I've wondered for a long time why anybody would buy a Volvo. They're
ugly, though recent models are a little less so, and built like a brick.
They also affect the minds of fairly normal (I said fairly) who are
turned into that dangerous and stupid road beast, the Volvo driver,
something rather like a rhino, short-sighted, aggressive and only able
to move in straight lines, usually fairly slowly.

The only excuse that I've heard is that, being built like a brick
shit-house Volvo drivers can keep their sprogs uncrushed despite their
bad driving.

It turns out that I was wrong. Apparently the back seats of revolves are
the most comfortable mobile bonk locations. I'm not sure if Rolls Royces
and Winnebagos were included in the survey, and I'm surprised that jags
don't feature as their seats are quite squishy, but it is probably the
sheer width that gives them the edge - or maybe those funny barred
headrests give a good purchase. I'm not sure, the article said that they
were best, not exactly why.

What's odd is that revolves tend to be driven by middle-aged wage-slave
types who can, presumably, bonk at home. When have they had the
opportunity or inclination to find out enough to fill in the survey? If
anything, I'd have expected them to carry out adulterous limbo dancing
in the bog at the local Sainsbury's or in their shed on the allotment.

Or could it be that the sprogs, protected from crushing over all these
years in their brick on wheels are forced to rebel when teenagers
borrowing the car? It would make sense, I suppose.

Peter H.M.Brooks wrote [all over the place] :


I had an accident in someone else's volvo once (my fault) and would have
prolly died it it hadn't been built like the tank it was, I said at the
time that I'd buy one, I never have


I keep seeing the odd one or two on the road that look "ok", byut
whenever I consider buying cars, I can never work out which model I'd
though might be "ok" after all.

Do you have something useful to say or are you just trolling? You really
should find some meaning in your life. When your last day comes you may look
back and say, "I wasted the gift."

Andy Burns wrote:
Very wise, why buy cars so that you can accidents in them?
Saab also makes cars that look slightly less ugly these days, as do
Citroen. This is a curious thing as aesthetics has generally taken a bit
of a dive the past couple of decades.

Peter H.M.Brooks wrote:

I suspect that South Africans just had very little exposure to any new
models until recently, due to sanctions.

When I got to Australia I was amazed at the car models that had never even
made it to my radar!


--
gilleebee

*go with the flow* ;-)

gilleebee wrote:
I don't think so - I saw less ugly models starting to develop back when
I was living in Pom.

Michael Pardee wrote:
I'm not quite sure about this, but that rather sounds like the sentiment
of a Volvo driver. That isn't, by the way, a gift that you've wasted,
it's another road user!

Michael Pardee wrote:

Who are you responding to? Please quote enough of the post you're responding
to to give readers some context.

"gilleebee" <writeozzieshowersinger@gmail.com> wrote


OH!!

So now we backward are we ??????????????




Like aus is *such* an advanced country .. human right records just continue
to amaze, huh?


**PLONK**

On Fri, 06 Oct 2006 09:09:11 +0200, "Peter H.M.Brooks" <peter@new.co.za>
wrote:


It's been many years since I drove a Volvo, but when I did none of those
criteria applied. It was simply the fastest saloon car on the road, and
outperformed a lot of sports cars.


--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://people.tribe.net/hayesstw
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk