Comments by "Lynott Parris" (@DenUitvreter) on "Doug DeMuro" channel.

  1. The very first Countach, in a softer kind of yellow, was the only one without questionable additions. Great clean design, shame the louvres didn't let enough air in to cool the engine adequately.
    29
  2. Yes, and killing the catalyst converter. Very costly mistake to make.
    27
  3. I believe he's selling this car a bit short on the handling too. Yes, it's unapologetically front wheel drive and build for comfort, but it's got a much better comfort/body roll ratio than any conventionally sprung car till very long after. The engine so far in front helps in the snow, it sits like a rock at high speed on the Autobahn helped by the onconventional steering and it can be thrown about without drama or surprise. It will understeer and roll, but keep going in the right direction, the rear will follow the front.
    18
  4. It might have been more restrained and sublte, when it came out it was a remarkable design. It might have been one the 90's semi-retrotrendsetters, but the big side outlets and C pillar angles were pretty wild for it's day. Not in a shoutabout away, but in origniality and being different of the design.
    16
  5. The brilliance of the Citroen engineers makes me mad at the marketing and board people, it's lack of sales killed real Citroens forever. - You got by the most comfortable car in it's class, why not also a longer version like with the CX? Then you have comfort as a statement and everyone who wants to work in the car would have to consider it. - You got different settings on the suspension, and then you make a 'sport' setting that's still too soft for motoring journalists who always like to be the keen driver/ hard suspension type. It's a luxury, comfortable car, but also the top model. Why not put a bore out the engine for the flagship model? The car gets introduced and has a disadvantage on the competition straight away. Yes, it excells on comfort but that's not an excuse not to keep up with the competition on power. They had a gem that could save Citroen as a luxury brand and as a manufacturer that did things differently, but they wasted it on a few wrong choices.
    9
  6. I don't agree at all, it's great design, same language throughout the car, it's form follows function. It's is butt ugly but that's because the form follows the function. It's ugly in a convincing, unapologetic way because the exterior shows it's about interior space. They decided not to hide it's proportions but emphasize them, and it still looks better than all the ugly cars that try to hide their ugliness in bland anonimity. It's place in the MoMa is just as well deserved as it's topping the list of many ugliest car of all times competitions.
    7
  7. They just hadn't worked out how to design a cup and saucer holder yet.
    4
  8. What about the kid in the middle? Where is his ash tray? Should he reach over the other passengers? That's not luxury.
    4
  9. I do actually remember it from the 80's allthough not being an adult then. But I remember it as an Austrian project from Steyr Puch. Maybe I remembered wrong but Steyr did a lot of 4x4's, there's some connection to the name Magnum I believe. Anyway, the car magazine described it, an early version, as meant to be a Range Rover competitor, but judged it to handle poorly, not being comfortable and way too expensive, so I guess it's the same car.
    3
  10. Mercedes own explanation was precision, the very unAmerican concept of your hands being better than something electric.
    2
  11. Japan is also a cycling country, I would not like to pass a parked car in the dark and suddenly have a piece of car inches from my head. No matter how little the door sticks out, cyclists can pass parked cars very closely and you just don't expect something there.
    2
  12. It's actually not that original. Citroen Karin concept and Lancia Stratos Sibilo concept combined.
    2
  13. I think I understand. Limitations are what makes car design interesting and with 1000+ horsepower within reach for all manufacterers and then building small numbers for 2 million it's still an engineering achievement but only in top margins. When Koenigsegg builds a four seater then it suddenly becomes very interesting because it's a limitation they have to be very creative for, which they were. Building relatively big numbers for a reasonable price is limitation to what you can do also, and that does indeed make them more interesting. .
    2
  14. It looked very sharp back then and the vertical, estate like, back end was something quite new for a hatchback. To be fair to Honda, they made a daring challenge to the European small hatchtback market. It wasn't a boring Japanese car in Europe at all.
    1
  15. With European cars of the 70's and 80's in mind I wasn't surprised at all 60 hp makes it go. Those under 800 or 900 kilo cars really don't need much. Just revs and turn off the radio uphill.
    1
  16. Mercedes believed the manual control of the mirror to be more precise so they refused to make that part of the car less good than they could just for a feeling of luxury. Didn't the E stand for Einspritzung, injection in English btw.?
    1
  17.  @chrisdavidson911  Indeed, they distinguished themselves from the Germans by beeing undermotorized and have the sports setting of the suspension too soft and not have a longer version. The could have had the Chinese market with the local obsession with rear seat leg room. Skoda made great money there. But at least the C6 showed inspiration, the thing a Citroen absolutely can't do without. With the Xsara and the C5 the looks were a give away of the structural problem at Citroen.
    1
  18. I suspect it's Japanese, but that's about all.
    1
  19. I'd like to see him do a Tatra T113, the Renault AvanTime, a ZIL, some 70/80's Saabs, Lada Niva maybe, a Citroen SM. an Espada and the 70/80's Maserati Quattroporte.
    1
  20.  @pablorey9203  How could I forget that one.
    1
  21.  @armadillolover99  You're right, I saw that, it was Jay Leno who still has to.
    1
  22.  @davidhunternyc1  I don't care for either, but the Gemera is a very interesting car technically, and that's not because it's the fastest toy for the very rich but because Koenigsegg had to engineer around 4 seats and luggage space, resulting in a very small engine and a futuristic drivetrain.
    1