In message , at
09:11:19 on Tue, 15 Feb 2005, Adrian remarked:
Roland Perry ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

I picked the one which is most common, the 89-98 model.

OK, so let's use the contemporary Mondeo and E-class for comparison.
Mondeo 14'11" x 5'8"

My Parkers says "2000-" model, 15'5" x 5'11"

E-class 15'9" x 5'10"

ditto "2002-" model 15'9" x 6'5"

Have both of these been superseded since last August (the date of my
Parkers).

Unfortunately my "Parkers Guide" only lists the latest one's width
*including* wing mirrors, which isn't a fair comparison.

That's OK, I've taken all the measurements I've given from Parkers, so
they're a reasonably fair comparison.

On what planet does such a vehicle take up "far more space"?

I don't believe I said it did.

No, Wolmar did, and it was his analysis that I was critiquing.

That's an easily disproved claim. It's also a silly one in a world where
there's recommended two second gaps between all vehicles in motion, and
where parking spaces are usually of a fixed size. However, it's a claim
that has been made, and if you're going to disprove it credibly, you
need to keep some academic honesty involved.

I'm glad you agree it's a silly claim. Not sure what's lacking in the
academic honesty.

All modern cars are large - too large. Compare the size of a Mk 1 Golf
with the current VW range

All cars seem to get bigger over the years, and smaller models are
introduced at the bottom. I used to have a Matiz, about as small as they
come. Very useful in towns. However, it's not the sort of thing you can
use to take the family on holiday, so the appeal is limited for the
average family motorist.

As I've said before, I used to own a Range Rover (quite an old one) and
it was chosen because of the space inside, not the 4WD (although I was
living in the country and it was useful from time to time). If
people-carriers had been invented (the only one at the time was the
Espace) I'd probably have got one of them instead. 2WD, of course

- and, at up to 2.7tons, one whole ton heavier than
an E-class.

Irrelevant. The proposition was *space*.

One proposition was space. Weight is a claim that is less easily
disproved, and leads directly to vastly increased emissions - which I
noticed you snipped. I repeat - the current Disco's CO2 g/km emissions
are only slightly short of those of a Mondeo PLUS an Astra combined.

You've extended the criteria to include weight and emissions (is a
diesel Disco really as bad as you describe, please give the numbers). I
was only commenting on Wolmar's rather misleading remarks.
--
Roland Perry