Have we got it all wrong? Are cars too fast now?

Have we got it all wrong? Are cars too fast now?

Author
Discussion

TameRacingDriver

18,094 posts

273 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Mr Tidy said:
Really?

I much prefer chucking my Z4C around than my E46 - get your ar*e by the rear wheels and man up FFS!
Yes really. The e46 seemed to feel like a better handling car to me. I've seen it mentioned before on here as well. I don't need to man up either (as the guy who ended up in a field in his Mx5 while hooning with me would likely testify). There are plenty of reviews of the z4 which state that it's handling could be better.

Your e46 is a compact? My old one was a normal coupe. So I don't know if that handles differently what with the possible longer wheelbase...

Don't get me wrong though I enjoyed owning the z4c. Lovely car. Just not the last word in driving dynamics, imo.

Edited by TameRacingDriver on Sunday 24th September 11:44

RemaL

24,973 posts

235 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
If cars are to fast!! really on Pistonheads SPEEDMATTERS !!!

Yes many are quick but the bulk of the public want crappy 1ltr eco boxes.

With regards to fast, get a bike. I have one that's rather nippy. I have fast cars but the bike's in another league

I cannot see a issue with fast cars. But the OP saying he has a Mclaren and saying about cars being fast. he's lucky he has the cash for the Mclaren.

Plenty of expensive cars that are not as quick. Just buy that

CABC

5,589 posts

102 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Jaroon said:
XFR owner with characterful exhaust. 6 mile commute, redline in 1st, 2nd, 3rd every journey, late odd work shifts and dangerously brief warm up. Travel under 2 bridges. Every journey a joy, accelerative on the dual carriage way, wonderfully sonorous under bridges, thought provoking in the damp, generally not license losing territory but my 26 year clean record does come under an acceptable threat level imo. 650/700bhp and I may call it quits, oh and it must sound right. Mums nets ---->way,
lovely car, had one for a few days.
By Mumsnet i presume you mean the stability control that keeps it on the road? wink

"too fast", well, as a driver it's nice to be in control (and responsible) for the power on hand.


Arnold Cunningham

3,773 posts

254 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
That's a really interesting point. I'm not really a motoring enthusiast, but I love great engineering, which includes cars. I have quite a few friends who are really into their cars - but open the bonnet and they don't even know where the windscreen washer fluid goes! I always argue being an enthusiast is more comprehensive than paying for a car you like, but knowing a bit about them and the maintenance of them too. But maybe I'm just a bit old school in that regard.

Back to the original point, I think there is some merit in it. I have an old RS6 and it's both lovely and a complete nightmare. Lovely because the midrange torque on it is neck snappingly fun and makes a great tourer on the continent etc. But also a nightmare because it's so easy to both go obscenely fast and, even worse, go so much faster or accelerate quicker than another road user might reasonably expect you to. So when I drive it, I drive it really quite carefully. Whereas my old MG TF, it's quite easy to have some fun in it without breaking any limits or frankly doing anything particular silly at all. It's just more fun to drive, despite nothing on it even being close to the calibre of the RS6.

neil-935ql said:
This post is going to sit like a turd in a punch bowl but I don't actually deem any of those cars to be enthusiasts cars. I just see them as fast cars. I'm sure the owners are very enthusiastic about them but that doesn't necessarily make them motoring enthusiasts.

Great analogy ! Loving that one . I reckon enthusiasts cars can be anything that takes there fancy , must be 'clubs' and car meets for all types of vehicles , from 2CV to Aston Martin

skyrover

12,674 posts

205 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
Buy a TVR OP

Your problem isn't speed, it's an univolving car.

circuit junky

4 posts

80 months

Sunday 24th September 2017
quotequote all
speed can mean different things:
- absolute speed
- cornering speed
- % of speed you can carry in a corner compared to expert driver
- level of speed where your full attention is required to get round a corner

RS6 to cover the ground or 610R on a damp track for amusement?

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Mr Tidy said:
RobM77 said:
Interesting. I have to admit I never had an issue with mine. It was a standard Coupé with the 19" M Sport wheels.
Very interesting - standard Z4Cs came with 18" wheels. confused
Yes, I know they did?! Mine was standard in every way other than the optional 19s.

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
TameRacingDriver said:
Mr Tidy said:
Really?

I much prefer chucking my Z4C around than my E46 - get your ar*e by the rear wheels and man up FFS!
Yes really. The e46 seemed to feel like a better handling car to me. I've seen it mentioned before on here as well. I don't need to man up either (as the guy who ended up in a field in his Mx5 while hooning with me would likely testify). There are plenty of reviews of the z4 which state that it's handling could be better.

Your e46 is a compact? My old one was a normal coupe. So I don't know if that handles differently what with the possible longer wheelbase...

Don't get me wrong though I enjoyed owning the z4c. Lovely car. Just not the last word in driving dynamics, imo.

Edited by TameRacingDriver on Sunday 24th September 11:44
I loved the feel of the Z4C up to 7/10ths, but I must admit, I found that if you pushed it then you got too much understeer in the dry and very neutral if not slightly oversteerey handling in the wet. There's no doubt in my mind that the 3 series handles better - I went straight from the Z4C to an E90 and thought that immediately, but from memory I'm sure the same applies to the E46, E36 and E30. I always just assumed they put more effort into the 3 series because they sold more of them.

oceanview

1,511 posts

132 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
TameRacingDriver said:
Mr Tidy said:
Really?

I much prefer chucking my Z4C around than my E46 - get your ar*e by the rear wheels and man up FFS!
Yes really. The e46 seemed to feel like a better handling car to me. I've seen it mentioned before on here as well. I don't need to man up either (as the guy who ended up in a field in his Mx5 while hooning with me would likely testify). There are plenty of reviews of the z4 which state that it's handling could be better.

Your e46 is a compact? My old one was a normal coupe. So I don't know if that handles differently what with the possible longer wheelbase...

Don't get me wrong though I enjoyed owning the z4c. Lovely car. Just not the last word in driving dynamics, imo.

Edited by TameRacingDriver on Sunday 24th September 11:44
I loved the feel of the Z4C up to 7/10ths, but I must admit, I found that if you pushed it then you got too much understeer in the dry and very neutral if not slightly oversteerey handling in the wet. There's no doubt in my mind that the 3 series handles better - I went straight from the Z4C to an E90 and thought that immediately, but from memory I'm sure the same applies to the E46, E36 and E30. I always just assumed they put more effort into the 3 series because they sold more of them.
I thought the same really, when I got my Z4C- which is why I put on new Suplex springs and Bilstein dampers, along with droplinks f&r plus polybushed the f&r arbs.
After that, I had a proper alignment done at a motorsport place, who know the Z4 well- they completely disregard the BMW settings as they are crap- the Z4 needs more camber on the front and less at the rear.

With all this done ( it was already on non run-flats, which goes without saying!) its transformed- feels so much more alive, responsive and just much "better".

Interestingly, the original shocks were pretty much done- particularly the front off-side- and the car had only done 62000, I know a lot of it motorway as well.

Kawasicki

13,091 posts

236 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
oceanview said:
I had a proper alignment done at a motorsport place, who know the Z4 well- they completely disregard the BMW settings as they are crap- the Z4 needs more camber on the front and less at the rear.

With all this done ( it was already on non run-flats, which goes without saying!) its transformed- feels so much more alive, responsive and just much "better".
How does it handle when you carry out a 155mph emergency lane change?

oceanview

1,511 posts

132 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Kawasicki said:
How does it handle when you carry out a 155mph emergency lane change?
I wouldn't know- I live in the UK ,so I wouldn't dream of going over 70mph- but at this speed, it slots in lovely right in front of Bob and Mavis in their Jazz.

Rawwr

22,722 posts

235 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Jaroon said:
XFR owner with characterful exhaust. 6 mile commute, redline in 1st, 2nd, 3rd every journey
Oil temp in my car only starts twitching into usable after a good 10 miles.

PixelpeepS3

8,600 posts

143 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Jumpingjackflash said:
Maybe the chase for more power, faster, bigger, wider and louder is all wrong?
No, its not.

where would mankind be without the desire to push the envelope ?

Stop being such a girl smile

Gary C

12,484 posts

180 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
PixelpeepS3 said:
Jumpingjackflash said:
Maybe the chase for more power, faster, bigger, wider and louder is all wrong?
No, its not.

where would mankind be without the desire to push the envelope ?

Stop being such a girl smile
Your right of course, but it was fun when pushing the envelope was more achievable because cars were slower, with no electronic aids and the roads were free enough to fully exploit them.

My last really quick car was wonderful, but far to fast to use fully on the road these days as I would now be banned.

Pica-Pica

13,821 posts

85 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
PixelpeepS3 said:
Jumpingjackflash said:
Maybe the chase for more power, faster, bigger, wider and louder is all wrong?
No, its not.

where would mankind be without the desire to push the envelope ?

Stop being such a girl smile
How are girls supposed to be then? Where would we be without Amelia Erhart?

Kawasicki

13,091 posts

236 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Nanook said:
Kawasicki said:
How does it handle when you carry out a 155mph emergency lane change?
Do you think the standard set up is optimized for 155mph chicanes?
Not optimised for that alone, but it would be considered.

CABC

5,589 posts

102 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Kawasicki said:
Nanook said:
Kawasicki said:
How does it handle when you carry out a 155mph emergency lane change?
Do you think the standard set up is optimized for 155mph chicanes?
Not optimised for that alone, but it would be considered.
where do these compromises balance out?
if i can have a more responsive car up to 80mph but have high speed stability compromised then i'm happy too.
Although if that is the case it's useful to be well aware of these points.
are these even technical trade-offs? or is it that Reggie and Mavis prefer a less communicative car? (or bit of both).
genuinely interested. is there a Dummies guide to this? some of the more technical articles get very techy very quickly.
something written for Nigel Mansell rather than Nico Rosberg...

Kawasicki

13,091 posts

236 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
CABC said:
Kawasicki said:
Nanook said:
Kawasicki said:
How does it handle when you carry out a 155mph emergency lane change?
Do you think the standard set up is optimized for 155mph chicanes?
Not optimised for that alone, but it would be considered.
where do these compromises balance out?
if i can have a more responsive car up to 80mph but have high speed stability compromised then i'm happy too.
Although if that is the case it's useful to be well aware of these points.
are these even technical trade-offs? or is it that Reggie and Mavis prefer a less communicative car? (or bit of both).
genuinely interested. is there a Dummies guide to this? some of the more technical articles get very techy very quickly.
something written for Nigel Mansell rather than Nico Rosberg...
It is a very interesting topic. I don't have much time, but I will type a few words!...

The steering stability of the car in normal (non limit driving) is a fundamental characteristic of how a car feels to drive. It is also know as "linear understeer". It is mainly an outcome of the position of the centre of gravity...but other important influences are the tyre stiffnesses and the front and rear axle self steering movements (kinematics and compliances) under lateral loads, steering ratio, etc.

Then there is the limit balance, which occurs in the non linear region of the tyres, right up to and beyond the limit, which is what most people think of whenever under or oversteer is discussed.

Then there are all the details, that when tuned properly make or break the driving experience. Where to start? Precision due to lateral stiffness of the axles, friction/damping in the steering system, steering system stiffness, camber stiffness, even aero has a remarkable effect.

Stability itself is obviously a compromise. Too much yaw stability and the car won't respond in time, too little yaw stability and the car will need a very careful measured input and probably plenty of well timed steering corrections to stay on course.

What does communicative mean? Is it communicative when I have to be careful how I steer? Where I have to monitor/watch very carefully how the car responds to small changes in steer angle? Or is it communicative when I feel the texture of the road through the seat and/or the steering wheel? Or when I lift off that I feel the cornering line tighten instantly, that I have authority over the attitude of the car?

Look at what manufacturers do with four wheel steering systems. They try to satisfy high speed stability, but also make the car agile at lower speeds. Even then they are usually in full stable mode by 80mph. Reggie and Mavis dislike surprises, or high cognitive loads for that matter.

It is a huge topic. I know what I like, I like what I like because of how I drive. You probably have a different driving style/environment, so you might prefer something different to me. There is no right and no wrong...cars can be tuned to most tastes. Most people think high levels of yaw agility at high speed are downright "sh!t your pants" scary. Many cars (not just German) are tuned for stability at Autobahn type speeds, i.e. flat out.

Yes there are technical trade-offs. But most customers are happy with where cars are tuned today. There are plenty of modern cars that feel agile at low speed, yet are pretty rock solid stable at high speed.



RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
Perhaps with more knowledge than me you could shed some light on this, but one aspect I look for in a car is linearity of response at all slip angles. I'll explain: I've noticed a tendency with many modern cars to be very darty to initial steering response, which gives an illusion of sportiness, but then once you start to build the speed up and lean on the car more, the dartiness completely vanishes and leaves you with oodles of understeer, often laughably so. I first noticed this when I had an Alfa 156 JTS for a few weeks many years ago back when they were new, but since I've noticed it on many more cars, many without sporting pretensions at all. The type of cars I like don't have this characteristic and remain linear throughout: my 3 series for example, or my single seater track car.

My question is: is the dartiness caused by initial toe out (that's what it feels like), which then shifts to toe-in with suspension deflection, whereas my 3 series keeps its geometry more stable across suspension deflection values? It's the only explanation I can think of, but the reason I ask the question is that my knowledge in this area is very limited.

thanks!

CABC

5,589 posts

102 months

Monday 25th September 2017
quotequote all
thanks for the post. i'm going to re-read it a couple of times!
it's an interesting topic to understand because i suspect the engineers are sometimes sending false messages and that what i feel is communication may not be the truth.

I'm in a minority, i want cars to feel more race car like. formula ford, Lotus, Caterham etc.
However, most cars today feel planted, neutral but secure. Heavy. Comfortable over distance for sure. If things got out of hand i'd probably not know enough about it and wouldn't respond in time. ESC would keep it together. The Caterham talks to you and you can sort it out at the limit. An XJR with esc fully off would bite me hard i suspect.

Have you driven the GT86? that relatively civilised car reminds me of old school hot hatches. Unlike a Cayman it's chassis is chattering away very early on, you pay attention much earlier and way before actually losing grip. how did they achieve that and how 'real' is it?

another example is the Elise. OK, so the tyres are semi slick, warm weather specials. It always amuses me that a car that corners like pretty much nothing else on the warm dry road starts sending nervous signals through the seat in the wet or when temps approach zero. Without there being any close calls i'm 'told' to ease off and let all the other cars speed by, most of who are probably completely oblivious to any change of grip in their own car. Those cars would probably feel as secure to the driver right up to the point ESC kicked-in or the car lost control, with that famous phrase "i don't know what happened, it just spun for no reason..."