Comments about this vehicle

Author	Message
Star Wars Fanatic ◊ 2008-12-08 21:15
rpcm ◊ 2008-12-08 21:52	It's a 1974 ( DVLA checked ) 1.8 in Super De Luxe trim.
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-08 21:54	I'll never understand the fun of destroying classic cars
chris40 ◊ 2008-12-08 22:18	Adrián, yo entiendo lo que dices … pero a mi parecer, aunque producto de los años 70, el Marina no mereció de llamarse clásico.
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-08 22:22	Bueno, a mi entender un clásico es cualquier coche que tenga ya alrededor de unos 30 años en adelante, independientemente de que sea feo, malo, que se maneje mal, que fuese común o poco fiable, es un coche raro al fin y al cabo, y no le veo mucho sentido el destrozarlo la verdad, pero bueno ya sé que hay mucha gente a la que no le gusta estos coches y le da igual, qué le vamos a hacer -- Last edit: 2008-12-08 22:24:53
J-2 ◊ 2008-12-08 22:49	Exacto, por ejemplo, el Trabant es un pedazo de mier**, pero es un icono del automovilismo, como coche malo, pero icono. El Marina ya imagino que será muy malo, pero es un clásico guste o no, aún si fuera nuevo...
antp ◊ 2008-12-09 00:07	carchasesfanatic wrote I'll never understand the fun of destroying classic cars Yes that's a shame But on the other hand, sometimes even if a car seems to look nice it may be completely rotten...
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-09 00:08	Does not seem to be the case of this one, and even if they are rotten, that has a solution most of the times so it can be fixed, still not a reason to destroy such car, but well that's just my opinion
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-09 16:05	I enjoyed the race against the lada, but setting fire to it was pretty gratuitous.
lastinpurple ◊ 2008-12-09 16:16	I still don\'t get why they\'re still bashing British Leyland products today. BL disappeared 22 years ago!. It makes me wonder, well, the Marina was supposed to last 3 or 4 years until it was replaced by a new model, but is that bad?. I think that is enough about BL. There are much worse cars in the world than BL\'s. And this is not an old rusty banger, it was from a member of the Morris Marina owners club, it was well cared, it was loved, and that\'s all for the car? Well, here is the full story of the car: Link to "www.fastmarinamagazine.com" Link to "www.fastmarinamagazine.com"
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-09 20:33	carchasesfanatic wrote I'll never understand the fun of destroying classic cars This is NOT a classic! The Morris Marina is widely regarded as one of the worst British cars ever!
tali ◊ 2008-12-09 20:36	A car doesn't necessarily have to great or good to be a classic
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-09 20:43	I know that if you pick up a classic car ads paper you'll see cars which are just old rather than real classics, but the word classic should really be applied to cars that were outstanding examples of style and engineering. Would it be right to call a Vauxhall Astra (which is still better than this) a classic car in 30 years time? -- Last edit: 2008-12-09 20:44:47
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-09 21:07	G-MANN wrote This is NOT a classic! The Morris Marina is widely regarded as one of the worst British cars ever! It is for me, maybe not for your criteria. G-MANN wrote but the word classic should really be applied to cars that were outstanding examples of style and engineering. I totally beg to differ, i don't know how will i see in 30 years time a car from the nineties, i'll tell you when i arrive, in the same way that someone from 30 years ago couldn't know if a car from that era was going to be a classic or not, as i said above i know that for some of you, not every old car deserves the title of "classic" but they all deserve it for me, as i said no matter if it was unreliable, ugly or whatever. G-MANN wrote Would it be right to call a Vauxhall Astra (which is still better than this) a classic car in 30 years time? It will probably be by then, we can't know now, but anyway as i said i don't count as classics just those which are well known, i really find them all interesting, and i dont find it funny to destroy them nowadays, but anyway i'm not trying to persuade anyone, as a Spanish saying says "there's nothing written about taste"
chris40 ◊ 2008-12-09 22:00	Well, I'm sorry: I didn't mean to start a holy war (which may be why I answered ccf in Spanish). The trouble is that everybody evidently has their own idea of what is a classic; J-2 mentions the Trabant, which you might think according to my lights I'd reject, but I don't because while it is, as he says, a heap of s*t, it has to my mind a significant place in automobile history as an ingenious response to the circumstances in the DDR at the time. I'd contend that the Marina has no such significance; the engineering was mostly inherited from earlier BL models and therefore outdated, and the styling seemed to be based rather on the Mk.II Ford Cortina (which had just gone out of production when the Marina was introduced). Having said all this, I'm aware that some people still love Wartburgs and F-series Vauxhall Victors and Austin Allegros; as Adrián says, sobre gustos no hay nada escrito*. (Adrián, we had this argument about Sierras, didn't we? )
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-09 22:12	chris40 wrote Well, I'm sorry: I didn't mean to start a holy war (which may be why I answered ccf in Spanish)(Adrián, we had this argument about Sierras, didn't we? ) No problem, as long as we do it with good manners i don't have any problem with long discussions, and about the Sierra, yes we did
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-09 22:18	http://forum.imcdb.org/forum_topic-4228-27273.html (to the forum)
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-10 11:04	chris40 wrote J-2 mentions the Trabant, which you might think according to my lights I'd reject, but I don't because while it is, as he says, a heap of s*t, it has to my mind a significant place in automobile history as an ingenious response to the circumstances in the DDR at the time. I'd contend that the Marina has no such significance; the engineering was mostly inherited from earlier BL models and therefore outdated, and the styling seemed to be based rather on the Mk.II Ford Cortina (which had just gone out of production when the Marina was introduced). Having said all this, I'm aware that some people still love Wartburgs and F-series Vauxhall Victors and Austin Allegros; as Adrián says, sobre gustos no hay nada escrito. (Adrián, we had this argument about Sierras, didn't we? ) There was nothing ingenious about the Trabant. The only reasons for its success and durability were because of its long production life and the fact that there were few other economical options for the people in East Germany, Poland, Romania (particularly under Ceausescu) and the rest of the Soviet Bloc in general. In East Germany, if you were a little bit more lucky you could maybe have a ZAZ 968, slightly further up the food chain you could have a Wartburg, and if you were living the socialist dream you could just maybe hope to have a Lada or a GAZ Volga. When the Trabant 601/P60 came out in 1963, it was already a simple and outdated design which wasn't even on par with most western cars of the early 1950s. It was only originally intended to be in production until the late 1960s when they'd bring out a more sophisticated and more modern replacement, but every design was rejected by the DDR government due to cost. I don't think the Marina is a classic by any means, but I can understand why some people are upset about the needless destruction of it here. I would much rather see a Trabant get destroyed, because there are far more of them still around and many more were produced over its much longer production life. Not to mention that the Trabant is in no way a better car than the Marina. The only advantage it has over the Marina is that the recycled "duroplast" body doesn't rust. I believe that the Trabant and the historical and political era it represents was so uniformly inept in almost all respects that it has passed into folklore and become perversely "cool". While I agree that the Marina has no significant place in automotive history, I would argue that the Trabant doesn't have any positive historical significance either, and its popularity was more a matter of convenience for the people due to a weak political system and economy that provided few other options. Actually, you could say that the Marina had historical significance as a car that represented everything that was wrong with the British motor industry at the time, in much the same vein as the Trabant being symptomatic of everything that was wrong with the politics and economy of the Soviet Bloc (or Soviet Empire on a whole, including the Soviet Union). As I stated earlier, I thought the race action with the Marina and the Lada was pretty entertaining, but burning it was just going too* far. Even though it was quite badly damaged after shunting it and crashing it into the Lada, it would still have been easily restorable. However, I was more concerned about this poor FSO: /vehicle_203939-FSO-Caro-1995.html. I'm sure nobody really misses it, but it's probably just about the rarest vehicle featured here and it was killed in an instant. I think crashing a Lada into a Trabant would have been great, as the Lada is quite solid and the Trabant extremely flimsy, so it would be an interesting battle between two of the Soviet Bloc's automotive disasters, although it's obvious which one would have come out on top!
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 18:48	Good post, ecclefechan! I know I have a knack of starting arguments, but I always find it funny (and a bit pathetic, unfortunately) when people get "upset" (don't take this too literally) seeing cars getting wrecked in Top Gear, which frankly aren't particularly special. In fact I think part of the reason Clarkson and co are so destructive with these mediocre old cars is to wind up the anoraks (read nerds) who actually like them (but I don't really mean you, CCF ). -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 23:34:05
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-10 19:20	Do you think they really set out to destroy a certain car, or do they simply destroy anything they can get their hands on and just make a show out of it? I mean kind of like: Hey, lets destroy a Morris Marina this week or Hey, I found a really cheap Morris Marina for sale, you want to use it on the show? -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 19:20:47
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 19:35	I think they must have deliberately chosen a Marina because if they just needed a cheap old car, it would be something younger and more common, like from the early 90s (and they have done this before, they've obviously chosen cars just for cheapness rather than to make an example of). Today a Marina isn't something you'd easily find on a used car forecourt, you'd have to seek it out a little. -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 19:44:40
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-10 19:38	They bought it on ebay mind you.
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-10 19:52	Jeremy Clarkson has a long standing dislike for the Marina and just about anything from British Leyland of that era. They've definitely seeked out the Marina, the FSO and the Lada in this segment. Apparently the Lada was bought from Ebay also and cost £700. I have no idea where they could have found the FSO, however.
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 21:12	I've just watched the repeat of this episode (it was first shown on Sunday but I missed it). In this part they try to find out if the communist world (the Soviet Union) ever produced a good car (unsurprisingly they conclude that they didn't) and they bring on the Marina because it was what the British were offering during the Cold War and Clarkson races it against a Lada (driven by James May). Clarkson totally slags it off, "Britain made this? They had the affrontery and the bare-faced cheek to call it a "Super". They should have called it "Trotskyite crap"! Maybe that's what "TC" stood for." -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 21:15:13
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 21:18	ecclefechan wrote Apparently the Lada was bought from Ebay also and cost £700. What a rip off!! I'm not joking, £700 for an E-reg (1987) Lada??
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-10 21:52	@ecclefan: a little nitpicking: the ZAZ 968 had a worse reputation in the GDR than the Trabant. The "Sapo" was the only car, you could get immediately over there, without waiting a lot of years (between 10 to 20!) for delivery after the order. O.k., this long years of waiting for a new car was usual, when the payment was made in the lousy, worthless "Mark der DDR". If you had paid with the Western D-Mark, you got everthing. And this immediately. A propos ancient GDR-technology: all Wartburg's were based by chassis and technic (except the 1.3-engine after 1988) on a DKW-prototype of 1943. Several parts were identical with the post-war Western DKW's. The 1.3-engine was just a damped VW Polo-engine. I had the luck to visit the Leipzig-fair in autumn 1988 (as a Western toursit, with a special organized visa), when the Wartburg 1.3 was presented. It was unbelievable. Thousands of GDR-citizens had scrambled around three of this cobbled junk-cars. We Western guys couldn't believe this scenery. -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 21:59:43
antp ◊ 2008-12-10 22:45	Neptune wrote Do you think they really set out to destroy a certain car, or do they simply destroy anything they can get their hands on and just make a show out of it? They destroyed this model on purpose. They could get a common junk car of the 80s/90s for cheaper I think (or at least for a similar price). G-MANN wrote which frankly aren't particularly special They are special... they are rare, especially in good shape/state. I do not find that fun at all. Same for the FSO, even if the car is bad etc., it is a rather rare one now. -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 22:47:10
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 23:02	You really care about rareness, don't you Antoine? If something's a piece of shit (like that FSO), who really cares if it's slightly rare? It's probably not like there's less than 100 left in the world. And it's just a badly designed box of metal, not an endangered species of animal (which once is extinct cannot be brought back). -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 23:13:03
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-10 23:09	I am with him, he's totally right, i care if it's rare nowadays and as i said don't mind it's reliability or design, this is just a question of taste, some of us care about old cars in general no matter it's "story" and other's just don't mind, "if they're bad, why not destroying it?", it's as simple as that, in the same way that some of us have nothing against other type of cars and others do, just that. -- Last edit: 2008-12-10 23:16:33
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-10 23:29	carchasesfanatic wrote this is just a question of taste Yes, there's good taste and bad taste. Check out this old video of Clarkson testing the FSO Polenez (I think he was better back then) http://www.metacafe.com/watch/108087/the_polonez_in_top_gear/ In the comments some Polish guy is being a real crybaby (in broken English) about Clarkson's harsh treatment of the car (It's a complete DOG!!). It's like he's taking it as a slight against his country! To me this explains why Clarkson has done so well in Britain.
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-10 23:59	G-MANN wrote Yes, there's good taste and bad taste. Erm no... in this case it is rather what you appreciate and what you don't not exactly what's nice and what isn't, so don't try to leave me in the wrong place saying that
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-11 00:13	So you care about any old car, even if you don't think it's nice?
taxiguy ◊ 2008-12-11 00:22	I have already posted this on the forum, but I will post it here as well so other people can see it too: All I have to say on this matter is, 40 years ago would anyone have ever thought that the Volkswagen Beetle would turn out to be a classic? The Volkswagen Beetle! The cheapest, noisiest, slowest, ugliest little piece of crap ever produced? Well just look around you today in 2008, what is the most well-known and beloved classic car in the world? The Volkswagen Beetle. Hell, Volkswagen even went to the trouble to design a whole new model devoted simply to this little car that you would consider "rubbish". So I would think twice, G-MANN, the next time you want to say that a "common, boring" car like an Escort or a Lumina will never be a classic, because you just never know. -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 00:23:09
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-11 01:05	And I answered this on the forum.
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-11 10:01	Ingo wrote @ecclefan: a little nitpicking: the ZAZ 968 had a worse reputation in the GDR than the Trabant. The "Sapo" was the only car, you could get immediately over there, without waiting a lot of years (between 10 to 20!) for delivery after the order. O.k., this long years of waiting for a new car was usual, when the payment was made in the lousy, worthless "Mark der DDR". If you had paid with the Western D-Mark, you got everthing. And this immediately. A propos ancient GDR-technology: all Wartburg's were based by chassis and technic (except the 1.3-engine after 1988) on a DKW-prototype of 1943. Several parts were identical with the post-war Western DKW's. The 1.3-engine was just a damped VW Polo-engine. I had the luck to visit the Leipzig-fair in autumn 1988 (as a Western toursit, with a special organized visa), when the Wartburg 1.3 was presented. It was unbelievable. Thousands of GDR-citizens had scrambled around three of this cobbled junk-cars. We Western guys couldn't believe this scenery. Well, I remember reading somewhere that the ZAZ was at least worth a little more at the fall of communism, because it contained more steel which could be sold for scrap metal. Were you ever in any of the other COMECON/Soviet Bloc countries during the Cold War era? I find the history of them very interesting, but unfortunately I was only 4 years old when the Berlin Wall went down. -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 10:01:56
antp ◊ 2008-12-11 17:24	G-MANN wrote So you care about any old car, even if you don't think it's nice? Yes And I actually do not really dislike any car. There are some that I find ugly, yes, but even those have some historical interest. The only one that I do not care are the ugly recent common ones. So I'd prefer to see a brand new Nissan Murano or Buick Enclave (just to cite two) destroyed in Top Gear rather than a Morris Marina or a FSO in good condition (if it was completely rusted and so, it is not the same problem, as it would have been in a scrapyard soon or later anyway). Or even a brand new Ferrari, I would not really care... Cf in the recent "Doomsday" movie: I found it sad for the NZ-made Rover SD1, but not for the Bentley -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 17:27:20
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-11 21:07	@G-Mann (and Mr.Clarkson, too): if you are complaining about the Polonez, you may should think about the fact, that it's bad technology is orign Italian? Technic and chassis of the Polonez is originally based on the (Polski) Fiat 125. The Polonez is not alone. The -in my opinion horrible, disgusting and impudent- engine of the Ford Fiesta's of the same age as the Polonez, based on the ancient British "Kent"-engine from the 50ies. The engine of the Opel Corsa A/Vauxhall Nova is ancient, too. At first it was released in 1961 for the Opel Kadett A.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-11 21:27	ecclefechan wrote Were you ever in any of the other COMECON/Soviet Bloc countries during the Cold War era? I find the history of them very interesting, but unfortunately I was only 4 years old when the Berlin Wall went down. Between 1987 and 1990 I'd been several times to the GDR. It was (still is) annother interest of me except old cars. I'm very lucky, that I could make the experience with the Leipzig-fair in 1988. One time I also had passed the Berlin Wall by the legendary "Tränenpalast" ("The Tears Palace"), the subway-station Friedrichstraße. My father had trusted me, so my first long-distance-trip by car, I made alone with my fresh driver's license, was visting a friend in Eisenach/GDR. So I was also standing there, at the GDR-border, for more than one hour, while the GDR-"Stasi" (secret service)-officers had checked the car (my dad's 1981 VW Passat) if I smuggle something (mainly refugees) out of the GDR. I will never forget it. We Western tourists were standing at f...ing temperatures (less than 0 degrees, snow) in an edge of the GDR-border-terminal "Herleshausen" -always tried to avoid nasty comments, rolling eyes and so on, only hidden smiles from one Western guy to the other Western guy- while several GDR-army-majors (majors, not low creatures like corporals or so. High paid for GDR-circumstances) were creeping under our cars. But at least the controls wasn't so bad, as the most peoples have thought. After I had seen it one/two times, I had started to smuggle forbidden things - mainly West German newspapers and magazines. A good hideaway for that, was the space behind the glove-box of the 32B-Passat. Also over the left back wheel-arch in the trunk, you could store some things. Sure, if they would have found the magazines, they would have confiscated them - if they would have found them packed and hidden, I would have been arrested and daddy's Passat confiscated, too. But I didn't care about that. All the times, even today, I never have accepted the GDR. It was never more than a Soviet colony, a subjective invention by Soviet-bondaged communists, without any right of existing. -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 22:57:17
chris40 ◊ 2008-12-11 22:40	Ingo wrote @G-Mann (and Mr.Clarkson, too): if you are complaining about the Polonez, you may should think about the fact, that it's bad technology is orign Italian? Technic and chassis of the Polonez is originally based on the (Polski) Fiat 125. Ingo, I've ridden in a Fiat 125 and driven, for my sins, a 1972 Polski-Fiat 125p (1300!), and the only thing they had in common was the shape. Originally the Polski-Fiat was fitted with crossply tyres, which gave it a mind of its own in the wet. The engines were the ancient and terminally gutless pushrod Fiat 1300 and the scarcely less uninspiring 1500, not the Fiat 125's dohc 1608cc unit. The trim was possibly slightly less luxurious than the contemporary entry-level Lada/Zhiguli ... as I've said elsewhere, there's no way I'd ever have bought one. And if I'm not mistaken the Polonez even lacked the 125p's undeniably sturdy bodywork ... who'd have designed a car that shape without a hatchback? -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 22:44:43
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-11 22:51	@chris40: to your last (rhetorical) question. The -totally stupid- idea of making a fastback-body without a hatchback-lid is not Polonez-typical. Just a short brainstorming: 1973-80 VW Passat (all the 1973/74 ones, later on some versions), Citroen GS, Fiat 127, Leyland Princess, Opel Kadett D/Vauxhall Astra MKI (the basic versions)... To be continued. Perhaps I'll remember more, but I should go asleep now. -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 22:57:46
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-11 23:19	Ingo wrote It was never more than a Soviet colony, a subjective invention by Soviet-bondaged communists, without any right of existing. That's interesting, as that's exactly how I've pictured East Germany and much of the COMECON states, especially PR Bulgaria and Mongolia. The architecture and urban planning look exactly like the USSR (example in East Berlin: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/134/383239709_a073908db6_b.jpg). I picture lots of grey concrete, Soviet apartment blocks in the "modern" parts of town and much of the pre-communist buildings being neglected and dilapidated alongside very rough road surfaces, full of Trabants, Wartburgs and Ladas. Were the road conditions very bad? I've seen some videos and photos and it still amazes me that they reunited it with one of the most developed and prosperous western European countries. I know that economically it's been a pretty big blow to the economy, but it's impressive all the same that they managed it at all. -- Last edit: 2008-12-11 23:23:39
greybear ◊ 2008-12-12 01:13	I notice that Clarkson didn't mention either the Moskvitch or Skoda rally cars. In the 1960s there was a production saloon car racing championship in Britain in which cars were classed according to their purchase price. Because the Moskvitch was so heavily subsidised in the UK it was able to compete against cars with much smaller engines. The result was that it kept winning! Eventually I think they had to ban it... In the RAC Rally, Skodas won their class 19 times in 20 years, if I recall correctly. I would certainly call a Skoda rally car from the 1960s a classic. -- Last edit: 2008-12-12 01:14:08
Gag Halfrunt ◊ 2008-12-12 01:46	Of course Clarkson isn't going to talk about Soviet cars that have any positive qualities. For instance, the M-20 Pobieda had a drag coefficient of 0.34...in 1946. http://www.volga.nl/GAZhistorieENvictory.htm -- Last edit: 2008-12-12 01:47:43
Weasel1984 ◊ 2008-12-12 06:22	Oh I really didn't want to defend the Polonez and to take a part in this disscussion, but you forced me to this. First about the Fiats. The 1300/1500 were actually one of the best handling cars of their class in the 1960's and the 125p was introduced only 6 years later, so wasn't based on anything terrible. I guess Chris that your 125p was rented from some state owned company. No? It can explains a lot. It is a case of the purchaser, different cars were made for the export, different for the private use and different for the state companies (soc. realities). Of course I agree even the best made 125p wasn't a very good car, but also wasn't so bad as you have described this. Especially the early ones had a good opinion. Sorry not in Poland, but actually in the UK it was voted as a "Wagon of the year" (1973 or 1974), by one of your's automotvie magazines. BTW. the Ladas are also a bit underrated IMO. Not a brilliant cars, but some owners can't say many wrong things about them (abuse of the old Riva in a bad condition proofs nothing). Polonez was ofcourse a hatchback - it had a 5-door body. Again I agree we can't say that it was a masterpiece, some were really bad (the problem was the engine), but it also had a lot of pluses - many of them are probably understandable only for us - but for us it was designed. The other are that it was for example designed to be one of the safiest cars in the world - and actually in its time it was (that's why have such design, which not everyone like). I agree with Gag. The last thing which Clarkson could do would be mention of the Skoda successes. It wouldn't fit to the thesis whom he wanted to prove from the beginning. Also Skoda still exists and is owned by a very big and rich car concern so it is better and more safety to do not mix "her" in such "games". A real face of this "spontaneous" and "uncompromising" critic - J. Clarkson? I wouldn't be suprised. Maybe you don't remeber that once he said that Alfa Brera is the ugliest car on the world and then, later it was for him the most beautiful vehicle which he had ever seen... Greybear - he had also a Moskvitch, at least he thought that he had one (if I understood well), but he actually mixed it with an Izh - because such expert he is! Ignorant! The Eastern block do not exist since 20 years! His jokes about it are even less original than sinking a Rolls in the swiming pool. -- Last edit: 2008-12-12 06:53:07
tali ◊ 2008-12-12 18:58	G-MANN wrote What a rip off!! I'm not joking, £700 for an E-reg (1987) Lada?? Nice to see the Beeb spending licence payers money so wisely
BeanBandit ◊ 2008-12-12 19:23	How rare is it in GB? I just read an article from Finnish youngtimer magazine, where they presented a 1976 1.3, orangy red Coupé Marina, where they said, that there's 74 Marinas registered in Finland, only 24 of them saloons (was 3 door coupé cheaper?), and only four of them automatics.
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-12 19:57	There are roughly 750 Marinas left in the UK, less than 0.1% of the number sold.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 20:01	For me the Moskvitch is worse than the Polonez. It was made more (more than a Lada) for the people on the Soviet countryside, rougher, simpler, harder, etc., also the ground clearence was higher. As the ZAZ 968, too. Both cars were constructed, so that the driver can help himself, when he had a breakdown far away from any civilization. I've read in an article about the ZAZ 968 in an oldtimer-magazine, that its original tool-set was very well sorted. The ZAZ was a NSU Prinz-copy, but no license-product. The technic was also different than from the NSU. Some friends in my NSU-club had wrecked a "Sapo" in the early 90ies, just for looking, who close it is to the NSU. Sure, they got the car for free in that years. The ZAZ wasn't exported officially to Western Germany and there were only a few single NSU's running in the GDR, so the imagination is totally different, even today. In West Germany nearly all people are saying "Oh an NSU Prinz", when they see a "Sapo" (if there will be some single ones to see over here). On the other hand: when I drove a NSU 1200 C in the years 1995-97 as an all-day-car, absolutely everyone in the East, or former GDR-citizen, living in the West, were saying "Hey, you're driving a Sapo. How you got it as a "Wessi" (a mainly badly meant nickname for West Germans)? Noone had known the company NSU. Back to the Moskvich ("Mossi" called by East German fans): I made one personal experience with it. Friends in the GDR had owned one. I made a tour in in 1989, when Wall and GDR still had existed. The car made a quite rough impression (o.k., the Ford's of the 60ies weren't better, especially not the 1968+ Escort). I was shocked about the trunk. I said to the owners "What an impudence to construct such a trunk." You cannot open the hood widely, the trunk was not deep (total different simension than an Audi 80, for example. And the Audi's trunk is an impudence, too) and the spare-tire was lying idiotically on left side. So the usable space was tiny. Even in the 60ies, when the "Mossi" was constructed, more intelligent solutions had been possible. Just look to the Audi 60, the Ford 17 M [P5], the Simca 1501, Peugeot 404, Mercedes W 115, opel Rekord PII and so on and so on.. Even the Wartburg was better in that. -- Last edit: 2008-12-12 20:41:07
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 20:09	ecclefechan wrote There are roughly 750 Marinas left in the UK, less than 0.1% of the number sold. I don't know the numbers for Germany, but I'd say, that never ever have existed 750 Marinas at all. As I know, there wasn't ever an official export. If yes, the numbers of sold cars weren't worth to mention. I cannot remember any Marina with German registration ever. I've seen Marina's only at vacations in Denmark, Holland and Belgium. Also to Austria and Switzerland they were exported in countable numbers. -- Last edit: 2008-12-12 20:09:30
DynaMike ◊ 2008-12-12 20:20	BeanBandit wrote (was 3 door coupé cheaper?) In Holland the coupé was about 5% cheaper than the sedan; it was rather seen as a 2-door version.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 20:31	@ecclefan: these concret-houses were a big GDR-export-product for the other COMECON-countries. It was the system "WBS 70", industial produced big apartment houses. It was exported all around in other communist countries, even to Cuba and Angola. Recently I've read an article, that in Northkorea there is one little town, completely made in GDR-style. It was a project in the 70ies, at least a gift from the GDR to the "brothercountry" Northkorea. Still today everything is complete, rotten, but not changed to modernity. Yes, the condition of GDR-streets had been worse. Anyways, the whole infrastructure was worse as hell. So the telephone-system was one of the most rotten in Europe. The GDR had always said, that they are the 10th biggest industry-country in the world. But this was a lie. Even in the West a ot of people have believed it. So after the Wall felt down and the unification came so suddenly, whole Germany, mainly the Western part has made big eyes about the horrible surprises, when you had looked closer. I was a big luck, that West Germany had some of the best economical years in hte late 80ies. Anyways, I'm belonging to the silent majority of West Germans, who are saying even today "Our economical standard would be much higher, if the Wall would still standing. The unification has pulled us down". Nearly all GDR-Autobahn-routes, also the other long-distance-roads were still from pre-war-times. And it wasn't repaired much, so it was not just a feeling "Ah, I'm driving on Hitler's Reichsautobahn" or "I'm using a road, where the Emperor Wilhelm II's troops were going into the WW I in 1914 - it was a real fact. Only the Autobahn from Berlin to Hamburg was newly made in the mid-80ies - completely paid form Western Germany. O.K., also in Western Germany there had been several Autobahn-parts from the 30ies, until they were renovated in the 90ies. Nowadays nearly all of them were gone by renovation and reconstruction. On of the last parts of "Reichsautobahn" was the A 11 from Berlin to Stettin/Szczecin in Poland. But last year they had finished the renovation. A tip, if you are interested in the history of streets, bunkers or other military- or public buildings, I recommend that page: http://www.lostplaces.de/ There is also a chapter for old gas-stations.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 20:38	P.S. Sorry, dear US-members over here, but at our last vacations in February 2008 (New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Washington DC and New York) me any my family were really shocked about the condition of the highways, roads and other infrastructure. Several times, when our rental car was smashed again in a big hole on the lane, we'd said "OMG, this is not much better than in the GDR of the 80ies". All these hanging telephone- and electricity-cables were unusal even in the GDR. It reminded us to African countries.
DynaMike ◊ 2008-12-12 20:47	Nice link, Ingo Danke! About the bad roads in the US (I've never been there but many friends told me similar stories): I guess that's because nobody wants to pay taxes...?
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 21:08	@DynaMike: you can be happy. My impression is, that the Netherlands is the country with the best streets. Their conditions is better than in several other countries, even than in Germany. But I dislike, how small and narrow all the roads are, except the highways. It sucks a bit. O.K., you don't have any space in your country.
Gag Halfrunt ◊ 2008-12-12 21:26	Ingo wrote Recently I've read an article, that in Northkorea there is one little town, completely made in GDR-style. It was a project in the 70ies, at least a gift from the GDR to the "brothercountry" Northkorea. Still today everything is complete, rotten, but not changed to modernity. You might be thinking of Hamhung, which was rebuilt by East German architects in the 1950s. Here's a set of recent photos of the city: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kernbeisser/sets/72157604982498653/ Quote Hamhung (Hamhŭng) is the DPRK's second largest city and an important industrial centre. The old city was heavily destroyed during the Korean War and rebuilt with aid from the German Democratic Republic from 1955-62. Several buildings from that period show the influence of Bauhaus design. The project ended two years earlier than planned for political reasons.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-12 21:39	Ah, yes, it was Hamhung. Thanks for the pic. (Interesting: pics from Northkorea, where you can see people on the streets). I've read, that they also had a "Wilhelm-Pieck-Avenue". I'm always pissed, when I see, how many streets and places are still existiing in Eastern Germany, which still have names from the pre-unification-times. Names of any communists leaders, KP-nomenklatura, historical heroes (mostly communists, killed by the Nazi's) or even GDR-officials. It's just pure defiant by bone-headed GDR-lovers (still alive everywhere in the Eastern "Zone". Fuck 'em all.
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-13 17:13	Regarding what Ingo said, I've been to Washington D.C. (a lovely city), Florida, Texas, Virginia and most recently California and I never noticed anything wrong with the main roads, highways and interstates. I'd say most of the them (even way out in the countryside) where in fine condition. Maybe if you go into the rough parts of cities and remote villages you might find some less pristine roads, but generally American roads are fine. -- Last edit: 2008-12-13 17:17:25
chris40 ◊ 2008-12-13 21:40	Weasel1984 wrote Polonez was ofcourse a hatchback - it had a 5-door body. Again I agree we can't say that it was a masterpiece, some were really bad (the problem was the engine), but it also had a lot of pluses - many of them are probably understandable only for us - but for us it was designed. The other are that it was for example designed to be one of the safiest cars in the world - and actually in its time it was (that's why have such design, which not everyone like). Oops, sorry, Michał … I was relying on my (obviously faulty) memory. Of course the Polonez was a hatchback … but you couldn’t fold the back seats down, could you? (IIRC they put that right with the Caro.) I’m also sorry if I offended you by slagging the 125p off, but I was speaking as I found. I’m well aware of the virtues of Eastern European cars, particularly the durability and ease of maintenance of Russian and the better-class Polish, Czech and Jugoslav ones, but even in 1973 their finish and performance wasn’t up to the standards even of British-made cars, let alone German or French. -- Last edit: 2008-12-13 21:44:01
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-14 06:07	The roads here in North Carolina are generally well kept (privatized roads often show wear and tear) our telephone systems are run underground in most parts (along with fiber optic cables) The only above ground lines we have are for power source. The main reasons the power supply (at least for North Carolina) is not buried are for cost effectiveness and ease of modification and repair. (Ease of modification and expansion are important to North Carolina as it has a lot of land space (Though keep in mind it’s still not the biggest state of the USA) Though, I think we have some areas where power supply is run underground where applicable. We have specialized Hurricane Power poles to supply power. They are concrete and steel and are raised higher to minimize tree damage. They are rated to withstand sustained winds of at least an entry level CAT 4 Hurricane.
58Roadmaster ◊ 2008-12-14 17:41	Here are some of the worst examples of urban Minnesota freeways: Highway 100 Minneapolis: http://www.ajfroggie.com/roadpics/mn/mn100/nb-42nd-2003b.jpg Video of Interstate 94/35W northbound into downtown Minneapolis: Link to "www.flickr.com" Of course the Interstate 35W Bridge disaster: http://www.flickr.com/photos/80651083@N00/148124998/ Link to "www.flickr.com" Link to "www.flickr.com" Link to "www.flickr.com" http://www.flickr.com/photos/sujatha_fan/1046710820/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bmw328driver/1244667949/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bmw328driver/1245562018/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/bmw328driver/1244658813/ Link to "www.flickr.com" Tasteless title: http://www.flickr.com/photos/miranda_brandon/1309976700/ New Bridge: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dwallick/3074616865/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/phillipotoole/2990028888/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/ezthorson/3067716377/ -- Last edit: 2008-12-16 09:44:53
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-14 17:53	OMG! The roads in that video are horrible, why don’t the residents complain? I would, that’s one area your taxes should be spent on!
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-14 18:45	The majority of NC roads look like this, clean and well kept. Though there are some exceptions I’ve seen.
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-14 19:17	Ingo wrote @ecclefan: [...] Yeah, "plattenbau" is the German name for them isn't it? I know they're all over the former COMECON states and look pretty much identical everywhere. A truly grim example of typical Soviet industrialisation would be this in Norilsk, Siberia: (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/3013403454_414898b8ee_o.jpg). Interesting what you say about DDR, thanks. There seems to be a general curiosity many people have of the DDR, but also a rather large ignorance at the same time. Many people don't really seem to understand the extent of Soviet influence in it and they seem unaware of just how far behind the west it really was. I've heard about the claim of it being the 10th biggest industrial country in the world from a 1980s article I read, and I certainly didn't believe it either. I've also read on Wikipedia that it had the highest standard of living in the Warsaw Pact states and the "most advanced economy", which I also believe to be inaccurate. Do you believe that claim? Judging from the accounts I've heard from people who've been there/lived there and from photos and video I've seen, it certainly does not look any more prosperous or developed than any other of the Warsaw Pact/COMECON states (with the exception of Ceausescu's Romania, perhaps) like Poland or the USSR, for example. As for American roads, I've been to America every year from 2003-2007 and have generally found the quality of the roads to be excellent. Most of the time has been in the American west, mainly California but also Colorado, Wyoming, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, Utah and Nevada. I've never driven on American north east roads though, so I can't speak for them. I find Scottish roads to be beyond awful. Most urban residential streets have very rough surfaces and lots of uneven patches and potholes. The main motorways and dual carriageways between major cities are OK, but single lane country roads are as bad as ever. Many of them appear to follow old horse trails and have lots of unnecessary bends, resulting in short distances in rural areas taking far longer than they should. Single track roads with passing places are often very poorly maintained and lack crash barriers, and crumble at the side. I don't know if English roads are as bad - I suspect not. -- Last edit: 2008-12-14 20:37:37 (antp)
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-14 22:19	@ecclefan: in our opinion (my wife and me a big Scotland-fans have travled over there several times) Scottish roads aren't that bad. O.K., sometimes the gullies aren't mounted really nice, but this I've only seen as a problem at our last trip, when I drove my dad's Mercedes A 210 with the ugly sport-suspension and the much uglier, uncomfortable low section tires. And the typical Scottish single-track-roads are very curvy, so you need a long time, because you always have to drive slow. O.k., in the Ullapool-area we'd seen some really narrow ones, tricky to drive, but in the Highlands you normally don't have problems with any kind of thick traffic. A least you're mainly alone. @Neptune: we had the impression, that the road-condition is better in Washington D.C. and Maryland than in Pennsylvania. In New Jersey it was worse, in the state New York, mainly in its North, really horrible. Our rental car was so-and-so. We'd been a bit astonished about its quality: /vehicle_140412-Chrysler-Town-and-Country-2008.html P.S. Yes, compared with other COMECON-states, the GDR had indeed a higher standard of living. Otherwise it was -except the Soviet Union- the country, where it was most difficult to get Western made cars. In Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary it was much easier. Just look for the pic at IMCDB of pre-1990 movies from that countries. As wickey, Weasel and Bravada have told, it was possible and their families had owned some Western cars. -- Last edit: 2008-12-14 22:26:24
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-14 22:46	Ingo wrote We'd been a bit astonished about its quality: /vehicle_140412-Chrysler-Town-and-Country-2008.html What exactly was wrong with it?
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-14 23:54	On this evening's episode of Top Gear, they mentioned that members of the Morris Marina Owner's Club had gotten very angry over last week's episode, Clarkson pretends to be apologetic and says they'll never destroy another Marina again and that they've bought another Marina to keep preserved, they cut to a video of it and a piano falls on it! I immediately thought of the discussion on this page and I thought it was so funny! -- Last edit: 2008-12-15 00:04:26
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-15 01:30	They just love to upset people Though, destroying another one, just because the Owners Club was upset seems a little immature. -- Last edit: 2008-12-15 01:32:52
Animatronixx ◊ 2008-12-15 01:43	It's a sick sick sick sick world...
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-15 10:49	I didn't find the piano Marina scene funny at all. However, since it was only a distant side-on shot and there was no visible interior, I'm suspecting it could be just the fire damaged one repainted. EDIT: Forget about what I said there, it IS a different car: -- Last edit: 2008-12-15 10:56:30
antp ◊ 2008-12-15 17:35	Animatronixx wrote It's a sick sick sick sick world... Yes They could quite easily destroy every single Marina left in Britain, that's quite frightening...
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-15 17:47	If destroying the first one was pointless enough then doing it for a second time just to "annoy" people makes no sense whatsoever...
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-15 20:22	carchasesfanatic wrote What exactly was wrong with it? As I wrote there: big, but the interior and other details made a cheap, loveless impression. And the fact, that after ca.1000 km driving -we got it as nearly brand new, with just 6000 mls on the clock- the valve had begun to ringing and the car lost power upon hills.
Ingo ◊ 2008-12-15 20:38	Come on guys, it's nothing special, that someone makes such clips or other films and provokes (advisedly or not) some people, especially the owners/lovers of such a car/other thing. So actually the Matra Bagheera-fans are very pissed about that spot: http://www.autoumwelt.at/ The guy (as I've heard, popular in Austria, he also has participated at classic-car-rallyes) don't destroy a car, he just said, that he had such a car a long time ago and it was an ugly, unreliable rubbish. It's also bad for the environment etc.... He said, you should buy a brand new car. The reason for it: it's a spot of the Austian car-importer-community, which tries desperately to find find buyers for new cars in the actual crisis. To the guy gor money for saying that. He reacted quite arrogant on letters and mails, he got from angry Matra-freaks. Anyways, I'm not upset about that. Even if they (Clarkson and this Austrian guy) would say/make something bad about my favourite K 70, I wouldn't react like the Marina Owners Club or the Matra Owners Club. It's just made for amusement for some people and for offending some others. As I wrote in the forum before: who the f... is Clarkson, that it's worth to be angry about his TV-show? Is there any persomal reason for anyone of us? P.S. I must admit, that I'm a very resentful guy. When I inherit a bit money of my grandmother, I haven't chosen "Pfandbriefe und Kommunalobligationen" (a kind of German bonds, issued by the state and the communities) for one reason: there was a TV-spot in late 1980, where they had thrown a K 70 from a cliff (followed by a Simca 1308). Even 25/26 years later on, this was a reason for refusing these bonds. -- Last edit: 2008-12-15 20:40:41
antp ◊ 2008-12-16 00:25	Ingo wrote Even if they (Clarkson and this Austrian guy) would say/make something bad about my favourite K 70, I wouldn't react like the Marina Owners Club Well if he just said things it would be ok of course, but destroying these is too much when they are in quite good state/shape
Star Wars Fanatic ◊ 2008-12-16 00:34	Here is the second Marina that was destroyed for everyone to vent about /vehicle.php?id=204654 Personally, I found it amusing.
Kowalski ◊ 2008-12-16 00:57	Star Wars Fanatic wrote Here is the second Marina that was destroyed for everyone to vent about /vehicle.php?id=204654 Personally, I found it amusing. Me too!
G-MANN ◊ 2008-12-16 12:40	Ingo wrote As I wrote in the forum before: who the f... is Clarkson, that it's worth to be angry about his TV-show? Is there any persomal reason for anyone of us? Was this a recent post? Which topic is it in? Anyway, as you've said (or at least I think this is what you mean), it's not worth getting angry about Clarkson, even if you totally disagree with what he says/does. I don't anyone should take him 100% seriously (I think even he would agree). His immflatory remarks are very deliberate, so the people who get geniunely offended by them are a bit like the kind of saps who would get upset by Bernard Manning. I once saw a comment on one of the Clarkson videos on Youtube which said "Clarkson only offends the people who deserve to be offended." I think that's spot-on. The truth is some of you are over-reacting a little about the destruction of the Marina (it's ONLY a Marina!). -- Last edit: 2008-12-16 12:42:39
CarChasesFanatic ◊ 2008-12-16 14:47	G-MANN wrote The truth is some of you are over-reacting a little about the destruction of the Marina (it's ONLY a Marina!). Either you don't want to understand us or you just act as if you didn't, do you see any of us getting furious about it ? we just find it annoying that he destroys these cars (which for some of us they are classics, you can just call them as you want) instead of other more modern ones, i don't hate Clarkson and i am not stopping watching the programme just because of this, they do it, i don't agree with it but i still enjoy this show a lot and i laugh with them three, even if they were to destroy an old Cadillac i'd find it very annoying but i wouldn't say "enough" and stop watching it, that would be just stupid, it's still the best or at least the most entertaining car show on the world and i like it, the same way that we can understand your stance i think you could understand ours and stop reiterating that "it is just a Marina"...
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-16 15:08	I wish he'd destroy one of those. I absolutely fucking hate those things and unfortunately have never had the satisfaction of seeing one of the them get destroyed. Not in real life, film or TV. God, I hate them. I'd like to know what Top Gear thinks of them. If I won the lottery, I'd personally buy one of those and smash it to pieces with a sledge hammer.
58Roadmaster ◊ 2008-12-16 22:35	Scion xB. When Motor Trend asked college students majoring in automotive design for their impressions of this car, it was dubbed by one such student a "toolshed on wheels." I agree, but now there is the Ford Flex which shares some of the lines. Why does ugly and square (Honda Element fits this description as well) represent the 20-something youth market to 40-plus-year-old automotive stylists? [Back to topic?] -- Last edit: 2008-12-16 22:39:49
Neptune ◊ 2008-12-16 22:59	The Honda Element and Scion xB are indeed aimed at youth buyers, but the Ford Flex (which is a cross between a Minivan and Station Wagon) is aimed toward adults with family. It is the replacement for the Ford Freestar minivan.
Weasel1984 ◊ 2008-12-17 17:00	chris40 wrote ... but you couldn’t fold the back seats down, could you? (IIRC they put that right with the Caro) That's true, it was in the early 1990's. Edit: my BIG bad, it was since early 1980's! chris40 wrote I’m also sorry if I offended you by slagging the 125p off, but I was speaking as I found. Oh no, there is no way to offend me by something like this. I also do not feel offended by the Clarkson when he destroy this or other car - not by the act of destruction. Though is it really so funny - I wouldn't say so. Also the idea to destroy the second Marina just to irritate its fans was childish. chris40 wrote Even in 1973 their finish and performance wasn’t up to the standards even of British-made cars, let alone German or French. No doubts about it. That's what, somehow I've already wrote. -- Last edit: 2009-08-05 17:23:01
ecclefechan ◊ 2008-12-17 22:45	fastmarinamagazine.com wrote The Server that Fastmarinamagazine.com is hosted on has been the target of a "Denial of Service" Attack. This means that I can't turn the forum back on at this time. Looks like this "war" has yet to end!
Kowalski ◊ 2008-12-19 12:00	Unbelievable, that people are bitching and moaning about Top Gear destroying one of the worst cars ever made. Get a life for effing sake! -There are much better cars which are true classics rather than this skip. This thing was bad from day one! Most cars of the same class, at the time, were already fitted with disc brakes at the front and the Marina still had drums! In Australia there was a 2.6 straight six version which had the same suspension set-up of the 1.3 model… Oh dear… Can you imagine anything worse? A Diesel Marina, perhaps? Ewww!!! -- Last edit: 2008-12-19 12:01:02
wirelessworshipper ◊ 2008-12-27 12:37	I own a Marina and I need to correct you on a couple of things Kowalski. It's not one of the worst cars ever made, it's a cheap, reliable and fairly nippy bread and butter 70s saloon. The Marina 1.3 did have drum brakes at the front (all others had discs all round) as they didnt think discs were needed at the front and indeed the drum brakes at the front on 1.3s are up to the job (although obviously discs are better). Anyway, all you need to do is look at its rivals and you will soon see there is nothing wrong with the Marina. The Cortina MK3 had pretty shocking handling and the Hillman Avenger was never going to set the world on fire (unless it was a Tiger...)
subzero ◊ 2009-07-22 14:26	It is sad and sick to see a vintage car get destroyed. -- Last edit: 2009-07-22 14:28:02
TheHeartbreakKid15 ◊ 2009-07-27 00:38	The vehicle details for TWN 719N are: Date of Liability 01 12 2009 Date of First Registration 01 08 1974 Year of Manufacture Not Available Cylinder Capacity (cc) 1798CC CO2 Emissions Not Available Fuel Type Petrol Export Marker Not Applicable Vehicle Status SORN Not Due Vehicle Colour GOLD Vehicle Type Approval null
carenthusiast08 ◊ 2021-06-12 23:23	Jeremy Clarkson has single-handedly killed most of the Morris Marinas on the planet.
JohnSmith1882 ◊ 2024-11-17 03:49	I'd say it was basically the Marinas that have been killing themselves, not Clarkson, due to being complete rubbish. Even if they weren't being driven and breaking down they'd eventually succumb to poor rust-proofing. And how many did Clarkson kill, about 3 or 4?

Advertising

Last completed movie pages

1974 Morris Marina 1.8 Super De Luxe MkI [ADO28]

1974 Morris Marina MkI [ADO28] in Top Gear, Non-fiction TV, 2002-2015 Ep. 12.06

Comments about this vehicle

Add a comment

Advertising

Watch or buy this title - Powered by JustWatch

Advertising