Modern Cars- No Character!?

[mrnoisy78]

Ahbefive said:

Seems odd that a few cars have this issue, it's not something I have ever felt and I also don't see thousands of reports of this (there must be hundreds of thousamds of cars with this feature), just a very few saying it felt a bit odd, some saying cured by changing tyre pressures or getting the alignment done. Anyway....isn't that character?

Over 100 I think on the Mk3 owners forum mate - they even did a survey on it whose data was sent to Ford.
Lots of people on rsoc too. Not related to alignment, or tyre pressures (although that obviously won't help) - those are always the first things people suggest who haven't done any background reading, along with torque steer...
No offense intended btw, but I've answered the same questions 50+ times on the forums, just do some more digging and you'll see it's not just the odd person reporting it.
Can PM you links if you want.

If you believe what people say, it does appear that some cars are affected worse than others, but given that everyone drives differently, that may account for those reports.
I didn't enjoy the car, found myself constantly watching for the fidgeting steering - and having had a big off 5 years ago, that's not a characteristic I want in a car - if I'm going to crash I'd prefer it to be down to my input, not the car's if you see my point!

[Gemaeden]

The car in the photo is not a sports car.

[Nicmenicnic]

I had a gallardo that i sold and bought a huracan...... Biggest regret ever... Should have just bought a rs6 and kept my 08 gallardo

[CABC]

Nicmenicnic said:

I had a gallardo that i sold and bought a huracan...... Biggest regret ever... Should have just bought a rs6 and kept my 08 gallardo

What was wrong with H exactly? Haven't driven either but interested in real life experience.
And why RS6 for a daily? Fast I know, but lacking character?

[Alpinestars]

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

[SidewaysSi]

True. The Focus RS also fell apart at ECOTY.

[Alpinestars]

SidewaysSi said:

True. The Focus RS also fell apart at ECOTY.

Yep. But it was a great car when it was first reviewed. Funny that.

[white_goodman]

I'm still trying to put my finger on why some cars have character and some don't. Of the ones that I have owned, it's roughly a 50/50 split.

Cars with character: Fiat Cinquecento Sporting, Peugeot 205 GTi, MG ZR, E30 BMW 325i, Corrado VR6, Impreza WRX, Fiat 500, Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.0, Mercedes C250TD, MINI Cooper

The ones that didn't: Vauxhall Astra, Mazda MX5 NB, mk4 Golf GTi, mk5 Polo TDI, Chrysler Sebring V6, Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic

I think it's harder to find a factory fresh car with character. The Merc perhaps doesn't deserve to be on that first list but being 14 years old and with 218k on the clock and a few dents and scratches, it certainly had some character and it had that Mercedes-ness feel about it which the old A-Classes certainly lacked and may not be so evident in the new ones (I haven't driven a new Mercedes recently).

The MX5 is perhaps a little surprising. It looked great, was my first RWD car and my first convertible and only a year old at the time I owned it but never got under my skin like the knackered 205 GTi that preceded it. My dad bought a new mk3.5 MX5 a few years ago and that certainly has the character that I expected an MX5 to have. My dad had a mk5 Golf TDI a few years ago that I really liked, enjoyed driving and was going to take it off his hands but it didn't work out. I wouldn't say it had character though, so I'm not sure if ability necessarily comes into it. My mum's basic mk1 Ford Ka certainly had character. I had no desire to own one but it was a distinctive-looking little car and surprisingly fun to drive. The European road trips in my WRX were memorable because of the car, my Polo would have certainly got me to where I was going in a similar amount of time in just as much comfort but not made for such a memorable trip.

I don't like that we've got into the whole RWD vs FWD and AWD thing again. It's OK to have a preference but I don't think that you can say that only RWD cars have character. Drive a classic Mini, Alfa Romeo Sud, mk1 Golf GTi, R5 GTT or 205 GTi (or any 80s FWD hot hatch to be honest) and tell me it doesn't have character. Likewise, an Audi Quattro, Delta Integrale, Sierra/Escort RS Cosworth or Subaru Impreza Turbo/WRX have bags of character.

My current MINI feels completely unique to sit in, although the switchgear ergonomics are questionable. I like the control weights (steering, gearshift, clutch), which have a BMW kind of weight and are heavier than most overlight small cars. I'm assuming I have EPAS (2010) but the steering feel is probably better than in any of my cars since my unassisted Cinq Sporting and 205 GTi. It does give feedback from the road surface and is leagues ahead the horrible artificial-feeling steering in my wife's old Fiat 500. The character can't be in the engine, as I have driven a Peugeot 207 with the same engine and it was horrid!

I find it difficult to believe that the new Fiesta ST and Focus RS don't have any character (whether positive or negative). Two new cars that I would actually quite like to try. The fast VAG stuff is good but devoid of any character apart from the Golf R32. However, in my experience, the only new car that I have driven in the last 10 years that has character fresh from the factory was the Mustang GT that I mentioned earlier.

Is there also any bias in here? Would we ever consider anything from the ultimate "white goods" manufacturer Hyundai/Kia to have any character?

Edited by white_goodman on Thursday 25th May 20:03

[white_goodman]

Alpinestars said:

Yep. But it was a great car when it was first reviewed. Funny that.

Surely that's going to happen when you compare it to cars costing as much 6 times as much though? In context against its main rivals at that price point though it does rather better. Can you expect a 30k car to compete on equal terms with a 200k car?

[Alpinestars]

white_goodman said:

Alpinestars said:

Yep. But it was a great car when it was first reviewed. Funny that.

Surely that's going to happen when you compare it to cars costing as much 6 times as much though? In context against its main rivals at that price point though it does rather better. Can you expect a 30k car to compete on equal terms with a 200k car?

That's missing the point. ECOTY is supposed to be about the best car. The most expensive car doesn't usually win. For me, a DC2 is more fun than a Gallardo. The Gallardo was some 70 times more expensive.

[s m]

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

What other cars in that class were reviewed against it in ECOTY though? I.e. 4-seater sports coupe/saloons at that price point?


Devil's advocate perhaps.....but are you saying a 911 always wins to keep the flow of factory testers coming? Or is that naive?

[white_goodman]

Alpinestars said:

That's missing the point. ECOTY is supposed to be about the best car. The most expensive car doesn't usually win. For me, a DC2 is more fun than a Gallardo. The Gallardo was some 70 times more expensive.

OK but that's not really fair is it? Give a car manufacturer an 100k budget and they're going to be able to make you a better car than if you give them 30k. It's not reasonable to expect the significantly cheaper car to be the better car. If they limited the price of entrants to 30k and the Focus lost then fair enough (although I seem to remember it beat the more expensive M2)? I certainly wouldn't choose a 30k Ford over a 100k+ Ferrari, Porsche, McLaren, Aston etc and neither would I expect you to.

To be fair the Golf GTI Clubsport S did pretty well but then personally if I was buying a 2 seater, it wouldn't be a 4 cylinder, FWD Golf hatchback no matter how good it is. In the real world where you haven't got 100k to blow on a new car, have to meet your needs with one car and need 5 seats and a boot then surely the Focus RS has to be one of the better cars for the money?

Given your example, fair enough but ask another 10 people and 9 of them would probably choose the Gallardo over the DC2. So who's right? I don't think you could say regardless of preference that either car doesn't have any character though.

[Alpinestars]

white_goodman said:

Alpinestars said:

That's missing the point. ECOTY is supposed to be about the best car. The most expensive car doesn't usually win. For me, a DC2 is more fun than a Gallardo. The Gallardo was some 70 times more expensive.

OK but that's not really fair is it? Give a car manufacturer an 100k budget and they're going to be able to make you a better car than if you give them 30k. It's not reasonable to expect the significantly cheaper car to be the better car. If they limited the price of entrants to 30k and the Focus lost then fair enough (although I seem to remember it beat the more expensive M2)? I certainly wouldn't choose a 30k Ford over a 100k+ Ferrari, Porsche, McLaren, Aston etc and neither would I expect you to.

To be fair the Golf GTI Clubsport S did pretty well but then personally if I was buying a 2 seater, it wouldn't be a 4 cylinder, FWD Golf hatchback no matter how good it is. In the real world where you haven't got 100k to blow on a new car, have to meet your needs with one car and need 5 seats and a boot then surely the Focus RS has to be one of the better cars for the money?

Given your example, fair enough but ask another 10 people and 9 of them would probably choose the Gallardo over the DC2. So who's right? I don't think you could say regardless of preference that either car doesn't have any character though.

People might choose a Gallardo because it has the cache. Not because it's more fun. Throwing extra money at something doesn't make it a better drive. That's the whole point of "new cars don't have character". Many examples I could quote of the old car (normally cheaper) being better.

Taking your stance to its logical conclusion, the most expensive car would be the best.

[Alpinestars]

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

What other cars in that class were reviewed against it in ECOTY though? I.e. 4-seater sports coupe/saloons at that price point?


Devil's advocate perhaps.....but are you saying a 911 always wins to keep the flow of factory testers coming? Or is that naive?

The 911s that win are usually of the GT3 ilk. And usually fantastic cars. So that's a win on merit in my book. Naive is to think that a tester is always objective. Magazines need to sell. If I were a tester, no one would buy most new cars, or my magazine. I'd have to sex it up.

[white_goodman]

Alpinestars said:

People might choose a Gallardo because it has the cache. Not because it's more fun. Throwing extra money at something doesn't make it a better drive. That's the whole point of "new cars don't have character". Many examples I could quote of the old car (normally cheaper) being better.

Taking your stance to its logical conclusion, the most expensive car would be the best.

Well generally yes but engineering talent and ingenuity comes into it too of course. Looking at the winner in that test (911R?), they already started with the sports car chassis and the flat 6 engine and what is still a 70k-80k car. No necessity to provide a big boot or rear seats. The standard 911 is already a good car. It doesn't take too much to make it into a great one and they can afford to take the best pick of components and owners won't blanch at the replacement costs of parts, as it's commensurate with the list price and being a limited edition, it's unlikely to be a car used as a daily.

The Focus RS on the other hand is based on a fairly average FWD hatch. I think for the money the transformation that the engineers have made to the car without making it ridiculously expensive is more impressive than what Porsche has done with the R. The RS is likely to be used as a daily and it'll be serviced in the same dealerships as Fiestas and Mondeos and a Focus RS owner isn't going to accept 4 figure bills for replacement parts.

I'm not saying the Focus RS is better (it probably isn't) but just trying to put some perspective on it. Fine, if you have 200k (not sure how much a 911R is) then the Porsche is the better car but that's not much consolation if you're budget is 30k and you need something that seats 4, has a decent boot and needs to have reasonable running costs as your daily. Is the Focus RS the best all-round new car for 30k? Possibly...

By the way I have nothing against the DC2. I like them and would love to try one. Did it ever win ECOTY though (I know it won their FWD shootout)? Is it better than a Gallardo? Maybe, maybe not. That's only your opinion though, which is no more relevant or irrelevant than my own. I don't think that the DC2 being a better car than the Gallardo is a generally accepted opinion though and for many the shove of the V10 would be enough to tip it in the Lambo's favour...

Edited by white_goodman on Thursday 25th May 21:29

[Alpinestars]

white_goodman said:

Alpinestars said:

People might choose a Gallardo because it has the cache. Not because it's more fun. Throwing extra money at something doesn't make it a better drive. That's the whole point of "new cars don't have character". Many examples I could quote of the old car (normally cheaper) being better.

Taking your stance to its logical conclusion, the most expensive car would be the best.

Well generally yes but engineering talent and ingenuity comes into it too of course. Looking at the winner in that test (911R?), they already started with the sports car chassis and the flat 6 engine and what is still a 70k-80k car. No necessity to provide a big boot or rear seats. The standard 911 is already a good car. It doesn't take too much to make it into a great one and they can afford to take the best pick of components and owners won't blanch at the replacement costs of parts, as it's commensurate with the list price and being a limited edition, it's unlikely to be a car used as a daily.

The Focus RS on the other hand is based on a fairly average FWD hatch. I think for the money the transformation that the engineers have made to the car without making it ridiculously expensive is more impressive than what Porsche has done with the R. The RS is likely to be used as a daily and it'll be serviced in the same dealerships as Fiestas and Mondeos and a Focus RS owner isn't going to accept 4 figure bills for replacement parts.

I'm not saying the Focus RS is better (it probably isn't) but just trying to put some perspective on it. Fine, if you have 200k (not sure how much a 911R is) then the Porsche is the better car but that's not much consolation if you're budget is 30k and you need something that seats 4, has a decent boot and needs to have reasonable running costs as your daily. Is the Focus RS the best all-round new car for 30k? Possibly...

By the way I have nothing against the DC2. I like them and would love to try one. Did it ever win ECOTY though (I know it won their FWD shootout)? Is it better than a Gallardo? Maybe, maybe not. That's only your opinion though, which is no more relevant or irrelevant than my own. I don't think that the DC2 being a better car than the Gallardo is a generally accepted opinion though and for many the shove of the V10 would be enough to tip it in the Lambo's favour...

Edited by white_goodman on Thursday 25th May 21:29

Never driven a 911R so can't comment. Money was never on the Elise's side, but it doesn't stop it being a real drivers' car.

How much is costs to service and how many people or how many cans of baked beans a car can carry is irrelevant to the drive. And neither does how difficult or impressive an engineering feat a car is.

The early Gallardo's v10 shove in the back is a bit underwhelming . You have to move to an LP for that. But even that doesn't make it a great car to drive for me.

Sometimes, less is more.

[white_goodman]

Fair enough but more often than not, the car that someone chooses to drive is not purely selected on driving criteria. The drive may be high up the list but other basic criteria such as practicality or running costs need to be met first. That doesn't mean that something that meets those criteria can't have character and offer a thrilling drive. Stuff like the Delta Integrales, Sierra/Escort RS Cosworths, Impreza turbos and Evos are prime examples of this, being relatively affordable to buy and run when new and giving more expensive "performance" cars a bloody nose in the process. Insurance costs being the biggest downside. But we're kind of arguing the same point now. Generally in life with all products/services, you get what you pay for and all things being equal, the more expensive product should be better, particularly when the price disparity is so large (e.g. DC2 vs. Gallardo). Of course there are exceptions though.

[s m]

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

What other cars in that class were reviewed against it in ECOTY though? I.e. 4-seater sports coupe/saloons at that price point?


Devil's advocate perhaps.....but are you saying a 911 always wins to keep the flow of factory testers coming? Or is that naive?

The 911s that win are usually of the GT3 ilk. And usually fantastic cars. So that's a win on merit in my book. Naive is to think that a tester is always objective. Magazines need to sell. If I were a tester, no one would buy most new cars, or my magazine. I'd have to sex it up.

Yes, summed up well, ......they have to 'sex it up' and a £125k GT3 is always going to be more sexy than something like a Lancer EVO when it comes to magazine buyers

[Alpinestars]

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

What other cars in that class were reviewed against it in ECOTY though? I.e. 4-seater sports coupe/saloons at that price point?


Devil's advocate perhaps.....but are you saying a 911 always wins to keep the flow of factory testers coming? Or is that naive?

The 911s that win are usually of the GT3 ilk. And usually fantastic cars. So that's a win on merit in my book. Naive is to think that a tester is always objective. Magazines need to sell. If I were a tester, no one would buy most new cars, or my magazine. I'd have to sex it up.

Yes, summed up well, ......they have to 'sex it up' and a £125k GT3 is always going to be more sexy than something like a Lancer EVO when it comes to magazine buyers

For magazine buyers, yes. You've picked a bad example as the EVO is a great car .

[s m]

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Alpinestars said:

s m said:

Ahbefive said:

This is like the N/A vs Turbo or FWD vs RWD threads, its totally subjective. What one person thinks has character to someone else its totally boring and vice versa.

Cars with good reviews get slated by people that have an alternative view and cars which were mever rated are suggeated as being quite something. It could go on amd on and round in circles forever.

.

It does depend on how much faith you place in the reviewer(s) as well please......but at least you generally know for most of the magazine reviews

a/ they actually drove the car
b/ they drove a reasonably new standard one
c/ it was often reviewed against similar cars in its class at the time.

I'll generally place more store in mag reviews from seasoned journos than Joe Average on a forum who's driven " a mate's 100k mile example with big wheels and tired suspension "

You mean the same journos that need to sell magazines to keep earning a living?

An example, the M2 is generally well reviewed. Including by EVO magazine, which rated it very highly when it came out. Come ECOTY time, and suddenly, up against other machines, it apparently starts to "show its flaws". The flaws are totally obvious on an isolated drive by "the average Joe". It didn't need it to be put up against other cars for anyone who does any kind of enthusiastic driving to realise that.

Naive.

What other cars in that class were reviewed against it in ECOTY though? I.e. 4-seater sports coupe/saloons at that price point?


Devil's advocate perhaps.....but are you saying a 911 always wins to keep the flow of factory testers coming? Or is that naive?

The 911s that win are usually of the GT3 ilk. And usually fantastic cars. So that's a win on merit in my book. Naive is to think that a tester is always objective. Magazines need to sell. If I were a tester, no one would buy most new cars, or my magazine. I'd have to sex it up.

Yes, summed up well, ......they have to 'sex it up' and a £125k GT3 is always going to be more sexy than something like a Lancer EVO when it comes to magazine buyers

For magazine buyers, yes. You've picked a bad example as the EVO is a great car .

Oh I know....that's why I picked it