Turning driver aids off and then complaining about it.
Discussion
Mini rant here but I was reminded of it by a friend today.
With the rise and rise of driver aids (and their associated off switches...) in modern cars, and as they become more and more pivotal to the car's performance, there seems to be a common theme of journalists and the like turning the aids off and then complaining the car is rubbish without them. Case in point: Ferrari 599 GTO. With no other car have I ever heard so much bleating about poor performance with the driver aids and electronic management turned off. (I'd like to clarify that I am talking about stability management etc programs designed for performance on proper performance cars, not the TC switch on a mid-spec Kia, for example).
The aids and management programs are there to make the absolute best of the car. They can intimately control individual systems that the driver can't and thus make the car better and faster. The only things that could possibly want turning off are things like traction control - and only then if you are literally a racing-calibre driver who is 100% sure of his tyre adhesion limits. The only real limit to management programs is that they can only react to stimulus, not predict it; but in 95% of cases they will handle it faster and better than a human can.
You don't hear about modern fighter pilots turning off all their planes' computers and then moaning that it flies like a pig (I'm talking about the recent stuff with inherent instability - best analogy for the 599 GTO really).
I can't decide if the whole turning-off-the-aids thing is just a typical case of us blokes being blokes and wanting to subconsciously brag about driving ability - or if it's just that people prefer the feel of reduced electronic interference, even if it is technically slower. If you're going to put forward the argument that you can drive faster without aids, I would suggest that your stability program is poorly designed...
End mini rant, apologies for lack of swearing - f
k fk fk fk bks fk tits.
With the rise and rise of driver aids (and their associated off switches...) in modern cars, and as they become more and more pivotal to the car's performance, there seems to be a common theme of journalists and the like turning the aids off and then complaining the car is rubbish without them. Case in point: Ferrari 599 GTO. With no other car have I ever heard so much bleating about poor performance with the driver aids and electronic management turned off. (I'd like to clarify that I am talking about stability management etc programs designed for performance on proper performance cars, not the TC switch on a mid-spec Kia, for example).
The aids and management programs are there to make the absolute best of the car. They can intimately control individual systems that the driver can't and thus make the car better and faster. The only things that could possibly want turning off are things like traction control - and only then if you are literally a racing-calibre driver who is 100% sure of his tyre adhesion limits. The only real limit to management programs is that they can only react to stimulus, not predict it; but in 95% of cases they will handle it faster and better than a human can.
You don't hear about modern fighter pilots turning off all their planes' computers and then moaning that it flies like a pig (I'm talking about the recent stuff with inherent instability - best analogy for the 599 GTO really).
I can't decide if the whole turning-off-the-aids thing is just a typical case of us blokes being blokes and wanting to subconsciously brag about driving ability - or if it's just that people prefer the feel of reduced electronic interference, even if it is technically slower. If you're going to put forward the argument that you can drive faster without aids, I would suggest that your stability program is poorly designed...
End mini rant, apologies for lack of swearing - f
k fk fk fk bks fk tits.The analogy between fighter pilots and driving enthusiasts isn't a fair one. A fighter plane is a tool to it's pilot and the more effective it is the better, pleasure is of little importance. Racing drivers rarely complain about driving aids for similar reasons.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
I see what you are getting at here and I am inclined to agree.
Mr Will, would you not say that the 599GTO is a tool too? In my eyes at least, the GTO is here to show off Ferraris technological capabilities rather than to be a great car to drive like we see an Elise for example.
I quite like the fighter plane analogy aswell. I don't know the physics about it but if the car is generally unstable then that will make it quicker with the use of computer, quite like the Eurofighter.
Mr Will, would you not say that the 599GTO is a tool too? In my eyes at least, the GTO is here to show off Ferraris technological capabilities rather than to be a great car to drive like we see an Elise for example.
I quite like the fighter plane analogy aswell. I don't know the physics about it but if the car is generally unstable then that will make it quicker with the use of computer, quite like the Eurofighter.
I understand the OP and Bobs point but surely if you buy a car like that you want to be able to drive it safely and easily with everything on when you are just driving but want to have more fun with it on some occasions with some or all of the gadgets turned off.
If you take a car like that on a track with everything switched on it will feel like you are being told off every time you start to get it moving around, that's no fun! Turn the gadgets off and it would be nice to think that your six figure purchase actually handles well
If you take a car like that on a track with everything switched on it will feel like you are being told off every time you start to get it moving around, that's no fun! Turn the gadgets off and it would be nice to think that your six figure purchase actually handles well
Steve H said:
I understand the OP and Bobs point but surely if you buy a car like that you want to be able to drive it safely and easily with everything on when you are just driving but want to have more fun with it on some occasions with some or all of the gadgets turned off.
If you take a car like that on a track with everything switched on it will feel like you are being told off every time you start to get it moving around, that's no fun! Turn the gadgets off and it would be nice to think that your six figure purchase actually handles well
If you take a car like that on a track with everything switched on it will feel like you are being told off every time you start to get it moving around, that's no fun! Turn the gadgets off and it would be nice to think that your six figure purchase actually handles well
Journalists are generally enthusiasts so when conditions allow they want to feel they're driving the car rather being driven.The fighter analogy is incorrect imo because a fighter pilot needs the ultimate tool so he stands the best chance of not being shot down. Whereas the driver, unless they're actually racing, is there for fun.
Looking at F1 a few years back where active suspension, ABS, launch control etc were standard.
Did the cars get faster when it was disabled? Of course not. Turbo era cars would probably be undriveable.
Technology can easily out pace a driver of an F1 car so a journo in a road Ferrari knows better? I think not.
Did the cars get faster when it was disabled? Of course not. Turbo era cars would probably be undriveable.
Technology can easily out pace a driver of an F1 car so a journo in a road Ferrari knows better? I think not.
Bill said:
Journalists are generally enthusiasts so when conditions allow they want to feel they're driving the car rather being driven.The fighter analogy is incorrect imo because a fighter pilot needs the ultimate tool so he stands the best chance of not being shot down. Whereas the driver, unless they're actually racing, is there for fun.
I, for instance, like driving my Evo fast on country lanes. I love having the 4WD grip and computers making things (speed/cornering etc) possible which would not be possible without them. I reckon I'd enjoy the 599 with the aids on, because it would be the fastest and for me that's more important than feeling like I'm doing it all myself. I also acknowledge this isn't the case for everyone.
Regards the 599 being 'awful' with aids off, I think what the OP was getting at with the jet analogy is that modern jets are designed to be inherently unstable but kept stable by the computers. The inherent instability is there to make rapid handling manoeuvres possible. So a design which is optimal with aids on is sub-optimal with aids off. This could be the case with the 599; if the geo/diffs/brakes were setup with computer control in mind then it should be no surprise they are sub-optimal with them off. What I'm suggesting is that it was built ground up to use the computers.
Mr Will said:
The analogy between fighter pilots and driving enthusiasts isn't a fair one. A fighter plane is a tool to it's pilot and the more effective it is the better, pleasure is of little importance. Racing drivers rarely complain about driving aids for similar reasons.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
Case closed.
Some journos (one inparticular) bang on and on about the 599 GTO being ruined, and bangs on about how when you turn the TC off in a merc it's not really off, but then raved about the prodrive e-diff and the stability systems in evos and the like.
Just seems like it's something to moan about or to give a false impression of driving supremacy. "this car is crap without the traction controll, and all good drivers turn off their traction control. You are a good driver aren't you? Or are you a big girls blouse?"
Just seems like it's something to moan about or to give a false impression of driving supremacy. "this car is crap without the traction controll, and all good drivers turn off their traction control. You are a good driver aren't you? Or are you a big girls blouse?"
mat205125 said:
Mr Will said:
The analogy between fighter pilots and driving enthusiasts isn't a fair one. A fighter plane is a tool to it's pilot and the more effective it is the better, pleasure is of little importance. Racing drivers rarely complain about driving aids for similar reasons.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
For an enthusiastic driver however, a car is a toy as well as a tool and therefore how it does the job becomes as important (if not more important) than the end effect it achieves. Look at the planes people buy for the joy of flying them and you'll find very few (if any) computers in them either.
Case closed.
My old man is taking delivery of his GTO this month/beginning of next month (I'm trying to persuade him to bring to a Sunday service soon 
), I've seen him start to get very worried about it's residual value having seen what happened on Top Gear and Clarkson's DVD so I'm glad someone else brought this up.
I completely agree, Clarkson whacked the manatino switch to full schumy and then basically said "oh it's terrible i can't drive it anymore"
But if you watch the vids on youtube of a professional ferrari driver taking it around you'll see he's actually got the hang of it and can still do a decent lap time (it also puts quite a big smile on his face)
The manatino switch on the GTO is like the difficulty setting on a game, where 99% suddenly realise they know little about accelerator control. As much as I find Clarkson funny, he talks a lot of bks most of the time
), I've seen him start to get very worried about it's residual value having seen what happened on Top Gear and Clarkson's DVD so I'm glad someone else brought this up.I completely agree, Clarkson whacked the manatino switch to full schumy and then basically said "oh it's terrible i can't drive it anymore"
But if you watch the vids on youtube of a professional ferrari driver taking it around you'll see he's actually got the hang of it and can still do a decent lap time (it also puts quite a big smile on his face)
The manatino switch on the GTO is like the difficulty setting on a game, where 99% suddenly realise they know little about accelerator control. As much as I find Clarkson funny, he talks a lot of b
ks most of the timeEdited by MetalFoot on Thursday 10th March 08:24
98elise said:
Making a car only drivable with driving aids seems odd. Driver aids should be there as a safety net, not the only way you can drive the car without falling off the road.
Why, though? It seems that this is what people are thinking when they criticize the car with the driver aids off, but that's not understanding that the aids can, in theory, create a more fun car.If you look at the whole universe of possible cars, available geometries, engine types, power, type of electronic assistance, and so on, then what is your justification for assuming that there are not cars out there where the driver aids let the car be more fun than the same car would be if it were designed to be drivable without those aids?
Just because they've often been used in the past in a way that reduced our fun, that doesn't mean that it must be so in the future.
Mr Will said:
The analogy between fighter pilots and driving enthusiasts isn't a fair one. A fighter plane is a tool to it's pilot and the more effective it is the better, pleasure is of little importance. Racing drivers rarely complain about driving aids for similar reasons.
I do, it lowers the bar 
Also worth pointing out that I'm fairly sure modern fighter jets aren't designed with inherent instability for manoevrability, it's more about something like centre of pressure for supersonic speeds or somesuch
mrmr96 said:
Remember that for some people the 'fun' isn't necessarily about the 'how'; sometimes is IS about the 'end result'.
I, for instance, like driving my Evo fast on country lanes. I love having the 4WD grip and computers making things (speed/cornering etc) possible which would not be possible without them. I reckon I'd enjoy the 599 with the aids on, because it would be the fastest and for me that's more important than feeling like I'm doing it all myself. I also acknowledge this isn't the case for everyone.
Regards the 599 being 'awful' with aids off, I think what the OP was getting at with the jet analogy is that modern jets are designed to be inherently unstable but kept stable by the computers. The inherent instability is there to make rapid handling manoeuvres possible. So a design which is optimal with aids on is sub-optimal with aids off. This could be the case with the 599; if the geo/diffs/brakes were setup with computer control in mind then it should be no surprise they are sub-optimal with them off. What I'm suggesting is that it was built ground up to use the computers.
I had an Impreza for four years so I know where you're coming from, but ultimately I found it a bit dull and lacking in involvement. And since thenonly place you can really go into full attack mode is on track I'd rather feel it was me doing the work rather than the car.I, for instance, like driving my Evo fast on country lanes. I love having the 4WD grip and computers making things (speed/cornering etc) possible which would not be possible without them. I reckon I'd enjoy the 599 with the aids on, because it would be the fastest and for me that's more important than feeling like I'm doing it all myself. I also acknowledge this isn't the case for everyone.
Regards the 599 being 'awful' with aids off, I think what the OP was getting at with the jet analogy is that modern jets are designed to be inherently unstable but kept stable by the computers. The inherent instability is there to make rapid handling manoeuvres possible. So a design which is optimal with aids on is sub-optimal with aids off. This could be the case with the 599; if the geo/diffs/brakes were setup with computer control in mind then it should be no surprise they are sub-optimal with them off. What I'm suggesting is that it was built ground up to use the computers.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff