The reason they're in trouble is because their car's suck :-). Atleast Merc/Honda make decent eco-cars if your into that sort of thing

Horrible, plastic, rattly quadricycles with all the structural integrity of a Blue Peter model that they made earlier, and the fine chassis finesse of a blancmange.

I have spent enough time in one [not much, but by god it was enough] to feel those things are fucking deathtraps in every sense of the word.

I feel sorry for the engineers who build it, but I don't feel sorry for the designers who decided to class it as a lower form of vehicle to escape crash regulations so they could save money on development - they're the ones who made it feel so fucking horrible, and they deserve everything they get IMHO.

Steven R

Skull and Crossbones, because that's all that would left of you if you had a head on with a real car at 30mph closing speed.

NOK, I think you'll find.

..may be heard, if you hold your web browser up to your ear.

You may be right in this case, I have no idea whether this particular car is rubbish or not.

But it does highlight a problem with 'leccy vehicles; unless various guvmints put their money where their collective mouths are and actively back manufactures and/or invest heavily in the support infrastructure, they will never take off (now there's a thought electric flying cars!!) and we'll see more of this.

Unfortunately, most guvmints couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery and think that by taxing petrol we'll be forced into alternatives. But sadly, there currently isn't a viable alternative and until there is we'll just keep paying increasingly exorbitant petrol prices.

So Saab & Volvo are more worthy of rescuing eh? I wonder how governments determine which companies should be saved in cases as we're seeing nowadays, could it be the ones where the ministers are shareholders? Or members of their families hold directorships.

Mine's the one with the japanese manufacturers car keys in the pocket because frankly most european cars are shit in comparison.

Jeez, as long as the batteries work..

Try starting a car or a moped (as I did, till the fuc*king thing was stolen, like my lappie. Live in Tuira, Oulu, Finland? Life in your hands, sunshine!) in minus 40 degrees Celcius - same in Fahreinheit, coincidentally. Beats standing waiting for a 'bus, when the diesel's frozen to gel at the depot, and there aint one..

(Aside - a Russian friend told me a Ruskie trick to start a car in cold weather. Don't keep cranking the starter. Waste of time. If it's sodding cold, put the headlights on, and go have breakfast for 10 minutes. Sounds contrary to what you'd expect, but - the battery warms up. Believe me, it bloody well works. She knew, she had a Lada. OK, built for it - but even so...)

@ Matthew

If merc/Honda/etc. made decent eco-cars then we wouldn't need to look at less than ideal alternatives. Actually I believe the Th!nk is a better alternative than the majors at the moment.

I tried to buy a leccy car (actually van like) about 4 years ago from Switzerland as the major manufacturer only sold it there. But I couldn't get UK dealers to support even the non-electric parts.

Until all the major manufacturers turn their backs on the infernal combustion engine there will never be proper progress!

Skull and cross bones as everytime a good electric car company needs investment to commercialise their product, they get bought up by a big-oil or car company and shut down - now if that isn't piracy, what is?

Their car's what sucks?

pedant mode off.....

Paris - well she definitely does!

Word's fail me. "Car's suck?" (titter!)

"Nothing Suck's like an Electrolux" (sniggger - wish my favouite sexual partner was called something other than "Henry")

Try the book "Eats Roots and Leaves". Essential homework before posting...

Anyhow, Matthew correctly used both "they're" and "their", in the same sentence no less. I've seen a lot worse on these boards...

I sometimes wonder if this isn't the old car industry kicking back with a little FUD. They did the same when the first plastic bodyparts appeared in cars, claiming that plastic would burn too easily and make a plastic car a deathtrap. In the meantime, the Th!nk is probably safer than a motorcycle, and probably better than some of the pre-NCAP cars still trundling round on UK roads. If you think that's innaccurate, consider that I - like many others - used to drive original Minis (including one that had a plastic nose and everything in front of the engine cut back to lighten it, so effectively lethal in a head-on collission). I still see plenty of old Minis, Mk1 Fiestas and the like around, and they're probably no better in a crash.

And then I have read that despite the rise of safety features in cars the accident rates have not gone down, in fact they seem to have led to a belief that car crashes are now survivable with little more than a bruise, leading to even more poor driving behaviour. I wonder if so many people would tailgate if they were in a car without features like crumple zones, and knew a crash was likely to lose them their legs? Maybe that's how we should deal with speeders - have them sentenced to a Th!nk for a year or two!

Personally, I think everyone that wants to drive in Britain should be made to learn in an old Mini in London - if you can survive that then you're probably fit to drive anywhere!

Jeez, if nobody want their shitty cars, they should go bust. It's that simple. Why is this hard to understand?