Do you prefer usable bhp or more bhp than you need?

[8IKERDAVE]

I was thinking a similar thing on my way in to work this morning. I have an Audi S5 and decided to enjoy the power a bit this morning. Although fairly swift and I love the car, I wouldn't class it as 'fun'. Pinning the hell out of a little Clio 172 or similar albeit at lower speeds gives much more driver satisfaction. Probably why 90% of the time I just waft around in comfort mode and don't feel the need to spank it at every given opportunity.

[av185]

Leon R said:

av185 said:

nickfrog said:

av185 said:

.

The icing on the cake of course is that manuals are far more involving than autos and much more skills are required to extract the bestperformance and therein lies the enjoyment.

I don't find that a manual requires that much more skill, even on track.
I can also see why someone would enjoy the driving experience of an auto more.

I think it's a personal and subjective choice.

But the mere fact you have to take your hand of the wheel whilst steering in order to change gear means a manual takes far more skill than an auto especially when driving at the limit. This is even before you start factoring the coordination and input required between a physical gearchange and clutch action.

Flappy paddle every gearchange is the same by pulling a lever requiring very little skill and no coordination whatsoever.

Neither is particularly 'skillful' really, one is harder (because you have to do more) than the other but claiming that one is something that only skilled drivers can do is dumb.

I had to drive a car with no syncro about 15 miles a few years ago which was easily the most difficult thing I have had to drive but I wouldn't claim that it took some ungodly amount of skill to get the hang of.

I clearly never claimed manual gearboxes require greater skillsets to drive than autos in normal driving. But manual gearboxes require far greater skillsets than autos to extract the best performance from the car especially when approaching or on the limit.

To claim otherwise would be dumb.

[nickfrog]

av185 said:

But manual gearboxes require far greater skillsets than autos to extract the best performance from the car especially when approaching or on the limit.

As I said, IME the delta in skill needed is small, particularly in relation to far more critical car control skills on track (where you can approach the limit). Let's put it this way, people who can genuinely pedal a car on its limits of lat grip and traction for s sustained amount of laps will not suddenly require far greater skills if they're in a manual. But on the other hand, I would agree that your average road driver may find it easier to approach those limits in an auto when they start track driving.

So, how's the GT4 on track?

[av185]

nunpuncher said:

I find I enjoy cars with around 250 - 350 at 1300kg - 1500kg.

I did have a 911tt with c450 and I just didn't enjoy it. Well, it was exciting when you felt it was safe enough to "explore" but that was rare so the normal experience went between being terrified I would lose my license and being frustrated that other people were on the roads, in the way and not driving like a dick (like what I would have done if they weren't there).

I didn't take any joy from bimbling about knowing I had all the power on tap as at normal speeds it was pretty uninteresting and sounded rubbish as well. I now have a C4 with c300bhp and find I enjoy it more of the time. It still has enough shove, it can still do silly speeds but when I get a clear section of Scottish B road I just feel I'm enjoying more of the car without thoughts of prison or death.

OP. You've been here before with your e90 M3. These big over powered modern cars are pointless on UK roads.

Due to customer demands the new 992 TTS although having 650ps and 800nm torque is way more focused as a drivers car than previous gens. Despite its power this makes it more involving and enjoyable to drive on fast roads than previous gens and in fact it is now half way to becoming a Porsche GT seriously knocking at the door of the 700PS GT2 RS and the TTS is as rapid in most situations only partly because it is 4wd v the RS 2wd.

As with any rapid car it is the ability to engage the driver at LOWER speeds as well as warp speeds which differentiates this from its few competitors.

[Leon R]

nickfrog said:

av185 said:

But manual gearboxes require far greater skillsets than autos to extract the best performance from the car especially when approaching or on the limit.

As I said, IME the delta in skill needed is small, particularly in relation to far more critical car control skills on track (where you can approach the limit). Let's put it this way, people who can genuinely pedal a car on its limits of lat grip and traction for s sustained amount of laps will not suddenly require far greater skills if they're in a manual. But on the other hand, I would agree that your average road driver may find it easier to approach those limits in an auto when they start track driving.

Pretty much my thoughts too.

[av185]

Haha Nickfrog btw the GT4 is currently at my OPC for a running in service and minor recall...

[FNG]

For me, light weight and agility combined with low power, a 16v engine and short gearing.

Then you can potter around not being noticed, or you can go and thrash the thing hard, and get to run through more than two gears before you're going insanely fast or arriving behind the next traffic jam, and not having your fun at antisocial speeds.

I've got a puma 1.7 at the moment and it's good fun through 1st, 2nd and 3rd. By the time you've been in 4th for a couple of seconds it's time to back off on most roads or you're approaching the next bend faster than the brakes can deal with it. Arguably the 1.4 could have been the better choice for rural road enjoyment.

Flipside, I had a E91 330i Touring auto a few years ago which was decently brisk, lots of grip, reasonable steering weight but not much feedback. It was impressive at speed, covered ground quickly, carried good corner speed, but it was far from entertaining. By the time the steering was telling me what it was doing, I was travelling far far too quickly for the distance I could stop in. It never gave a tangible reward for driving it quickly but sensibly, so what's the point?

[FNG]

av185 said:

Leon R said:

av185 said:

nickfrog said:

av185 said:

.

The icing on the cake of course is that manuals are far more involving than autos and much more skills are required to extract the bestperformance and therein lies the enjoyment.

I don't find that a manual requires that much more skill, even on track.
I can also see why someone would enjoy the driving experience of an auto more.

I think it's a personal and subjective choice.

But the mere fact you have to take your hand of the wheel whilst steering in order to change gear means a manual takes far more skill than an auto especially when driving at the limit. This is even before you start factoring the coordination and input required between a physical gearchange and clutch action.

Flappy paddle every gearchange is the same by pulling a lever requiring very little skill and no coordination whatsoever.

Neither is particularly 'skillful' really, one is harder (because you have to do more) than the other but claiming that one is something that only skilled drivers can do is dumb.

I had to drive a car with no syncro about 15 miles a few years ago which was easily the most difficult thing I have had to drive but I wouldn't claim that it took some ungodly amount of skill to get the hang of.

I clearly never claimed manual gearboxes require greater skillsets to drive than autos in normal driving. But manual gearboxes require far greater skillsets than autos to extract the best performance from the car especially when approaching or on the limit.

To claim otherwise would be dumb.

If driving a manual car didn't require more skill than driving an auto, there wouln't be an auto-only driving licence.

Whether it's a step change in skill level is another matter - as it happens I think changing gear on the lever is a red herring, it's clutch control that is key - but an additional skill is needed and only drivers who are more skilled than those who can only drive autos can do it.

[nickfrog]

av185 said:

Haha Nickfrog btw the GT4 is currently at my OPC for a running in service and minor recall...

Sorry to hear that! Can't wait to hear what it's like on track though

[Om]

FNG said:

If driving a manual car didn't require more skill than driving an auto, there wouln't be an auto-only driving licence.

Whether it's a step change in skill level is another matter - as it happens I think changing gear on the lever is a red herring, it's clutch control that is key - but an additional skill is needed and only drivers who are more skilled than those who can only drive autos can do it.

So, someone who is adept at driving a manual car AND an automatic 'properly' is more skilled than someone who would only contemplate driving a manual car?

[Pica-Pica]

FNG said:

If driving a manual car didn't require more skill than driving an auto, there wouln't be an auto-only driving licence.

Whether it's a step change in skill level is another matter - as it happens I think changing gear on the lever is a red herring, it's clutch control that is key - but an additional skill is needed and only drivers who are more skilled than those who can only drive autos can do it.

I am not sure that should apply anymore. There is much to modern autos nowadays. I agree the clutch control and hill start are perhaps different.

On an auto test, if your auto has hill-hold, (that is it is built into the brake and accelerator use, and cannot be switched off) do you need to demonstrate use of parking brake to move away?

[av185]

Wonder if those claiming autos require as many skills to drive near or on the limit as manuals have actually heard of heel and toeing.

[FNG]

Om said:

FNG said:

If driving a manual car didn't require more skill than driving an auto, there wouln't be an auto-only driving licence.

Whether it's a step change in skill level is another matter - as it happens I think changing gear on the lever is a red herring, it's clutch control that is key - but an additional skill is needed and only drivers who are more skilled than those who can only drive autos can do it.

So, someone who is adept at driving a manual car AND an automatic 'properly' is more skilled than someone who would only contemplate driving a manual car?

They would have more skills, yes.

Doesn’t mean they’re a better driver in all respects but they unarguably have more skills being competent at both types of transmission than someone who’s only competent at one.

[IntriguedUser]

Fossilthe4x4 said:

Doh! 148bhp in 1000kg! ZC32 swift sport.

Aren't there 1040kg and 134 bhp?

I quite like these tbh, I do also like the z33 too.

[nickfrog]

av185 said:

Wonder if those claiming autos require as many skills to drive near or on the limit as manuals have actually heard of heel and toeing.

I am not sure anyone is claiming that really, just that the amount of skill involved in driving a manual on the limit is within easy reach of an otherwise skilled driver as banging consistent hot laps requires far far more skill in the first place than the mere ability to change gear manually, including H&Ting every downshift with a lot of chassis tension.

Do you H&T all your downshifts on track on the limit ? I certainly try to and will fluff the occasional one but that pales into absolute insignificance compared to my shortcomings in more critical areas of track driving, particularly in the traction zones or even on turn in.

Edited by nickfrog on Friday 11th June 15:30

[mk1coopers]

Isn't the way around this to have more than one car that way you can take what suits the journey you are making, currently I've got access to things from around 50bhp to nearly 400, all can be enjoyed in different circumstances and there's plenty out there to suit all budgets

[BroadsRS6]

Since PH began the war between those who say any kind of speeding on the public road is utterly wrong and those who admit to speeding but choose their places has raged. The truth is this. How many 991 turbo drivers have never done 71 mph or even 91 mph? Honestly. How many A45AMG owners? My bike does 95 mph in first gear. Mid range rpm in 3rd on the big Duck is over a ton!
I say lots of bhp outputs can be fun. In various ways even a 29 bhp 2CV.

[TameRacingDriver]

FNG said:

For me, light weight and agility combined with low power, a 16v engine and short gearing.

Then you can potter around not being noticed, or you can go and thrash the thing hard, and get to run through more than two gears before you're going insanely fast or arriving behind the next traffic jam, and not having your fun at antisocial speeds.

I've got a puma 1.7 at the moment and it's good fun through 1st, 2nd and 3rd. By the time you've been in 4th for a couple of seconds it's time to back off on most roads or you're approaching the next bend faster than the brakes can deal with it. Arguably the 1.4 could have been the better choice for rural road enjoyment.

Flipside, I had a E91 330i Touring auto a few years ago which was decently brisk, lots of grip, reasonable steering weight but not much feedback. It was impressive at speed, covered ground quickly, carried good corner speed, but it was far from entertaining. By the time the steering was telling me what it was doing, I was travelling far far too quickly for the distance I could stop in. It never gave a tangible reward for driving it quickly but sensibly, so what's the point?

I had a Puma, personally I think the 1.4 would be too slow, if for no other reason than for overtaking, even the 1.7 wasn't great at it. However, it was a blast to drive absolutely flat out. As you say short gears and that gearbox could just be slammed from gear to gear effortlessly without even bothering to lift your foot off the throttle. I kept closer to my mates E46 328 on the twisties than I had any right to, yeah, it slightly 'gapped' me on the straights, but I caught him up again on the bends no bother. You're right about the brakes though, and as a result doing more than about a genuine 80 was taking your life into your hands if you needed to stop Probably the only thing that really spoiled the car, although sometimes I wish the engine had more 'verve'; I loaned a Corsa C 1.8 SRI once and despite being an all round worse car, I felt the engine was much better, just sounded better and was keener to rev.

Funnily enough I bought his 328 off him to replace the Puma, as I fancied a change and something more grown up. Apart from sounding better and being more luxurious, it was pretty dull. It handled quite well but it just didn't excite at all.

[Jaroon]

More bhp than I need. Accelerator is analogue not digital.

[pigeyman]

More than I need but not too much to handle on a day-to-day basis without getting myself in too much trouble.

A bit like a girlfriend, or a tax free salary.