 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Australian Car Forums / General Car Topics (Australian group) / October 2006New Commdore fails to excite
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,10166,20619922-462,00.html?from=public_rss And its still killing the dud 380 in sales. Charlie. > http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,10166,20619922-462,00.html?from=public_rss Subject is : NEW COMMODORE..... why are you nagging about 380... cant you read Charlie??? > And its still killing the dud 380 in sales. > > Charlie. > >> http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,10166,20619922-462,00.html?from=public_rss Isn't he comparing the sales of the NEW COMMODORE to the 380? Is that too complex for you? > Subject is : NEW COMMODORE..... > why are you nagging about 380... [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >>> http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,10166,20619922-462,00.html?from=public_rss > Isn't he comparing the sales of the NEW COMMODORE to the 380? > > Is that too complex for you? Why does there need to be a comparison? The article is correct about the VE, sales have been very poor compared to previous Commodore sales numbers but thats true about all large cars. Everyone keeps saying that Australians want large RWD cars, sales numbers suggest that that is a myth. Daryl "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- > Why does there need to be a comparison? > The article is correct about the VE, sales have been very poor compared to > previous Commodore sales numbers but thats true about all large cars. "Very poor" is stretching it just a tad. Figures are down compared to the days of the VT, but only by a 1000 odd units a month. The VE is currently selling around 40% better than the BF, so it's not *all* about large car phobia. In my opinion, anyone selling 5000+ new large cars a month at the moment is doing very well. > Everyone keeps saying that Australians want large RWD cars, sales numbers > suggest that that is a myth. Maybe, but two of the three most popular cars in this country are large rwd sedans. -- Regards, Noddy. > "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message > news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > units a month. The VE is currently selling around 40% better than the BF, so > it's not *all* about large car phobia. A lot more recent than VT. "The all-time monthly record was set in October, 2002, when 9667 Commodores were sold" They are down approx 4400 per month on their best so sales have almost halved since 2002, IMO thats very poor considering how much they spent on it. Maybe not "very poor" compared to its competitors but compared to only a few years ago the numbers are very bad. > In my opinion, anyone selling 5000+ new large cars a month at the moment is > doing very well. Thats true, things are not looking good for large car sales. >> Everyone keeps saying that Australians want large RWD cars, sales numbers >> suggest that that is a myth. > > Maybe, but two of the three most popular cars in this country are large rwd > sedans. True but overall sales of large RWD cars make up only a minor percentage of the total. Daryl "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message news:453ca1f2$0$488$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- > A lot more recent than VT. > "The all-time monthly record was set in October, 2002, when 9667 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Maybe not "very poor" compared to its competitors but compared to only a > few years ago the numbers are very bad. Not on yearly averages they're not. Some months splurge and some don't. -- Regards, Noddy. You're wrong. Back in the 'days of the VT', the Commodore was selling as follows: 1998 - 94642 (7887/month average) 1999 - 85648 (7137/month average) Now lets look at September 2006, with 5262 sales. Looks to me like that's some 2500+ units down on the 1998 average. But like you say, some months spike. So we really can't compare *one* month in 2006 to the overall average in 1998. The difference could eventually end up being far greater than 2500. > "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message > news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. > "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message > news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Regards, > Noddy. It would be interesting to see how many Falcadores would sell if the Camry, 380, Maxima, Sonata, and others were RWD. That would tell us if it's the size, drive train, or something else that makes the Falcon and Commodore more popular than any other large car.  SignatureBen Car related lyric of the week: "Can't you see me, overtakin? All the while I'm salivating. Won't you let me push a little thrust up you?" >> "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message >> news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > it's the size, drive train, or something else that makes the Falcon and > Commodore more popular than any other large car. Because Falcon and Commodore are percieved to be Australian cars. Just like the poms kept buying the rubbish they built themselves... but times are a changing. AU all over again.........GMH f.cked up real bad this time. > >> "D Walford" <walford@iprimus.com.au> wrote in message > >> news:453c9058$0$495$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader- [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > Just like the poms kept buying the rubbish they built themselves... but > times are a changing. > AU all over again.........GMH f.cked up real bad this time. Nope, nothing like the AU. The VE is still the best selling car in it's market segment, and it looks very good especially in it's SS guise. It has standard features not seen before on a locally built car as well. The current market has been affected by rising fuel prices more then anything else. The AU was ugly and really didn't offer any substantial advancement over previous models, hence it was a dud. t market has been affected > by rising fuel prices more then anything else. > > The AU was ugly and really didn't offer any substantial advancement over > previous models, hence it was a dud. I can think of a few. Uhm Oh they offered IRS oh wait only on some models. Then the dedicated LPG system. No that's not a real advancement either. Oh you said substantial advancement my apologies :-) SignatureRegards Dan >, and it looks >very good especially in it's SS guise. Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. Prove it :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. > >Prove it :) Show of hands? Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >> >>Prove it :) > > Show of hands? It's outselling everything else. >>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >> Prove it :) > > Show of hands? Mine hands up, the more VE's I see the less I like them but I did see a VE SS with an interesting rego plate today which I liked, O5RIP. Daryl >> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. > >Prove it :) Don't need to really....mine is also an opinion. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >> >>Prove it :) > > Don't need to really....mine is also an opinion. The problem with your opinion is that it is nearly always wrong. (Like in this case!) Reaper >>>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Reaper Problem here is that I didn't give an opinion......pity about you not understanding English. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > Problem here is that I didn't give an opinion......pity about you not > understanding English. Um so when you said "Don't need to really....mine is also an opinion.", you weren't really giving an opinion? Was that one of your famous "facts"? Pity you're as sharp as a vanilla slice :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> Problem here is that I didn't give an opinion......pity about you not >> understanding English. > >Um so when you said "Don't need to really....mine is also an opinion.", you >weren't really giving an opinion? Was that one of your famous "facts"? Ummm that would be my opinion that "many wouldn't agree" Here..read it "Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree." >Pity you're as sharp as a vanilla slice :) Pity you have such a small mental capacity. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > Ummm that would be my opinion that > "many wouldn't agree" So it *is* an opinion? :) > Here..read it > "Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree." But not *your* opinion, right? > Pity you have such a small mental capacity. I could have the mental capacity of Albert Einstein and still not "get" you. -- Regards, Noddy. >> Ummm that would be my opinion that >> "many wouldn't agree" > >So it *is* an opinion? :) Bwaaahahhahhahhahahhahahahhaaa! Yep, but a different opinion. >> Here..read it >> "Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree." > >But not *your* opinion, right? Oh No, It's my opinion that many wouldn't agree...not my stated opinion that the VE is an ugly beast. You see Nod, you're getting your self all confused again and you know what...I can't help you with this one. It's entirely up to you tp try and unravel your thoughts. >> Pity you have such a small mental capacity. > >I could have the mental capacity of Albert Einstein and still not "get" you. Yeah, I know, mental capacity has little to do with your inability to "get" simple conversations. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > You see Nod, you're getting your self all confused again and you know > what...I can't help you with this one. Forget it Oz. You just made yourself look like an idiot. Again :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> You see Nod, you're getting your self all confused again and you know >> what...I can't help you with this one. > >Forget it Oz. You just made yourself look like an idiot. > >Again :) You keep saying that..does it help? Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >> You see Nod, you're getting your self all confused again and you know >> what...I can't help you with this one. > >Forget it Oz. You just made yourself look like an idiot. > >Again :) If only you could follow a conversation, you'd see things as they really are. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > If only you could follow a conversation, you'd see things as they > really are. Sadly, there's enough people inside your head for there to be room for any of us, and that makes it a little hard. Give up Oz. The more you carry on with it, the dumber you look :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> If only you could follow a conversation, you'd see things as they >> really are. >Give up Oz. Yeah, I could go back and put he posts in chronological order...but then you'd need to understand what that meant. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >>>>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Problem here is that I didn't give an opinion......pity about you not > understanding English. So when you are saying you are offering an opinion you aren't really??? Hmmm.... you sure you aren't related to my ex mrs??? Reaper >>>>>> Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Reaper I offered no opinion on the VE, only that "many wouldn't agree" You're as silly as Nod it appears (an opinion) Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > I offered no opinion on the VE, only that "many wouldn't agree" In your humble opinion :) > You're as silly as Nod it appears (an opinion) Yeah, you're right Oz. It's the rest of the world, not you. -- Regards, Noddy. >> I offered no opinion on the VE, only that "many wouldn't agree" > >In your humble opinion :) Yep, my opinion that "many wouldn't agree...of course you snipped the rest to take my comment out of context. >> You're as silly as Nod it appears (an opinion) > >Yeah, you're right Oz. Thanks Nod. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >>>>> Don't need to really....mine is also an opinion. >>> Problem here is that I didn't give an opinion......pity about you not >>> understanding English. > I offered no opinion on the VE, only that "many wouldn't agree" Nope - you are even more confused than my Ex Mrs. Congratulations - that is one hell of an achievement! > You're as silly as Nod it appears (an opinion) Are you sure now?? Not that it matters as even you agree that your opinions are a waste of time. Reaper >Nope - you are even more confused than my Ex Mrs. Congratulations - that is >one hell of an achievement! Jesus...you really are a total fool. I post the sentence that I wrote and you still think I said something else. Here let me try just once more. "On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:17:14 +0800, "Clockmeister" <whowhere@andwhy.com> scribbled thusly: >, and it looks >very good especially in it's SS guise. Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you." Now can you tell me where in that post I offered an opinion on the VE? Look carefully now..try and remember your year3 english lessons. Here now, I'll give you a prompt. Clocky stated that the VE was a good looking car in SS guise. I then commented..."thanks for your opinion. Question,,Was I offereing an opinion on the VE? I then commented "many wouldn't agree" Is this an opinion on the VE? If you answer NO to both questions then you have passed simple english comprehension. If you answered YES to either or even both (god help you) then you have little understanding of English and should repeat Year 3. BTW is english asecond language in your home? >> You're as silly as Nod it appears (an opinion) > >Are you sure now?? Not that it matters as even you agree that your opinions >are a waste of time. > >Reaper Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > Now can you tell me where in that post I offered an opinion on the VE? > Look carefully now..try and remember your year3 english lessons. You really enjoy being a pedantic fuckwit, don't you? :) > Here now, I'll give you a prompt. > Clocky stated that the VE was a good looking car in SS guise. > I then commented..."thanks for your opinion. Yep. > Question,,Was I offereing an opinion on the VE? In reply to "thanks for your opinion", no. > I then commented "many wouldn't agree" > > Is this an opinion on the VE? Yep. > If you answer NO to both questions then you have passed simple english > comprehension. Bzzzzt. Wrong, unless you attended the Oz1 school for f.cking idiots. > If you answered YES to either or even both (god help you) then you > have little understanding of English and should repeat Year 3. > BTW is english asecond language in your home? Bzzzt. Wrong again. Your comment of "Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree" *was* in fact an opinion on the VE. By stating this you didn't claim that you personally didn't like it, but that "many wouldn't", which would indicate to anyone with half a brain that it is *your* opinion that there are people out there that don't find it an attractive car. An opinion on the VE in fact. Get back to us when you're *not* as dumb as dogshit Oz. Oh, and you might want to take a course in year 3 English some time soon :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> Now can you tell me where in that post I offered an opinion on the VE? >> Look carefully now..try and remember your year3 english lessons. > >You really enjoy being a pedantic fuckwit, don't you? :) Oh OK,,,,I'm being pedantic because I correct someone who accuses me of offering an opinion when I did no such thing. Whatever Nod..... >> Here now, I'll give you a prompt. >> Clocky stated that the VE was a good looking car in SS guise. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >Yep. Sorry Nod..it's NOT an opinion of the VE...It's an opinion of the statement NOT the car. IF I had said 'the VE is not a good looking car in SS guise ' then that would be an opinion of the car. >> If you answer NO to both questions then you have passed simple english >> comprehension. > >Bzzzzt. Wrong, unless you attended the Oz1 school for f.cking idiots. Seems you're a graduate! >> If you answered YES to either or even both (god help you) then you >> have little understanding of English and should repeat Year 3. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Your comment of "Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree" *was* in >fact an opinion on the VE Bzzzt wrong again! > By stating this you didn't claim that you >personally didn't like it, but that "many wouldn't", which would indicate to >anyone with half a brain that it is *your* opinion that there are people out >there that don't find it an attractive car. Exactly in my opinion, many would find the car unattractive...I DID NOT state MY opinion of the car. >An opinion on the VE in fact. Bzzzzt! Wrong again. An opinion that OTHERS not I may disagree. >Get back to us when you're *not* as dumb as dogshit Oz. Oh, and you might >want to take a course in year 3 English some time soon :) Nod...the fact that YOU have an inability to comprehend basic English has little to do with me..... Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > Oh OK,,,,I'm being pedantic because I correct someone who accuses me > of offering an opinion when I did no such thing. > > Whatever Nod..... Sorry to disappoint you Oz, but saying words to the effect of some people might not like the look of the VE is indeed offering an opinion, and about the car in particular. It might not be your opinion on the car's looks, but it's an opinion just the same and you offered it. End of story. > Sorry Nod..it's NOT an opinion of the VE...It's an opinion of the > statement NOT the car. f.ck... Is anyone else in this deep? :) > IF I had said 'the VE is not a good looking car in SS guise ' then > that would be an opinion of the car. Kinda, but to be precise that would be *your* opinion of the car. There's a distinction there Oz, and you can't see it. > Seems you're a graduate! Lol :) > Bzzzt wrong again! I'm really amazed that you don't get this. It's *basic*..... > Exactly in my opinion, many would find the car unattractive...I DID > NOT state MY opinion of the car. And now the penny has started to drop. You can thank me for giving you an "out" later :) > Bzzzzt! > Wrong again. > An opinion that OTHERS not I may disagree. Sure Oz, but let's clarify a few points here. Firstly, to play you at your own game of pedantry, you didn't claim that others "might not" agree, but that they *wouldn't* agree. An assumption on your part without fact, and by saying this, you have basically said "It's my opinion that some people don't like the look of the car". sh.t, was that an opinion about the VE that just wizzed by? Secondly, and probably more importantly, your comments were in reference to the attractiveness of a particular item, and by stating that "others wouldn't agree" you have given your opinion that there are people out there who don't find the car attractive (again, just to remind you, this is an asumption on your part). If this "opinion" of yours has nothing to do with the VE, then what "would they disagree" with? The taste of banana's? > Nod...the fact that YOU have an inability to comprehend basic English > has little to do with me..... The irony's so thick here folks you could drive a bus into the side of it and write it off :) -- Regards, Noddy. >> Oh OK,,,,I'm being pedantic because I correct someone who accuses me >> of offering an opinion when I did no such thing. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >might not like the look of the VE is indeed offering an opinion, and about >the car in particular. Bzzzt,,,Wrong...What is this "to the effect"? Just another way of putting your spin on what I actually said? I simply stated that some people would disagree with Clockys statement. Can you not see that in your blind efforts to try and prove that you are right again no matter what? >> Sorry Nod..it's NOT an opinion of the VE...It's an opinion of the >> statement NOT the car. > >f.ck... > >Is anyone else in this deep? :) You have friends in there? >> IF I had said 'the VE is not a good looking car in SS guise ' then >> that would be an opinion of the car. > >Kinda, but to be precise that would be *your* opinion of the car. Kinda? If I had said that then there is no "kinda"...... My opinion of the car? It looks like they designed it and thought it looked like the Astra...too small..so they tacked on a set of '70's flares to make it look bigger. They made it look like a small car with big flares something akin to a '70's Sports Sedan. >There's a distinction there Oz, and you can't see it. Yep, above is my opinion of the car...the other is an opinion of Clocky's statement. >I'm really amazed that you don't get this. It's *basic*..... I'm astounded that you'd keep prattling on about something when the facts are so plain to see. >> Exactly in my opinion, many would find the car unattractive...I DID >> NOT state MY opinion of the car. > >And now the penny has started to drop. What? I offer another unrelated opinion and now you're gonna try anf tie that in with the other....Jeez Nod, talk about shifting goal posts! >You can thank me for giving you an "out" later :) Never needed an out Nod..any thinking person would see the facts. >Firstly, to play you at your own game of pedantry, you didn't claim that >others "might not" agree, but that they *wouldn't* agree. An assumption on >your part without fact, and by saying this, you have basically said "It's my >opinion that some people don't like the look of the car". Ahh yes, you picked me up there.. My exact statement was "many wouldn't agree" Certainly an assumption without fact...IT WAS AN OPINION that many wouldn't agree that the VE looked good in SS guise. I basically siad NOTHING about the VE. I basically said that "many wouldn't agree" that it looked good in SS guise. You thick or ignorant? >Secondly, and probably more importantly, your comments were in reference to >the attractiveness of a particular item, and by stating that "others >wouldn't agree" you have given your opinion that there are people out there >who don't find the car attractive (again, just to remind you, this is an >asumption on your part). YEP, I was giving an opinion that "many wouldn't agree" that the VE looked good in SS guise. NO, Idid not offer any personal opinion of the vehicle or it's attractiveness. >If this "opinion" of yours has nothing to do with the VE, then what "would >they disagree" with? The taste of banana's? They would disagree with Clocky's statement that the VE looked good in SS guise if indeed they did not believe that the VE looked good in SS guise. But that would be the "many" not I. get it yet? I cannot explain it any other way..I've tried a few but you seem unable to comprehend. >> Nod...the fact that YOU have an inability to comprehend basic English >> has little to do with me..... > >The irony's so thick here folks you could drive a bus into the side of it >and write it off :) No irony Nod...just plain fact. Once again... I stated that "many wouldn't agree". An opinion that "many wouldn't agree" with Clockys statement the the VE looked good in SS guise. I did NOT offer any opinion of the VE is any guise until you asked for it. End of story! Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. <This is a deliberate snip here Oz. Don't be alarmed ;)> > Ahh yes, you picked me up there.. > My exact statement was "many wouldn't agree" Yeah, I know. > Certainly an assumption without fact...IT WAS AN OPINION that many > wouldn't agree that the VE looked good in SS guise. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You thick or ignorant? Ahem :) Read what you just wrote back to yourself dick f.cking head, and see if you can pick the error. I'll give you a tip: It's the line above that says "I basically said that "many wouldn't agree" that it looked good in SS guise." In this single sentence you're talking about "some people" and *the car*. It's your opinion that some people won't like *the car*. What f.cking *car* are we talking about here? Oh, yeah, the *VE*. You know, that car you're not making an opinion about? If you had said "Thanks for your opinion... Many wouldn't like to suck your cock" *then* I might have figured you were talking about something else. > YEP, I was giving an opinion that "many wouldn't agree" that the VE > looked good in SS guise. > NO, Idid not offer any personal opinion of the vehicle or it's > attractiveness. I never said you did. However, you claimed that you didn't give an opinion *at all*, and this is clearly not the case. Now :) > They would disagree with Clocky's statement that the VE looked good in > SS guise if indeed they did not believe that the VE looked good in SS > guise. Assuming for a moment that there is a "they".... > But that would be the "many" not I. > get it yet? > I cannot explain it any other way..I've tried a few but you seem > unable to comprehend. Oh no Oz, I comprehend just fine. Your problem is that you've taken a liberty to speak on behalf of others unknown and commented on what *you* think their reaction would be, when in reality you have no idea. All you've done is disclosed your own sentiments and then used this "many wouldn't agree" crap as a bullshit cover for it. *Then* you want to have a tanty over whether it's an opinion about the car, or people you don't know, or f.cking coconut meusli. And you think *I'm* thick? > No irony Nod...just plain fact. > Once again... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > End of story! Sure Oz. You're a perfect example of why people shouldn't leave school in Form 1 :) -- Regards, Noddy. On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:17:14 +0800, "Clockmeister" <whowhere@andwhy.com> scribbled thusly: >, and it looks >very good especially in it's SS guise. Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. My opinion that many wouldn't agree...with Clockys comment. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. >>, and it looks >>very good especially in it's SS guise. > > Thank's for your opinion...many wouldn't agree. I would. If I was looking for that sort of a car the SS would be near the top of the list. Or an XR6 turbo. Fraser >>>, and it looks >>>very good especially in it's SS guise. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Fraser I saw a few new Commies on our trip. One was a Calais V. Very nice and looked really smart in it's pale blue :-) Also saw a few Magna 380's in SA. I think they must have been owned by the workers... Also met a couple from WA who had travelled over the top and down throught QLD. I had to laugh but felt sorry for them at the same time. Every where the went, it rained. Hughenden where it rains in a pink fit, bucketed when they arrived. They waited four days in Hervy Bay to go over to Fraser Island, then gave up! I told then to go see the Mayor's of Forbes and Parkes, who would pay for them to stay :-) Ron >> AU all over again.........GMH f.cked up real bad this time. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > before on a locally built car as well. The current market has been > affected by rising fuel prices more then anything else. Yeah the space saver spare is an excellent standard feature as is the thumping 4 speed auto from the 80's. And the battery in the boot is a nice after thought. How does one check or refill the water? Climb into the boot with a flashlight? Really great in 3 years time when the battery dies and Mr Marshall comes out to replace it on your driving holiday when you have a boot full of luggage that you have to unload onto the side of the road so he can climb into your boot. Then he spills the acid on your boot carpet trying to pull the lump of lead out! > Yeah the space saver spare is an excellent standard feature as is the > thumping 4 speed auto from the 80's. And the battery in the boot is a nice [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > so he can climb into your boot. Then he spills the acid on your boot > carpet trying to pull the lump of lead out! Batteries in the boot are an excellent idea, as it helps with weight balance and extends the life of the battery some as they can be kept considerably cooler. Checking or changing the battery is no more difficult in the boot as it is under the bonnet, and if these are your "major" criticisms of the car then you've really got nothing to complain about, have you? :) -- Regards, Noddy. > Batteries in the boot are an excellent idea, as it helps with weight > balance and extends the life of the battery some as they can be kept > considerably cooler. Checking or changing the battery is no more difficult > in the boot as it is under the bonnet, and if these are your "major" > criticisms of the car then you've really got nothing to complain about, > have you? :) Im planning on having the battery in the boot in my HX Coupe and it will be out of sight. Anyways the VE has terminals in the engine bay incase you need a jump start. I know someone that has a dual battery set up in the back of his Nissan Patrol and he tells me that they do last longer and he has not had any issues with them located hidden in the back at all. SignatureRegards Dan "Serialpest" <silentshaft@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:45411cfa$0$14299$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au... > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> the road so he can climb into your boot. Then he spills the acid on your >> boot carpet trying to pull the lump of lead out! I bet if Mitsubishi had the battery in the boot you will be singing a different tune. But then again you can accept that the old Magna's looks like a penis on the front end. SignatureRegards Dan > Yeah the space saver spare is an excellent standard feature as is the > thumping 4 speed auto from the 80's. And the battery in the boot is a nice [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > can climb into your boot. Then he spills the acid on your boot carpet trying > to pull the lump of lead out! Obviously you haven't looked at one - it's behind a panel on the left hand side of the boot, inside the rear quarter panel. It's not hard to get at - and it's a maintenance free battery like most new cars have so there's no need to be checking and topping up the water. When it comes time to replace it, if you happen to have something in your boot it would just be a case of moving whatever was closest to the panel. It's a better location than under the bonnet as there's less heat, and allowed for the wheels to be pushed forward giving the VE its handling and styling advantage. Winning idea all round. Marco > AU all over again.........GMH f.cked up real bad this time. Yeah, of course they did. That's why it's the most popular car in the country right now. f.ck... Could you be any *more* of a retard? -- Regards, Noddy. > AU all over again.........GMH f.cked up real bad this time. Only to an imbecile as yourself they have. SignatureRegards Dan >Isn't he comparing the sales of the NEW COMMODORE to the 380? No...he's not...just quoting a news article. 'tis you making comparisons. Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. > >Isn't he comparing the sales of the NEW COMMODORE to the 380? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. And let me quote this from the news article: "Mitsubishi's 380 has also failed to deliver on expected sales" Sales of the 380 are down to a third of what the Magna/Verada had in 2002. A greater avalanche than the Commodore over the same period. >> >Isn't he comparing the sales of the NEW COMMODORE to the 380? >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Sales of the 380 are down to a third of what the Magna/Verada had in >2002. A greater avalanche than the Commodore over the same period. Great...the mention of 380 sales was made by the writer of the article..not the poster of the link. Point proven..Thank You! Oz1...of the 3 twins. I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.