So, is your car fast?
Discussion
Some of my previous cars have felt 'fast' despite not necessarily being that quick. My CLK 320, coming from a ford fiesta felt like a rocket ship. The BMW just felt adequate, however, not fast by any means. MY SL55, for me, without a doubt, rocket ship fast. The Maserati is still pretty fast, and I have to say I don't really miss the power of the SL
Of course, some people convince themselves they have fast cars by driving them hard, overtaking, tail-gating and getting tyre squeal on corners.
Last week I was on the A303, cruising home at about 75mph, about 2,500rpm in sixth, overtaking a few cars and being overtaken by the odd screaming Corsa, Ka, Mondeo etc. At one point an old blue van went hurtling past. No problem. A few miles on I had to swerve a little to avoid assorted bits of metal on the tarmac, followed by skid marks and the same van on the hard shoulder with smoke pouring from the bonnet.
Last week I was on the A303, cruising home at about 75mph, about 2,500rpm in sixth, overtaking a few cars and being overtaken by the odd screaming Corsa, Ka, Mondeo etc. At one point an old blue van went hurtling past. No problem. A few miles on I had to swerve a little to avoid assorted bits of metal on the tarmac, followed by skid marks and the same van on the hard shoulder with smoke pouring from the bonnet.
Pixelpeep said:
y2blade said:
Cars are NOT fast.
Motorbikes are though.
Thanks for that Mr Blade. Unfortunately the statement is completely redundant in a thread entitled 'So, is your CAR fast'Motorbikes are though.
otherwise we would get...
Motorbikes are NOT fast.
Jet fighters are though.
Tango13 said:
Jet fighters are mickey mouse toys, if you want to go properly quick you need an SR-71. The fastest jet fighters run out of puff at about Mach 2, the Habu didn't up on it's cams until Mach 3 and was happier at Mach 3.5+ and was only limited by the laws of thermodynamics.
The Millenium Falcon pisses all over an SR-71. You wouldn't even see which way it went and with the pedal to the metal and the wing mirrors folded in it'll do point five past lightspeed so it isn't even limited by the laws of thermodynamics.swerni said:
corozin said:
I never used to regard my car as really that quick, but when I thought about in terms of "how often did I used to get overtaken in it?" I think it must have been much quicker than I thought.
Curiously I've been driving quite a few rentals of late somehow the performance of the old VR6 often seems to creep into those cars. So it seems more like a case of the driver rather than the machinery.
How often you get overtaken is a function of how you drive rather than what you drive. Curiously I've been driving quite a few rentals of late somehow the performance of the old VR6 often seems to creep into those cars. So it seems more like a case of the driver rather than the machinery.
If I drove a Micra round the M25 at 95 mph , very few cars would overtake me
Doesn't meant the Micra is fast, just means I'm driving at an excessive speed
92 CRX 1.6 140hp 940kg checking in.
It's as fast as a E60 520d with 160-something hp, my cousin and I did some pulls the other day and he said he was flooring it. I was surprised, really thought he'd disappear after auto kickdown.
Anyway, not fast but FEELS fast and that's one important quality. Was in a Jag XJR Supercharged once, the needle just kept climbing, the rear was unsettling but I felt no excitement.
Then again, I don't live near Autobahn, where something powerful but civilized would be nice.
Fastest car I've sat in was an E36 M3 on track, stock engine but stripped out with semi-slicks. My neck was O.K. during acceleration but my God it was fast in the corners... Upgraded brakes nearly popped my eyes out. Fun fun fun
It's as fast as a E60 520d with 160-something hp, my cousin and I did some pulls the other day and he said he was flooring it. I was surprised, really thought he'd disappear after auto kickdown.
Anyway, not fast but FEELS fast and that's one important quality. Was in a Jag XJR Supercharged once, the needle just kept climbing, the rear was unsettling but I felt no excitement.
Then again, I don't live near Autobahn, where something powerful but civilized would be nice.
Fastest car I've sat in was an E36 M3 on track, stock engine but stripped out with semi-slicks. My neck was O.K. during acceleration but my God it was fast in the corners... Upgraded brakes nearly popped my eyes out. Fun fun fun
Passat W8 - nice motorway cruiser but not fast accelerating- however does have an epic top speed of about 175- 180 (delimited obviously)
Porsche 911 3.2 Carrera - fairly quick, great acceleration and great sound but not blistering fast overall - best as a cruiser also, tops out about 155
Lotus Esprit Turbo - yes up to about 130 mph, awesome midrange and not alot will keep up, tops out about 160
TVR Chimera 4.6 - (bored out 4.3) with lots of engine mods - Fekking quick right through and loud - never even taken close to top speed , Will sort that hopefully on a track day soon.
Porsche 911 3.2 Carrera - fairly quick, great acceleration and great sound but not blistering fast overall - best as a cruiser also, tops out about 155
Lotus Esprit Turbo - yes up to about 130 mph, awesome midrange and not alot will keep up, tops out about 160
TVR Chimera 4.6 - (bored out 4.3) with lots of engine mods - Fekking quick right through and loud - never even taken close to top speed , Will sort that hopefully on a track day soon.
Edited by james280779 on Monday 8th October 05:34
rohrl said:
Tango13 said:
Jet fighters are mickey mouse toys, if you want to go properly quick you need an SR-71. The fastest jet fighters run out of puff at about Mach 2, the Habu didn't up on it's cams until Mach 3 and was happier at Mach 3.5+ and was only limited by the laws of thermodynamics.
The Millenium Falcon pisses all over an SR-71. You wouldn't even see which way it went and with the pedal to the metal and the wing mirrors folded in it'll do point five past lightspeed so it isn't even limited by the laws of thermodynamics.A DeLorean with the right modifications will do 0-89mph in minus 30 years! thats right, it'll be at 89mph 30 years BEFORE it started. now thats fast by anyones standards!!
only downside is the consumtion as it does 1.21 gigawatts to the mile, although i hear they are working on a bio fuel solution to that problem
Depends on what you base it on.
My Tuscan was 'fast' in a straight line (bloody quick as it happens), but it wasn't a fast car in the true sense of the word because it wouldn't go fast around corners, and much above 130 mph the straight line experience was somewhat diluted by the fact that I was clinging on for dear life to the steering wheel. It was also wasn't fast in the wet, fast being replaced with 'death trap' in this scenario.
Compare this to the Vantage, which is a good 4 seconds to 100 slower (and feels it) but which I can properly drive. In this respect it is a faster car than the Tuscan because it's point to point ability is so much better - I doubt that there are point to point roads in the UK where the Tuscan could really show its legs on the straight before the poise and balance of the Vantage came into play. My B7 RS4 covered both bases. It felt a lot quicker to 100 mph than the official figure of 10 seconds suggested, whilst point to point it was brilliant (if a little lighter in feel when compared to the Aston)
Having said that, overall I would class all three cars as fast, simply because they sounded like they were going quick. The exhaust note of the Aston shades it for me (although the Tuscan and the Milltek'd RS4 were both great)
My Tuscan was 'fast' in a straight line (bloody quick as it happens), but it wasn't a fast car in the true sense of the word because it wouldn't go fast around corners, and much above 130 mph the straight line experience was somewhat diluted by the fact that I was clinging on for dear life to the steering wheel. It was also wasn't fast in the wet, fast being replaced with 'death trap' in this scenario.
Compare this to the Vantage, which is a good 4 seconds to 100 slower (and feels it) but which I can properly drive. In this respect it is a faster car than the Tuscan because it's point to point ability is so much better - I doubt that there are point to point roads in the UK where the Tuscan could really show its legs on the straight before the poise and balance of the Vantage came into play. My B7 RS4 covered both bases. It felt a lot quicker to 100 mph than the official figure of 10 seconds suggested, whilst point to point it was brilliant (if a little lighter in feel when compared to the Aston)
Having said that, overall I would class all three cars as fast, simply because they sounded like they were going quick. The exhaust note of the Aston shades it for me (although the Tuscan and the Milltek'd RS4 were both great)
Tango13 said:
Pixelpeep said:
y2blade said:
Cars are NOT fast.
Motorbikes are though.
Thanks for that Mr Blade. Unfortunately the statement is completely redundant in a thread entitled 'So, is your CAR fast'Motorbikes are though.
otherwise we would get...
Motorbikes are NOT fast.
Jet fighters are though.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff