Talk:Loremo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] are the figures for the two models accurate?
There seems to be a huge gulf between them - with the LS being somewhat too slow to be acceptable in the modern world (20s 0-60 is similar to the borderline-dangerous, ancient VW polo I used to own - and I'd be disappointed paying that much money for that kind of performance, even if it WAS super efficient... plus, though such figures would be just about acceptable if you used it as a solo-occupant city car, it wouldn't even have the same flexibility and minimal load-hauling ability as the Polo's diminutive 33kW petrol motor. By the time you'd picked up 3 friends with a bag each, reaching 60 at all would require favourable conditions never mind getting there quickly or sustaining it uphill; whereas I was still able to get over 75mph with the suspension down on the stops)... and the GT having disappointing economy for a next-generation eco car (not much better than the now nearly 10 year old Lupo 3L, which developed just as much if not more power, in a heavier and boxier frame) going with it's massively improved performance and not often usable top speed (at which i doubt it would be too efficient any more). It strikes me as odd there's no middle ground between them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.180.56 (talk) 19:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)