Quickest point to point car
Discussion
deltashad said:
in the dry on a tight twisty mountain pass very little can get close to my Elise, only something stupid with no boot and limited body panels is going to get close.
Thus my vote for the 2-Eleven. The grip that Lotuses generate by perfectly tuning their springs and dampers lifts them a level above what you'd expect from their power to weight ratio.RobM77 said:
DonkeyApple said:
All these low cars would lose out to one of the fast SUVs like the RRS SVR on public roads. The ability to see that much further and over many obstacles reduces the risk significantly and allows for higher speeds to be retained for longer. Over a section of typical UK B roads the big ugly van will be swifter for less risk than the faster and better handling lower cars. Close the roads and the vans will be thrashed however.
I know we've just agreed to differ on this in the past, but I strongly believe this is a much more minor point than many make out. I do a lot of cycling on the B and C roads around where I live, which have a variety of hedges, banks and walls at their edges and a number of times I've ducked down and then stood up on the pedals to simulate the typical height difference, and the increase in visibility is absolutely miniscule. Unless you happen to luck on a hedge that's exactly the right height, or a hidden dip the right depth, the visibility difference most of the time is fairly minor. In terms of A to B pace it's certainly dominated by the huge decrease in handling and agility that a 'fast' SUV suffers with its tall ride height and greater weight over something more focused.The simple examples are mid sized roundabouts with delightful flower displays that in a low car mean you cannot see at all far around them and the charming central reservation hedge as you approach that roundabout mean that you are blind right up to the last moment so have to slow down. With the height of a proper SUV you can see all dynamics 100% and have no need to slow down other than to negotiate the bend of the roundabout.
Reaching T-junctions with 3 foot garden walls. Again, you simply don't have a safe enough view to the other side of that obstacle in a low car so must slow. Sit higher up and that wall is no long an obstacle.
Same with hedges, side junctions, hill brows and many other small obstacles there is no need to lift off if you can see through them.
And then the overtaking, with a longer line of sight then you are given a greater number of overtaking opportunities as those periods start earlier and extend for longer. As you can also see over the top of the vehicle in front then it is safer as you can see the full road ahead without having to fanny about 'sticking your head out' or the risk of not having seen a side road or an obstacle ahead that could cause the vehicle in front to deviate etc.
The simple fact is that because you can see so much more ahead of you, earlier and for further, you are taking much lower risks for the same manoeuvres and pace.
If I'm needing to drive somewhere for pure fun then I'll take the low sports car. If I just want to get somewhere with no fannying about, no stopping at junctions that are clear but can't be confirmed until at them, no having to slow down because foliage or other obstacles prevent you from knowing for sure the way ahead is clear, no avoiding potholes, no surprises around corners, being easily seen by other road users, not having other road users wanting a race or do weird, unpredictable things because you're in a sports car then I'll always take the Rangie.
I drive weekly from the centre of London to the countryside and then around the countryside. The tall car is far quicker across country than the sports car for the same risk. On top of that its better on the motorway and it is far better in Town.
The actually reality is that sports cars are pretty crap at being road cars, just far too compromised on almost all levels. It's just a good job that they are so much more fun.
In the 'real world' it's the reasonably talented guy who is willing to sacrifice the most safety margin or is most ignorant to the dangers around him.
But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 28th September 11:58
The real world point to point argument is used (in my experience) by people who bought the 330d rather than the M3 or the V6 Mustang rather than the V8 Mustang and are looking at ways of defending the choice rather than simply admitting that the more expensive car was beyond their budget (which there is nothing wrong with) because of a fear of being judged.
Depends on the scenario surely? If speed limits are in place, normal traffic volumes, and normal road signs, stop, give way, traffic lights and roundabout rules are in place then would and Evo or something like that really have much of an advantage other than acceleration and over taking (if you get the opportunity for either) over a more mundane car?
If the rules don't apply (other than the car being taxed, MOT'd and insured) then it has to be some sort of super spec Caterham or Atom as it not only has the outright performance but the ability (due to low weight and a good chassis) to preserve lots of momentum.
Depends on the scenario surely? If speed limits are in place, normal traffic volumes, and normal road signs, stop, give way, traffic lights and roundabout rules are in place then would and Evo or something like that really have much of an advantage other than acceleration and over taking (if you get the opportunity for either) over a more mundane car?
If the rules don't apply (other than the car being taxed, MOT'd and insured) then it has to be some sort of super spec Caterham or Atom as it not only has the outright performance but the ability (due to low weight and a good chassis) to preserve lots of momentum.
Baldchap said:
In the 'real world' it's the reasonably talented guy who is willing to sacrifice the most safety margin or is most ignorant to the dangers around him.
But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
That depends on where you are though. I live in the south east, my 85hp bike is easily quicker on pretty much any point to route simply because of the traffic. However on a damp road without traffic the AWD rally reps will have so much more grip and braking that they need less commitment to go faster.But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 28th September 11:58
Transit (or other small van)
Higher so can see over countryside hedgerows thus no slowing down, just as fast "legally" on all other roads and will attract less attention from the pigs.
Obviously the fastest car ever is an Astramax Esate/Van, a staple throughout the 90's up the arse of ever Euro barge in the outside lane but Vauxhall seem to have dropped the ball in recent years by fitting them with throttles, I presume they only had on/off switches before?
Seriously- although am biased as a Caterham owner the visibility can be an issue (depending where you are) In "high" parts of the country, Wales and Scotland etc with long sight lines they probably are untouchable, anywhere there is a hedge- just as quick as most cars bar the odd overtake on rare straights, just more fun.
Most importantly how far apart are these "points" more than a couple of hours and some of the exotica suggested will need to stop for refueling and a Focus Diesel would be quicker, if their either end of Europe a RR Wraith would be best :-)
Higher so can see over countryside hedgerows thus no slowing down, just as fast "legally" on all other roads and will attract less attention from the pigs.
Obviously the fastest car ever is an Astramax Esate/Van, a staple throughout the 90's up the arse of ever Euro barge in the outside lane but Vauxhall seem to have dropped the ball in recent years by fitting them with throttles, I presume they only had on/off switches before?
Seriously- although am biased as a Caterham owner the visibility can be an issue (depending where you are) In "high" parts of the country, Wales and Scotland etc with long sight lines they probably are untouchable, anywhere there is a hedge- just as quick as most cars bar the odd overtake on rare straights, just more fun.
Most importantly how far apart are these "points" more than a couple of hours and some of the exotica suggested will need to stop for refueling and a Focus Diesel would be quicker, if their either end of Europe a RR Wraith would be best :-)
In my personal expeirence the Evo is the quickest point to point car i have owned. On the Evo triangle my Old Evo's(8,9 & 10) would have left my Exige S in most conditions. The standard suspension in the Evo is pretty good at taking bumps and generally it is a point a shoot car.
On a side note, having driven the New Focus RS i would say that it may be the new point to point weapon. Having never actually driven one in anger down a b road i can't say how is compares to an Evo in those conditions, all i can say is the little time i spent in one reminded me of an Evo.
On a side note, having driven the New Focus RS i would say that it may be the new point to point weapon. Having never actually driven one in anger down a b road i can't say how is compares to an Evo in those conditions, all i can say is the little time i spent in one reminded me of an Evo.
Baldchap said:
In the 'real world' it's the reasonably talented guy who is willing to sacrifice the most safety margin or is most ignorant to the dangers around him.
But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Very true. Again, where a bike would lose out to a car on a track doesn't come into play on public roads. But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 28th September 11:58
Any of our European road trips usually involve some of the people being on bikes and we've often discussed the merits of patching in to their headsets so they can tell us if the road ahead is clear, rather than waiting until we can see for sure.
But the real downside is that with a bike you spend your time, when not riding, pratting about with gear and trying to walk normally while sporting armoured underpants.
PanzerCommander said:
The real world point to point argument is used (in my experience) by people who bought the 330d rather than the M3 or the V6 Mustang rather than the V8 Mustang and are looking at ways of defending the choice rather than simply admitting that the more expensive car was beyond their budget (which there is nothing wrong with) because of a fear of being judged.
Depends on the scenario surely? If speed limits are in place, normal traffic volumes, and normal road signs, stop, give way, traffic lights and roundabout rules are in place then would and Evo or something like that really have much of an advantage other than acceleration and over taking (if you get the opportunity for either) over a more mundane car?
If the rules don't apply (other than the car being taxed, MOT'd and insured) then it has to be some sort of super spec Caterham or Atom as it not only has the outright performance but the ability (due to low weight and a good chassis) to preserve lots of momentum.
I agree with your second two paragraphs but not the first. I bought the halo models and am still using the real world point to point argument.Depends on the scenario surely? If speed limits are in place, normal traffic volumes, and normal road signs, stop, give way, traffic lights and roundabout rules are in place then would and Evo or something like that really have much of an advantage other than acceleration and over taking (if you get the opportunity for either) over a more mundane car?
If the rules don't apply (other than the car being taxed, MOT'd and insured) then it has to be some sort of super spec Caterham or Atom as it not only has the outright performance but the ability (due to low weight and a good chassis) to preserve lots of momentum.
The real world acceleration argument used by diesel drivers is largely mince, but point to point on real roads, it's 20% car and 80% how much the driver doesn't mind being killed if he slings the car into a corner and finds a tractor coming the other way taking up 2/3 of the road width.
DonkeyApple said:
But the real downside is that with a bike you spend your time, when not riding, pratting about with gear and trying to walk normally while sporting armoured underpants.
Sadly very true!! Whilst kevlar jeans, trainer-esque boots and casual retro jackets all exist, I don't go full bore whilst wearing them, so we either lose or we have to piss about on arrival!
That said, I've always said a bad day on the bike beats a good day in the car! No feeling like it (though it does take years to get good enough to appreciate it)
rallycross said:
justleanitupabit said:
My Caterham.
Easily quicker than anything else I've owned. (And that includes an Impreza, an FTO and a 205GTi)
On a real UK road, bumpy, maybe a bit cold cold and damp ( normal I'm westher)'your Caterham would be a very long way behind a top spec 4wd turbo ( anything like Evo MR, Spec C, even things like Golf R).Easily quicker than anything else I've owned. (And that includes an Impreza, an FTO and a 205GTi)
I have a 320d daily and a M3 for fun. If I want to get from A to B fast on back lanes and B-roads, or over a short to middle distance, the I use the M3. If there are lots of dual carriageways or motorway or it is a really long distance, 320d all day long.
My point is, comfort and fuel economy also form part of my decision over what is fastest point to point, not just power to weight or handling. Driving a M3 at high speed on a 'dull' route is not as comfortable or cheap as in a 320d....so I would settle into a slower cruise in the M3.
You also 'stick out' less for plod to take an interest in you when driving at high cruising speeds, if you are in a 'boring' car.
My point is, comfort and fuel economy also form part of my decision over what is fastest point to point, not just power to weight or handling. Driving a M3 at high speed on a 'dull' route is not as comfortable or cheap as in a 320d....so I would settle into a slower cruise in the M3.
You also 'stick out' less for plod to take an interest in you when driving at high cruising speeds, if you are in a 'boring' car.
Baldchap said:
In the 'real world' it's the reasonably talented guy who is willing to sacrifice the most safety margin or is most ignorant to the dangers around him.
But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Not a bad call. Even a little naked middleweight like a Hornet or a Street Triple is devastatingly fast in the right hands. Bikes make up their incredible point to point pace in sheer acceleration; where they may sacrifice a marginal amount of speed to corner by sight, their ability to reach warp speed once the road ahead is seen to be clear is what makes the real difference. Even in the top level of motorbike racing, the current riding style seems to favour going in hard on the brakes, turning early and standing the bike up as early as possible to get the throttle wide open. But the correct 'PH answer' is a motorcycle.
Real roads have traffic and no matter how much power you have, in a car you need a lot of room to overtake that a bike doesn't need. The moment there's a light or give way the bike's at the front of the queue. We're high up and can see what's coming up over hedges etc as well.
Couple that with (on a well ridden bike) almost as high cornering speeds as a high performance car and almost unimaginable acceleration (compared to most fast four wheelers - even my middleweight naked is over 800bhp/ton) from about 20mph to Vmax and you're onto a winner.
Edited by Baldchap on Wednesday 28th September 11:58
Whilst some cars can still carry a higher corner speed, it is often purely academic on roads where you're guided by the golden rule. In such circumstances, even a tuned Evo won't be able to accelerate out of a corner like a GSXR 1000 or a even something slower like a Daytona 675.
Essentially, the advantages of a bike in performance terms over a car can be utilised fully on the road (i.e. acceleration and safe overtaking due to being narrower), whereas the advantages of a car (braking and cornering speed), are less able to be utilised safely. Naturally though, the thread title is the reason many people (me included) didn't mention this That and the law. Not for the law's sake, but because real roads have concealed entrances with other road users trying to cover both approaches before pulling out. They can be reasonably expected to spot and make decisions on vehicles either seen to be approaching, or more importantly, being within the field of view at all at up to 60mph or possibly a little bit over to account for those going a wee bit too quick. Nobody should be expected to avoid a motorbike (or anything) flying into view at 120mph on a real road where many real junctions only allow a view up the road of 100 yards or so.
Whilst Captain Reflex on his GSXR might be happy arseholing along at twice the speed sensible people expect, he's in no position to moan if he's about to belt the side of another vehicle that had no visibility of him before checking the other direction was still clear and moving out due to the shortened time taken to come into view and cover the visible distance to the junction.
Experienced road users with a brain will make further allowances for people who should give way but don't see them coming for whatever reason.
Sorry folks, but this thread is all b
ks unless we're talking about closed road time-trial type events. You need to be able to deal with what's waiting around every corner for you on real public roads, but you also need to behave in a way that other road users can reasonably expect and make allowances for. People aren't fking chameleons. They can only check one direction at a time, so your speed on public B-roads needs to take account of the fact that it is inversely proportional to the time available to other people to see you and avoid pulling out into your path.
Whilst Captain Reflex on his GSXR might be happy arseholing along at twice the speed sensible people expect, he's in no position to moan if he's about to belt the side of another vehicle that had no visibility of him before checking the other direction was still clear and moving out due to the shortened time taken to come into view and cover the visible distance to the junction.
Experienced road users with a brain will make further allowances for people who should give way but don't see them coming for whatever reason.
Sorry folks, but this thread is all b
ks unless we're talking about closed road time-trial type events. You need to be able to deal with what's waiting around every corner for you on real public roads, but you also need to behave in a way that other road users can reasonably expect and make allowances for. People aren't fking chameleons. They can only check one direction at a time, so your speed on public B-roads needs to take account of the fact that it is inversely proportional to the time available to other people to see you and avoid pulling out into your path.Fastest "real world" car I have owned was an Impreza STi, fastest road/track car was a 7 replica, which won me many trophies, but I would cover the ground faster on the road in the STi.
Better visibility, more forgiving and just so much easier to drive fast.
I imagine a 911 turbo would be hard to beat though.
Better visibility, more forgiving and just so much easier to drive fast.
I imagine a 911 turbo would be hard to beat though.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff