Whats the most annoying thing about your car?
Discussion
2019 Gtr - although much better than the earlier models, the heat that comes off the transmission tunnel in traffic is fairly noticeable, makes ac a must especially in the warmer months .
No auto dip mirror in reverse is abit annoying too!
Nav is crap, but Apple CarPlay works well generally.
No auto dip mirror in reverse is abit annoying too!
Nav is crap, but Apple CarPlay works well generally.
Ioniq hybrid.
Adaptive cruise control is pretty dim-witted. It'll catch up to the vehicle ahead then brake hard rather than easing off the accelerator nice and early. Also gets itself into a panic when in the leftmost lane of a motorway passing a queue building on the exit slip road, making the poor sod behind think I'm brake testing him...
The key fob has large and easily pressed buttons, and consequently it'll unlock the car from within my pocket when knocked or if I bend down.
Adaptive cruise control is pretty dim-witted. It'll catch up to the vehicle ahead then brake hard rather than easing off the accelerator nice and early. Also gets itself into a panic when in the leftmost lane of a motorway passing a queue building on the exit slip road, making the poor sod behind think I'm brake testing him...
The key fob has large and easily pressed buttons, and consequently it'll unlock the car from within my pocket when knocked or if I bend down.
Gad-Westy said:
Some of you seem to love a bit of range! I don’t honestly know if I’ve ever even eeked 400miles out of a tank from anything I’ve ever owned. In fact a couple of my cars wouldn’t hit triple figures though I admit that was a tad annoying!
Me too. It must be the diesel generation. I've driven many diesels up and down the country with work but I've never owned one so anything over the 300 miles per tank mark is happy days for me. The tiny tank in the m135i was a joke but I'm loving the extra range on my G30.Peter76 said:
M140i - power being inhibited next time you pull away after the traction control kicks in (which is often when it's wet). Not just annoying but dangerous when you need to pull away at a roundabout quickly.
I found this got better with familiarity, and also binning the Pilot Super Sport tyres for Pilot Sport 4s transformed the car in the kind of cooler, damp conditions we get at this time of year (with no perceptible trade off in grip during summer / dry conditions for enthusiastic road use - can't comment on track though). They are lasting better too, as a bonus.Also helps if it's not in Sport/Sport+ mode as the throttle mapping is much more linear, so it's easier to modulate the power.
When all is said and done, it's a relatively small and light 2WD car with an open diff, and 500 NM of torque from 1,500 RPM. It's always going to need a bit of care to get off the line, unless the roads are dry and warm.
Edited by Limpet on Thursday 14th November 09:55
toon10 said:
Gad-Westy said:
Some of you seem to love a bit of range! I don’t honestly know if I’ve ever even eeked 400miles out of a tank from anything I’ve ever owned. In fact a couple of my cars wouldn’t hit triple figures though I admit that was a tad annoying!
Me too. It must be the diesel generation. I've driven many diesels up and down the country with work but I've never owned one so anything over the 300 miles per tank mark is happy days for me. The tiny tank in the m135i was a joke but I'm loving the extra range on my G30.
B5 S4 - Everything genuine is becoming/has become NLA. Making it hard to keep them on the road these days. Why can't Audi be more like BMW/Porsche in their parts department? 
Mk3 Mondeo - heated screen - although the idea is nice, seeing those little wiggly lines all the time grates on me.
Mk3 Mondeo - heated screen - although the idea is nice, seeing those little wiggly lines all the time grates on me.
rayyan171 said:
You'd think it would be the diesel generation but we only get around 500 miles, sometimes slightly less, from a 100L tank, on the E70. The A6 is better, gets around 450-500 (possibly) from 80L. Both 3L, the Audi is a petrol.
That's pretty poor - my E46 320td could manage over 600 miles on a 63 litre tank!And the replacement 123d could do over 500 miles on a 55 litre tank.
I've moved over to straight 6 petrols now, but my E90 330i can easily do over 400 miles on one tank.
[quote=SkodaIan]The nannying "change gear now" symbol on the dashboard of my Octavia.
quote]
Same on my IQ... except if you change up a gear when the light flashes you find the engine struggles and labours. I try and ignore it and change when I hear the engine note change, but that f
king light keeps flashing away until I do - and having owned lots of older cars I am pre-programmed to note anything that flashes a warning on the bloody instrument cluster.
quote]
Same on my IQ... except if you change up a gear when the light flashes you find the engine struggles and labours. I try and ignore it and change when I hear the engine note change, but that f
king light keeps flashing away until I do - and having owned lots of older cars I am pre-programmed to note anything that flashes a warning on the bloody instrument cluster.Gad-Westy said:
Some of you seem to love a bit of range! I don’t honestly know if I’ve ever even eeked 400miles out of a tank from anything I’ve ever owned. In fact a couple of my cars wouldn’t hit triple figures though I admit that was a tad annoying!
Some weeks I am doing Norwich to London, then Norwich to Birmingham, then London again later in the week. I have done it in M3s, S4's etc. and the novelty of filling up 3 times in one week, often at 6.00am in the rain and the wind with it 0ºc outside soon wears off. Haha
cerb4.5lee said:
You've over stepped the mark now for me, we are done! 
I know, it is really has surprised me. Mine has a DTUK 3 channel box on it, rolling road showed, 238hp. Plus it feels nice an light upfront. I bet there is no more than 20kg between the 20d and 30d, but it feels a lot when it is up front. Using my old AP22 race tech meter to time 0-60mph it is showing 6.4 seconds. So it never feels lethargic, in fact, knowing it is a 2 litre diesel always impresses.
Having said all that, I did make an offer on a 540i Touring over the weekend. Haha
We couldn't get there figure wise, but I'm sure I will have one by next spring.
HoHoHo said:
My car often thinks there’s something behind and close when I’m reversing and stops dead rather than letting me reverse...........when there’s nothing there 
First time I ever experienced that my focus rs stopped me from crunching my garage wall, foot slipped off the clutch, shot forward. Car stopped with about an inch to spare.....: ) RobM77 said:
TREMAiNE said:
cerb4.5lee said:
When I read posts like this I do wonder why I run a V6 engine when it is only returning 22mpg...when I could have a V8 with a much bigger capacity that is better on fuel! 
It's crazy how economical big engines can be these days. Back when I owned an RX-8 getting 18mpg, I never would have expected that one day I'd have a 5.0 V8 with nearly double the power, almost thrice the torque and yet 50% better fuel economy and a third of the VED!Get into a V8 while you still can!
There are far more factors at play than engine size. My last three track cars prove that. All three were driven identically, i.e. flat out, and the most economical has a 3.5L V8 and weighs 960kg, the next up, albeit close, had a 2.0L n/a 4 and weighed 490kg, and the least economical by an enormous margin had a 2.0L s/c 4 cyl and weighed 670kg. Of course, if all other factors are identical, for example comparing a 330d with a 320d, then smaller is better, but like with the lack of correlation between car performance and engine size, there are so many other variables at play if the cars are different.Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 13th November 14:23
RobM77 said:
TREMAiNE said:
cerb4.5lee said:
When I read posts like this I do wonder why I run a V6 engine when it is only returning 22mpg...when I could have a V8 with a much bigger capacity that is better on fuel!
It's crazy how economical big engines can be these days. Back when I owned an RX-8 getting 18mpg, I never would have expected that one day I'd have a 5.0 V8 with nearly double the power, almost thrice the torque and yet 50% better fuel economy and a third of the VED!Get into a V8 while you still can!
There are far more factors at play than engine size. My last three track cars prove that. All three were driven identically, i.e. flat out, and the most economical has a 3.5L V8 and weighs 960kg, the next up, albeit close, had a 2.0L n/a 4 and weighed 490kg, and the least economical by an enormous margin had a 2.0L s/c 4 cyl and weighed 670kg. Of course, if all other factors are identical, for example comparing a 330d with a 320d, then smaller is better, but like with the lack of correlation between car performance and engine size, there are so many other variables at play if the cars are different.Edited by RobM77 on Wednesday 13th November 14:23
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff