What is a drivers car to you?
Discussion
ZeroGroundZero said:
Well, I think the opening condition regarding the clutch is very subjective, as for me a clutch pedal is essential for it being a "driver's car".
More involvement over the gear change, involvement how the gear engages, the required attention needed for choice of gears for the upcoming road conditions and intentions with the car, or even the ability to remove 'drive' and coast (for what ever reason that may be), the point being the driver involvement is such that you are in more control, which for me is an essential part of what I would consider a "driver's car".
Personally I enjoy the characteristics of a high powered rear wheel drive, manual 6-speed box and a rear mechanical limited slip differential.
We share a very similar view and those ingredients are my personal go to for a car. More involvement over the gear change, involvement how the gear engages, the required attention needed for choice of gears for the upcoming road conditions and intentions with the car, or even the ability to remove 'drive' and coast (for what ever reason that may be), the point being the driver involvement is such that you are in more control, which for me is an essential part of what I would consider a "driver's car".
Personally I enjoy the characteristics of a high powered rear wheel drive, manual 6-speed box and a rear mechanical limited slip differential.
I've also over the last couple of years(similar to what Leins was alluding to) got a lot of enjoyment from a low(ish) powered FWD Hatchback. It wouldn't be my normal go to but it has raised many smiles on the right roads for me for sure.
RobM77 said:
I can see why this is the case in those specific examples, but is it really true generally? Your logic assumes that function is implicitly always at odds with enjoyment.
To explore that we have to answer a more basic question first,namely:What is a "car"?
Broadly, if we define a car as simply:
"a form of non-human powered device to transport people and goods from A to B"
then i'm not really sure of actual "functionality" that also directly helps improve how a car drives or feels to a driver.
eg:
Power steering = less effort to drive = less feedback to driver
More seats = more space for humans = heavier, and bigger = poorer handling
Radio cassette = entertainment for occupants = more weight again
Sun roof = nice light cabin = higher CofG
For me, and I'm well aware this is a stupid definition, but it's a car with appreciably more power than tyre.
Trying to expand why I think this, I've come up with the following reasoning. For me, I like driving any car, cars that handle badly or are a bit crap etc. are still fun to learn and 'hustle' along, and cars that are precise weapons of road devouring potency are obviously enjoyable too.
For me the fun bit is the 'on the edge' sensation, or rather, learning where that is and being in control of keeping it within those limits, or exceeding them if that's fun. For example driving in the snow is fun because you have to measure all of your inputs and be much more in touch with braking and steering than normal.
Any car can be steered unsympathetically enough that it will understeer, or enough speed can be carried that steering input is limited. Steering is quite obviously an input that you need to use your own feel (regardless of how much info the car gives you) to make the most of.
Almost any car could provide enough braking force to lock the wheels (I imagine any car but not 100% sure). So braking is another input that you need to deploy with feel.
Not every car has enough raw power that tyres can be eviscerated unless care is used. Those that do give you the other input that you need to deploy with feel.
For me it's a more complete experience when you need to exercise skill with all the inputs you have available, basically.
I know modern performance vehicles have ludicrous power figures now and should thus tick all of my boxes, so I suppose that's when having ridiculously high limits somewhat blunt the 'driving' experience simply because the limits are so high you don't need to exercise any feel until you're at ludicrous speeds which I personally don't feel comfortable with on the road.
So there you go, I'm a power crazed moron who doesn't like modern crazy power vehicles!
Trying to expand why I think this, I've come up with the following reasoning. For me, I like driving any car, cars that handle badly or are a bit crap etc. are still fun to learn and 'hustle' along, and cars that are precise weapons of road devouring potency are obviously enjoyable too.
For me the fun bit is the 'on the edge' sensation, or rather, learning where that is and being in control of keeping it within those limits, or exceeding them if that's fun. For example driving in the snow is fun because you have to measure all of your inputs and be much more in touch with braking and steering than normal.
Any car can be steered unsympathetically enough that it will understeer, or enough speed can be carried that steering input is limited. Steering is quite obviously an input that you need to use your own feel (regardless of how much info the car gives you) to make the most of.
Almost any car could provide enough braking force to lock the wheels (I imagine any car but not 100% sure). So braking is another input that you need to deploy with feel.
Not every car has enough raw power that tyres can be eviscerated unless care is used. Those that do give you the other input that you need to deploy with feel.
For me it's a more complete experience when you need to exercise skill with all the inputs you have available, basically.
I know modern performance vehicles have ludicrous power figures now and should thus tick all of my boxes, so I suppose that's when having ridiculously high limits somewhat blunt the 'driving' experience simply because the limits are so high you don't need to exercise any feel until you're at ludicrous speeds which I personally don't feel comfortable with on the road.
So there you go, I'm a power crazed moron who doesn't like modern crazy power vehicles!
Others have said it - a car that is engaging and fun even at modest speeds regardless of its configuration. For me, it doesn't NEED to be uncomfortable and compromised - but some of my candidates are. The more compromised the car the fewer occasions you will choose to use it. In no particular order (as they say):
Lotus Elise
Clio 182 Trophy
Alpine A110
Caterham (almost any midrange one}
Suzuki Swift Sport (previous version)
Peugeot 205/309GTI
Given the interest I think a poll would be a good idea - the hot hatch one was interesting. Probably best to limit it to vaguely affordable models rather than rare or exotic cars that most won't have driven.
Lotus Elise
Clio 182 Trophy
Alpine A110
Caterham (almost any midrange one}
Suzuki Swift Sport (previous version)
Peugeot 205/309GTI
Given the interest I think a poll would be a good idea - the hot hatch one was interesting. Probably best to limit it to vaguely affordable models rather than rare or exotic cars that most won't have driven.
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 13th December 14:52
Edited by bcr5784 on Friday 13th December 15:06
Great handling and brakes. I am not after an extreme car such as an Ultima, excellent though they are.
I like a car that I can be fun on track and be very drivable on the road. OTOH,I also have a Jeep Wrangler which is amazing for one purpose...climbing rocks.
I don't know of a car that does everything equally well.
I like a car that I can be fun on track and be very drivable on the road. OTOH,I also have a Jeep Wrangler which is amazing for one purpose...climbing rocks.
I don't know of a car that does everything equally well.
I suppose the above post has a point.... Is a Suzuki Jimny a driver's car? It's woefully underpowered and seems to have body roll that is more comparable to a boat than a car.
But in the end I expect the reason people buy it is not to get to A and B but to enjoy bumbling over hills and country lanes with lots of mud.
That to me makes it a driver's car.
But in the end I expect the reason people buy it is not to get to A and B but to enjoy bumbling over hills and country lanes with lots of mud.
That to me makes it a driver's car.
There is no such thing as a drivers car.
If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're not much of a driver.
If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're not much of a driver.
Fort Jefferson said:
There is no such thing as a drivers car.
If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're no much of a driver.
The latter part is true, but the initial point isn't. If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're no much of a driver.
A car primarily designed to get from A to B as cheaply as possible is distinct from a car that is designed to be fun first and foremost. There is a middle ground that appeals to both, but to say there is such thing as a driver's car is just not the case.
Fort Jefferson said:
There is no such thing as a drivers car.
If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're not much of a driver.
That's rubbish.If you are any sort of decent driver, you should be able to adapt your driving to suit the vehicle you're driving, whether it's front, rear or four wheel drive, with the engine in the front, middle or rear. If you can't, you're not much of a driver.
Cambs_Stuart said:
You can adapt your style to get from A to B in any car, but some are more fun/rewarding than others. I can get from A to B much faster in my barge on almost any journey, but it's a lot more fun in the clio.
of course, i thought we'd all pretty much agreed that.an RS6 covers the ground as fast as anything. a fast car, not a driver's car though...
Cambs_Stuart said:
SidewaysSi said:
That's rubbish.
You can adapt your style to get from A to B in any car, but some are more fun/rewarding than others. I can get from A to B much faster in my barge on almost any journey, but it's a lot more fun in the clio. We're not discussing the driver's ability to seek enjoyment in anything he or she drives.
That's two very different concepts.
Hence, Si is absolutely correct that within the context of this discussion, the above post is indeed rubbish.
Cambs_Stuart said:
Surely enjoyment is the defining characteristic of a drivers car.
What you enjoy will vary, depending on preferences and circumstances.
Maybe it is that enjoyment is intended in some, but not other cars? Some are simply designed as very functional tools, such as a Toyota Corolla. What you enjoy will vary, depending on preferences and circumstances.
Cambs_Stuart said:
Surely enjoyment is the defining characteristic of a drivers car.
What you enjoy will vary, depending on preferences and circumstances.
Read the thread title.What you enjoy will vary, depending on preferences and circumstances.
We're discussing the subtleties of what makes a driver's car.
It's really not a hard concept to grasp. Well, it shouldn't be, at any rate
Edited by TheJimi on Monday 16th December 12:41
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff