I’m sure some people will say that it is the best car they owned, but the Fiat Multipla has got to be the ugliest car ever made. Ney, the ugliest man made object on the planet.
It is ugly from the 5 visible sides, so underneath must be quite something.

I cannot believe that such a drawing board atrocity was allowed to leave Italy, famous for producing attractive looking “Stuff”. I can’t believe a person actually living in Italy, surrounded by attractive “Stuff” even conceived such a munter of a thing.

A Camel is a Horse designed by a committee, the A400 is a C-130 designed by a committee, the Multipla is a mobile toilet designed by a blind committee and then aborted.

PS. I really don’t like that car.

But, don’t get me onto big box Volvo’s, or rather their drivers.:mad:

I live in a safer part of the UK 😉 I was watching TV at the time……….and we had no tremor and the fist time I knew about it was 6pm news.

Disagree ,the E39 is one of the nicest BMW’s every designed and the body work on mine is certainly not cack.

Yes, will agree there…..but I’ve never owned one (As per thread) “Modern” in my context is the E60 – the decline of the 5.

68,000 lbs thrust from four F118s is nothing to sneeze at. Under normal circumstances it gives B-2 a better T/W ratio at takeoff than the B-52Ds that flew from Andersen during the Viet Nam War. But with the loss of an engine (or two) B-2 is probably in grave trouble.

That isn’t the issue I was making a point on. The issue I refer to is that we, mere punters, cannot possibly know the true capabilities, and thus cannot possibly state that the engines are underpowered etc.
And yes, engine loss on the B-2 is probably a graver situation than a normal pod slung system.

Best cars I’ve owned?
BMW Shark nosed 6, 7 series E28, 3 series E30, 5 series E34.
Proper BM’s. I’m sure the modern ones have a well engineered lump, but the bodywork is cack and the styling is Japanese influenced ugliness created by that damn American.

If you want parity, then you need a converged set of currencies aiming to balance the Euro.

IIRC, Article 2 (Yes two) of the Treaty of Rome requires the EEC to have a Common Currency. You join the EEC, you accept the currency ideal IMO.
We ran away from that (Or rather Lamont lost all nerve) when we left the convergence process.
We are in Europe, but insist that we don’t sign up to the difficult bits, but still demand the right to assume we have a say. Armchair referee is the best analogy here.
We should have gone Euro at least a decade ago, but I fear that the corruption in the City pressured the politicians into not doing so. After all, the FX markets would have little to do, and that means lost money in the city which means brown envelopes are delivered to Westminster to ensure the (in)correct decisions are made.
It’s no use harbouring a love for the pound, all the other nations also loved their own currency but were prepared to converge towards a greater goal.

However, a common tax and duty regime is also needed to balance fuel/booze/fags. This can only happen after a common currency used AND we have purchasing power parity too.