Re: compare this what?

[harrison <hsapir@multiverse.com>]

Well, excuse the intrusion here, but the nice thing about these cars is that
they have nice rides, great creature comforts, and good performance. On the
same token, I would not be able to call the A8 a performance car with a
straight face. Good tires or not, it's a big boat of a highway cruiser with
the nice added feature of all wheel drive.

harrison

Michael Williams wrote:

> QSHIPQ decided to speak these words:
>
> >I'm not with you on this one.  Apples is Apples, when one is genetically
> >disposed to performance, the mutants better get some restructure.
>
> My point is that no 4000 lb sedan, no matter the weight distribution, or
> what not is going to be able to actually PERFORM.  Yeah, perhaps it can
> do a 0-60 time in the 6 second range, maybe it can corner, but lets be
> serious here.  Why would you want to have a car that heavy if you are
> looking for performance...that makes no sense.  So what if it is apples
> to apples, if the apples are luxurious apples grown to be extra tasty and
> crunchy, why compare them based on color or luster.  It doesnt make sense
> does it?  Why compare luxury sedans based on performance?  They are
> inherently SUPPOSED to have supple rides, isolated cabins, quiet,
> comfortable.  If a car is more sporty in nature, some of the luxury is
> removed.  Look at the Mercedes.  The S is a very large car and is not a
> performer by any means, however it is considered by many to be THE
> standard in luxury cars.  Why? Because it has a soft ride, comfortable
> seats, is quiet...those are the reasons these cars are made, not to do
> mountain twisties or the slalom at 65 mph.
>
> later...
>
> Michael Sheridan Williams
>
> My new one: 1985 4000 S Quattro
> 175,000+ miles, and going like a new car
> Well, went like a new car.....right into a guard rail :o(
>
> http://members.aol.com/daserde2