Discussion
RobM77 said:
It's nice to see a balanced viewpoint on here. Petrol and diesel engines both have their merits. My heart will always be with petrol engines, as I feel they sound better, I prefer the characteristics, and if it's not weird to say so,I prefer the smell of petrol and the idea that it's combustable at room temperature and pressure! However, diesel has a theoretically higher efficiency, and what's most important in this day and age is that a diesel like the one in my 320d responds initially with instant torque - I mean initially, because obviously you get turbo lag on the straights, but it's that initial response you need to balance a car in a corner. In contrast, most modern petrol engines have quite a significant delay (up to 1 second, typically around half a second) in that initial response, which means you coast jnto every corner and don't have the connection between throttle pedal and the balance of the car (in an average corner, half a second is the distance from turn in, where you go from brake to throttle, up to halfway to the apex - that's up to half the corner, and arguably the most crucial part of it, gone). I really tried to get on with modern petrol engines, but save for a few notable exceptions (like my Lotus), I'm happy to give up all the positives of petrol and go to diesel just because it allows me to control the car again through corners, which is what I enjoy about driving. It's a matter of priorities, and I will always prioritise cornering control over speed and sound. Like you, it's a matter of budget, because for me an E90 M3 is perfect, it provides the sound, the balance of a V8, the responses and everything, but I do 650 miles a week and the cost is just too prohibitive. I tried a 330ci and a Z4C, but that lag just drove me nuts and I'm far happier in my 320d (I was happier still in my E36 328i, but it just got too old to be reliable enough for me). Hopefully one day the technology will allow car companies to make a responsive petrol engine again for someone with my budget, but until then I'm sticking with diesel as that initial response more than makes up for the horrible sound and the responses. Thankfully my weekend car allows me to indulge in what a petrol engine should be like!
Have you EVER written a post or reply on here that doesn't mention this supposed chasm of delay in throttle response?? It reminds me of the spoof Honda Civic forum member on Sniff Petrol sneaking a reference to his "HCTS" into every single thread.RobM77 said:
Devil2575 said:
RobM77 said:
As far as balancing a car in a corner goes, this for me is the pleasure of driving. If you don't enjoy corners, what do you enjoy about driving? Straights?!?!!
I don't balance my car on the throttle and I enjoy corners. For me it's about smooth but rapid progress without feeling like you're on the very edge. Punching the pedal on the apex and hauling yourself out of the bend onto the next straight is a pretty nice feeling, even in a relatively low powered car. I've managed to experience this is many cars including one with the same engine as in your lag video.You don't need to drive like your pants are on fire to enjoy yourself.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 22 September 09:50
Devil2575 said:
RobM77 said:
Devil2575 said:
RobM77 said:
As far as balancing a car in a corner goes, this for me is the pleasure of driving. If you don't enjoy corners, what do you enjoy about driving? Straights?!?!!
I don't balance my car on the throttle and I enjoy corners. For me it's about smooth but rapid progress without feeling like you're on the very edge. Punching the pedal on the apex and hauling yourself out of the bend onto the next straight is a pretty nice feeling, even in a relatively low powered car. I've managed to experience this is many cars including one with the same engine as in your lag video.You don't need to drive like your pants are on fire to enjoy yourself.
Edited by RobM77 on Monday 22 September 09:50
To make matters worse, a lot of modern DBW cars exhibit a lag when coming off the throttle too. Most sporty cars, like Porsche or BMWs, don't have this, but most mundane cars such as Peugeots or Vauxhalls put this into their software to help slow people with their upchanges. Obviously it's a disaster if you like driving, so these cars are obviously not 'sporty'.
dme123 said:
Have you EVER written a post or reply on here that doesn't mention this supposed chasm of delay in throttle response?? It reminds me of the spoof Honda Civic forum member on Sniff Petrol sneaking a reference to his "HCTS" into every single thread.
Yes, thousands. The problem is that whenever I do mention it, people deny it and we end up arguing for several pages, so it gets way more exposure on here than I would ever intend. It bores me too - I wish people would just accept it.RobM77 said:
dme123 said:
Have you EVER written a post or reply on here that doesn't mention this supposed chasm of delay in throttle response?? It reminds me of the spoof Honda Civic forum member on Sniff Petrol sneaking a reference to his "HCTS" into every single thread.
Yes, thousands. The problem is that whenever I do mention it, people deny it and we end up arguing for several pages, so it gets way more exposure on here than I would ever intend. It bores me too - I wish people would just accept it.
I mentioned "small capacity turbo" as they are, to most people, the type of engine that suffers most from lag. You have cottoned onto one imperceptible (to most people) form of lag and yet seem entirely unconcerned by another, far more problematic, delay that is most acute in precisely the kind of car that you think represents driving heaven.
Incidentally, and for balance, I recently drove a car that definitely did have throttle lag (and massive turbo lag) - a petrol 1.8T Mercedes C-Class. Abominable in both respects and the first modern petrol car in which I have thought "Why doesn't the pedal do anything?". (Early 2000s cheap cars definitely had quite bad throttle lag, too, if I remember rightly).
ORD said:
Incidentally, and for balance, I recently drove a car that definitely did have throttle lag (and massive turbo lag) - a petrol 1.8T Mercedes C-Class. Abominable in both respects and the first modern petrol car in which I have thought "Why doesn't the pedal do anything?". (Early 2000s cheap cars definitely had quite bad throttle lag, too, if I remember rightly).
It can also go the other way. A set of Roller Barrels I used were so poor for throttle progression they made the car a nightmare to drive at light throttle. You had to wedge your foot onto the side of the tunnel and roll it really gently, moderating it if the car started lurching, not great if you weren't in the mood to play. Sounded nice at WOT but utterly crap compared to my experience with Jenvey's IMO. If you want lag, try an E350 cdi, an exercise in how not to map an engine 
ORD said:
I mentioned "small capacity turbo" as they are, to most people, the type of engine that suffers most from lag. You have cottoned on to one imperceptible (to most people) form of lag and yet seem entirely unconcerned by another, far more problematic, delay that is most acute in precisely the kind of car that you think represents driving heaven.
You're referring to turbo lag I presume? That's only a problem if you demand large amounts of power quite quickly. The amount of power needed to balance a car in a corner is always very small (it's enough to counteract the drag of cornering), so you're nowhere near the point where you'd feel turbo lag, so it won't affect cornering control.RobM77 said:
You're referring to turbo lag I presume? That's only a problem if you demand large amounts of power quite quickly. The amount of power needed to balance a car in a corner is always very small (it's enough to counteract the drag of cornering), so you're nowhere near the point where you'd feel turbo lag, so it won't affect cornering control.
I still don't really see it, I am afraid. If I wanted to balance the car on throttle, I would be at moderate revs, where pick up is pretty much instant in an NA petrol. Then again, I don't trail brake much in road driving because, to be frank, it is introducing an element of complexity that just doesn't need to be there when driving at normal and safe speeds. I can think of about 1 very slow corner along any route that I drive for which trail braking is maybe worthwhile. For every other corner, I cant really see why you wouldn't be off the brake and on gentle throttle well before the apex, which would take up any lag before you accelerate through (which is where the turbo lag would be really noticeable).
I would have thought that for road driving, the sensible way to take pleasure out of corners is to brake earlyish, take up the throttle gently and then power out once the car is settled and the sightlines are clear. It is in the "power out" phase that a turbo lag pretty much ruins driving.
Hmm.. this may be car dependent. The only way to get turbo lag in my BMW is to come off the throttle for a while and then suddenly go back on it. If you have a steady throttle and then accelerate, as with coming out of a corner there's no turbo lag at all. I have experienced what you describe though in other cars - I did a few laps in a Noble M400 at launch a few years ago and the turbo lag ruined the experience for me as it was forever spooling up mid corner or at corner exit.
RobM77 said:
It's exactly the same as when you're going fast - a tiny bit more throttle will lift the nose a bit and a tiny bit less throttle will drop the nose a bit (not visually of course, unless you're a clumsy loon, but I think it's a good way of describing it and you can feel that balance from inside the car quite easily). The ideal situation in a corner is to have a steady throttle at a steady speed (right foot still - you'll need some throttle to counteract the extra friction of cornering) with the balance neutral between front and rear and the steering steady (hands still); that way the car is balanced. If you can't picture that at low speed, then just imagine you're going faster on a race track and the front and rear are sliding equally - that balance for me is the satisfaction in driving, whatever speed I'm doing. This is why motor racing is classified as a 'carving sport' - it's the same motion as a snowboarder, skier, surfer etc carving round a turn with balance. A car that permits and relishes this control is, for me, 'sporty'. This balanced state is the state you move to after braking for a corner and exchange brakes for steering at turn-in, only if you have a throttle lag, as in the videos above, then after your foot touches the accelerator pedal to balance the car, you end up coasting for the time of the lag before the throttle does anything, so whilst you're coasting the nose drops and the balance shifts towards oversteer. When the throttle does kick in, it's unlikely you've been holding the throttle at the right place blindly, so you'll have to adjust it again, and before you know it you're at the apex and you've screwed the whole corner up. It's extremely annoying!
To make matters worse, a lot of modern DBW cars exhibit a lag when coming off the throttle too. Most sporty cars, like Porsche or BMWs, don't have this, but most mundane cars such as Peugeots or Vauxhalls put this into their software to help slow people with their upchanges. Obviously it's a disaster if you like driving, so these cars are obviously not 'sporty'.
I get what you're saying but unless the car is actually on or close to the limits of it's grip, so going quite fast, it's not really balancing is it. It's just altering the attitude of the car. To make matters worse, a lot of modern DBW cars exhibit a lag when coming off the throttle too. Most sporty cars, like Porsche or BMWs, don't have this, but most mundane cars such as Peugeots or Vauxhalls put this into their software to help slow people with their upchanges. Obviously it's a disaster if you like driving, so these cars are obviously not 'sporty'.
I've balanced a FWD on the limit of grip on sweeping bends in the past and had no problems with thottle lag. The last time I did it I was in a Focus 1.8 Zetec. I wouldn't have tried it in my E46 BMW 330i because in the dry it had too much grip so the speeds would have been too high and in the wet if you get it wrong in a RWD it can all get very messy, expensive and dangerous.
RobM77 said:
Yes, thousands. The problem is that whenever I do mention it, people deny it and we end up arguing for several pages, so it gets way more exposure on here than I would ever intend. It bores me too - I wish people would just accept it.
I have noticed throttle lag as you describe it on modern petrols, although most of them are so w
k I can't say it affected the experience. The turbo lag and boost threshold are far more of an obstacle you have to learn to drive around though, I would say. I have a Volvo D5 and sometimes it can be a proper "signal to the engine room for more power" experience, but it's a big fat convertible so it doesn't really detract that much.I've certainly never driven a diesel powered car that I'd describe as exciting and isn't that sort of a pre requisite for "sporty", however else you choose to define it? Plenty have been powerful, smooth, efficient, effective and even refined but never exciting. Ironically the old school tractor engines with a big old turbo were the least un-exciting as you waited for the big belt of boost, never quite sure when it might arrive.
Devil2575 said:
I get what you're saying but unless the car is actually on or close to the limits of it's grip, so going quite fast, it's not really balancing is it.
Of course it is, balance simply means balancing out the load front/rear. Whether or not you're at the limits of grip doesn't affect the process. Besides, every driver will find their own limits according to their skill and the setup of the car.dme123 said:
I've certainly never driven a diesel powered car that I'd describe as exciting and isn't that sort of a pre requisite for "sporty", however else you choose to define it? Plenty have been powerful, smooth, efficient, effective and even refined but never exciting. Ironically the old school tractor engines with a big old turbo were the least un-exciting as you waited for the big belt of boost, never quite sure when it might arrive.
We're back to individual definitions there then I think. Nobody would ever describe an MX5 as 'exciting', but it's definitely a sports car. There are some road cars in certain situations that I'd find exciting (none of them are diesels!), but it would be very limiting to call only those sporty or sports cars, so no, exciting is not part of my definition of sporty.RobM77 said:
Devil2575 said:
I get what you're saying but unless the car is actually on or close to the limits of it's grip, so going quite fast, it's not really balancing is it.
Of course it is, balance simply means balancing out the load front/rear. Whether or not you're at the limits of grip doesn't affect the process. Besides, every driver will find their own limits according to their skill and the setup of the car.Explain how this is anything other than simply driving at a constant speed well within the limits of grip.
Devil2575 said:
RobM77 said:
Devil2575 said:
I get what you're saying but unless the car is actually on or close to the limits of it's grip, so going quite fast, it's not really balancing is it.
Of course it is, balance simply means balancing out the load front/rear. Whether or not you're at the limits of grip doesn't affect the process. Besides, every driver will find their own limits according to their skill and the setup of the car.Explain how this is anything other than simply driving at a constant speed well within the limits of grip.
RobM77 said:
Because if you did that, then 99% of the time the car would just be understeering (front slip angles greatly dominating rear ones). To explain how to drive with balance would involve me virtually writing a book on the subject on here though! Basically I'm referring to the process of car control; if a car responds to inputs well in that sense then I would call it sporty.
But it wouldn't be understeering, because as previously discussed, we're not travelling at or close to the limits of grip. I can enter a corner in any car and as long as I am well within the margins of front and rear grip it will neither understeer or oversteer on a contant throttle.
Which was my point, if you're not close to the limit how can you balance anything? Balance for me comes when you are at or close to the limit of grip and throttle input allows you to control the attitude of the car such that you avoid understeer or oversteer and in some cases cause the entire car to drift sideways as the loss of grip front to rear is balanced.
I also think that your definition of sporty one that is not really relevant to 99% of drivers and this is kind of what is wrong with PH at times. Do you honestly think that when people say they want a car that's sporty this is what they are talking about? It's very much like when someone says they want a fast car and something like a 350z is suggested to which some clever poster pops up and says that to be considered fast a car needs a sub 5 second 0-60 time.
It will actually, a car tyre always has a slip angle. Where you are on the slip grip curve can be sensed and if you drive sympathetic to that then you're driving in a sporty manner and for me that's rewarding.
I stand by my definition of a sporty car, because by my definition a 1.6 base model Caterham is more sporty than an S Class AMG, but perhaps not with yours? Both are front engine rear drive, but the Caterham's low centre of gravity, short wheelbase, low weight, suspension setup etc are 'sporty' and they make the car agile and responsive. The S Class is very fast, but it's not sporty and not does it try to be.
I stand by my definition of a sporty car, because by my definition a 1.6 base model Caterham is more sporty than an S Class AMG, but perhaps not with yours? Both are front engine rear drive, but the Caterham's low centre of gravity, short wheelbase, low weight, suspension setup etc are 'sporty' and they make the car agile and responsive. The S Class is very fast, but it's not sporty and not does it try to be.
nickfrog said:
tjlees said:
nickfrog said:
tjlees said:
330D grips better than the boxster too - 0.99g v 0.93g even given 1735kg v 1420kg.
Source ? Having driven / owned both I know exactly which one has higher lat acceleration, by far.Lighters cars with lower COG tends to generate more lateral load, tyres being equal. Even BMW can't defy the basic laws of physics.
yonex said:
There we go then, a 330d is a better sports car than a Boxster. Seriously. What a total crock of st 
What next, 7 series has as much mechanical grip as a base Caterham.......
So what do you draw from the skid pan test? Just a stat and a meaningless one at that? Didn't we all look in awe at the GTR Nissan lateral G and also the P1 etc given that to instantly discount it as you have seems odd. t What next, 7 series has as much mechanical grip as a base Caterham.......
But I certainly agree the 3 series is not a sports car while the Boxster is.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff