RE: In praise of difficult cars: Speed Matters
Discussion
pppppppppppppppp said:
Alias218 said:
This has long been my train of thought. I'd much rather a flawed car than a perfect car.
Take the Golf R - amazing car, superb, superlative, superlative... but boring. I look at it and don't hanker to drive one. It's too accomplished.
In a way I'm tempted to agree with you. I have a Golf R, and I love it. It is a superb all-rounder. However, you need the right road for it; one where you can't reach stupid speeds yet can use the power, where driving it hard isn't going to kill you or someone else.Take the Golf R - amazing car, superb, superlative, superlative... but boring. I look at it and don't hanker to drive one. It's too accomplished.
My first car was a 1L metro and while it was a heap of rust, it handled surprisingly well. It wasn't quick, but it was well-suited to the narrow and winding roads near where I grew up north of Glasgow.
A few years ago I drove the same roads in a much quicker car and it didn't present the challenge that it did with the Metro. I was somewhat more daring/stupid back then, mind you.
I wouldn't want a car where you had to drop down gears to get up hills on motorways now though. Or one which would lead to certain death if you crashed it.
Overall, I'll stick with the Golf.
Itsallicanafford said:
its funny, i was thinking the very same thins this morning while driving an M3 CSL into work (my brothers car). Never in the history of motoring has a gearbox been more maligned...but the sheer laugh-out-loud ferocity of the full bore upshifts combined with the auto-blipping downshifts playing the engine like a musical instrument through the carbon airbox, warts and all, the experience was simply sublime....
I've had all manner of fast cars but the CSL was my favourite. The gearbox is tricky but you do learn to drive around it (part of the fun) also, when cold, the engine has a wonderful crackle around 2200rpm (10 years on and I still remember this!) which disappeared as it warmed up.This article is so true, I never thought twice about selling my F-Type, M5, AMG GLE etc... but have hung onto an ageing Discovery 3 for no other reason that I love driving the old tank!
My 1999 Honda NSX Type S has bags of character - one being the manual steering. Most NSX of this vintage have an innovative electric PAS system which, by all accounts, is great. Mine doesn't - it was de-selected at the time of construction, making it (so I understand) highly unusual.
Sure, I need to remember to apply a very good antiperspirant deodorant (Secret Clinical Strength) before driving, but that aside it is a very communicative without being a pain in the ar$e.
Sure, I need to remember to apply a very good antiperspirant deodorant (Secret Clinical Strength) before driving, but that aside it is a very communicative without being a pain in the ar$e.
Bad design and/or flawed execution are not endearing a car to me, no matter what vintage. But there are a couple of non-mainstream features I really love, like frameless windows and the mentioned dog-leg gearbox. And less visible technical solutions like 2-valve DOHC with twin-spark ignition, and dry sumps, and transaxle gearboxes. With ever better sensor-computer-actuator miniaturization and integration a lot is possible and made acceptable which would be awful if done purely mechanically. And knowing that the mechanical basis is sound, even before applying the electronic glacing on it, is also quite satisfactory for me.
Some of this will depend on how good the good bits are as opposed to how bad/annoying the flawed bits are. I had an Alfa 156 2.5 24V V6 which was a good example. Fabulous performance with an engine note that I could never tire of, stunning looks and a very nice place to sit in and listen to the soundtrack. Terrible ride control, non-existent de-misting (very, very irritating on cold damp mornings) poor fuel consumption and a throttle position that caused my right ankle to feel as if it was dislocated. The ride was either too soft or wallowy or it bounced and pitched disconcertingly on poor roads. On one occasion it bottomed out several times on the way home I stopped to have a look under the front end as I was convinced the engine undershield must have come adrift……… it hadn’t. The radio reception was poor too which was annoying. But……… it looked so good and was finished in Nuvola Blue which changed colour in the light and that engine, the sound, the performance absolutely addictive……… It was almost enough to overcome all the other flaws.
j4r4lly said:
Some of this will depend on how good the good bits are as opposed to how bad/annoying the flawed bits are. I had an Alfa 156 2.5 24V V6 which was a good example. Fabulous performance with an engine note that I could never tire of, stunning looks and a very nice place to sit in and listen to the soundtrack. Terrible ride control, non-existent de-misting (very, very irritating on cold damp mornings) poor fuel consumption and a throttle position that caused my right ankle to feel as if it was dislocated. The ride was either too soft or wallowy or it bounced and pitched disconcertingly on poor roads. On one occasion it bottomed out several times on the way home I stopped to have a look under the front end as I was convinced the engine undershield must have come adrift……… it hadn’t. The radio reception was poor too which was annoying. But……… it looked so good and was finished in Nuvola Blue which changed colour in the light and that engine, the sound, the performance absolutely addictive……… It was almost enough to overcome all the other flaws.
I have noticed with Alfa's (and Fiats) that the suspension is completely variable from day to day and It is something I can't explaine. Some days it rough as hell, crashing and rattling over the smallest of bumps and other days it is smooth and controlled. No other brand does this. Why?I love driving a difficult car. It makes it so much more of an event, and 'mastering' it to produce a really safe, systematic, smooth and swift drive is very satisfying.
For example. Dad's 986 Boxster S was a really easy car to drive. You could jump straight in and it wasn't at all difficult or intimidating to drive. You could take it for a blast on some country roads and have a great time. However, the only issue I had was that it required little to no effort to drive well (subjective).
On the contrary, the TVR drives some something older it's 22 year age. There's flex in the chassis and body. The steering isn't very direct and there's some play. The pedals and gear box have some real weight to them, and the power delivery isn't as linear or smooth as the Boxster. Infact, it surprisingly arrives in a bit of a lump higher up the rev range. Using Dan's phrase of 'keeping it on the boil' is perfect as that's exactly what you need to do to get the best of of it, as it can bog down a bit if you don't use the revs/gears to their full effect.
It's not as easy to drive, but because you put more effort in, it feels like you get a lot more out of it.
For example. Dad's 986 Boxster S was a really easy car to drive. You could jump straight in and it wasn't at all difficult or intimidating to drive. You could take it for a blast on some country roads and have a great time. However, the only issue I had was that it required little to no effort to drive well (subjective).
On the contrary, the TVR drives some something older it's 22 year age. There's flex in the chassis and body. The steering isn't very direct and there's some play. The pedals and gear box have some real weight to them, and the power delivery isn't as linear or smooth as the Boxster. Infact, it surprisingly arrives in a bit of a lump higher up the rev range. Using Dan's phrase of 'keeping it on the boil' is perfect as that's exactly what you need to do to get the best of of it, as it can bog down a bit if you don't use the revs/gears to their full effect.
It's not as easy to drive, but because you put more effort in, it feels like you get a lot more out of it.
This is why I drive a 12 year old Subaru. The interior and level of trim is basic in the extreme. It's noisy, the ride is harsh, it's very thirsty and it needs a lot of maintenance to keep running. A 1.9 TDi golf would be a better car 90% of the time.
But the Subaru makes a great noise, the power delivery is addictive and it's got so much character. The only thing it will be replaced by is another 10 year old Subaru...
But the Subaru makes a great noise, the power delivery is addictive and it's got so much character. The only thing it will be replaced by is another 10 year old Subaru...
I keep finding most modern cars very dull. The rental Qashqai in Spain was a case in point; it did nothing badly but its best points were the air conditioning and the cruise control.
My daily driver is a 1989 Land Rover CSW; no air conditioning and no cruise control, but it does have excellent visibility, very versatile and engaging. This is a keeper.
Now in the garage I have a Morgan 4/4 1600; again no air conditioning and no cruise control; its talents are a long way from the Land Rover, but again its a keeper.
To keep a car for a long time you need to "connect" with it. Connecting with 'white goods' is just weird.
My daily driver is a 1989 Land Rover CSW; no air conditioning and no cruise control, but it does have excellent visibility, very versatile and engaging. This is a keeper.
Now in the garage I have a Morgan 4/4 1600; again no air conditioning and no cruise control; its talents are a long way from the Land Rover, but again its a keeper.
To keep a car for a long time you need to "connect" with it. Connecting with 'white goods' is just weird.
pppppppppppppppp said:
Alias218 said:
This has long been my train of thought. I'd much rather a flawed car than a perfect car.
Take the Golf R - amazing car, superb, superlative, superlative... but boring. I look at it and don't hanker to drive one. It's too accomplished.
In a way I'm tempted to agree with you. I have a Golf R, and I love it. It is a superb all-rounder. However, you need the right road for it; one where you can't reach stupid speeds yet can use the power, where driving it hard isn't going to kill you or someone else.Take the Golf R - amazing car, superb, superlative, superlative... but boring. I look at it and don't hanker to drive one. It's too accomplished.
My first car was a 1L metro and while it was a heap of rust, it handled surprisingly well. It wasn't quick, but it was well-suited to the narrow and winding roads near where I grew up north of Glasgow.
A few years ago I drove the same roads in a much quicker car and it didn't present the challenge that it did with the Metro. I was somewhat more daring/stupid back then, mind you.
I wouldn't want a car where you had to drop down gears to get up hills on motorways now though. Or one which would lead to certain death if you crashed it.
Overall, I'll stick with the Golf.
GTis are 10 a penny, no-one says "Oh, I'd much rather have a Focus ST than a boring RS" and yet we get this drivel about the R every day.
It's boring in that it's a Golf, but so is the GTi.
On a twisty road the GTi won't see where the R went and you'll be readjusting your sense of how fast a family estate car can go.
One thing that is becoming increasingly true, though, is that most modern cars are too easy to drive and too fast for the ever restricted roads around (my son's 10 year old Hyundai will break the speed limit anywhere without any effort).
You can argue that you need to buy a car with more 'character', but no-one makes one anymore...
My last car was a Mazda RX8 - it had an engine rebuild, it did 22MPG, I couldn't get my dive gear in it, it was getting rusty and yet... it was a delight everytime I sat in it...
The R is better in nearly every respect, but it's just a car, like everything else vaguely practical these days and even cars which should exist only to be exciting...
M
I used my 1999 Nissan S14 daily for 10 months until I couldn't handle it any more, felt a plonker rolling up to work in a shirt and tie popping flames. Now thats tucked up in the garage and I drive a 2001 BMW 530i, better in every way. Can't wait to get the Nissan back on the road though..
Cambs_Stuart said:
This is why I drive a 12 year old Subaru. The interior and level of trim is basic in the extreme. It's noisy, the ride is harsh, it's very thirsty and it needs a lot of maintenance to keep running. A 1.9 TDi golf would be a better car 90% of the time.
But the Subaru makes a great noise, the power delivery is addictive and it's got so much character. The only thing it will be replaced by is another 10 year old Subaru...
Same here. The only thing is that the hot hatches I compare my car to are getting so very fast now that I'm feeling the need for more power. Stupid I know, but part of the pleasure has always been knowing that the old Subaru could keep up with more modern offerings. That's no longer true for me. But the Subaru makes a great noise, the power delivery is addictive and it's got so much character. The only thing it will be replaced by is another 10 year old Subaru...
turboflutter said:
I used my 1999 Nissan S14 daily for 10 months until I couldn't handle it any more, felt a plonker rolling up to work in a shirt and tie popping flames. Now thats tucked up in the garage and I drive a 2001 BMW 530i, better in every way. Can't wait to get the Nissan back on the road though..
Ha ha! Yes! I have experienced similar ignominy!yellowstreak said:
turboflutter said:
I used my 1999 Nissan S14 daily for 10 months until I couldn't handle it any more, felt a plonker rolling up to work in a shirt and tie popping flames. Now thats tucked up in the garage and I drive a 2001 BMW 530i, better in every way. Can't wait to get the Nissan back on the road though..
Ha ha! Yes! I have experienced similar ignominy!Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff