RE: Speed thrills: PH Blog
Discussion
It does seem that more track footage is the only way for journos to go. Hasn't TG alluded to this at some point - with their tests increasingly taking place on their track?
Breaking laws as part of your job is always a risk - it is NOT the law's responsibility to adapt to your career. Reviewing a 911 at sensible speeds won't sell, and you can't review a suite of cars that are designed for fun on public roads (rather than willy-waving) if they're not being made, you are held to the manufacturers in this regard. It might not be optimal for the consumer but it's use a track, lobby for some exemption for journos, or take increasingly undesirable chances.
For the record, I am not in the slightest seriously advocating the following should happen.
But: if there was one way of getting more fun cars on the road, it would be: a tax bracket that heavily encouraged <150bhp cars. As zeppelin101 put it, manufacturers like competing on the basis of power and speed, because that's easy to market. One big number. I wonder what they could do with a market segment where desirability has to come from something else.
Breaking laws as part of your job is always a risk - it is NOT the law's responsibility to adapt to your career. Reviewing a 911 at sensible speeds won't sell, and you can't review a suite of cars that are designed for fun on public roads (rather than willy-waving) if they're not being made, you are held to the manufacturers in this regard. It might not be optimal for the consumer but it's use a track, lobby for some exemption for journos, or take increasingly undesirable chances.
For the record, I am not in the slightest seriously advocating the following should happen.
But: if there was one way of getting more fun cars on the road, it would be: a tax bracket that heavily encouraged <150bhp cars. As zeppelin101 put it, manufacturers like competing on the basis of power and speed, because that's easy to market. One big number. I wonder what they could do with a market segment where desirability has to come from something else.
Nick Young said:
If they're condoning dangerous driving on public roads, maybe that's a good thing?
They don't condone it explicitly - though re-reading some 90s issues of Performance Car magazine has been interesting on this score. A big issue is that driving standards, deriving in part from driving ability, experience, and concentration levels, vary hugely between different drivers with a current road licence. The rules are designed in a lowest common denominator fashion, IE, set so that the least able driver with a current licence should be safe if they observe the traffic laws and drive with due care and attention. Certain other drivers' actual ability to drive safely will allow higher speeds in safety. In the absence of a multi-tiered driving licence, which would almost certainly be unworkable and attract some fairly negative press from certain sectors, we are left with the current same-rules-for-everyone situation.
I would feel more comfortable sharing a road with a racing driver such as Mildenhall driving within his own personal abilities, than with a school run type driving at the speed limit, distracted by children in the car, and with no interest in driving, or any understanding of the relationship between the vehicle, the road surface, and driving inputs.
GregorFuk said:
There's a time and a place. He got the time right but the A96 is never a location for three figure speeds. He should have done a bit more research.
+1 the A96 is quite a dangerous road. Even at 1am the same junctions exist and it is well used by HGV's and other slow vehicles at that time.My point is there are better and quieter roads to have fun up there, but the A96 isn't one of them.
Still 127mph in a 60 is pretty silly and not far from a custodial sentence.
127mph on a motorway at 1am with no traffic in good weather is not so bad though IMO.
Would like to know a little more about the precise location, date (and weather) out of curiosity more than anything but having grown up reading the local paper referenced, I seem to recall that the A96 featured rather too often in part three of the hatches, matches, and dispatches section (although many stretches have been upgraded and 'dualled' over the years) so perhaps not surprising that there are random nightshift speed checks in place.
I feel for the guy though but also curious to read that he was really knocking up 80,000 miles per annum (if accurately reported)?
I feel for the guy though but also curious to read that he was really knocking up 80,000 miles per annum (if accurately reported)?
theJT said:
There but... indeed.
Fast driving isn't necessarily dangerous driving tho, and a bit of a telling off is surely sufficient and should be at the officers discretion?
The media do not distinguish between these. Fast = dangerous. Shades of grey dilutes the 'Speed kills' message. Fast driving isn't necessarily dangerous driving tho, and a bit of a telling off is surely sufficient and should be at the officers discretion?
I agree with you.
Dan Trent said:
How, as an owner, can you really expect to get any enjoyment out of a car that, like the Porsche Cayman GTS we had in the other day, will hit 85mph in second gear?
You're asking the wrong question. When most of us come up against a question like "should I buy a car with those capabilities?", we answer it with a simple "no" and buy something else. Many people (especially motoring journalists) seem unable to answer this question correctly. How many professional car reviews of a modern Porsche knocked points off the score because the capabilities are too high? If anyone answers more than zero then I'd love a link to the review.It'll be a brave journalist who eventually marks down a car like a 911 because it's too capable. I'd love to see EVO car of the year 2015 as something like the new MX5 and the 991 GT3RS marked down for being too capable for the real world.
I had this argument with my son just a week ago. As an (ex-)racing driver, sometimes owner of stupidly fast and powerful automotive machinery it could just as easily have been myself but I learned some time ago that for the grin factor, on the road, the milder hot-hatch is immense fun and if you do cross mr traffic plod you stand a fair chance of walking away with just points on your license and the legal right to drive yourself home.
That isn't to day I wouldn't own another seriously powerful and mentally fast car again - I still have one, but using such a vehicle on the road is just an abject lesson in temptation and masochism. Putting the majority of such vehicles on the track rarely works either as those actually prepared for track use tend to be few and far between, instead all but the most balanced and agile cars feel overpowered and overweight. So the real question is why make such things, I understand the desirability of such aspiration objects but on those stakes alone the big bad supercar is just a static piece of mechanical art, with appropriate price tag.
I don't want those car manufacturers to disappear or stop making such wonderful pieces of engineering, the problem is where can we use them. The track is largely inappropriate and the road even less so where it isn't the driver's capabilities that cause a problem, instead it is the environment and the other road users (although the driver can be as much of a problem as wreckedexotics can demonstrate with ease). That leaves us with a the purely artificial environment presented by the likes of the nurburgring - oversized, road-like tracks, or maybe the other car testing grounds that exist, when made publically accessible.
Personally I will stick with my hot hatch and a stupidly overpowered, lightweight, agile race car...
That isn't to day I wouldn't own another seriously powerful and mentally fast car again - I still have one, but using such a vehicle on the road is just an abject lesson in temptation and masochism. Putting the majority of such vehicles on the track rarely works either as those actually prepared for track use tend to be few and far between, instead all but the most balanced and agile cars feel overpowered and overweight. So the real question is why make such things, I understand the desirability of such aspiration objects but on those stakes alone the big bad supercar is just a static piece of mechanical art, with appropriate price tag.
I don't want those car manufacturers to disappear or stop making such wonderful pieces of engineering, the problem is where can we use them. The track is largely inappropriate and the road even less so where it isn't the driver's capabilities that cause a problem, instead it is the environment and the other road users (although the driver can be as much of a problem as wreckedexotics can demonstrate with ease). That leaves us with a the purely artificial environment presented by the likes of the nurburgring - oversized, road-like tracks, or maybe the other car testing grounds that exist, when made publically accessible.
Personally I will stick with my hot hatch and a stupidly overpowered, lightweight, agile race car...
mrclav said:
Captain Muppet said:
mrclav said:
Captain Muppet said:
mrclav said:
Sorry but I have to disagree with your last point. Human beings by nature will always attempt to improve on previous efforts no matter what the situation or product. If we applied your thinking to computing, mobile phones, the internet, medical products etc, we'd all be a LOT worse off than we are.
The target for improvement doesn't have to be speed though, does it?I pity anyone who has speed as their top priority.
It's obviously not just about the speed, it's the comfort whilst doing so as well as the knowledge that I can repeat the feat safely all over again. My car does well over 155mph - have I exploited it to the fullest on a public road? Yes I have (although it was only once, on the autobahn - natch). I've also experienced it on more than one track too. You forget that cars in the main are not bought by people who think like you, especially cars that are generally capable of extremely high speeds. If some want to call it willy-waving or if you want to pity me etc, I couldn't care less. I'm just glad I live in a time where I can experience a car that has the ability to reach almost 200mph but at the same time be driven perfectly safely in London traffic in total comfort.
Would you agree that you could improve a car without making it faster? I strongly suspect that most people don't ever experience their cars maximum speed, but experience handling, steering feel, economy, feedback and noise all the time. Even the buyers of extremely fast cars.
Also you mentioned twice that your car is faster than mine, which does seem a bit like willy waving. Although you've definitely won.
You can be the safest driver in the world but you share the roads with others...all ages,some inexperienced,some older with poor vision and sense of distance.....what that guy should have done was get a colleague to drive the road to see if clear then he could make 'Steady Progress' ....
There are two clear indisputable truths here.
The first is: it's not our problem, it's yours. And I'm talking to you PH road testing staff.
Secondly: it seems obvious that if we can't drive them at 120-whatever-mph on the road then there's no point in you doing it either.
If you choose to, and you lose your licence then…tough. The relative dynamic prowess of the car is immaterial.
We all know that it's the raw and deeply satisfying excitement of driving that attracts us. Just don't blame us if you choose to feed our habit.
The first is: it's not our problem, it's yours. And I'm talking to you PH road testing staff.
Secondly: it seems obvious that if we can't drive them at 120-whatever-mph on the road then there's no point in you doing it either.
If you choose to, and you lose your licence then…tough. The relative dynamic prowess of the car is immaterial.
We all know that it's the raw and deeply satisfying excitement of driving that attracts us. Just don't blame us if you choose to feed our habit.
I've written on this before - regarding Monkey's work:
Bike tests long ago ceased to be about road copmpetence.
It's ALL track-based opinion.
And useless for the majority of riders, with the possible exception of those who buy sports bikes primarily for track day work.
The super-sport bike market is dead.
Everyone wants to be Charlie/Ewan on a large Trailie.
Not sure about the car equivalent?
The only meaningful bike tests are the group tests, made on a long (usually European) trip, with some time at a track included along the way.
Then at least, the conclusions are relative.
If it helps - what makes me want a 4C more than (say) a 458 is the review Monkey did explaining how well it worked on the streets of Bristol.
I don't give a tiny rat's ass about the last 3/4 of a second round a circuit.
Bike tests long ago ceased to be about road copmpetence.
It's ALL track-based opinion.
And useless for the majority of riders, with the possible exception of those who buy sports bikes primarily for track day work.
The super-sport bike market is dead.
Everyone wants to be Charlie/Ewan on a large Trailie.
Not sure about the car equivalent?
The only meaningful bike tests are the group tests, made on a long (usually European) trip, with some time at a track included along the way.
Then at least, the conclusions are relative.
If it helps - what makes me want a 4C more than (say) a 458 is the review Monkey did explaining how well it worked on the streets of Bristol.
I don't give a tiny rat's ass about the last 3/4 of a second round a circuit.
Dan, you write as though 'motoring journalism' is some sort of higher calling that demands the indulgence of society at large.
You are paid (hopefully!) to write about cars by a commercial publishing company, and loaned cars by companies that want to sell them.
If you advertise a desire to break the law in the cars your job gives you access to, the game will be up even sooner than you think. (Have you asked the Haymarket HR/legal/insurance teams where they stand on all this, for example?)
I humbly refer you to the first rule of Fight Club...
You are paid (hopefully!) to write about cars by a commercial publishing company, and loaned cars by companies that want to sell them.
If you advertise a desire to break the law in the cars your job gives you access to, the game will be up even sooner than you think. (Have you asked the Haymarket HR/legal/insurance teams where they stand on all this, for example?)
I humbly refer you to the first rule of Fight Club...
"Bikers, we need your help."
I think you should write "we need a bike" instead. Having had hot hatches and my last Pistonheads-type car was a 350Z I decided to do my Direct Access and got a GSXR. The best thing I did for fun purposes and not losing my licence. Track days are a cheap affair considering you don't burn through a set of pads/tyres so quickly and a bonus in it's cheap to tax and insure. Faster by far than any car that would be in my price range. On the road you don't have to do silly speeds to have fun as you're not removed from all of the sensations.
It reinforced my decision on the first year I got my licence when a group of us went for a ride through Shropshire and into Wales; we overtook three guys in their 2 x Elise and 1 x Exige convoy stuck behind two camper vans. We rode on, had a blast, stopped, went into a diner, bought a coffee and chatted for a bit. Then slowly two camper vans went past, followed by the three Lotus drivers and it's not like we were riding like idiots to do gain that distance, it was all around the 60mph mark but without being held up by any traffic.
Cars going back to basics on narrower tyres etc with less sound insulation seems the way forward for road driving.
I think you should write "we need a bike" instead. Having had hot hatches and my last Pistonheads-type car was a 350Z I decided to do my Direct Access and got a GSXR. The best thing I did for fun purposes and not losing my licence. Track days are a cheap affair considering you don't burn through a set of pads/tyres so quickly and a bonus in it's cheap to tax and insure. Faster by far than any car that would be in my price range. On the road you don't have to do silly speeds to have fun as you're not removed from all of the sensations.
It reinforced my decision on the first year I got my licence when a group of us went for a ride through Shropshire and into Wales; we overtook three guys in their 2 x Elise and 1 x Exige convoy stuck behind two camper vans. We rode on, had a blast, stopped, went into a diner, bought a coffee and chatted for a bit. Then slowly two camper vans went past, followed by the three Lotus drivers and it's not like we were riding like idiots to do gain that distance, it was all around the 60mph mark but without being held up by any traffic.
Cars going back to basics on narrower tyres etc with less sound insulation seems the way forward for road driving.
dasbimmerowner said:
r7ehw said:
The problem I do have when I see magazines glorifying the ease of power sliding a car on the road, or excessive speed is that buyers will want to copy, and frankly its just not safe on public roads.
That's true. Back when I was a lad one of my mates was determined to show us all that he could drift his Sierra (yeah I'm that old!) just like something in 'Car' magazine (they were reviewing a Cosworth, he had a 1.8). It started to well, tail out... yes...rear slightly lit up, yup going well, then it caught grip flicked the other way and went straight into a wall writing said Sierra off. Young lads of today will be exactly the same, because that is how young males are naturally programmed.As some have said its not speed itself thats the issue its the situation.
I live in a village 300m's down the road from a roundabout where the 50 zone drops to a 30 half way down. People thunder off the roundabout whether it be cars, bikes or fully loaded lorries and dont even start thinking of braking to usually past my house.
There are parked cars on the left and the road sweeps to the left making it blind with a Primary school soon after.
You get the odd sports car etc being a prat but its usually Mr or Mrs grey in their Golfs/Audi a3's, Q5's flying past the house easily doing 50+ only half paying attention and having to slam their brakes on at the last second and having to swerve etc. Don't get my started on the indestructible bikers in the summer the way they come down the road.
My cat was killed recently by someone doing silly speeds and then just carrying on (neighbour saw it) What if that was a kid stepping out.
Yes doing 120 at 1am is stupid but not half as bad as these thoughtless arses doing 40-50 in a 30 zone at 4 in the afternoon but for some reason thats never looked on a badly in the general public unless good forbid somebody gets hit.
stavers said:
"there is still no substitute for a properly crossed-up, fully-lit cornering shot."
That there is the problem in a nutshell. Every motoring magazine has now perpetuated that unless you can get this sort of shot then there's no point in doing a report.
No-one, and I mean no-one, can get anywhere near a modern supercar or hypercar limit on the road and be safe with the amount of hazards that are around nowadays. At one time in the past, maybe, but not today with the amount of traffic, idiots in & out of cars, and everything else going on. Cars are now seemingly sold on headline numbers for bragging rights down the pub (or at the bar at Goodwood/Silverstone/Ascot...you get the picture) and 99% of drivers can't get near to the limits of a standard car on the road without causing danger.
I love fast cars, love the noise etc. but I know I cannot get anywhere near their limits on the road so subsequently I do not try. I am not saying that I don't push on every now and again but not in a manner that tries to exploit the limits of handling (well, except in my wife's 1.0l Corsa which can be thrashed everywhere). I go to a track for that.
The problem for me is that it all boils down to common sense, as to when & where this type of driving is acceptable, and the majority of the population do not have enough of it.
Agree with everything you have said.That there is the problem in a nutshell. Every motoring magazine has now perpetuated that unless you can get this sort of shot then there's no point in doing a report.
No-one, and I mean no-one, can get anywhere near a modern supercar or hypercar limit on the road and be safe with the amount of hazards that are around nowadays. At one time in the past, maybe, but not today with the amount of traffic, idiots in & out of cars, and everything else going on. Cars are now seemingly sold on headline numbers for bragging rights down the pub (or at the bar at Goodwood/Silverstone/Ascot...you get the picture) and 99% of drivers can't get near to the limits of a standard car on the road without causing danger.
I love fast cars, love the noise etc. but I know I cannot get anywhere near their limits on the road so subsequently I do not try. I am not saying that I don't push on every now and again but not in a manner that tries to exploit the limits of handling (well, except in my wife's 1.0l Corsa which can be thrashed everywhere). I go to a track for that.
The problem for me is that it all boils down to common sense, as to when & where this type of driving is acceptable, and the majority of the population do not have enough of it.
It's saddening to see the amount of abuse the XCAR team get on YouTube for "not being able to drive properly" - just because they don't hang the back out at every opportunity i.e. they test cars as they would be used in reality.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff