What is your ideal car?

[cerb4.5lee]

Tuvra said:

cerb4.5lee said:

My old Cerbera 4.5 was pretty close for me...I still needed to run another car for tip runs and when it didn't work though, so not exactly ideal.

All cars have a compromise of some sort...so for me there isn't such a thing as an ideal car sadly.

Wow, surprised at this suggestion. Mine was horrendous to drive in traffic, things liked to break on it, water leaked on to your feet when it rained, the steering wheel switches worked when they decided to work, windscreen wipers never really got on with the windscreen, it was a bd to park and in less than perfect conditions it was frankly terrifying.

The experience of mine was very similar too...however I thought it was close to my ideal purely because it turned heads and was a rare sight on the road, it was offensive with the noise it made on its sports pipes, always felt quick at pretty much any revs and always put a smile on my face(when it worked obviously!).

I loved the fact it was terrifying and I have got frustrated having to switch off all the nanny traction electronics in other cars I've had since, I loved it for its relative purity and you just don't get that with many cars nowadays, I have tried sensible cars like the E92 M3/Z4M...they just don't come close to the TVR.

[Don1]

Actually, my Sagaris is pretty much my dream car. Yes, the thought of a Mc F1 is lovely, but I always wanted a sports car rather than a supercar.

I then modified it to fit my real taste and view of it.
Slats cut out.
Rear reflectors moved to light cluster.
Light cluster modified.
Engine modified.



Next up: interior mods. Maybe an upgraded gearbox soon. Keep running it until something breaks/wears out then upgrade that.

[RobM77]

diehardbenzfan said:

please explain how a 4.2 v8 audi rs4 is gutless!! You must be comparing it to an s65 amg or flying spur

The RS4 was probably the most disappointing car that I've ever driven. Yes, I'm afraid it did feel totally gutless, at least compared to other cars of its ilk like the M3. I drove a two year old 30k mile example in 2009. I asked on PH at the time and the answers given were: drivetrain losses, 'coking' of the engine, and weight. Couple that with a safe and secure but dull suspension setup and you get what is undeniably a capable and comfortable car, but not much different from any other A4 in my opinion.

Edited by RobM77 on Thursday 28th July 11:43

[CABC]

Don1 said:

Actually, my Sagaris is pretty much my dream car. Yes, the thought of a Mc F1 is lovely, but I always wanted a sports car rather than a supercar.

I then modified it to fit my real taste and view of it.
Slats cut out.
Rear reflectors moved to light cluster.
Light cluster modified.
Engine modified.



Next up: interior mods. Maybe an upgraded gearbox soon. Keep running it until something breaks/wears out then upgrade that.

oh, yes!

still amazing to think they only weigh 1100 too.
I remember TVR being discussed on Jalopnik, and our american cousins, who i feel just do not understand cars, thought it was just a kit car and that a 'Vette had more power..... There's a reason i only browse that site and never registered.
Anyway, a great submission for 'ideal'

[Don1]

Thanks. My one is a little lighter with mods done (carbon bonnet as well, exhaust blah blah blah), and is an utter joy to drive..... short distances (under 200 miles). Anything above that it becomes a test of endurance!

[CABC]

Don1 said:

. short distances (under 200 miles).

isn't that the fuel range?

[Don1]

Around 250-300 a tank on a long run. It's got a short diff and close ratio box which makes it fast on track, less comfortable on the motorway.

[Dave Hedgehog]

diehardbenzfan said:

That doesnt make sense to me, an RS4 being gutless low down and poor to drive, I had a e46 330i auto with about 220 lbft and i changed it for an ep3 type r and before i did, i was put off by the high redline and the *140* lbft, put off because i thought it would have to be revved out all the time, what a load of bks that was, test drove it and it was completely fine, perfect in fact, never need to rev it out, short gearing means you will easily with no fuss reach 60 from say...20 mpg without passing 4000 rpm.....please explain how a 4.2 v8 audi rs4 is gutless!! You must be comparing it to an s65 amg or flying spur

Compared to the RS6 and RS3 (465nm @ 1650 rpm), they both pull hard from low down but will be playful up top if you want. The V8 in the R8 feels the same as the RS4, you have to work it to get anything, but it is glorious when you do. Just not what I want from a daily driver.

The new RS4's V6 should be an epic daily driver engine with its instant on electric turbo's

[R E S T E C P]

An small estate, no more than Focus sized, just big enough for the dogs.
Small highly tuned NA engine, like a 3.0 V8, which loves to be revved.
AWD, with suspension setup further towards sporty than comfort, but not too far.
Loads of soundproofing for road noise, very little for engine noise.
Perfect driving position, pedals not offset, small diameter steering wheel with lots of reach adjustment.
Supremely comfortable big wide deeply-padded supportive driver's seat with adjustments in every angle possible - the lower height limit should be touching the floor of the car, and I should be able to tilt the front of the base enough that I'm looking the rear passenger in the eye.
Hydraulic power steering, not electric, and only a bit - just enough so it's not a strain.
Manual gearbox.
Android head unit fully connected to all of the car's functions, everything customisable and programmable.
The choice of both auto wipers and manual multi-speed intermittent wipers.

[jamieduff1981]

kambites said:

For my daily driver I'd go something like:

No more than 1000kg wet
No more than 1800mm wide (excluding mirrors)
40:60 F:R weight distribution
Manual convertible roof
3 seats (ala Mclaren F1)
2 litre longitudinal NA mid-mounted flat-plane V8; producing 250bhp at 9000rpm and at least 90% of peak torque at peak power.
Unassisted steering
Unassisted brakes
Cable throttle
Manual dog-leg gearbox; around 70mph in third at the limiter.
A boot no smaller than my current Elise.
Passive double wishbone suspension all 'round.

I'd like this car, but would personally prefer an inline 6 with otherwise similar characteristics

[RobM77]

jamieduff1981 said:

kambites said:

For my daily driver I'd go something like:

No more than 1000kg wet
No more than 1800mm wide (excluding mirrors)
40:60 F:R weight distribution
Manual convertible roof
3 seats (ala Mclaren F1)
2 litre longitudinal NA mid-mounted flat-plane V8; producing 250bhp at 9000rpm and at least 90% of peak torque at peak power.
Unassisted steering
Unassisted brakes
Cable throttle
Manual dog-leg gearbox; around 70mph in third at the limiter.
A boot no smaller than my current Elise.
Passive double wishbone suspension all 'round.

I'd like this car, but would personally prefer an inline 6 with otherwise similar characteristics

It would be fantastic. The McLaren F1 is my perfect car, but it doesn't actually need 600bhp+ and a carbon chassis to be good, without those things it would still be an excellent car. I'm sure if you replaced the F1's huge V12 with the engine Kambites describes above that it would save enough weight to be able to replace the expensive carbon chassis with one like the Elise has for example, and make some of the components out of less exotic materials.

The above also reminds me of one of the Bahar Lotus concepts - was it the Elan?

Finally, the Cayman should be this car and it's why I put aside £50k and raced along to an OPC to test drive one, but sadly it falls down on some of the key areas Kambites lists above.

[kambites]

jamieduff1981 said:

I'd like this car, but would personally prefer an inline 6 with otherwise similar characteristics

I think keeping the overall weight down with a longitudinal inline-6 would be too difficult; they're just too long to package in a small car.

[Fastchas]

We all know what happens when you let the buyers design a car...

[jamieduff1981]

kambites said:

jamieduff1981 said:

I'd like this car, but would personally prefer an inline 6 with otherwise similar characteristics

I think keeping the overall weight down with a longitudinal inline-6 would be too difficult; they're just too long to package in a small car.

Alas true. A mini-AJP8 type thing could be little longer than a BMC A-series.

[CABC]

how compromised is a modern V6 though? not the old school pure choice but the balancing has presumably gotten so much better?

In reality you can make some pretty damn good 4-pots with great noise too. lighter.

[routari]

My ideal car, considering my income and how much I have to spend on maintenance, insurance, fuel, trackdays etc, would be a new MX-5. I don't do much motorway driving, and you anything more powerful actually becomes less fun on the road for me.

[jamieduff1981]

CABC said:

how compromised is a modern V6 though? not the old school pure choice but the balancing has presumably gotten so much better?

In reality you can make some pretty damn good 4-pots with great noise too. lighter.

No 4-pot would ever make a "my ideal car" spec.

I love a V6, but they are pretty compromised. They balance at 120deg between the banks, not 60deg. 60deg is chosen for being half of 120deg which deals with some of the harmonics but it will never truly balance.

That however isn't a V6's only trouble - you can't set up any practical exhaust scavenging with them because like a cross-plane V8, the exhaust pulses are unevenly timed on each bank.

[CABC]

jamieduff1981 said:

No 4-pot would ever make a "my ideal car" spec.

I love a V6, but they are pretty compromised. They balance at 120deg between the banks, not 60deg. 60deg is chosen for being half of 120deg which deals with some of the harmonics but it will never truly balance.

That however isn't a V6's only trouble - you can't set up any practical exhaust scavenging with them because like a cross-plane V8, the exhaust pulses are unevenly timed on each bank.

in which case i wonder whether a (good) I4 is better than a V6 for lighter cars and then you wait until the car is big enough before fitting an I6?

The Z4 has so much going for it, not least the engine. Shame that BMW never really got a hold of the chassis. Maybe that can be modded appropriately.

[RobM77]

CABC said:

The Z4 has so much going for it, not least the engine. Shame that BMW never really got a hold of the chassis. Maybe that can be modded appropriately.

I owned a Z4C for a year and it did indeed have so much going for it: big boot, great driving position, good looks, lovely engine, comfortable and quiet. The 3 series I swapped it for though actually handled and rode better, which is odd. I do wonder if BMW just put more effort into cars they're going to sell in bigger volumes? Both were 2007 cars.

[cerb4.5lee]

RobM77 said:

CABC said:

The Z4 has so much going for it, not least the engine. Shame that BMW never really got a hold of the chassis. Maybe that can be modded appropriately.

I owned a Z4C for a year and it did indeed have so much going for it: big boot, great driving position, good looks, lovely engine, comfortable and quiet. The 3 series I swapped it for though actually handled and rode better, which is odd. I do wonder if BMW just put more effort into cars they're going to sell in bigger volumes? Both were 2007 cars.

Agree with this big time and I thought BMW had completely forgot to focus on the chassis of my Z4M especially when compared to my M3, the M3's ride and handling were a world apart from the Zed.

Such a shame because on paper the Z4M has quite a few nice ingredients.