Can a car BE 'over-rated'?
Discussion
Porsche 968CS. Not particularly quick, not particularly light, expensive (though seemingly a good investment!), and to me quite uninspiring. Put me off Porsche's for a while but I am now very much enjoying my Cayman S, despite some recent big bills! Much more special to drive, significantly more sophisticated feeling and much less hyped.
I'd add the Ferrari 355 following a Ferrari experience thing, but I suspect the car I drove was not representative and for those looks and that sound I can forgive the terrible driving position and the typically early '90s Italian car build quality feel!
I'd add the Ferrari 355 following a Ferrari experience thing, but I suspect the car I drove was not representative and for those looks and that sound I can forgive the terrible driving position and the typically early '90s Italian car build quality feel!
ORD said:
In my view, the 4.3 cars are woeful and the 4.7 are barely any better. 997 is infinitely better in all respects except looks (and so I bought one 
) It is a world better to drive than the Aston, but you seem to be one of these people who equates looking and sounding "sporty" with being "special", rather than being into handling. Nothing wrong with that, but hardly a basis on which to call the 911 over-rated or dull. The AM is far more suited to being a daily driver, as it struggles to cope when pushed, whereas the 911 becomes more and more fun the harder you drive it.
Interesting. IMO the 911 is more of a 'jack of all trades, master of none'. It's a great all rounder, but to me it looks/sounds/feels dull in comparison to a Vantage. All subjective I know. ) It is a world better to drive than the Aston, but you seem to be one of these people who equates looking and sounding "sporty" with being "special", rather than being into handling. Nothing wrong with that, but hardly a basis on which to call the 911 over-rated or dull. The AM is far more suited to being a daily driver, as it struggles to cope when pushed, whereas the 911 becomes more and more fun the harder you drive it.It also doesn't drive as good as say a Lotus, so it sits somewhere in the middle doing nothing exceptionally, albeit doing a lot of things very well.
justin220 said:
Interesting. IMO the 911 is more of a 'jack of all trades, master of none'. It's a great all rounder, but to me it looks/sounds/feels dull in comparison to a Vantage. All subjective I know.
It also doesn't drive as good as say a Lotus, so it sits somewhere in the middle doing nothing exceptionally, albeit doing a lot of things very well.
A lot of people say this, so I know there must be something in it. But I just dont get it. The AM is heavier, slower and less tactile. It is nothing like as good a sports car. Using your language, the AM isnt even a jack of any trades apart from looking pretty. Style over substance.It also doesn't drive as good as say a Lotus, so it sits somewhere in the middle doing nothing exceptionally, albeit doing a lot of things very well.
Whether or not you like an engine sound is almost completely subjective. The flat 6 is generally regarded to have one of the best sounds, but if you dont like it, you dont like it, and some people dont. I dont really like standard V8s, so the AM engine is lost on me, but I am in the minority there.
You cant compare a 1400kg car to a Lotus. It's like saying a Lotus is a master of no trades because it isnt a Caterham or a Radical. Different cars.
For me it's the EP3 Civic Type-R, every man and his dog - both journos and regular joes raved about it like it was the second coming of B-road blasters. Test drove one down some supposedly ideal roads that I knew well and even if I ignore what is probably my personal preferences coming in to play with the steering (it was precise enough but had all the feel of a XBOX pad to me) then I was pretty massively underwhelmed. More boring than tapwater off-VTEC and whilst not a bad drive it certainly didn't feel like anything special.
rb5er said:
99% of VAG cars.
This.I really can't grasp why they have to be so damn uncomfortable?I mean, how can anyone in their right minds have a test drive a Merc E-class, BMW 5-series and then an A6 and determine it's the best choice? Are they that much cheaper? I know I did recently and the Audi was a massive, massive let down.
Agreed with VAG cars. Every single one I have driven has been a lardy understeery load of rubbish, and I have NEVER known anyone own one without having some kind of issue with it, regardless of age and mileage. I have to say they have excellent quality feel in the car, but I think that underneath there is some pretty sub standard engineering compared to many of their rivals (BMW and Ford's engines are truly state of the art).
I honestly don't know how they manage to maintain their excellent brand image with some remarkably poor and dull products.
I'm also going to stick up for the Civic Type R mentioned above. I own one (super biased) and other than the poor steering feel it has a good chassis and one of the most special hot hatch powertrains of all time. Its definitely a ten tenths car though!
I honestly don't know how they manage to maintain their excellent brand image with some remarkably poor and dull products.
I'm also going to stick up for the Civic Type R mentioned above. I own one (super biased) and other than the poor steering feel it has a good chassis and one of the most special hot hatch powertrains of all time. Its definitely a ten tenths car though!
lucadiella said:
Agreed with VAG cars. Every single one I have driven has been a lardy understeery load of rubbish, and I have NEVER known anyone own one without having some kind of issue with it, regardless of age and mileage. I have to say they have excellent quality feel in the car, but I think that underneath there is some pretty sub standard engineering compared to many of their rivals (BMW and Ford's engines are truly state of the art).
I honestly don't know how they manage to maintain their excellent brand image with some remarkably poor and dull products.
I'm also going to stick up for the Civic Type R mentioned above. I own one (super biased) and other than the poor steering feel it has a good chassis and one of the most special hot hatch powertrains of all time. Its definitely a ten tenths car though!
I can only assume that it is because most people dont cross-shop and test drive cars. You could not sign up for an Audi 2.0 diesel after experiencing the equivalent BMW engine. Still horrible, but miles better.I honestly don't know how they manage to maintain their excellent brand image with some remarkably poor and dull products.
I'm also going to stick up for the Civic Type R mentioned above. I own one (super biased) and other than the poor steering feel it has a good chassis and one of the most special hot hatch powertrains of all time. Its definitely a ten tenths car though!
I am always amazed with what people will tolerate in expensive cars. I got a lift in a friend's Q3 and thought it was utterly dreadful, at any money.
Can only really comment on cars I've driven.
Top of the list are 911s. I've driven a few, but the 964RS was the worst. Terrible. Admittedly I was driving it on English roads and not around a race track - it might be better there.
But the idea that it is worth, what £200-250k is plainly absurd.
Top of the list are 911s. I've driven a few, but the 964RS was the worst. Terrible. Admittedly I was driving it on English roads and not around a race track - it might be better there.
But the idea that it is worth, what £200-250k is plainly absurd.
suffolk009 said:
Can only really comment on cars I've driven.
Top of the list are 911s. I've driven a few, but the 964RS was the worst. Terrible. Admittedly I was driving it on English roads and not around a race track - it might be better there.
But the idea that it is worth, what £200-250k is plainly absurd.
I have to agree with this to some extent since I owned a 964RS for four years. Hopelessly hobbled on most roads by the awful damper/spring rates. The prices are crazy now. But my vote goes to the 350Z which was slow, heavy, thirsty, has chocolate brakes and a naff interior. Top of the list are 911s. I've driven a few, but the 964RS was the worst. Terrible. Admittedly I was driving it on English roads and not around a race track - it might be better there.
But the idea that it is worth, what £200-250k is plainly absurd.
CorvetteConvert said:
Not a suit needed here but a nuclear bunker, but here goes anyway.
Of the cars I have driven enough to form an opinion, I have found a few under and over rated, as I see it and as I found the cars to be.
Over-rated (and yes there are thousands of fans of these out there, I know, who will disagree) are first the BMW M3 CSL. Impossible to drive 40-50% without letting the world know about it via the induction scream (nice WHEN you want it) and poor performance unless you thrashed it. In cut and thrust driving on a car run out the CSL could easily be left by less powerful cars unless you held low gears the whole time waiting for that top-end rush of power and noise. Also it had very poor brakes for a £60,000 (nearer £70,000 in today's prices) car and the gearbox was rubbish.
Ferrari F40. Yes really.
I got to do around 200 miles in my friend's car, in 2 stints, a month apart, on roads which should have suited it perfectly. Big lonely roads in the wilds of California (where he lives).
The fit and finish inside and out was appalling. You could actually see the outside world with the doors closed around their edges! The gearbox was poor and heavy. The clutch was very heavy and had a sudden biting point. The engine was a typical low capacity unit with two huge turbochargers which gave lag like you would not believe before a huge rush of power hit you. But because the car was not happy to rev high it was over as quick as it had arrived and so the effective power band was tiny. These things are going for a million quid each now, remember.
The kit was sparse, the engine hated going slowly and the brakes were appalling for a car expected to stop from 203 mph.
A Californian said to me that it was a race car for the road and should be viewed as such. In which case 470 bhp and 1100 kgs ain't that great is it? Not when for £100,000 you can have a 750 bhp Ultima which weighs 1,050 kgs and has better brakes, suspension, gearbox and is way faster with huge grunt from tickover.
Under-rated? Cooper S Works GP Gen 1. A real gem few got to know or drive. What a hot hatch should be. Light at 1090 kgs. Powerful at 218 bhp. Plenty of urge from 2,000 rpm to over 7,000 rpm. I own one now, my third.
Many American cars. Some are tat but many are written off without people ever trying them. The new Corvette is an absolute gem.
I can't quite get my head around either of these views. I appreciate every thing you've said is totally true but you've basically said a fish is sOf the cars I have driven enough to form an opinion, I have found a few under and over rated, as I see it and as I found the cars to be.
Over-rated (and yes there are thousands of fans of these out there, I know, who will disagree) are first the BMW M3 CSL. Impossible to drive 40-50% without letting the world know about it via the induction scream (nice WHEN you want it) and poor performance unless you thrashed it. In cut and thrust driving on a car run out the CSL could easily be left by less powerful cars unless you held low gears the whole time waiting for that top-end rush of power and noise. Also it had very poor brakes for a £60,000 (nearer £70,000 in today's prices) car and the gearbox was rubbish.
Ferrari F40. Yes really.
I got to do around 200 miles in my friend's car, in 2 stints, a month apart, on roads which should have suited it perfectly. Big lonely roads in the wilds of California (where he lives).
The fit and finish inside and out was appalling. You could actually see the outside world with the doors closed around their edges! The gearbox was poor and heavy. The clutch was very heavy and had a sudden biting point. The engine was a typical low capacity unit with two huge turbochargers which gave lag like you would not believe before a huge rush of power hit you. But because the car was not happy to rev high it was over as quick as it had arrived and so the effective power band was tiny. These things are going for a million quid each now, remember.
The kit was sparse, the engine hated going slowly and the brakes were appalling for a car expected to stop from 203 mph.
A Californian said to me that it was a race car for the road and should be viewed as such. In which case 470 bhp and 1100 kgs ain't that great is it? Not when for £100,000 you can have a 750 bhp Ultima which weighs 1,050 kgs and has better brakes, suspension, gearbox and is way faster with huge grunt from tickover.
Under-rated? Cooper S Works GP Gen 1. A real gem few got to know or drive. What a hot hatch should be. Light at 1090 kgs. Powerful at 218 bhp. Plenty of urge from 2,000 rpm to over 7,000 rpm. I own one now, my third.
Many American cars. Some are tat but many are written off without people ever trying them. The new Corvette is an absolute gem.
t at climbing a tree.The CSL is an M3 GT3 effectively - stripped out and track day focused. It's not meant to be enjoyed at 50% or at all off a race track. It's just about road legal when new, that should give the game away.
The F40 - everything you've criticized it for is what defines it. It has no equipment to reduce every bit of weight they can. The panel gaps are because they used the minimum amount of material. The build quality was not there because of many reasons, but mostly because it's a handbuilt Italian car from the 80's where they wouldn't add weight by making it more sturdy and could still get away with it then.
As for the Ultima comparisson, - you do realise the F40 was made in the 1980's and not now? Could you get 750bhp and weighed 1050kg? I very much doubt it.
And then you go on to praise a Mini Cooper, oddly of which, you've had 3 but which most people dont really like.....
My nomination is the E46 BMW non M3.
I've owned a 330 sport convertible for the last 5 years between the miles of 62k and 82k. Considering people hark on about German build quality, I have replaced:
1) Thermostat - failed
2) Inlet pipe - perished
3) Rocker gasket. Twice. Leaked.
4) Front wish bone. Knocking ball joint- failed MOT.
5) Front wishbone rear bushes Rubber perished.
5) Front drop links. Rattled.
6) Steering coupler - tramlinned
7) Glovebox lock - Had to break in.
8) Satnav drive - Disc jammed
9) Multichanger - Laser stopped.
10) Front Wings from rust
11) Front ARB bushes - 5mm gap all round.
12) Battery keeps going flat. Don't know why.
13) ABS Sensor(s) stop - no speed, revs, ABS, traction control etc until it comes back.
14) EML light on most of the time.
15) Uses oil - crank case ventilation unit needs replacing.
16) Harnon Kardon farting subs - x 2
17) Convertible roof sometimes opens on it's own. (When parked unattended, not when driving thankfully)
I'm sure there's been more and they're ALL common.
I've owned a 330 sport convertible for the last 5 years between the miles of 62k and 82k. Considering people hark on about German build quality, I have replaced:
1) Thermostat - failed
2) Inlet pipe - perished
3) Rocker gasket. Twice. Leaked.
4) Front wish bone. Knocking ball joint- failed MOT.
5) Front wishbone rear bushes Rubber perished.
5) Front drop links. Rattled.
6) Steering coupler - tramlinned
7) Glovebox lock - Had to break in.
8) Satnav drive - Disc jammed
9) Multichanger - Laser stopped.
10) Front Wings from rust
11) Front ARB bushes - 5mm gap all round.
12) Battery keeps going flat. Don't know why.
13) ABS Sensor(s) stop - no speed, revs, ABS, traction control etc until it comes back.
14) EML light on most of the time.
15) Uses oil - crank case ventilation unit needs replacing.
16) Harnon Kardon farting subs - x 2
17) Convertible roof sometimes opens on it's own. (When parked unattended, not when driving thankfully)
I'm sure there's been more and they're ALL common.
Nissan GTR: I've driven one fast around a circuit. It's boring, uninteresting, dull and thoroughly brings me to a state of unconsciousness. Basically I didn't find it engaging at all.
VW Golf GTI: (all of them) yes it's a good solid car, but it's also dull and just plain common. Nothing makes you feel special when you drive one, not unless you have an R32.
Any Porsche after the 928: Porsche has been playing it safe and for me has fallen miserably from it. They're not special to look at, not the most exciting drive and just plain nerdy.
Mazda MX5/Miata/Eunos/rubbish: Any MX5 since the MK1 has been pretty dull. It's a cracking car but you see them every day even in winter, they're not that pretty, not very sporty and I prefer almost every rival it's had since they came out. Yes even the Fiat Barchetta and MG TF
VW Golf GTI: (all of them) yes it's a good solid car, but it's also dull and just plain common. Nothing makes you feel special when you drive one, not unless you have an R32.
Any Porsche after the 928: Porsche has been playing it safe and for me has fallen miserably from it. They're not special to look at, not the most exciting drive and just plain nerdy.
Mazda MX5/Miata/Eunos/rubbish: Any MX5 since the MK1 has been pretty dull. It's a cracking car but you see them every day even in winter, they're not that pretty, not very sporty and I prefer almost every rival it's had since they came out. Yes even the Fiat Barchetta and MG TF
Edited by Malachimon on Monday 7th September 17:05
ORD said:
Touche. I meant a Lotus that is remotely credible.
You couldn't be more transparently biased if you changed your name to Dave Porsche. What's next? The R8 is obviously inferior and the F-Type isn't even to be considered. Set up a thread titled "Who loves the 911 and wants the world to know it?" then respond with "Me".
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff