Sir,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
Sir,
May a Bentley owner reply to Mr. Andrew Lloyd’s letter comparing, Mk VI perfornumee with earlier 44-litre ears.
It is ‘general for post,war road tests on English fuel to slany lower figures than pre-war on all comparable ears, therefore ti U’ coilmarison may be misleading. I hat e found that the Nlk VI Can show some slight advantage on sheet speed and acceleration, though the car’s eharaeter us suell that this aspect should not. Ice consideml Sitparitiely front its other qualities.
‘I her(‘ is. however, ample justification for the ” showroom talk ” of higher perfi r111111111! hettittL5C the suspension is vastly Unproved and the general road, wortiliness, at least of more recent Mk : Ii, is of the very highest, order. The new engine has improved torque and pulls higher .gear ratios (except for the overdrive model), while the brakes are incomparable. ConsequentLy, the owner will regularly Ilse a higher level of performance. I alit not say that an earlier -44-litre could not hold it if driven with sufficient dei erininalioa, but not many drivers would vale to do in for long its it Wtttlid Seellt tar too hectic by corn15111500. I am, Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL C. fluGoEs, Henley-on-Thames. *