LIGHT v. HEAVY CARS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3194, 2 June 1915, Page 59

LIGHT v. HEAVY CARS.

TItIE IDEAL AUTOMOBILE,

A controversy has lately taken place in tho American motoring press on tho respective merits of light and heavy automobiles. A small section advocates heavy cars, a larger one light vehicles, but the majority seem to favour motors of medium and horse-power. Tho term ‘‘ medium in this case refers to motors weighing 25001 b, which is tho average weight of European cars oi 15-20 h.p. The great argument in favour of tho light ear is the low first cost and operating expenses, due to —(1) its consuming less fuel per mile; (2) the tyres costing less, and, as a rule, giving a greater mileage ; (3) license, insurance, and interest on investment being less; and (4) the repair bill being lower, because of the new parts being lighter, cheaper, and nior<i easily replaced. The light car .is particularly fitted for work in tho country districts, for it will not sink so deeply into the mud as a Hieavy machine, and less energy is expended in removing it when it becomes bogged. The light car also has its place in the city, for it will turn around in a small compass, is easily handled in crowded traffic, and will do the same amount of work as a heavy car. When expense is not considered as a prime factor, the heavy car appeals to touring motorists, because of its greater riding comfort. It has longer and easier springs, and there is less vibration when travelling at a good speed ever rough roads. A great deal of vibration is noticeable in a light car w'hen travelling at a faster rate than 25 miles an hour over the average road, but the.car approximating 300 Jib in weight, well tyred and properly sprung, can bo •driven at from 50 to 40 miles an hour over only fair roads with no more than normal wear on car or tyres, and with comfort to tho passengeis. The advocates of this type enumerate the disadvantages of the light car as follows: —■(!) There is but a small amount of room available for passengers; (2) the short wheel-base leads to chscomfort on rough roads; (3) the cushion effect of tyres is not so pronounced, owing to their smaller size; (4) the light car cannot be driven as fast, as heavier vehicles, and is more ant to skid when wet or leave tho road when striking ruts; and (5) there is only room for a limited amount of luggage. Analysing the letters, it would appear that the ideal car should have a weight of between 25001 b and 30001 b, with a wheel base of about 10ft, and long, comfortable springs. Tho petrol consumption should range from 18 to 24 miles to the gallon, and the vehicle should run about ’SOOO miles on a set of 36in by 4jin tyres- The extra expenditure would bo justified, by tho additional comfort in touring, for, notwithstanding the arguments of the light car advocates, it is obvious that an obstruction or hole in the road will tend to disturb the course of a swiftly-moving light body more than it will a heavier body travelling at the same speed. The correspondence serves to show that each car has its place — the light . car when service and economy are the chief considerations, _ the medium car when comfort is also desired, and the heavy car when every other consideration is sacrificed to comfort, appearance, and speed.