Ooops, wrong weight class

[stanglish]

I took ages to get a proper first car. When I did, it was an early mk7.5 Fiesta. That lovely 1.0 Turbo back when they allowed it in the Fiesta in 140ps tune was a nice balance as I couldn't stretch for the ST.

But the handling was so confidence inspiring, and the feedback was better than a mk8 I drove a few years later. Obviously a very easy car to drive fairly quickly and no bad habits really - I'm not pointing out anything you didn't know already. It just felt so chuckable and assured, yet not a total tinpot compared to small hire cars I'd driven the past.

Step forward a few years and after a gap between cars, I picked up a used mk8 Civic. Now, I didn't go into this thinking it would be dynamically better or even equal but I was slightly more disappointed than I expected to be. To me it feels twice as heavy, not 30%. The car is competent in every way, but I just felt the increased mass more than I expected I would.

It got me thinking, are there people like me who practically see the benefits of fast estates and larger cars but just can't see themselves driving something that heavy day in, day out? I honestly think the next move I'll make is an estate shed paired with something as close to a ton as possible.

Or do you not care and the mass doesn't bother you as long as the car doesn't have a clear understeer problem?

[Daston]

I don't think you can really compare the basic versions for of cars and expect them to be amazing handling wise. I'm pretty pleased with our ST estate and would say it handles a lot better than standard focus hatchback.

Our 911 is a fair bit more heavy than our old RX7 and certainly not as sharp (the RX had a lot of suspension mods). I do miss it but the 911 covers everything else so well that I don't really mind too much.

[havoc]

The Mk7 Fiesta was/is revelatory - the Ford chassis guys, for an ordinary hatch, have performed wonders.

Honda, meanwhile, haven't made their 'cooking' cars handle well for about 20 years. Primarily because their core market wouldn't notice if they did...


So it could just be that particular combo - you're going from possibly THE best 2010s supermini (handling-wise, at least) to a rather humdrum mid-range family hatch.

[samoht]

Mass is important to me, yes; however where the mass is is equally significant. The ideal is
- low mass
- low centre of gravity
- low moment of inertia (mass centralised)
- equal or rear-biased balance (<= 50% of the mass carried by the front tyres). This generally implies RWD.

The other three elements contribute to the sense of responsiveness, poise and agility that makes a drivers' car (along with many other factors such as suspension, of course).

I also got an RX-7 because it had the power and layout I wanted, while minimising the weight (~1275kg). A Supra would've been at least as quick and likely much lower maintenance, but a quarter ton more.

So I don't buy the lightest car possible, but I do seek out the lightest car that meets my other criteria.

[Super Sonic]

Best handling civics are the mk 4,5,&6. These were made from 87-2000. They all had wishbone front and multilink rear suspension. The Mk7 from 2000 had Mac strut (except for the ep3 type R) front but still had the independent rear. The mk 8 lost the independent rear.

[stanglish]

It's hard to put a finger on. I just feel that for 2 equivalent cars (talking of FWD) they can have very similar handling tendencies just in the basics of their balance, how they progress into understeer etc. However if those two cars are poles apart mass-wise, there's just something infinitely more joyful about the lighter car.

It sticks in my head because a basic example would be that in most cases a Focus would be a more practical all-rounder but I can't imagine choosing one over the Fiesta.

It's maybe stretching it a bit but do you know how a GTR gets an astonishing result around a track but they seem to be doing it with applying power and rubber and sheer mechanical grip to the situation, but it's all a bit soulless?

[Slow]

Maybe its more a fwd thing. Dont notice the weight as much between 3/5/7 series to say its incredibly noticable unless your driving like a bit of a dick.

Even my L405 is around 10% lighter than my old L322 and it doesnt feel very different.

[ingenieur]

don't forget, a lot of the size of a bigger car is just empty space. Sure a bit of extra metal is required to form the extra bodywork on a larger car but small and large cars have the same basic feature set.

[mintmansam]

I like light small cars. Cheaper to maintain and run.

Ford do seem to have good front end bite and stiffer than most on the rear so they get good front grip while can roll from the rear. Some other manufacturers seem to prefer to tune for understeer/ comfort over dynamics

Cars can feel heavier if they are softly sprung and have too soft an anti roll bar.

[HelldogBE]

Slow said:

Maybe its more a fwd thing. Dont notice the weight as much between 3/5/7 series to say its incredibly noticable unless your driving like a bit of a dick.

Have you ever tried throwing a 3 and a 7-series around a wet roundabout/tight corner? Even a 1-series is noticeably more nimble/playful than a 3.

I've had several 320D's and 530D's and under heavy braking and in tighter turns the extra mass and wheelbase is a big handicap. The extra acceleration only outweighs the poorer handling when you can go flat out in straightish lines/long winding turns.

Still they're more than capable and you need to be driving like a tit to reach the limits in the dry on public roads, but in wet and slippery conditions you'll find out the handling limits soon enough. Also it's not s much about where the limit is, but how the car feels approaching those limits.

Edited by HelldogBE on Sunday 26th June 21:47

[havoc]

stanglish said:

It's hard to put a finger on. I just feel that for 2 equivalent cars (talking of FWD) they can have very similar handling tendencies just in the basics of their balance, how they progress into understeer etc. However if those two cars are poles apart mass-wise, there's just something infinitely more joyful about the lighter car.

If your Mk8 Civic was the futuristic-looking wedgey one, then there's actually maybe 100kg difference between the two cars, as the Mk8 Civic was surprisingly light. <10% car-on-car difference.

...so what you're describing, in this instance, is less to do with weight and more to do with:-
- suspension and anti-roll-bar stiffness which governs where the weight sits, both statically and dynamically
- suspension set-up and geometry, including bushing
- steering rack rate, sidewall size, PAS behaviour and bushing stiffness which affects the way the car behaves to steering inputs
- tuning of all of the above to give a desired effect


I'm not denying what you're saying is right, but I AM saying there's more to it than raw mass...a lot more.

[Haltamer]

Add a rear anti roll bar (Check the rear beam whilst you're there)

Even a fairly mellow one does a far bit to neutralise the handling.

AFAIK The mounts should be shared with the FN2, So you should have plenty of options.

[Slow]

HelldogBE said:

Slow said:

Maybe its more a fwd thing. Dont notice the weight as much between 3/5/7 series to say its incredibly noticable unless your driving like a bit of a dick.

Have you ever tried throwing a 3 and a 7-series around a wet roundabout/tight corner? Even a 1-series is noticeably more nimble/playful than a 3.

I've had several 320D's and 530D's and under heavy braking and in tighter turns the extra mass and wheelbase is a big handicap. The extra acceleration only outweighs the poorer handling when you can go flat out in straightish lines/long winding turns.

Still they're more than capable and you need to be driving like a tit to reach the limits in the dry on public roads, but in wet and slippery conditions you'll find out the handling limits soon enough. Also it's not s much about where the limit is, but how the car feels approaching those limits.

Edited by HelldogBE on Sunday 26th June 21:47

I would argue its the size not the weight that makes the difference on a wet roundabout/tight corner.
You wont ever really notice unless your driving like a dick either way though (we all do it now and then!). My e46 was much harder to control when past the limits compared to the e38 oddly. The e38 it was easy to have a controlled slide but I put that down to the length.

[Wills2]

Slow said:

HelldogBE said:

Slow said:

Maybe its more a fwd thing. Dont notice the weight as much between 3/5/7 series to say its incredibly noticable unless your driving like a bit of a dick.

Have you ever tried throwing a 3 and a 7-series around a wet roundabout/tight corner? Even a 1-series is noticeably more nimble/playful than a 3.

I've had several 320D's and 530D's and under heavy braking and in tighter turns the extra mass and wheelbase is a big handicap. The extra acceleration only outweighs the poorer handling when you can go flat out in straightish lines/long winding turns.

Still they're more than capable and you need to be driving like a tit to reach the limits in the dry on public roads, but in wet and slippery conditions you'll find out the handling limits soon enough. Also it's not s much about where the limit is, but how the car feels approaching those limits.

Edited by HelldogBE on Sunday 26th June 21:47

I would argue its the size not the weight that makes the difference on a wet roundabout/tight corner.
You wont ever really notice unless your driving like a dick either way though (we all do it now and then!). My e46 was much harder to control when past the limits compared to the e38 oddly. The e38 it was easy to have a controlled slide but I put that down to the length.

I'd say you notice the 7 series weight under braking and in the wet it will wag it's tail (as I found out coming back from the lakes last year as came off a roundabout sideways) God knows what the guy in front thought if he was looking in the rear view mirror.

Not so much round the corners or on entry or exit in the dry as modern tyres have huge amounts of grip in the dry, still it's fun to press on in a 5+ metre long 2 tonne barge.