Modern Cars- No Character!?

[Sa Calobra]

Citroen Berlingo = character

[white_goodman]

TameRacingDriver said:

Cheers. I enjoyed those, but confused by the mk4. It has received some rave reviews for its handling but the second video says it's too soft? I think I'd definitely have it over the gt86 though, it seems like it would be more fun, slightly faster and is a convertible which goes a long way.

Here's one more. A UK-based one and the guy doing the video is a self-confessed MX5 nut. Basically he says

ND>NC>NA>NB

I haven't driven the ND yet but would expect it to be the best, as it combines the best elements of the mk3 (more power, comfort and refinement) and the mk1 (lean looks and lightness). This seems to go along with my findings, as my NB was a nice enough car but never really got under my skin (it had the extra weight and comforts of the mk3 but without the power).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhfwYgBvd_E

[V8RX7]

CABC said:

can't agree. the mk3 engines were a little flat, esp compared to a zingy 1.6, but the car was great.

Did you come to the MK3 after years on MK1 / 2 ownership ?

There aren't many who did, who prefer the MK3

[CABC]

V8RX7 said:

Did you come to the MK3 after years on MK1 / 2 ownership ?

There aren't many who did, who prefer the MK3

yes.
10yrs 1.8 NA, 2 years early mk3 2L, now with a 1.6 NA track beast (SC)

favourite is the 1.6. just glorious, wish i'd got that earlier and resisted the 1.8 'because it had more power'. Wrong.

mk3 is different, more grown up. My point was that some modest mods brought it to life making it great fun and more usable.
But overall an 1.6 is one of the very best cars over the last 30yrs. it would certainly be in my own top 10 and certainly in the 25 most important cars of the last half-century. Oh, and it has character!

[DoubleD]

Monkeylegend said:

rockin said:

Were old cars somehow magically better than modern cars? Of course not.

I don't think people are saying that newer cars aren't better in terms of performance, reliability, build quality etc, but the fact that older cars tend to be more temperamental is in part what gives them the "character" missing in mass produced modern cars, IMO of course.

Edited by Monkeylegend on Thursday 1st June 14:01

So you would be happier with your modern car if it broke down a little more often?

[CABC]

DoubleD said:

So you would be happier with your modern car if it broke down a little more often?

Only if it can be fixed at the roadside with a pair of tights and a club hammer

[V8RX7]

DoubleD said:

So you would be happier with your modern car if it broke down a little more often?

I did have this discussion with a local millionaire's daughter.

He asked me to talk her out of her MGB GT as he was concerned about her taking it to Uni

She loved it as it had character - he was worried she'd get hurt either from an accident or after it broke down.

He was offering to buy her any car and she was having none of it.

I asked her if she appreciated it's character as much whilst she was waiting for a Recovery truck at the side of the motorway.

[TameRacingDriver]

white_goodman said:

Here's one more. A UK-based one and the guy doing the video is a self-confessed MX5 nut. Basically he says

ND>NC>NA>NB

I haven't driven the ND yet but would expect it to be the best, as it combines the best elements of the mk3 (more power, comfort and refinement) and the mk1 (lean looks and lightness). This seems to go along with my findings, as my NB was a nice enough car but never really got under my skin (it had the extra weight and comforts of the mk3 but without the power).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhfwYgBvd_E

Thanks, I watched this last night, was enjoyable to watch - but if I was going to nit pick, I'd say it was a shame they didn't compare the various cars like for like. They had a 1.8 Mk1, a 1.6 Mk2, a 2.0 Mk3 and a 1.5 Mk4. I would have been a bit more interested to see 1.8/1.8 6-sp/2.0/2.0 respectively or 1.6/1.6/1.8/1.5 just to give an idea of the real difference in performance. It was not exactly a surprise to see a 1.6 NB as the slowest and poorest to drive in this case. Might have been a different story if the NB was a 1,8 6-speed Sport or an RS. I'll take his modded Mk1 over them all though

[300bhp/ton]

V8RX7 said:

I did have this discussion with a local millionaire's daughter.

He asked me to talk her out of her MGB GT as he was concerned about her taking it to Uni

She loved it as it had character - he was worried she'd get hurt either from an accident or after it broke down.

He was offering to buy her any car and she was having none of it.

I asked her if she appreciated it's character as much whilst she was waiting for a Recovery truck at the side of the motorway.

In this day and age, there is no reason why it shouldn't be highly reliable though. Fickle carbs and points where the most likely bug bears on such cars. That and neglect. But if you have the money to maintain one well and do some sensible upgrades like electronic ignition, then there really isn't much to actually go wrong...

[Monkeylegend]

DoubleD said:

Monkeylegend said:

rockin said:

Were old cars somehow magically better than modern cars? Of course not.

I don't think people are saying that newer cars aren't better in terms of performance, reliability, build quality etc, but the fact that older cars tend to be more temperamental is in part what gives them the "character" missing in mass produced modern cars, IMO of course.

Edited by Monkeylegend on Thursday 1st June 14:01

So you would be happier with your modern car if it broke down a little more often?

I am very happy for modern mass produced cars to be reliable with no character.

Defining what you think gives character to a car is not the same as saying that's what you want

[havoc]

DoubleD said:

Monkeylegend said:

rockin said:

Were old cars somehow magically better than modern cars? Of course not.

I don't think people are saying that newer cars aren't better in terms of performance, reliability, build quality etc, but the fact that older cars tend to be more temperamental is in part what gives them the "character" missing in mass produced modern cars, IMO of course.

So you would be happier with your modern car if it broke down a little more often?

As opposed to modern cars with far too many electronics and too many emissions controls on the engines - yep, they're a paragon of reliability!



I know what you're getting at - the reality is a simple nat-asp petrol engine now is more reliable than ever, on average. But all the gubbins around it in most cars - turbo's, DPFs, EGR valves, dual-mass flywheels, 20 different electronic sensors which shouldn't be necessary... - are NOT always reliable. And that's before you get to adaptive suspension, DCT gearboxes and all the non-engine electronics!

I'd be loath to have a modern turbo-diesel out of warranty. There's no way in HELL I'd have a modern high-spec Rangie or Audi without a warranty...and they're so-called premium brands. BMW's reputation seems to have suffered too. And even Honda aren't the paragons of reliability they used to be...



Oh - and I disagree with monkeylegend's assertion that temperamentality = character. Only (as I think i said several pages ago) for old, bearded English masochists with far too many tools...

[DoubleD]

Be interesting to see if anyone had any average miles per brake down by year of production.

I know that modern cars will show up a few warning lights(often with no actual fault), but I reckon that they probably actualy come to a stop a lot less than older cars.

[V8RX7]

havoc said:

Oh - and I disagree with monkeylegend's assertion that temperamentality = character.

Agreed - the MX5 is possibly the most characterful modern car and it's also very reliable

[aaron_2000]

Modern cars aren't the problem (Stick with me).

The average driver doesn't car about cars, and you can't do something well if you don't care/have no interest in it.

For someone who has no interest in driving, and therefore probably isn't very good at it, driving a BMW 5 Series with heavy steering is no good.

So BMW pander to their biggest buyer, the guy who doesn't care about driving, and therefor is probably not very good at it, we'll call him Dave.

So they make their cars easier to drive, with light steering, vague controls and lots of stuff to keep you from feeling the road, so Dave will be happier driving.

Dave likes these kind of cars because he hates driving, and is probably terrible at it, these cars making driving easier.

When Dave finds these cars too hard to keep driving, BMW make their cars even less connected so Dave feels happy again.

Eventually they add electronics that make it so Dave doesn't have to drive at all. Dave is happy to pay £500pm for 3 years on PCP with only £4000 down because it means he doesn't really have to do anything while driving.

It's when you don't have to really do anything that cars become appliances. With electric PAS, radar cruise control, Autopilot and all that.

So its the average car buyer that's cause the average car to become dull, and of course this means the hot versions will be dull too. We also have safety regs and EU Emissions to blame, but Dave has nothing to do with that.

Modern cars are dull appliances because that's what people want, which leaves us to go live in the 90's and drive something old. For me, cars after 2007 just don't interest me.

[DoubleD]

Poor old Dave, he gets the blame for everything.

[coppice]

'Become dull '? There never , ever was a golden era where every car was 'interesting ' and 'characterful' - it's just rose tinted vision that makes people think so . Take the paragon of 60s glamour , the Vauxhall Victor 101- ghastly; 70s - Nissan Bluebird (impossibly dull , awful to drive ) or 80s (Renault 14 anybody ?) ;90s try a Tipo (you won't thank me ) . All sold in shedloads and people were proud to drive them- quite why is a mystery but I'm sure if some of the 30 somethings on here met some of their heroes they 'd be shocked ,and not in a good way- such as applying the brakes on a Mk 1 Golf Gti or trying to steer just about any family saloon pre pas.

[TameRacingDriver]

Agree with some of the posters above. Lack of reliability does not make for character. Frankly that's a silly assertion.