I've become bored of cars.
Discussion
C70R said:
SuffolkDefender said:
I've had motorcycles and yes, they're exciting - when every other driver isn't trying to kill you with their lack of attention, or the roads aren't trying to derail you with potholes, poor surfacing, loose gravel and wet leaves; I've crashed and been knocked off, broken bones and opened skin thanks to bikes. I've been a motorcyclist since I was 16 and I'm bordering on 50, riding for a large part of those years everything from TS50X to CBR600, GSXR1100K, Multistrada, R1, R6, ZX6, Hayabusa and two BMWs including an R1200RT. I like bikes. But practical they are not, especially in the winter, the rain, or when you want to go out with friends or family without getting dressed up as if you're going to fight the Power Rangers.
I have a 4-door 'family' sports car because I need four doors and a boot, not two seats that you have to get off after, at best, 100 miles and with a carrying capacity of less than a Peugeot 106.
So yes, probably sell the M3 and keep the Pulsar whilst I debate my next move.
The problem with the M3 is that you've basically bought a fairly dull car (a 3-series saloon) that BMW have tried to make interesting.I have a 4-door 'family' sports car because I need four doors and a boot, not two seats that you have to get off after, at best, 100 miles and with a carrying capacity of less than a Peugeot 106.
So yes, probably sell the M3 and keep the Pulsar whilst I debate my next move.
If you started with an interesting car, you'd probably get more pleasure out of it.
Obviously they couldn't be more different though(even if on paper they were similar with them both being a 2+2 Coupe). The M3 was borderline boring for me(a good all round car though) in comparison to the Cerbera. The Cerbera was designed to be exciting, whereas the M3 was designed to blast down an autobahn in as much comfort/quietness as possible in comparison.
In saying all that, if I hadn't have had the Cerbera...then I'm sure that the M3 would've ticked many more boxes for me though.
Court_S said:
I felt very similar to the OP about my M140i; on paper it seemed perfect. Fast, semi-practical with relatively cheap running costs. Yet, once I got over the feeling of acceleration, I lost interest very quickly. Despite what I thought it was going to delivery, in the end it was all a bit meh
Couldn't have said it better myself.Especially considering all the accolades from the motoring press at the time...
C70R said:
Funk said:
Funnily enough I've been thinking about this too of late.
My brother gives me his copies of Evo when he's finished them and I sat down to have a read through the latest one the other night....only to be struck by the realisation I really wasn't all that interested. I flicked through it in a matter of minutes and into the recycling it went. There's a new m+ supercar along every 5 minutes, they all look pretty much the same thanks to packaging and legal regulations but something else I realised was that most cars no longer have their own 'character'.
With everything now being fly-by-wire and controlled by electronics, all the interaction points aren't real - they're just whatever a clever boffin programmed them to be. Cars no longer have their own ride or handling characteristics that make them distinctive, it can all be changed with the press of a button. A supercar can ride like a wafty barge and a 2-ton+ barge can be made to corner flat. Engine sounds aren't real any more and even on my car there's a distinct change in throttle response, steering and handling when switching between driving modes etc - it's like driving a different car. Clever but...why?
My point is that it makes reading about the latest xyz supercar a bit moot as it can all be changed with a laptop and some code. Add in the ever-increasing demonisation of drivers and actually enjoying a car, hatred borne of 'politics of envy' (see the Labour MP's tweet above), the proliferation of other drivers' idiocy, every third car having a dashcam and a self-righteous dick eager to upload its contents and the whole endeavour has, for me, lost its appeal.
I think unfortunately I'm just another former petrolhead cowed (or almost) into submission. Even with something 'fun' it's only fun if you can drive it and those opportunities are (very) few and far between. Sadly it feels like the end of a golden age of motoring.
Congratulations. You've just won PH 'new cars are boring/driving is rubbish these days' cliche bingo.My brother gives me his copies of Evo when he's finished them and I sat down to have a read through the latest one the other night....only to be struck by the realisation I really wasn't all that interested. I flicked through it in a matter of minutes and into the recycling it went. There's a new m+ supercar along every 5 minutes, they all look pretty much the same thanks to packaging and legal regulations but something else I realised was that most cars no longer have their own 'character'.
With everything now being fly-by-wire and controlled by electronics, all the interaction points aren't real - they're just whatever a clever boffin programmed them to be. Cars no longer have their own ride or handling characteristics that make them distinctive, it can all be changed with the press of a button. A supercar can ride like a wafty barge and a 2-ton+ barge can be made to corner flat. Engine sounds aren't real any more and even on my car there's a distinct change in throttle response, steering and handling when switching between driving modes etc - it's like driving a different car. Clever but...why?
My point is that it makes reading about the latest xyz supercar a bit moot as it can all be changed with a laptop and some code. Add in the ever-increasing demonisation of drivers and actually enjoying a car, hatred borne of 'politics of envy' (see the Labour MP's tweet above), the proliferation of other drivers' idiocy, every third car having a dashcam and a self-righteous dick eager to upload its contents and the whole endeavour has, for me, lost its appeal.
I think unfortunately I'm just another former petrolhead cowed (or almost) into submission. Even with something 'fun' it's only fun if you can drive it and those opportunities are (very) few and far between. Sadly it feels like the end of a golden age of motoring.
To really shout "house!" there would need to be mentions of:
- RWD
- NA
- Move up north/to Scotland where the roads are empty
Then in the rematch, anyone that dares disagree being told either to:
- go and lease a white diesel Audi
- hand their driving licence in
Maybe I've been here too long
I agree with the consensus here that a sports car with removable roof of some description is the way forward. I have an MX-5 for exactly this reason.
But one car that stands out for me is the 911 convertible. Why is it so often undervalued vs its coupe counterpart? Is the Boxster simply too close in terms of capabilities, or is there something about the 911 that simply doesn't work without a fixed roof?
I do agree it is hard to enjoy cars now, with the roads being so busy.
People glibly say "you're just driving on the wrong roads" and I'm sure you're right. But I live daaan saafff and I've got a 3yr old, a 5yr old, a dog that needs walking, a wife and a full time job - I simply don't have the time currently to drive for 2 hours to access empty roads to "begin" my enjoyment.
Finding that balance between usability and occasion is a really tricky thing for a car to manage. Looks are of course subjective, but I think cars like the Abarth 124, Alpine A110 Sport, GR86 etc strike a great balance between being practical and usable day to day vs coming alive and exciting you when the opportunity presents itself.
But don't listen to a word I say - my daily is a 10 year old, diesel, skoda superb...!
But one car that stands out for me is the 911 convertible. Why is it so often undervalued vs its coupe counterpart? Is the Boxster simply too close in terms of capabilities, or is there something about the 911 that simply doesn't work without a fixed roof?
I do agree it is hard to enjoy cars now, with the roads being so busy.
People glibly say "you're just driving on the wrong roads" and I'm sure you're right. But I live daaan saafff and I've got a 3yr old, a 5yr old, a dog that needs walking, a wife and a full time job - I simply don't have the time currently to drive for 2 hours to access empty roads to "begin" my enjoyment.
Finding that balance between usability and occasion is a really tricky thing for a car to manage. Looks are of course subjective, but I think cars like the Abarth 124, Alpine A110 Sport, GR86 etc strike a great balance between being practical and usable day to day vs coming alive and exciting you when the opportunity presents itself.
But don't listen to a word I say - my daily is a 10 year old, diesel, skoda superb...!
If you liked the older Porsches etc why not get yourself one again - an analogue car in the modern era. I couldn't be less interested in DCT/DSG this and that with 300/400 hp. Give me a 80s/90s motor any day and whilst I might not be the quickest car out there I sure as hell have the most engaging ownership experience.
There are lots of these threads on PH where people say that sports saloons, coupes and supercars are too fast for the road and the answer is a lower powered car with better handling where you can go at 8/10ths rather than 3/10s and therefore have a lot more fun. I have one of the sports cars often mentioned as being one of the best road cars for having fun, but I find that it's difficult to have fun in that too.
In fact, I think the problem isn't so much the car as much as the traffic conditions prevailing in much of the UK. There are swathes of dim-witted drivers who do 37mph everywhere, even in national speed limits. And not only that, but many of the roads that used to be fun back in the day when you could drive a car at a speed when it was dynamically interesting have now been slapped with lower speed limits which mean that even at times when there isn't much traffic around, you have to break the law and stay on the lookout for cameras in order to have fun where a few years ago, the same driving would have been perfectly legal.
I don't know how much of this has been driven by too many people on the road, or by (in my opinion) the foolish quest for ever reduced risk on the roads, or by alternative political aims (the demonisation of the car, the ambition to be seen as green by giving over ever more roadspace to walking and cycling) or just by the reduction in driving standards.
When I learned to drive in 1991 (and again in 2001 when I did a direct access bike course and test) the idea that the speed limit was a limit and not a target was taught, but there was more emphasis on not showing undue hesitation and not holding up traffic by driving too slowly. If you drove much under the speed limit without a reason, such as other traffic or weather conditions during lessons, my instructor would warn me that I should keep as close to the limit as possible to avoid getting marked down for being too slow. I'm pretty sure this has gone out of the window, and not only that but I'm pretty sure a vast number of drivers pass their tests without really understanding what the words "national speed limit" actually mean in practical terms. I remember that it didn't really click for me until about two years after I started driving. I'm pretty sure I wasn't alone. Three weeks ago, I had an debate with my sister about what the meaning of "dual carriageway" was. She was insistent that dual carriageway meant two lanes in each direction. She's been driving for 25 years.
In fact, I think the problem isn't so much the car as much as the traffic conditions prevailing in much of the UK. There are swathes of dim-witted drivers who do 37mph everywhere, even in national speed limits. And not only that, but many of the roads that used to be fun back in the day when you could drive a car at a speed when it was dynamically interesting have now been slapped with lower speed limits which mean that even at times when there isn't much traffic around, you have to break the law and stay on the lookout for cameras in order to have fun where a few years ago, the same driving would have been perfectly legal.
I don't know how much of this has been driven by too many people on the road, or by (in my opinion) the foolish quest for ever reduced risk on the roads, or by alternative political aims (the demonisation of the car, the ambition to be seen as green by giving over ever more roadspace to walking and cycling) or just by the reduction in driving standards.
When I learned to drive in 1991 (and again in 2001 when I did a direct access bike course and test) the idea that the speed limit was a limit and not a target was taught, but there was more emphasis on not showing undue hesitation and not holding up traffic by driving too slowly. If you drove much under the speed limit without a reason, such as other traffic or weather conditions during lessons, my instructor would warn me that I should keep as close to the limit as possible to avoid getting marked down for being too slow. I'm pretty sure this has gone out of the window, and not only that but I'm pretty sure a vast number of drivers pass their tests without really understanding what the words "national speed limit" actually mean in practical terms. I remember that it didn't really click for me until about two years after I started driving. I'm pretty sure I wasn't alone. Three weeks ago, I had an debate with my sister about what the meaning of "dual carriageway" was. She was insistent that dual carriageway meant two lanes in each direction. She's been driving for 25 years.
SuffolkDefender said:
I just think it's pointless. If we're all driving at 75-80mph on the motorways (even if you're not trying to save fuel), then what's the point in having a car that does 150mph+?
Or am i just becoming a grumpy old b
d?
Horses for courses. Although the S58/B58 is a great motor I found it incredibly dull on the road. Switching to a similar super estate/saloon type of car with a V8 really helped stir the soul more, even when pottering.Or am i just becoming a grumpy old b
d?I’m sure it’s been mentioned, but go do some track time if you want to push your limits and get the adrenaline pumping.
Also, nothing wrong if cars don’t float your boat any more, go find something else to keep you busy. Life’s too short.
Get yourself a Defender,
Pretty much an experience at any speed within the speed limit.
Constantly breaking / needing a fettle / billions and billions and billions of parts to pratt around and have fun modifying them with, most of which don't cost the earth and can be fitted with a few simple sockets and a large hammer.
My daily driver is a 110 TD5 Double Cab, its the only car I've owned which I've never considered 'replacing'.
Pretty much an experience at any speed within the speed limit.
Constantly breaking / needing a fettle / billions and billions and billions of parts to pratt around and have fun modifying them with, most of which don't cost the earth and can be fitted with a few simple sockets and a large hammer.
My daily driver is a 110 TD5 Double Cab, its the only car I've owned which I've never considered 'replacing'.
Friends and I find ourselves more entertained with some 80's/90's tat than any "Modern performance car".
None of us are in a Ferrari/Lambo obtainable position but could stretch to an M2/M3 on some form of borrowing if we had the desire.
Far more entertaining for us on track days in a sub 3k box.
You said you enjoyed the MX5 - Would a turbo MX5 on sticky tyres be entertaining enough ? You could install a kit yourself (I actually enjoy working on cars, is half the fun for me - you may find it inspires some interest) and at the end of it have something pretty fast, hilarious and will have cost you pennies in comparison to the modern stuff.
None of us are in a Ferrari/Lambo obtainable position but could stretch to an M2/M3 on some form of borrowing if we had the desire.
Far more entertaining for us on track days in a sub 3k
box. You said you enjoyed the MX5 - Would a turbo MX5 on sticky tyres be entertaining enough ? You could install a kit yourself (I actually enjoy working on cars, is half the fun for me - you may find it inspires some interest) and at the end of it have something pretty fast, hilarious and will have cost you pennies in comparison to the modern stuff.
rottenegg said:
Yeah, one tyre fires out of junctions, terminal understeer from pushing on slightly harder than usual, smelly exhausts, oil burning, oil leaks and having to thrash the motor to get any sense of urgency out of it are traits I was glad to leave behind in the 80s/90s.
People call that drama, fun, excitement, whatever. I call it annoying.
I would sooner take a Golf R that effortlessly wafts itself and it's occupants along the road in comfort, than any of those crashy, jiggly, unsophisticated has-beens from 25 years ago.
For those wanting to be annoyed by their Golf R, it's just a simple case of slamming it, fitting a big boy exhaust, dialling in a pops and bangs map, leaving it in drift mode and just nailing it everywhere.
A classic could be one way to get some interest back into your motoring. Even if you don't have the skills or inclination to fix it yourself, you could just overpay for the best possible example of whatever you fancy/can afford and find a specialist to look after it - should be reliable enough then. A nice 4 door 20th Century Merc to ferry the family about in, perhaps? Derive enjoyment from the character, from being different, from keeping our motoring heritage alive, and from giving pleasure to other road users.
Motoring's heyday was the 20th Century. It started to go downhill in the mid-noughties in my view. Perhaps we should be viewing our hobby as something from the past rather than the present.
Alternatively, (and some won't like this) I've actually found that EVs have given me a bit of a sense of being a motoring pioneer again. I've found driving something propelled by a new(ish) form of propulsion quite exciting, although the driving experience itself is the opposite - super relaxing - and I guess the novelty will wear off eventually.
Motoring's heyday was the 20th Century. It started to go downhill in the mid-noughties in my view. Perhaps we should be viewing our hobby as something from the past rather than the present.
Alternatively, (and some won't like this) I've actually found that EVs have given me a bit of a sense of being a motoring pioneer again. I've found driving something propelled by a new(ish) form of propulsion quite exciting, although the driving experience itself is the opposite - super relaxing - and I guess the novelty will wear off eventually.
coming from a stage 2 + 240i ( 100 - 200 in 6.9 / 7)
i do miss the speed.
however a few seconds foot to floor and you are in trouble. it was just a matter of time before something bad happened
now with a 987 boxster which feels very slow. but i can rev it out which is quite fun.
shame the technology and speed moved so fast as imagine the fastest cars did 0-60 in 8 seconds plus.
all relative
i do miss the speed.
however a few seconds foot to floor and you are in trouble. it was just a matter of time before something bad happened
now with a 987 boxster which feels very slow. but i can rev it out which is quite fun.
shame the technology and speed moved so fast as imagine the fastest cars did 0-60 in 8 seconds plus.
all relative
cerb4.5lee said:
That situation hit me really hard after I'd had the Cerbera when I ended up in the E92 M3. In my head I thought that the M3 would be a good replacement for the Cerb because it was a manual...and it also had hydraulic steering/RWD/LSD etc.
Obviously they couldn't be more different though(even if on paper they were similar with them both being a 2+2 Coupe). The M3 was borderline boring for me(a good all round car though) in comparison to the Cerbera. The Cerbera was designed to be exciting, whereas the M3 was designed to blast down an autobahn in as much comfort/quietness as possible in comparison.
In saying all that, if I hadn't have had the Cerbera...then I'm sure that the M3 would've ticked many more boxes for me though.
That’s because the cerbera is a four wheeled assault on all the senses Obviously they couldn't be more different though(even if on paper they were similar with them both being a 2+2 Coupe). The M3 was borderline boring for me(a good all round car though) in comparison to the Cerbera. The Cerbera was designed to be exciting, whereas the M3 was designed to blast down an autobahn in as much comfort/quietness as possible in comparison.
In saying all that, if I hadn't have had the Cerbera...then I'm sure that the M3 would've ticked many more boxes for me though.
cerb4.5lee said:
C70R said:
SuffolkDefender said:
I've had motorcycles and yes, they're exciting - when every other driver isn't trying to kill you with their lack of attention, or the roads aren't trying to derail you with potholes, poor surfacing, loose gravel and wet leaves; I've crashed and been knocked off, broken bones and opened skin thanks to bikes. I've been a motorcyclist since I was 16 and I'm bordering on 50, riding for a large part of those years everything from TS50X to CBR600, GSXR1100K, Multistrada, R1, R6, ZX6, Hayabusa and two BMWs including an R1200RT. I like bikes. But practical they are not, especially in the winter, the rain, or when you want to go out with friends or family without getting dressed up as if you're going to fight the Power Rangers.
I have a 4-door 'family' sports car because I need four doors and a boot, not two seats that you have to get off after, at best, 100 miles and with a carrying capacity of less than a Peugeot 106.
So yes, probably sell the M3 and keep the Pulsar whilst I debate my next move.
The problem with the M3 is that you've basically bought a fairly dull car (a 3-series saloon) that BMW have tried to make interesting.I have a 4-door 'family' sports car because I need four doors and a boot, not two seats that you have to get off after, at best, 100 miles and with a carrying capacity of less than a Peugeot 106.
So yes, probably sell the M3 and keep the Pulsar whilst I debate my next move.
If you started with an interesting car, you'd probably get more pleasure out of it.
Obviously they couldn't be more different though(even if on paper they were similar with them both being a 2+2 Coupe). The M3 was borderline boring for me(a good all round car though) in comparison to the Cerbera. The Cerbera was designed to be exciting, whereas the M3 was designed to blast down an autobahn in as much comfort/quietness as possible in comparison.
In saying all that, if I hadn't have had the Cerbera...then I'm sure that the M3 would've ticked many more boxes for me though.
Of course there are plenty who will argue till they are blue in the face that boring sex is actually really quite exciting because they know no different.
And sometimes, as on this thread, they realise they are getting old and time is running out to experience something properly fun before it's too late...
Sim75 said:
Two things.
1. You're getting old.
2. You've raised your own bar too high.
Go back to more simplistic motoring and expect less from your car. Then it will suprise you like it did in the (probably) early nineties.
PS: Im 47 and going through the same. The above is my own analysis
Hey, I’m 47 as well….1. You're getting old.
2. You've raised your own bar too high.
Go back to more simplistic motoring and expect less from your car. Then it will suprise you like it did in the (probably) early nineties.
PS: Im 47 and going through the same. The above is my own analysis
I’m not sure if this has been mentioned but Track days are the answer here. Get a Clio 182 or similar and you can have a blast…
SidewaysSi said:
walm said:
If I were you, I would try an Exige S3... still very near the top of my bucket list.
Nah, has to be an S1. The S3 is a fat old thing... Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff