RE: Fast should mean scary: Tell Me I'm Wrong
Discussion
This is why I yearn for a Honda NSX. If fully exploited, they are properly fast, but can bite you badly if you get it wrong. In fact, except for practicality, it's very difficult to fault the NSX. They're fast, visceral reasonably frugal, not THAT expensive, very reliable, depreciation proof, quirky, good image, petrol head kudos (Senna, and they sound incredible on WOT.
eliotrw said:
bitwrx said:
See now my Rallye just feels dull compared to the Mini that it replaced.
All relative I suppose.
I would say your rallye needs attention.All relative I suppose.
I have a 100% tip top Gti-6 and its the epitome of driver involvement.
Has some mods mind but i had it standard too and it was just as good.
They benefit massively from a rebuild beam and new bushes all round
I can also recommend Miles gear rods available from pugracing on ebay or miles on 306gti6.com
Also, Lightened flywheels make first "interesting"
Edited by eliotrw on Thursday 14th November 15:06
The article said you need to be a bit scared to have fun. I totally agree. So far I've not been able to scare myself at legal speeds in the 306. In the Mini, I felt no further than a couple of thou from the edge on every trip out.
s
tting balls, I want my Mini back.ETA: It's not really a fair comparison. The Rallye is standard, and I use it as a daily, tooling up and down the M5. I would not have wanted to do that in the Mini; it was a bit raucous at anything above 60. So conclusion is: small slow scary car is more fun than big fast not-scary car.
Edited by bitwrx on Thursday 14th November 17:11
Edited by bitwrx on Thursday 14th November 17:14
j_s14a said:
This is why I yearn for a Honda NSX. If fully exploited, they are properly fast, but can bite you badly if you get it wrong. In fact, except for practicality, it's very difficult to fault the NSX. They're fast, visceral reasonably frugal, not THAT expensive, very reliable, depreciation proof, quirky, good image, petrol head kudos (Senna, and they sound incredible on WOT.
One of my 'why the hell did I ever sell that' cars! 
Read the title and thought, yes I agree. Read the article and agree even more. I love my bike and going fast, but I will never hit the limit of what mine is capable of. I do want an old school cafe racer to do quiet B roads on. Something where the breaks are not as good as they should be and you are always on the edge of safety.
Kawasicki said:
dod said:
For once (and once only), TVR drivers have no idea what you're talking about. 
I once drove a TVR Tuscan at reasonable speed on a moderately bumpy B-road. Wow, just wow...very...engaging.The old girl is an absolute nightmare to drive on your first try, but once you get to know her, its an absolute joy.
Noise, very heavy controls, understeer, understeer, understeer, understeer, heavy controls, and more understeer, but I'm still in love with her.
The immense difference between 1971 and 1999 also keeps me appreciate the Chimaera so much.
If I wouldn't have the old Tuscan, the hunger for more speed/power/handling (Tuscan S6, T350...) would be uncontrollable
I'm not so sure if fast should mean scary, but I'm a firm believer in putting effort into going fast, generic turbo hot hatches are fine for the majority. I can accept that they are more suited for day to day use and accept why they are more popular - but I like my fun N/A style, short gear ratios and high revs, on a more basic level I like the TypeR's and I own a Clio Cup 200 (11 plate) as a second car which is great fun and a very capable little motor, when I can get the keys back from my girlfriend.
I think it's much more rewarding than just thrashing a torquey turbo motor and well worth any perceived drawbacks.
Although a Z Cars Mini with an R1 engine in I took a passenger run in (owned by a friend of my Dads, ambiguous link I know) was truly scary..... and very, very fast.
I think it's much more rewarding than just thrashing a torquey turbo motor and well worth any perceived drawbacks.
Although a Z Cars Mini with an R1 engine in I took a passenger run in (owned by a friend of my Dads, ambiguous link I know) was truly scary..... and very, very fast.
Very good article indeed.
This hit the nail unbelievably squarely on the head:
"..... newer 911s and their equivalents elsewhere in the fast car world just raise the speed at which you'll eventually have that accident. Which you won't have seen coming because you'll have never felt the onset before...... "
The unfortunate truth is that most drivers, despite a belief that they're the best thing since Schumacher, have absolutely no idea how to read the messages a car is sending them. They won't recognise the approach of the limit and will have no idea what to do once the car's limit is exceeded. For most people, only proper car control training will awaken them to the language of the car and empower them to control things at and beyond that limit. But most people don't bother with car control training. Why would they need to? Statistics prove that the great majority of drivers believe they're 'above average' - think about that one! Still others just think they're utterly infallible.
In years gone by, when everything happened more slowly, there was just a possibility that our inexperienced-but-infallible 'perfect driver' might have the time & space to gather things up and proceed with just a serious scare. Today, with massively high limits and everything happening at a million mph, our 'above-average' driver will just have the massive accident that as Dan rightly says, (s)he will never see coming.
My personal belief is that proper driver training (Don Palmer's courses and similar being perfect examples of what I mean) should be made mandatory before anyone gets to drive today's really fast cars. It not only makes for a safer, more aware individual, but also allows that person to derive so much more enjoyment (and raw pace in the right location) from their car. Another very agreeable side-effect would be to help derail the lefty, green, anti-fast-car lobby who would ban all fast cars (or should that just be 'all cars') if they could.
This hit the nail unbelievably squarely on the head:
"..... newer 911s and their equivalents elsewhere in the fast car world just raise the speed at which you'll eventually have that accident. Which you won't have seen coming because you'll have never felt the onset before...... "
The unfortunate truth is that most drivers, despite a belief that they're the best thing since Schumacher, have absolutely no idea how to read the messages a car is sending them. They won't recognise the approach of the limit and will have no idea what to do once the car's limit is exceeded. For most people, only proper car control training will awaken them to the language of the car and empower them to control things at and beyond that limit. But most people don't bother with car control training. Why would they need to? Statistics prove that the great majority of drivers believe they're 'above average' - think about that one! Still others just think they're utterly infallible.
In years gone by, when everything happened more slowly, there was just a possibility that our inexperienced-but-infallible 'perfect driver' might have the time & space to gather things up and proceed with just a serious scare. Today, with massively high limits and everything happening at a million mph, our 'above-average' driver will just have the massive accident that as Dan rightly says, (s)he will never see coming.
My personal belief is that proper driver training (Don Palmer's courses and similar being perfect examples of what I mean) should be made mandatory before anyone gets to drive today's really fast cars. It not only makes for a safer, more aware individual, but also allows that person to derive so much more enjoyment (and raw pace in the right location) from their car. Another very agreeable side-effect would be to help derail the lefty, green, anti-fast-car lobby who would ban all fast cars (or should that just be 'all cars') if they could.
rejn said:
Yep - I agree - and James Hunt was right all along with his A35 Van.
seconded.my 911 gives me a healthy scare every time i drive it. mix its reputation with the messages the chassis sends you and if you don't feel that squirrelly feeling in your guts every time you stretch it out, frankly not only are you going to have an accident, it's likely to be a big one and what's more you'll deserve it.
on a related note, i believe the proliferation of driver's 'safety' aids such as rear-view cameras, park-assist, proximity sensors, etc is merely creating a generation of people behind the wheel who are only semi-engaged and therefore extremely dangerous to other road users. harrumph.
Ian_UK1 said:
The unfortunate truth is that most drivers, despite a belief that they're the best thing since Schumacher, have absolutely no idea how to read the messages a car is sending them. They won't recognise the approach of the limit and will have no idea what to do once the car's limit is exceeded. For most people, only proper car control training will awaken them to the language of the car and empower them to control things at and beyond that limit.
I completely agree with you. I've owned my Sagaris since 2008 yet it was only last month on a wet and greasy Silverstone that I finally learned how it feels on and over the limit, and it unlocked a whole new chapter on driving it. Also boosted my confidence enormously. very true. i was chatting to a guy at work, he's got an old Caterham kit, today about the enjoyment of driving and that folks in their super-powerful hot hatches could probably beat either of us - i've a standard S2 k-series Elise. we'd be having much more fun though, as every journey is an event, and it's plenty fast enough as it is.
Andy ap said:
BigGingerBob said:
I find it very odd that everyone I have read on here agrees with this but then when something is done about it (BRZ, GT86) people complain that there isn't enough power.
'Needs a turbo!'
'Only 200 brake, might as well walk, I don't get out of bed for anything less than 700.'
Etc.
Welcome to PH where we say one thing but actually mean something completely differnt. 'Needs a turbo!'
'Only 200 brake, might as well walk, I don't get out of bed for anything less than 700.'
Etc.
This article perfectly sums up why I love my S2000 so much, enough power to not get bored, N/A top end power delivery that needs to be exploited and due to the wind noise either with the roof up or down when pure going fast you certainly know about it. I have a feeling it is and will be the best £4500 I've ever spent.
TooMany2cvs said:
Ladies an' Gennulmen, I present you with the pinnacle of automotive perfection that is the -spec 205. 1.1 4spd in our case, rather than the 1.4 5spd that a driving god like Monkey can cope with.
If that all gets a bit too, well, refined and boring - then there's always the 2cv.
This strikes a chord. The first car I bought was an E-reg 205 1.1 XL and was seriously fun to drive. 55hp, 745kg and 145 Michelin tyres.-spec 205. 1.1 4spd in our case, rather than the 1.4 5spd that a driving god like Monkey can cope with.If that all gets a bit too, well, refined and boring - then there's always the 2cv.
I was 20 then so the fact that it scared me
less a couple of times was more to do with the driver (exuberance>skill) than the car but I know what you mean about all the components reaching their limit at the same moment.Felt like a rocket ship next to Mum's Citroen Dyane & the Simca 1100 it succeeded.
The fastest I have ever driven is around 175 MPH (ON PRIVATE ROADS/TRACKS BEFORE YOU CALL PLOD) in a 911 carerra and it was very scary, mainly because it felt like the whole car was going to explode once you got over 130 ish. The dashboard was shaking like in an old ford escort Mk3 (those ever drove a Mk3 Escort know what I mean) and it was an experience. In comparison I had a highly modified FOCUS ST3 and it hit 160+ with ease and felt 100 % planted, well sorted and as a result not really very exciting (apart from the sensation of speed). In know it might not be a fair comp as the Porker was 8 years old the the Focus was almost a new car. But for excitement the 911 had it in spades.
My current steed is a yank muscle car and I love it for the fact you dont have go that fast to have fun. With 580 odd BHP you cant really use the power 90 % of the time, but when I pull away from a roundabout and the back end does a little dance it gets the blood pumping and thats what its all about in my view!
My current steed is a yank muscle car and I love it for the fact you dont have go that fast to have fun. With 580 odd BHP you cant really use the power 90 % of the time, but when I pull away from a roundabout and the back end does a little dance it gets the blood pumping and thats what its all about in my view!
Ian_UK1 said:
Very good article indeed.
This hit the nail unbelievably squarely on the head:
"..... newer 911s and their equivalents elsewhere in the fast car world just raise the speed at which you'll eventually have that accident. Which you won't have seen coming because you'll have never felt the onset before...... "
The unfortunate truth is that most drivers, despite a belief that they're the best thing since Schumacher, have absolutely no idea how to read the messages a car is sending them. They won't recognise the approach of the limit and will have no idea what to do once the car's limit is exceeded. For most people, only proper car control training will awaken them to the language of the car and empower them to control things at and beyond that limit. But most people don't bother with car control training. Why would they need to? Statistics prove that the great majority of drivers believe they're 'above average' - think about that one! Still others just think they're utterly infallible.
In years gone by, when everything happened more slowly, there was just a possibility that our inexperienced-but-infallible 'perfect driver' might have the time & space to gather things up and proceed with just a serious scare. Today, with massively high limits and everything happening at a million mph, our 'above-average' driver will just have the massive accident that as Dan rightly says, (s)he will never see coming.
My personal belief is that proper driver training (Don Palmer's courses and similar being perfect examples of what I mean) should be made mandatory before anyone gets to drive today's really fast cars. It not only makes for a safer, more aware individual, but also allows that person to derive so much more enjoyment (and raw pace in the right location) from their car. Another very agreeable side-effect would be to help derail the lefty, green, anti-fast-car lobby who would ban all fast cars (or should that just be 'all cars') if they could.
I agree with much of what you say, especially about our over-estimation of our driving skill, and agree with the gist of this thread - that high speed demands respect because of the consequences of crashing, and that it is possible to get the adrenalin rush from a well designed car at lower speeds.This hit the nail unbelievably squarely on the head:
"..... newer 911s and their equivalents elsewhere in the fast car world just raise the speed at which you'll eventually have that accident. Which you won't have seen coming because you'll have never felt the onset before...... "
The unfortunate truth is that most drivers, despite a belief that they're the best thing since Schumacher, have absolutely no idea how to read the messages a car is sending them. They won't recognise the approach of the limit and will have no idea what to do once the car's limit is exceeded. For most people, only proper car control training will awaken them to the language of the car and empower them to control things at and beyond that limit. But most people don't bother with car control training. Why would they need to? Statistics prove that the great majority of drivers believe they're 'above average' - think about that one! Still others just think they're utterly infallible.
In years gone by, when everything happened more slowly, there was just a possibility that our inexperienced-but-infallible 'perfect driver' might have the time & space to gather things up and proceed with just a serious scare. Today, with massively high limits and everything happening at a million mph, our 'above-average' driver will just have the massive accident that as Dan rightly says, (s)he will never see coming.
My personal belief is that proper driver training (Don Palmer's courses and similar being perfect examples of what I mean) should be made mandatory before anyone gets to drive today's really fast cars. It not only makes for a safer, more aware individual, but also allows that person to derive so much more enjoyment (and raw pace in the right location) from their car. Another very agreeable side-effect would be to help derail the lefty, green, anti-fast-car lobby who would ban all fast cars (or should that just be 'all cars') if they could.
BUT, I think you are wrong here: "In years gone by, when everything happened more slowly, there was just a possibility that our inexperienced-but-infallible 'perfect driver' might have the time & space to gather things up and proceed with just a serious scare. Today, with massively high limits and everything happening at a million mph, our 'above-average' driver will just have the massive accident that as Dan rightly says, (s)he will never see coming."
There is no doubt that the rate of serious injuries and deaths among car users keeps dropping on UK roads, despite the congestion and the cars that apparently make you feel too safe at high speed. The 'massive accidents' to which you refer either happen less nowadays or hurt fewer people when they do. See the charts on page 3 of this: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/255125/road-accidents-and-safety-quarterly-estimates-q2-2013.pdf
I think there's little doubt that a benefit of modern car design, regardless of the psychological state of the driver, is that it has contributed to greater safety for most road users.
Having said that, I want a Morgan 3-wheeler.
My 911 isn't scary. It has the potential to be but I don't drive it really fast so doesn't get the opportunity to be.
I enjoy the feel and sound of the car, happy to occasionally go faster than I ought to, but it is very occasional and nowhere near the cars potential - nowhere near my wife's Mini Cooper S could go for example - and what I really enjoy is the acceleration which I do partake in. I drive it like I have any other car I've owned, well within my personal safe zone.
But then I like 4x4's and enjoy going slowly over obstacle courses and while I love fast cars, I'm just not into driving them at their limits. I have no ambition to race.
I agree that fast should mean scary though - it is in part the reason I don't drive my 911 like I stole it, I don't want to experience the scary feeling that will happen if I did.
Therefore the fact that fast generally means scary - albeit thrilling no doubt - keeps me in check.
I enjoy the feel and sound of the car, happy to occasionally go faster than I ought to, but it is very occasional and nowhere near the cars potential - nowhere near my wife's Mini Cooper S could go for example - and what I really enjoy is the acceleration which I do partake in. I drive it like I have any other car I've owned, well within my personal safe zone.
But then I like 4x4's and enjoy going slowly over obstacle courses and while I love fast cars, I'm just not into driving them at their limits. I have no ambition to race.
I agree that fast should mean scary though - it is in part the reason I don't drive my 911 like I stole it, I don't want to experience the scary feeling that will happen if I did.
Therefore the fact that fast generally means scary - albeit thrilling no doubt - keeps me in check.
Coolbanana said:
My 911 isn't scary. It has the potential to be but I don't drive it really fast so doesn't get the opportunity to be.
Mine feels a little scary, especially with it's reputation, and I rarely slide it, but when things are perfect, there is little to beat such a raw experience except maybe an even older 911Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff