BMW planning takeover bid for Volvo!! & greenie issues

Nigel wrote: Don't forget the 1602 & 2002 weren't BMW's they were made by glass if I remember correctly.

I don't believe that is trictly true...

Firstly the company was Glas (not Glass)

The 02 were, indeed, built at the old Glas plant in Dingolfing...But they were a BMW design, based on the Nueue Classe 4-dr saloon floorpan suitably shortened.

But Dingolfing is currently the largest BMW production facility...Perhaps the Rolls Royce is really a Glas, too?

larzyh wrote: I think threads should be allowed to develop "organically" (notice the green connection), in whatever direction the contibutors deem appropriate...   Larzyh.

I get enough organic at home thanks very much

I think threads should be allowed to develop "organically" (notice the green connection), in whatever direction the contibutors deem appropriate...

 

Larzyh.

LOL, your first post says the thread is going off course and the environmental issues should be moved to a new thread. Your next one then adds to the environmental debate.

Now how's that for inconsistency

how has a thread regarding BMW maybe buying ovlov out become an argument regarding the environment, i recommend that there should be a separate thread for this discussion and get back to BMW buying the old mans car disc

flyingalexf68 wrote: That bio fuel is a scam.  Anyone can make an engine run on alcohol.

Why exactly is it a scam?

The fact that anyone can do it is a good thing surely.

I wouldn't be totally averse to a degree of state (EU) subsidisation to farmers growing fuel; we've been subsidising farmers in other areas producing less needed products like butter!

And I do think the BMW 2002 is a classic (BMW).

Larzyh.

larzyh wrote: Are we back to the whole "this car isn't a BMW because it is not made in Bayern in a factory with a BMW logo on it" debate? I consider the X3 a BMW (even the motorcycles produced by Cagiva, I consider BMW's) and the 2002 is, for me, in many ways the quintessential BMW. Larzyh.

I wasn't suggesting that, I was just pointing out that a car most people seem to think is a BMW classic was actually from a company they took over.

On the subject of bio fuels, there was a prog on BBC radio four some time ago that said of the rape seed stuff that if you needed one extra pass with a tractor for weed control or whatever, then the farmer would have used more diesel growing the crop than the crop would make.

As I see it, bio-fuel's main advantages are sustainability and the lessening dependancy on fossil fuel.

With regards to "poor africans", there never has been a shortage of food in the world and there probably never will be; the problem is inequitable distribution of resources and that is unlikely to change.

I am considering converting my car to run on bio fuel - get some farmers back to the land and stop lining the pockets of some very dubious regimes in the Middle East.

Larzyh.

635CSi wrote: Nostrils wrote: IIRC Ford own much if not all of volvo and its probably their way of finding more money to get them out of the hole they are in at the moment. The Ford Focus ST has the 5 cylinder Volvo engine which is why it sounds familiar to the older V70! Volvo have come a long way in modern times and are certainly catching up with the competition. BMW could be using Volvo to concentrate on newer combustion engines with so-called Bio fuels, the swedes are good at all this environmental stuff!! It's amazing how the S40 T5 has the same chassis and the exact same engine as the Focus ST, but drives nothing like it!! Biofuels aren't really revolutionary but they definitely make more sense than hybrids. I'm not into them really though, you would need to be wearing slippers and grow your own clothes to drive one!

the biofuels produce more bhp than petrol. saab are producing a 300bhp 2 litre 100% biofuel engine. the production of hydrids and the disposal produces a hell of a lot more co2 than ordinary petrol engines.