![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
How could Margaret Thatcher order a fleet of P5s 6 years after production ended? 22:47, 1 December 2007 Conollyb
As outlined in the text, the last fleet of Rover P5s were reserved for government use, hence why Thatcher phased in the P5s as so that nobody in her government at least would be driven around in her view of the "hidious" SD1. PoliceChief 00:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC) (And please poser of question sign your posts)
What's the source for the label "middle class Rolls-Royce"? It seems to have been rather more than just a "middle class" car if it was the favoured car of Queen and Government. Quite the aristocrat, in fact. 81.151.145.119 ( talk) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
The photo captioned as a 1960 model looks like a Mark II to me - or at least a Mark 1a - as it doesn't have the glass wind deflectors over the windows. RGCorris ( talk) 15:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether the wind deflectors were dropped for the Mk 1-A - they certainly were not on the Mk II. My father had a Mk II and I recall the lack of deflectors being the most obvious external visual difference from the Mk 1, but I wasn't previously aware of the 1-A. Ergo I asked the question to see if someone could give a definitive answer rather than change the caption. RGCorris ( talk) 17:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Wish they would stop using the epithet Poor mans Rolls Royce. It generally means anything with leather and wood and a reasonable finish. It was applied to the Austin A60 upmarket version, the 4 Litre R and a few others. But to my recollection the phrase was first coined for the Ford [Zephyr4] the square one which had acres of leather. That would be about 1962. Rover was certainly never a poor mans rolls Royce, indeed in some respects it was far better.Ps fly screens as they were known ceased after 1A Regards (user:[LeoRoverman| LeoRoverman])(User Talk:LeoRoverman|Talk]) 18:44 09/07/2011` — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoRoverman ( talk • contribs) 17:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Don't know how to cite it, but for the "citation needed" part of Her Majesty's P5, there's a youtube video out there of an old Top Gear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-Kc7UL24wQ
The registration is JGY280. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.20.79 ( talk) 10:11, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
It is not often noted now that this car's pleasing shape (a great relief from er distinctive predecessors and successors) is a simple and direct copy of the 1955 model Chrysler Corporation body shape. Eddaido ( talk) 23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
May I also point out the similarity between the 300 and the XJ6 series 1 - the latter, obviously being the more beautiful.
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
How could Margaret Thatcher order a fleet of P5s 6 years after production ended? 22:47, 1 December 2007 Conollyb
As outlined in the text, the last fleet of Rover P5s were reserved for government use, hence why Thatcher phased in the P5s as so that nobody in her government at least would be driven around in her view of the "hidious" SD1. PoliceChief 00:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC) (And please poser of question sign your posts)
What's the source for the label "middle class Rolls-Royce"? It seems to have been rather more than just a "middle class" car if it was the favoured car of Queen and Government. Quite the aristocrat, in fact. 81.151.145.119 ( talk) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
The photo captioned as a 1960 model looks like a Mark II to me - or at least a Mark 1a - as it doesn't have the glass wind deflectors over the windows. RGCorris ( talk) 15:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether the wind deflectors were dropped for the Mk 1-A - they certainly were not on the Mk II. My father had a Mk II and I recall the lack of deflectors being the most obvious external visual difference from the Mk 1, but I wasn't previously aware of the 1-A. Ergo I asked the question to see if someone could give a definitive answer rather than change the caption. RGCorris ( talk) 17:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Wish they would stop using the epithet Poor mans Rolls Royce. It generally means anything with leather and wood and a reasonable finish. It was applied to the Austin A60 upmarket version, the 4 Litre R and a few others. But to my recollection the phrase was first coined for the Ford [Zephyr4] the square one which had acres of leather. That would be about 1962. Rover was certainly never a poor mans rolls Royce, indeed in some respects it was far better.Ps fly screens as they were known ceased after 1A Regards (user:[LeoRoverman| LeoRoverman])(User Talk:LeoRoverman|Talk]) 18:44 09/07/2011` — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoRoverman ( talk • contribs) 17:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Don't know how to cite it, but for the "citation needed" part of Her Majesty's P5, there's a youtube video out there of an old Top Gear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-Kc7UL24wQ
The registration is JGY280. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.20.79 ( talk) 10:11, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
It is not often noted now that this car's pleasing shape (a great relief from er distinctive predecessors and successors) is a simple and direct copy of the 1955 model Chrysler Corporation body shape. Eddaido ( talk) 23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
May I also point out the similarity between the 300 and the XJ6 series 1 - the latter, obviously being the more beautiful.