Author Topic: Suzuki  (Read 10412 times)


marcus

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2676
    • http://marcusdemowbray.wordpress.com/
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2011, 04:49:16 PM »
That pic's the Renault, but in the link you can see the Suzuki Q concept and Regina.

All nice looking, but a complete waste of time, energy, materials and resources because nothing like them will be made. I am getting sick and tired of Concept Cars!
Just remember: as one door closes behind you, another slams in your face

Jonathan Poll

  • Jonny One Nob
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1132
  • Nobel 200 Anorak
    • Nobel 200 Restoration
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2011, 08:35:44 PM »
That pic's the Renault, but in the link you can see the Suzuki Q concept and Regina.

All nice looking, but a complete waste of time, energy, materials and resources because nothing like them will be made. I am getting sick and tired of Concept Cars!

I am tired of any new car.

Just look at this concept

Of course the real thing is different, but still ugly.

Why do they make cars so ugly?

Just chekc this out...


Who could like that? Not gonna show too many pics, but there are loads of ugly recent cars... Fiat Multipla (the 2001 model I think), the Chrysler PT cruiser (aka Piece of Turd cruiser), and loads more.

Some of the recent Renaults are OK, but not the best. I think a great idea was the VW scirroco... It was a rebodied Golf, just to make it look less "boring". New Audis and Mercs are lovely, but thats a higher range.

I really hope the new cars will be better in the future. The present ones are ugly as crap.
Cars: Messerschmitt KR200, Nobel 200
Mopeds:
- Peugeot BB3SP, BB3T, BB3 "BITZA", BB VT, BB104,  TSA, Bima Luxe,
- Motobecane: 50V, M7 SL, 51 Club, EV50
- Other mopeds: Malaguti Superquattro, Solex 2200, Puch Monza, Puch Maxi

marcus

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2676
    • http://marcusdemowbray.wordpress.com/
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2011, 08:41:12 PM »
Don't mind those so much. The new BMW X6, Porsche Cayenne, that big Chrysler saloon and the new bigger, squarer Mini Cooper and the Range Rover Vague are the plugliest monstrosities on the road.
Just remember: as one door closes behind you, another slams in your face

Chris Thomas

  • Administrator
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1261
  • old Banana
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2011, 10:20:52 PM »
Dear All

I think it is interesting that at least some of the major manufacturers are trying to develop what we recognise as microcars, which are small, light, and contain tandem seating, or three wheels. We may not like the looks, but at least if others like them they will draw drivers away from 4x4 trucks, and executive barges that are just getting bigger and bigger, using more and more fuel and just playing to the executive ego.

One day they will learn from Microcar history, and design a suitable vehicle

Chris Thomas

Big Al

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4578
  • Ranttweiler, biting the breeze block of banter
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2011, 07:52:49 AM »
I am not sure they are learning. Weight is a key element to a microcar. Chum has just bought a middle of the range car, a used Passat. Nearly two tons. Great, it does 52 MPG. What would that engine achieve in the similar sized Borgward at just over a ton. More than 52 MPG. Creating a small car means a choice. A small engine working hard or a larger engine not working so hard. The problem is the larger engine takes up more space. Add in all the rubbish people seem to think a car needs to have today and the lack of small low reving engines and clearly a new microcar being seriously marketed is about as likely as Greece paying off her debts. So we get these stylistic humbugs to pretend that they are working on it. In reality the are a only a few light cars left. Things like the Fiat sinkingchento. Everything else is heavy tackle while we beat our chests over being green, dig girt holes and create wastelands to purify platinum coated exhaust systems etc or other holes/wastelands making battery cars no one really wants so as to shift the pong to the power station and pretend to be green. None of this is sustainable or makes any sense at all really. It does make a profit though. Until State intervention or shear price forces the situation we are not going to get the best of the old technology married to the new and obtain genuinely green cars, be they microcars or anything else. Till then the greenest car is an older well used and maintained older car which strangely we are not encouraged to use - since no one makes any more money out of it.
Messerschmitt set, Goggo Darts, Heinkel 175, Fiat Jolly, Autobianchi, Fairthorpe Electron Minor, Borgward, Isuzu Trooper
Citroen BX 17TZD & GTI 16v
Held - MG Magnette ZB & 4/44
For sale - Vellam Isetta, Bamby, AC Type 70, Velorex, Church Pod, Reliant Mk5, KR200,  Saab 96, Bellemy Trials, Citroen BXs

marcus

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2676
    • http://marcusdemowbray.wordpress.com/
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2011, 08:12:29 AM »
One of the best small concept cars was the VW Scooter cabin thingy, clearly inspired loosely by KR200, but this was 30 or 40 years ago. Since then there have been scores of bubble/micro concept cars which have got no further than motor shows. They are designed to tease us into thinking there is new stuff around the corner, and to get good publicity and kudos for the company.

Out of scores or hundreds, we did finally get Smart cars, and their success HAS made a few people realise that it is not necessary for a lone commuter and his/her lap top to travel daily in a huge executive barge. Daewoo, Toyota and a couple of others have also had modest success with small cars, but none of them has looked like any concept cars or shared a single component with them, so as far as I know virtually every concept car has been a dead end, and therefore a waste of money and resources.

However there is one fundamental flaw of the Smart car: it is a one trick pony: only 2 seats and room for a sponge bag! We have a Suzuki Wagon R+. It is only very slightly larger than the Smart, has more power, can carry 5 people and a reasonable amount of luggage, or 2 people, drum kit, geetars and amps, or two people, picnic and Drum Car. It's better on motorways and long drives, slightly more economical, easier to service.....


.....and.....

..... our top-of-the-range one cost...

....less than half the price of a Smart Car!
Just remember: as one door closes behind you, another slams in your face

Barry

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1207
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2011, 08:39:08 AM »
I have a Smart Car diesel.
It has saved me over £2000 in fuel last year compared to my diesel Discovery on 10,000 miles
It is paying for it self and helping the environment.

You are right, it only carries two.  But I use a bigger car if we all go out - Family of 6 so no Suzuki I am afraid.

It is expensive but does not depreciate.

I commute 65 mile each way but only twice a week.  It is fast and keeps up with traffic easily.  It's a bit 'twitchy' due to the short wheel base and stiff suspension.

We have to weigh up everything when we choose a car.
It is not possible for everyone to have different cars for different conditions but I do think there should be incentives that allow families to run a family car and a commuter car.

The one thing I would say about a Smart is that its quite wide so the country roads are only a bit easier.  The Messerschmitt is much narrower but not quite as survivable under a Tractor.

« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 08:41:07 AM by Isetta_Owner »

marcus

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 2676
    • http://marcusdemowbray.wordpress.com/
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2011, 09:03:45 AM »
Don't get me wrong, I love Smart cars, have driven them and I think they have been BRILLIANT at getting a relatively small number of drivers to make a sensible choice.

 I completely agree about having different vehicles for different jobs. I do most of my daily shopping (domestic and business) on my bicycle, and although my Trojan is off the road at present I have used it regularly for loads too big for cycle safety/comfort. The Suzuki is next up our "transport ladder", great for carrying several people and/or luggage. Next up is our high top Transit van, and this is for heavy use, and for festivals and camping, and for taking bubble cars to distant places (room inside for Trojan and 6 seats and camping gear!)

I even have a normal bike and a small folding one, and choose them appropriately, the folding one is great for cycling to rail or tube station for onward travel by rail.

The interesting thing is that the Transit carries 6 people and an enormous amount of stuff, even more if we take out the back seat, and yet it is slightly narrower than the big Benz, Chrysler, BMW executive limos, and can get through London's countless width restrictions much quicker than those enormous luxury cars, usually with one sole occupant.
Just remember: as one door closes behind you, another slams in your face

richard

  • Rich
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4458
  • Bond ,Gordon,Bruetsch
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2011, 05:01:22 PM »
my only problem is they are not UNUSUAL microcars  ;) then again soapbox carts and even steam rollers aren't either  :)
outside of a dog a book is mans best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read .Groucho Marx 1895-1977

Jonathan Poll

  • Jonny One Nob
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1132
  • Nobel 200 Anorak
    • Nobel 200 Restoration
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2011, 05:53:43 PM »
I'm sure a low end Lotus is more economical than those heavy petrol cars...
Cars: Messerschmitt KR200, Nobel 200
Mopeds:
- Peugeot BB3SP, BB3T, BB3 "BITZA", BB VT, BB104,  TSA, Bima Luxe,
- Motobecane: 50V, M7 SL, 51 Club, EV50
- Other mopeds: Malaguti Superquattro, Solex 2200, Puch Monza, Puch Maxi

Chris Thomas

  • Administrator
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1261
  • old Banana
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2011, 06:13:37 PM »
Dear All

I would really like to take a Caterham 7 and change the engine  for something much smaller and economical, put on narrower low rolling resistance tyres, and see what sort of MPG you could get out of it. With low frontal area, low weight, and a smaller engine I would imagine it could be made to exceed 100 mpg. If I can get over 100 mpg out of my Honda, with something lighter it should be possible.

If the engine was 700 cc it could be called a Caterham 700. But would it be classified as a microcar?

Chris Thomas

Big Al

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4578
  • Ranttweiler, biting the breeze block of banter
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2011, 07:38:38 PM »

It is not possible for everyone to have different cars for different conditions but I do think there should be incentives that allow families to run a family car and a commuter car.


A valid point that could be made a sensible element of family tax credits or something as it ensures an increased effect to the larger family who could well do with a few extra sheckles. You have no idea how it pains me to say that!
Messerschmitt set, Goggo Darts, Heinkel 175, Fiat Jolly, Autobianchi, Fairthorpe Electron Minor, Borgward, Isuzu Trooper
Citroen BX 17TZD & GTI 16v
Held - MG Magnette ZB & 4/44
For sale - Vellam Isetta, Bamby, AC Type 70, Velorex, Church Pod, Reliant Mk5, KR200,  Saab 96, Bellemy Trials, Citroen BXs

Jonathan Poll

  • Jonny One Nob
  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1132
  • Nobel 200 Anorak
    • Nobel 200 Restoration
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2011, 07:46:15 PM »
Dear All

I would really like to take a Caterham 7 and change the engine  for something much smaller and economical, put on narrower low rolling resistance tyres, and see what sort of MPG you could get out of it. With low frontal area, low weight, and a smaller engine I would imagine it could be made to exceed 100 mpg. If I can get over 100 mpg out of my Honda, with something lighter it should be possible.

If the engine was 700 cc it could be called a Caterham 700. But would it be classified as a microcar?

Chris Thomas

You don't need cars to go top speed. Just look at the TG500. Fine, its now very rare and expensive, but what if they made cars lie that...

500cc with modern technology. Doesn't need a dome if they want to lower costs, could be a cabrio, or even a metal roof.

dont really need power steering on it, since its light, and rear engined. Small dampers worked fine in the days, so why not now?

It was the best car in its category in the old days, so it would surely be good these days with modern technology!

I don't know what to think about modern electric cars. Fine, quiet, economical, dont need fuel so good for the planet, but if 80% of the world uses electric cars, there will be less petrol stations, and it will cost more, and they may not even sell it after a while, which will really annoy us, we wont be able to use our old cars!
Cars: Messerschmitt KR200, Nobel 200
Mopeds:
- Peugeot BB3SP, BB3T, BB3 "BITZA", BB VT, BB104,  TSA, Bima Luxe,
- Motobecane: 50V, M7 SL, 51 Club, EV50
- Other mopeds: Malaguti Superquattro, Solex 2200, Puch Monza, Puch Maxi

Big Al

  • Prolific Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 4578
  • Ranttweiler, biting the breeze block of banter
Re: Suzuki
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2011, 07:59:05 PM »
Dear All

I would really like to take a Caterham 7 and change the engine  for something much smaller and economical, put on narrower low rolling resistance tyres, and see what sort of MPG you could get out of it. With low frontal area, low weight, and a smaller engine I would imagine it could be made to exceed 100 mpg. If I can get over 100 mpg out of my Honda, with something lighter it should be possible.

If the engine was 700 cc it could be called a Caterham 700. But would it be classified as a microcar?

Chris Thomas

The challenge would be to find the right engine perhaps. The theory is sound and in some ways it would be a more interesting car to drive as without the excess of power the skill of the driver would come very much more into play. Would it be a microcar? On the cusp I guess but go to a 500cc and the claim gets stronger. However that might take the car below the threshold of user satisfaction. You could do this experiment with a cheap Locost/Robin Hood abandoned kit car if you had the time and motivation to see if the result appealed before splashing a serious amount of cash.

I am not sure what class/category of car the Tiger was in other than itself? That is part of the appeal. It is just a cul de sac of automotive design for many reasons, some no more than fashion.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2011, 08:02:50 PM by Big Al »
Messerschmitt set, Goggo Darts, Heinkel 175, Fiat Jolly, Autobianchi, Fairthorpe Electron Minor, Borgward, Isuzu Trooper
Citroen BX 17TZD & GTI 16v
Held - MG Magnette ZB & 4/44
For sale - Vellam Isetta, Bamby, AC Type 70, Velorex, Church Pod, Reliant Mk5, KR200,  Saab 96, Bellemy Trials, Citroen BXs