Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments about this article.
Disclaimer: Comments submitted by third parties on this site are the sole responsibility of the individual(s) whose content is submitted. The Daily Star accepts no responsibility for the content of comment(s), including, without limitation, any error, omission or inaccuracy therein. Please note that your email address will NOT appear on the site.
Alert: If you are facing problems with posting comments, please note that you must verify your email with Disqus prior to posting a comment. follow this link to make sure your account meets the requirements. (http://bit.ly/vDisqus)
Unfortunately, if a car was a sad, pathetic excuse for an automobile to start with, the likelihood that it would be desirable today is slim to none, a case in point being the Renault 12 .I can understand some of the reasons the 12 was such a glum car – The directive from Renault's bigwigs for Project 117 in the late 1960s was clear: make the car simple, unsophisticated, and a small engine would suffice. That describes most of the cars on the road in the 1970s, and Renault could have come up with something like the Audi 100 of that era, or the BMW 2002 . What are you supposed to do when driving up a mountain road with four people in the car?The part I don't understand is that despite all this mediocrity, over the 12's 12-year production run, Renault actually managed to con 2.5 million unsuspecting customers into buying this ... am I allowed to say pile of crap in this newspaper in regard to a car?That's 2.5 million dejected and angry people driving Renault 12s, and a lot of them were right here in this country before the Civil War started.
Let’s restrict abuse of power to the asphalt
Future of cars more fantastic than we imagined
A fan’s take on ‘The Last Jedi’ and audience expectation
FOLLOW THIS ARTICLE