007 Morgan plus four....the scuttle shakes, the ride is rock-hard, they use wood in the construction, the hood leaks, they need re-building every few years, and there's a waiting list for these, too.

 

[janner]

I'd rather have one of these - 0-60 in 3.5 secs, and 225 mph at 4500rpm? Now that's eccentric...

Looks a lot like a 1970's TVR...

 

[Swiss Toni]

1. People who buy modern Bristol Cars
2. People admitted to hospital suffering from infections due to self-administered tattoos.

These are two groups of people who are neither "eccentric" nor "individual".

 

[Dave Lewis]

I'm not too keen on having cars on the roads that don't even have the most basic safety features, it's not just the eccentrics that drive them that are put at danger (their problem really), but other road users as well. I can understand that economicaly perhaps it is not yet possible to have all new cars fitted with such essentials (in my view) as abs, brake assist or esp and I can understand that there is a legacy of existing cars without those features, but building new cars of 150K without such provisions is in my view irresponsible and should just not be allowed anymore.

ABS is not a neccesity, I don't like it. It just increases braking distances. If I could switch it off on my 124, I would. If you have good brakes with good feel, good tyres, and know how to cadence brake, stopping distances are much shorter on slippery roads without ABS. Judging by the way people tailgate on motorways in the wet, most drivers seem to think that they're invincible with ABS.

Relics are good and well, but they should be in the relics cupboard, not on the public roads. Note that because of the very small number of cars they make, they are also excempt from crash testing their cars. I wonder if they tell their clientele that?

The separate chassis construction actually makes them very safe for the occupants. The accident figures for Bristols are actually much better than most cars. There are very few about anyway. Have you ever seen a Blenheim on the road, or any other Bristol?
The esteemed (eccentric) motoring journalist LJK Setright has a good handle on Bristols, he understands them, has owned them, and thinks they're marvellous. And he's certainly not stupid.
Morgans have live rear axles, cart springs, no ABS, separate chassis, and cost the same as an SLK. They're not comparable though, any more than a Bristol and a Bentley Continental are. Both Morgan and Bristol are still in business though, so they must be doing something right.

 

[MBManInKen]

ABS is not a neccesity, I don't like it. It just increases braking distances. If I could switch it off on my 124, I would. If you have good brakes with good feel, good tyres, and know how to cadence brake, stopping distances are much shorter on slippery roads without ABS.

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense and it mixes up a lot of different issues. ABS does make a car a lot safer on wet surfaces, try the cobblestone roads of my native Flanders for a start. ABS is not intended AFAIK in the first place to shorten the braking distance, but to keep the car (a) from sliding across the surface and (b) by maintaining steering ability. And by the way, ABS will shorten the braking distance compared to non-ABS braking on the same surface. Most people happily forget to mention the last part when talking about ABS braking distances.

When the ABS is not active, there is no reason why the braking distance should not be the same as without ABS AFAIK.

I learned to drive before cars commonly had ABS and consequently went on a course to learn cadence braking and a few other techniques. I can tell you: anyone who claims they are as good in pressing/depressing their brake pedal as an electronic system, is just deluding themselves.

The main point however is that the truth is that most people are not able to keep their vehicle under control when braking hard on a wet road, and even amongst those that do, many will be caught out by unexpected nature of an emergency - after all this is not about demonstrating cadence testing as part of some training, where you are well concentrated and aware of what is coming, but about the real world where suddenly you have to brake hard on a slippery surface.

I might be old school in terms of having learned to drive in an era before all these advanced features, but that experience is not making me arrogant enough to think I don't need them. In fact, I would not even remotely consider a car without ABS and stability control.

Judging by the way people tailgate on motorways in the wet, most drivers seem to think that they're invincible with ABS.

This is no argument against ABS, although it is one of those classis non sequiturs that this type of discussion always seems to generate. Yes, some people are under the misapprehension that ABS means they can now ignore the laws of physics, but that is in no way invalidating the usefulness of ABS as a system, although it might say something about the education of drivers.

The separate chassis construction actually makes them very safe for the occupants.

The point is that there is no objective data to prove their safety - this is all speculation spiced up with some nostalgia for the good old days. I will happily take my s-class with its up to date crash protection features and 8 airbags over some 70s style vehicle. In case you hadn't noticed, cars today are a lot more safe than back in the 60s and 70s and your chances of getting out alive are statistically a lot better in a modern car than in one of those days, even a chassis based one. There is more to crash safety than just a chassis based design.

The accident figures for Bristols are actually much better than most cars. There are very few about anyway.

I think you have just provided your own answer: there is no statistically relevant data for Bristols.

The esteemed (eccentric) motoring journalist LJK Setright has a good handle on Bristols, he understands them, has owned them, and thinks they're marvellous. And he's certainly not stupid.

If he thinks they are either better or safer than a 21st century car, then he certainly is stupid. People tend to let nostalgia cloud objective judgement. The fact that they get away with it or even are admired for it does not make it any less stupid, frankly.

Both Morgan and Bristol are still in business though, so they must be doing something right.

Depends on what you define "right" as. Business is business, as long as you find enough customers paying for what you offer, it makes business sense. That's really all that there is too it, making business sense does by no means imply that what the business is offering is either good, better than the competition or even overall of any use. If you doubt that, then consider the fact that lots of people spend money on crazy frog ringtones, the fact that a lot of the stuff sold on tv shopping channels is plain tut, or the highly profitable business of selling all kinds of snake oil type products.

Finding a few fools forking out lots of dosh for old tut does not prove that it isn't tut to begin with.

 

[glojo]

ABS is not a neccesity, I don't like it. It just increases braking distances. If I could switch it off on my 124, I would. If you have good brakes with good feel, good tyres, and know how to cadence brake, stopping distances are much shorter on slippery roads without ABS.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you are the first person I have heard of, that in a life or death situation has the presence of mind to carry out cadence braking. I have witnessed a number of road traffic incidents and on the very very few that I have seen the drivers eyes, they are the size of golfballs (not literally). In 99.9999% of incidents where the driver has time to apply the brakes, they will apply them as hard as possible. I have NEVER been in a situation where I needed ABS in an emergency, but using it in a test environment I can still even years later feel the seat belt cutting into my shoulder. ABS is a brilliant innovation as are most of the electronic braking gizzmo's that are on modern cars. Buying a high performance vehicle is really all about image or ego. There is NO WAY anyone will use its full performance on the rural roads of Great Britain. Around town I would be disappointed if I could not keep up with any car if I were driving the lowest powered A-class unless the other driver had a death wish and was driving recklessly.

Sorry to disagree and I accept you might be the driver that in an emergency might well out perform a modern car with modern braking options.

Regards
John

 

[bolide]

The esteemed (eccentric) motoring journalist LJK Setright has a good handle on Bristols, he understands them, has owned them, and thinks they're marvellous. And he's certainly not stupid

If he thinks they are either better or safer than a 21st century car, then he certainly is stupid. People tend to let nostalgia cloud objective judgement. The fact that they get away with it or even are admired for it does not make it any less stupid, frankly

You can accuse LJKS of many things but stupidity is not something he was acquainted with. I suspect his liking of Bristol cars was based on something far cerebral and subtle than "better" or "safer"

Unfortunately he's no longer with us and that leaves us all poorer

Nick Froome
www.w124.co.uk

 

[BonzoDog]

But they're a niche car, for eccentrics who don't see cars as a statement, so normal ideas about value and looks don't count. There appears to be enough drivers who like the idea of simplicity, a separate chassis and coachbuilt body to keep them in business. Same goes for Morgans - it makes no sense to some to buy a wooden-chassis car with rigid axle and antiquated ride and handling, but that's what some drivers want. Long may they continue. These sort of cars cannot be compared to mass-produced cars in terms of price and spec.
I think the McLaren SLR is ugly.....I'd rather have one of these - 0-60 in 3.5 secs, and 225 mph at 4500rpm? Now that's eccentric...

I'm partly with you. All this swooning about Ferrari's and Noble's or Gobblers whatever they are called is somewhat fashion led.
We were just on holiday in Knokke, Belgium. On the seafront was a display of Ferrari's from a Ferrari club form somwehere. Our two families were not impressed they were just too girly European for our tastes. A little later a club of Corvettes arrived and lined up nearby. Real cars, that will go all day, every day, don't cost an arm and a leg and are a great drive.
Always had a soft spot for the Bristols though.

 

[Mr E]

In 99.9999% of incidents where the driver has time to apply the brakes, they will apply them as hard as possible.

I'll have to dig out the stats/research, but it's probably round the other way - we don't get close to hitting the brakes hard enough, which is why we've had developments like Brake Assist.

I've been fortunate enough to have had training in a car where the ABS could be switched off. The results were quite interesting:

1. Dry surface - not much between ABS and non-ABS in standard operation, except that you can stamp on the pedal all you want in the ABS car and it allows you to keep control. Under cadence braking (compared to standard ABS operation) the car stopped quicker. I asked why, and it's due to weight transfer - ABS operates too fast for the correct transfer of weight to occur and the front end remain loaded.

2 Wet / mixed surface - ABS wins hands down, especially in emergency conditions.


The best bit of advice from the day was to take your car out (in the wet and the dry) on a quiet road and practice using the brakes. You'll also get an idea what the stopping distance is for your car - but the lesson lies in then applying this knowledge to everyday driving.

The instructor said that if you had ABS intervene more than once a year then you were really putting yourself into situations that you shouldn't be in, so use it as a warning to modify driving behaviours and not just as a safety net.

Strange how may drool over TVRs, but the same arguments could be presented about them as Bristols, etc......

 

[BonzoDog]

Check out ugly cars - there's hundreds of 'em, and Bristol don't even get an honourable mention.....

It has the classics like the Marina and Ssongyang (Sing Song) but while it rightly includes the Cayenne, it excludes the Audi Q7. This, when it also gives the Merc R class a big raspberry.
Worst of all though it includes the Citroen DS. My father had one and it was a revelation in comfort and fantastic looking for its time and, in my view, still is.

 

[grober]

A luddite speaks!

I can see arguments on both sides. I am 100% in favour of electronic driving aids which assist/enhance the driver to control a car or increase passive safety. This would include ESP, ABS and AIRBAG /SEATBELT TECHNOLOGY. I am not so certain about systems that begin to "take over" what I would call driver command decisions like brake assist/radar controlled collision avoidance systems or lane guidance systems. On the other hand unnecessary electronic system integration (without well designed software or hardware backup /redundancy) results in cars that are unreliable and a nightmare for technicians to repair. Mercedes ill judged dalliance with complex ( and some might say superfluous) Bosch et al electronic technology, (which MB freely admit now was never adequately tested in an integrated setting in cars in the real world ) did much to damage their reputation for reliability in last few years. A car that is relatively free of complex technology has a certain appeal under these circumstances. No point in owning an expensive/exclusive car if its spends months off the road at the dealer being repaired.

 

[Parrot of Doom]

If people want to buy Bristols, and spend a lot of money doing so, then thats fine. What on earth does it have to do with anybody else?

I bought my TVR with practically zero safety aids. Didn't bother me. If it did, I wouldn't ride my bike on the roads.

Personally I think Bristols are lovely looking cars. Theres nothing ugly about the Blenheim, its Ronseal all over.

Oh and I'd love to know how an ABS equipped vehicle can stop in a shorter distance on dry tarmac than a similar vehicle with the wheels locked. It might retain control, but it certainly won't stop any quicker.

 

[prprandall51]

Who is to say that Bristol wouldn't jump at the chance of fitting ABS / ESP if they could afford to?

It isn't the cost of the parts, it's the cost of the engineering of the system to suit the car that costs so much for small-time manufacturers of limited production runs.

If we legislate that ABS, ESP, etc. is a legal requirement, we can look forward to a car marketplace denuded of small-scale specialist manufacturers.

No more Rocket, Morgan, Bristol, Noble, Lotus, Caterham, and many others. That would be a sad world.

And people would still continue to drive into each other because they will still be stupid.

 

[Dryce]

The esteemed (eccentric) motoring journalist LJK Setright has a good handle on Bristols, he understands them, has owned them, and thinks they're marvellous. And he's certainly not stupid.

Make no mistake. LJK was not stupid. But his prespective was a bit different from most of us which is what made him so interesting. But not always right.
I always felt LJK and Bristols were a good match.

 

[BonzoDog]

The Bristol is also one of the few luxury cars that is both good looking in the flesh and understated except for the latest version. I recently felt as though I had been at a Bentley convention when visiting a do with some friends. It confirmed that Bentley has taken over form the old Rolls Royce in that it is driven by people with an affinity for wearing a lot of gold everywhere. I suspect that there will soon be a version with gold-plating. Most of them i am sure would eschew a Bristol, thank goodness. It is not just about ABS and BLING.

 

[glojo]

I'll have to dig out the stats/research, but it's probably round the other way - .

Sorry,
I certainly did not explain myself very well and what your saying is certainly more accurate. In a real life panic situation the driver rarely gets the full benefit from the brakes. They think they are applying maximum pressure is a much better wording On some modern vehicles they can recognise the foot lifting off from the accelerator onto the foot-brake in emergency situations and then the vehicle applies the foot brake more aggressively.

Stopping in a test situation bares no resemblance at all to life or death accidents. When we watch old footage of motor sport just watch drivers completely locking up their tyres when they realise they have made a whoopsie. I have no opinion on folks buying whatever cars they want, nor what braking systems those vehicles have.

The instructor said that if you had ABS intervene more than once a year then you were really putting yourself into situations that you shouldn't be in, so use it as a warning to modify driving behaviours and not just as a safety net..

He is being very polite. Good observation and anticipation are the cheapest life saving 'accessory'

John