holden VS ford

wrote:
Did I miss something? Isn't this the bike group.. cagers to the left?
:-P



Ummm, from an engineering point of view, bicycles and cars "DO" have
something in common



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Internal combustion engine with four wheels? Boring.



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Internal combustion engine with four wheels? Boring.



--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

yeah right
let me guess - you'd take the auto over the manual any day?


"Paul Jones" (nospam) wrote in message
...
now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

yeah right
let me guess - you'd take the auto over the manual any day?


"Paul Jones" (nospam) wrote in message
...
now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

technically unsophisicated, but still with a ton of power and heaps of
space. And usually much cheaper. Not only much cheaper to buy, but much
cheaper to insure and to fix. Check out spare parts costs of European
cars.

yes I definately would prefer a Falcon or Commodore. My current car is an
AU2 ex police car. (police mods include XR6 suspension, ABS, cruise) If I
could afford a Euro car, then I would have a more powerful Falcon of
COmmodore like an XR8 or SS. Or one with more space like a Fairlane or
Caprice. This means more to me than how quiet the car is, or whether
others at the coffee shop are impressed by the badge or not.

i would prefer a manual, but I drive an auto. That is because manuals are
hard to find.

Falcon wagons are great for transporting bikes! Dont even need to take any
wheels off.

Paul

Nicholas & Domino wrote:

yeah right
let me guess - you'd take the auto over the manual any day?

"Paul Jones" (nospam) wrote in message
...
now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

technically unsophisicated, but still with a ton of power and heaps of
space. And usually much cheaper. Not only much cheaper to buy, but much
cheaper to insure and to fix. Check out spare parts costs of European
cars.

yes I definately would prefer a Falcon or Commodore. My current car is an
AU2 ex police car. (police mods include XR6 suspension, ABS, cruise) If I
could afford a Euro car, then I would have a more powerful Falcon of
COmmodore like an XR8 or SS. Or one with more space like a Fairlane or
Caprice. This means more to me than how quiet the car is, or whether
others at the coffee shop are impressed by the badge or not.

i would prefer a manual, but I drive an auto. That is because manuals are
hard to find.

Falcon wagons are great for transporting bikes! Dont even need to take any
wheels off.

Paul

Nicholas & Domino wrote:

yeah right
let me guess - you'd take the auto over the manual any day?

"Paul Jones" (nospam) wrote in message
...
now compare the price and features of the Audi 1.8 to the 3.8 and 4.0
Falcons.

Give me the commodore or falcon anyday

Paul

amirm wrote:

Twisties wrote:
holden

Both and none. Both because they both are great cars for the value
(Falcon and Commodore). None, because they are still technologically
unsophisticated, lagging behind Euro's. I vote for my Audi A4 1.8TQ.

--
--------------------------
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

Depends whether you like your turds to be solid or soft...

"Twisties" wrote in message
...
holden