Are modern performance cars irrelevant?
Discussion
Alfanatic said:
OP, I think that's more to do with the M5 than with modern performance cars as a whole.
I've never driven an M anything, and I have liked the 5 series cars that I've driven, but I've driven a few six cylinder 3s of various generations and they've all left me feeling the same as the M5 left you feeling. Just too clinical and refined when not caning it. Perhaps that's just how BMW do things. Quiet family car most of the time, then it comes alive on a track (or so I hear).
I must be honest, I don't see the relevance of that on southern UK roads. Here, I'd rather have a car that feels brilliant and accurate and involving up to 6 tenths but then loses the plot when you're really cracking on, because that's a car I'll appreciate and enjoy for 99% of my time on the road, instead of just 1% when I'm on a bit of tarmac that's clear enough, and clearly sighted enough, and has enough space to exploit all of just about any modern car's performance in safety.
Personally, I do think if you tried a Quattroporte or Rapide, you might not have come to the same conclusion. Those are cars that seem to be able to distract the driver in pleasing ways even when they're not on a mission. And Mercs have a particular lazy or unhurried, stately character that can be appreciated at low speed. Or at least they used to. The car just needs something to make it feel special more often, and it can be done.
Yes the QP or Rapide would probably feel more special, but part of the allure (to me at least) of something like the M5 is that, apart from the average PHer, the majority of people wouldn't know an M5 from a 520d without close scrutiny. The QP and Rapiide are much more overtly not your run of the mill saloon.I've never driven an M anything, and I have liked the 5 series cars that I've driven, but I've driven a few six cylinder 3s of various generations and they've all left me feeling the same as the M5 left you feeling. Just too clinical and refined when not caning it. Perhaps that's just how BMW do things. Quiet family car most of the time, then it comes alive on a track (or so I hear).
I must be honest, I don't see the relevance of that on southern UK roads. Here, I'd rather have a car that feels brilliant and accurate and involving up to 6 tenths but then loses the plot when you're really cracking on, because that's a car I'll appreciate and enjoy for 99% of my time on the road, instead of just 1% when I'm on a bit of tarmac that's clear enough, and clearly sighted enough, and has enough space to exploit all of just about any modern car's performance in safety.
Personally, I do think if you tried a Quattroporte or Rapide, you might not have come to the same conclusion. Those are cars that seem to be able to distract the driver in pleasing ways even when they're not on a mission. And Mercs have a particular lazy or unhurried, stately character that can be appreciated at low speed. Or at least they used to. The car just needs something to make it feel special more often, and it can be done.
I currently have a Z4 30i for when the sun shines. Not slow but in a much lower league to the M5. But the Z4 feels faster. It's more rewarding to drive quickly, even though the steering isn't the best and it suffers from chronic understeer, as you have to work harder at it.
Maybe the issue is that base versions of cars like the 5 Series are too accomplished nowadays? Maybe my expectations of the M5 were just too much? Maybe the M5 is just too clinical?
dick_dastardly71 said:
Yes the QP or Rapide would probably feel more special, ...
the majority of people wouldn't know an M5 from a 520d without close scrutiny. The QP and Rapiide are much more overtly not your run of the mill saloon.
...
Maybe the issue is that base versions of cars like the 5 Series are too accomplished nowadays? Maybe my expectations of the M5 were just too much? Maybe the M5 is just too clinical?
Firstly, apologies for the selective quoting which I realise takes what you've said out of context. However, I do think you've highlighted a very important distinction here.the majority of people wouldn't know an M5 from a 520d without close scrutiny. The QP and Rapiide are much more overtly not your run of the mill saloon.
...
Maybe the issue is that base versions of cars like the 5 Series are too accomplished nowadays? Maybe my expectations of the M5 were just too much? Maybe the M5 is just too clinical?
The QP is what it is. A large high performance executive car, built to a particular price, with a V8 up front. That's what you get with the QP. It's quite easy to design and build all the bits of the QP to support its price, market, and purpose.
The M5 is different. It's a 5 series, which means that the base car has to work at 520D market, price and very importantly expectations (refinement, for instance).
So it has the refinement that many appreciate, but its refinement that at its core has to work financially at 520 price level, so its never going to have the ambience of something purpose built for its price bracket. The performance bits are bespoke, so it feels special when using the performance bits, but the refinement bits are shared, so it feels no different to a 520 when enjoying it as an exec saloon instead of a performance car.
I left the Rapide out this time because I think that shares the M5's position as a compromise, except instead of the compromises relating it to a £30ish k exec saloon, it's related to a DB9, so its luxurious and fast and enjoyable to drive, but cramped when 4 seats are squeezed in.
Probably sounds obvious actually, but I expect that the XFR also would have left a different impression, and that a Lotus Carlton would be more like the M5 but more down market in both the Carlton bits and in the refinement levels of the performance bits.
dick_dastardly71 said:
Yesterday I took the current M5 for a test drive, having waited and waited until I was in a position to order one. Whilst there is no escaping that it was one seriously capable and blisteringly quick piece of kit, I came away slightly disappointed and feeling a little 'cold'.
On dual carriageways and the like, it might as well have been a 520d. On more interesting roads, it was so refined and the cabin so 'cocooned' that you just didn't get the buzz of driving it quickly. I'm lucky enough to have had a few quick cars over the past few years (M3s, 997 C2S, etc), and parted with the last M3 as the opportunity to actually use it properly on public roads was very few and far between. I must admit I was missing having a proper performance car, but the test drive simply left me feeling that seriously quick cars are increasingly irrelevant on today's roads. I'm testing AMG Mercs this weekend but can't help feeling that it'll be a similar experience. And I've said on here before that a lower powered car that you can drive harder more of the time is probably more rewarding than a seriously quick car you can only exploit every now and then.
Does anyone feel similar, or am I just getting old?
I know exactly where you are coming from. On dual carriageways and the like, it might as well have been a 520d. On more interesting roads, it was so refined and the cabin so 'cocooned' that you just didn't get the buzz of driving it quickly. I'm lucky enough to have had a few quick cars over the past few years (M3s, 997 C2S, etc), and parted with the last M3 as the opportunity to actually use it properly on public roads was very few and far between. I must admit I was missing having a proper performance car, but the test drive simply left me feeling that seriously quick cars are increasingly irrelevant on today's roads. I'm testing AMG Mercs this weekend but can't help feeling that it'll be a similar experience. And I've said on here before that a lower powered car that you can drive harder more of the time is probably more rewarding than a seriously quick car you can only exploit every now and then.
Does anyone feel similar, or am I just getting old?
Last October I bought a Corvette Z06, whilst there is no doubt that it is a very fast and capable car, it could not be more different to drive than my modded ZR1. Power wise they are very similar at 505 vs 530 for the ZR1. However they are chalk and cheese when it comes to driving them. There's a rawness to the ZR1, it's very loud, has no traction control and you really feel part of the car. Even climbing in and out over the high chassis rails gives you a sense of occasion. I have spent a lot of time and money getting it to where it is regarding not just engine performance but brakes, suspension as well but it's such a joy to drive.
The Z06 is also nice to drive and is also quick but it goes about everything in such a different way. There's no chassis rails to climb over to get in. Its relatively quiet (i arrived at our friends in Le Mans in it without a headache!) it's a nice comfy place to be and has plenty of mod cons. However, you do feel a little detached or as you put it cocooned from the car.
For me, the ZR1 will never be sold on, it's a keeper. The Z06, it's early days and I still need to get it on an airfield to really bond with it I think.
With something like my S1 Elise you can drive it pretty much flat out without getting up to license losing/prison speeds, its much more fun than my last car which had nearly 3 times the power and about twice the weight. The plus points of modern performance cars are the luxury and safety, but that comes at the expense of fun and the ability to actually use the performance available.
My old caterham 7 was slower in a straight line then a BMW uber diesel
So using stopwatch logic the BMW uber diesel would be more fun
I disagree with the stopwatch and felt the caterham was way more fun the a BMW uber diesel
So i think modern performance cars are pretty much irrelevant as they struggle on a track due to lard, have exceedingly stiff suspension to control the lard on a race track which makes them utterly useless on the road where they spend 99% of their time but due to the speed of them all cars get tested on the track by the opinion makers.
Makers can't make them lighter due to customer demand for electric everything, they can't make them softer as then they would suck on track so the opinion makers will hate them, they can't make them slower as they would loose pub bragging rights.
A recipe for s
t cars
So using stopwatch logic the BMW uber diesel would be more fun
I disagree with the stopwatch and felt the caterham was way more fun the a BMW uber diesel
So i think modern performance cars are pretty much irrelevant as they struggle on a track due to lard, have exceedingly stiff suspension to control the lard on a race track which makes them utterly useless on the road where they spend 99% of their time but due to the speed of them all cars get tested on the track by the opinion makers.
Makers can't make them lighter due to customer demand for electric everything, they can't make them softer as then they would suck on track so the opinion makers will hate them, they can't make them slower as they would loose pub bragging rights.
A recipe for s
t carsRYH64E said:
With something like my S1 Elise you can drive it pretty much flat out without getting up to license losing/prison speeds, its much more fun than my last car which had nearly 3 times the power and about twice the weight. The plus points of modern performance cars are the luxury and safety, but that comes at the expense of fun and the ability to actually use the performance available.
That's a very valid point. If I topped out 1,2 and third gears in the Z06 (or a stock ZR1) I would probably be looking at jail if i got caught. I changed the diff gearing in the ZR1 from 3:55 to a very low 4:10. This makes for massive fun and by the time I'm in third I'm not going at an insane speedRYH64E said:
With something like my S1 Elise you can drive it pretty much flat out without getting up to license losing/prison speeds, its much more fun than my last car which had nearly 3 times the power and about twice the weight. The plus points of modern performance cars are the luxury and safety, but that comes at the expense of fun and the ability to actually use the performance available.
A mate recently bought an absolutely lovely Exige S - had loads of extras too. He stacked it and very nearly killed himself. H'e back in a Porsche now. While something like a Lotus is obviously fun to fling around, a mistake can be pretty awful. Same in any car really but this was a fairly minor shunt that annihilated the car. I now we all hate the increase in weight but a little extra safety is nice to have.A mate of mine's mum died in an old shape Beetle - she hit a tree at a very low speed and it crumpled. Any modern car would have saved her. So it's not all bad this weight thing.
My current thinking is that something like a Boxster Spyder or Cayman R is the best balance between raw fun but with a bit of safety added.
Personally, it's not the speed that's the issue. Let's face it 80's Sierra Cosworths etc were fast, even by today's standards. The issue is that performance is packaged in a hugely refined (and huge) body, with enough mechanical / electronic intervention to make the performance just too easy.
Ok TVRs are not everyone's bag but my Chimaera is certainly quick but it has enough drama at 'normal' speeds to mean you're not always craving 100+mph.
Most modern cars are Huge, Heavy and Safe, and the pay-off is regular speed boredom.
Ok TVRs are not everyone's bag but my Chimaera is certainly quick but it has enough drama at 'normal' speeds to mean you're not always craving 100+mph.
Most modern cars are Huge, Heavy and Safe, and the pay-off is regular speed boredom.
Vladimir said:
A mate recently bought an absolutely lovely Exige S - had loads of extras too. He stacked it and very nearly killed himself.
IMO that only proves that the Exige wasn't right for him. Personally, i'd take my chances with a car that could bite, over the safe option, any day of the week.The thing with something like the lower powered Elises is that a good power to weight ratio, modest absolute power and fairly high aerodynamic drag gives you a car with plenty of low speed acceleration which rapidly tails off at higher speeds.
Less weight rather than more power is the logical way to improve performance in the speed range you can use legally (or possibly more representatively, the speed range where you will probably get away with a FPN rather than a summons).
This is less the case with the heavier and more powerful Elises (like mine, or even more so the supercharged cars) which you can't really drive flat out on the road without being uncomfortably into three figures on any longish straight, but it still applies when you compare them to something much heavier with a similar power to weight ratio.
Less weight rather than more power is the logical way to improve performance in the speed range you can use legally (or possibly more representatively, the speed range where you will probably get away with a FPN rather than a summons).
This is less the case with the heavier and more powerful Elises (like mine, or even more so the supercharged cars) which you can't really drive flat out on the road without being uncomfortably into three figures on any longish straight, but it still applies when you compare them to something much heavier with a similar power to weight ratio.
Fire99 said:
IMO that only proves that the Exige wasn't right for him. Personally, i'd take my chances with a car that could bite, over the safe option, any day of the week.
It's not the fact it "bit" (he's a very decent driver) - it's the fact that when it went wrong, the car caved in very badly. It's all very hairy chested and manly to want the most dangerous car in the World but for most people, a bit of a safety net is essential.I'd love a Caterham but I wouldn't take my family (one at a time!) anywhere in it if I had one. Which makes having one rather selfish. Once the kids leave home, I'll probably go for something very silly.
Vladimir said:
A mate recently bought an absolutely lovely Exige S - had loads of extras too. He stacked it and very nearly killed himself. H'e back in a Porsche now. While something like a Lotus is obviously fun to fling around, a mistake can be pretty awful. Same in any car really but this was a fairly minor shunt that annihilated the car. I now we all hate the increase in weight but a little extra safety is nice to have.
A mate of mine's mum died in an old shape Beetle - she hit a tree at a very low speed and it crumpled. Any modern car would have saved her. So it's not all bad this weight thing.
My current thinking is that something like a Boxster Spyder or Cayman R is the best balance between raw fun but with a bit of safety added.
In many new performance cars you think you are going fairly fast, look at the speedo and find you are actually going very fast, in the Elise you think you are flying, check the speedo and find you are only doing 50 or 60mph. A mate of mine's mum died in an old shape Beetle - she hit a tree at a very low speed and it crumpled. Any modern car would have saved her. So it's not all bad this weight thing.
My current thinking is that something like a Boxster Spyder or Cayman R is the best balance between raw fun but with a bit of safety added.
You would be much safer crashing a Porsche at 50mph than an Elise at the same speed, but my experience would suggest that you are much more likely to be doing a far higher speed in the Porsche when you run out of talent.
Driving the Elise is a bit like driving a go kart, it feels fast without getting silly.
Vladimir said:
It's not the fact it "bit" (he's a very decent driver) - it's the fact that when it went wrong, the car caved in very badly. It's all very hairy chested and manly to want the most dangerous car in the World but for most people, a bit of a safety net is essential.
I do have to question the wisdom of going fast enough on public roads that if you made a mistake, the result would be a big crash. Especially when putting other people's lives at risk, as that little mistake could hurt someone entirely innocent.From this point of view modern cars are a bit irrelevant - by the time you are having a bit of fun, you are travelling at significant speeds, so a small mistake becomes a big problem. And the electronic safety nets mean instead of a gradual deterioration in performance as the car suggests that perhaps you are being a little silly now, you can go right up to the edge. And then you fall from a greater height.
Plus, it's all well and good having a car that can stand up to a crash - but would it be better not to have the crash in the first place?
RenesisEvo said:
I do have to question the wisdom of going fast enough on public roads that if you made a mistake, the result would be a big crash. Especially when putting other people's lives at risk, as that little mistake could hurt someone entirely innocent.
From this point of view modern cars are a bit irrelevant - by the time you are having a bit of fun, you are travelling at significant speeds, so a small mistake becomes a big problem. And the electronic safety nets mean instead of a gradual deterioration in performance as the car suggests that perhaps you are being a little silly now, you can go right up to the edge. And then you fall from a greater height.
Plus, it's all well and good having a car that can stand up to a crash - but would it be better not to have the crash in the first place?
Are you saying you are less likely to crash in an older car? I can place my heavy BMW much more accurately on the road than I could my mk2 Golf GTi. And IMO is IS more fun. I tested a 111R once and didn't really get on with it.From this point of view modern cars are a bit irrelevant - by the time you are having a bit of fun, you are travelling at significant speeds, so a small mistake becomes a big problem. And the electronic safety nets mean instead of a gradual deterioration in performance as the car suggests that perhaps you are being a little silly now, you can go right up to the edge. And then you fall from a greater height.
Plus, it's all well and good having a car that can stand up to a crash - but would it be better not to have the crash in the first place?
Vladimir said:
I'd love a Caterham but I wouldn't take my family (one at a time!) anywhere in it if I had one. Which makes having one rather selfish. Once the kids leave home, I'll probably go for something very silly.
Yeah I understand that. It's certainly horses for courses, and I do have a very 'grown-up' car for escorting others around but steering back towards the OP's point, It does seem a bit pointless giving that big & safe car, mega power, when to get any sensation of it you'd need to be going faster than the Starship Enterprise.Fire99 said:
Yeah I understand that. It's certainly horses for courses, and I do have a very 'grown-up' car for escorting others around but steering back towards the OP's point, It does seem a bit pointless giving that big & safe car, mega power, when to get any sensation of it you'd need to be going faster than the Starship Enterprise.
Strangely going at silly speeds doesn't do it for me, even in the cotton wool covered BM. It's getting a corner (or even better corners) just right, nipping past a few cars at once, that sort of thing. Just going 150 is briefly thrilling but silly and excessively dangerous.Vladimir said:
Strangely going at silly speeds doesn't do it for me, even in the cotton wool covered BM. It's getting a corner (or even better corners) just right, nipping past a few cars at once, that sort of thing. Just going 150 is briefly thrilling but silly and excessively dangerous.
Hence the appeal of the Elise, the fun is in the corners at what are pretty low speeds - you can even have fun within the NSL on a twisty road, it's legal so it must be safe...Edited by RYH64E on Sunday 4th March 14:37
Vladimir said:
Are you saying you are less likely to crash in an older car?
No I'm not saying that. Arguably it's all down to the nut that holds the steering wheel. A lot of accidents come from a failure to observe and/or correctly plan for a hazard. What car you happen to be in largely being irrelevant. IMO.But an older car might encourage you to back off earlier/drive at less silly speeds. Example - at approximately 1 leptons, my old Sierra felt light, floaty and nervous. It was unpleasant and I didn't repeat the experiment. At the same speed my Focus feels solid and stable. It gives much more confidence, so I could be more inclined to drive it at higher speeds if I chose to, and I would be happier to do so, even though it's arguably more dangerous (airbags/crumple zones only helping me out, no-one else). But is this not the other side of the coin that is lower limits = more fun?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff