Do you/Can you, really enjoy DRIVING your supercar anymore?
Discussion
PushedDover said:
or rather than go to the extremes...... a combo of a Mx5 and a fast BMW/Audi whatever transportation for the day job.
That might work as long as you didn't want anything with a higher profile,eg flashier' Must admit as much as i love my MX5 i don't think i would love it as much if it was my only car, FezSpider said:
jakesmith said:
What, on a supercar sub forum? Sorry but what a load of rubbish, as if anyone who has £150k on hand to buy a car is going to buy an MX5
You do know that some one will come on and say they did now dont you
Kind of just to prove a pointless point
Spend the money on some old stuff. "It is much more fun to go fast in a slow car than to go slow in a fast car" In a 60'ties car 70 miles/h feels bloody fast. Also, you get much more goodwill amongs the general public when you drive an old car, despite the fact that it might be worth 3 times that of your average supercar.
Jakesmith :
You know , in more than one way , it can be much more fun driving an old , but well maintained ( sadly rust kills them ) Series 1 MX5 than some other higher powered sportscars and some supercars .
Let's just say I know .
Strange but true .
Slow cars driven fast can be more fun ( ie more engaging ) than fast cars driven slowly .
Old , analogue cars with minimal scope for electronic intervention demand more direct intervention .
And you get more thrills at a lower speed , so you have a better chance of keeping your license .
You would get the same enhanced involvement if you used narrower tyres , or used tyres with less grip .
One of the most fun drives that I ever had was on the Grossglockner in June 2018 .
I stayed on the Pass , as they only open the road to the public at 6AM , but if you are already there , its all yours until that time .
Got up at 4.30 , and was devastated to find that it had rained overnight , and that the roads were wet/damp .
But it was the most fun drive ever because the grip levels were much lower , and so you had to tip-toe around , and try and stay just on the correct side of the adhesion fence .
So , much slower speeds , but so much more engagement , and therefore so much more fun .
Fun is not correlated to speed or money , thank God .
Some cars were just born with the right DNA . (Others would argue that the MX5 just snitched its genes from that undeniable paragon of handling , the original Elan )
I would entirely agree with you that the Series 1's major shortcoming is its crashworthiness .
rat rod , FezSpider and hornbaek -- I totally agree
You know , in more than one way , it can be much more fun driving an old , but well maintained ( sadly rust kills them ) Series 1 MX5 than some other higher powered sportscars and some supercars .
Let's just say I know .
Strange but true .
Slow cars driven fast can be more fun ( ie more engaging ) than fast cars driven slowly .
Old , analogue cars with minimal scope for electronic intervention demand more direct intervention .
And you get more thrills at a lower speed , so you have a better chance of keeping your license .
You would get the same enhanced involvement if you used narrower tyres , or used tyres with less grip .
One of the most fun drives that I ever had was on the Grossglockner in June 2018 .
I stayed on the Pass , as they only open the road to the public at 6AM , but if you are already there , its all yours until that time .
Got up at 4.30 , and was devastated to find that it had rained overnight , and that the roads were wet/damp .
But it was the most fun drive ever because the grip levels were much lower , and so you had to tip-toe around , and try and stay just on the correct side of the adhesion fence .
So , much slower speeds , but so much more engagement , and therefore so much more fun .
Fun is not correlated to speed or money , thank God .
Some cars were just born with the right DNA . (Others would argue that the MX5 just snitched its genes from that undeniable paragon of handling , the original Elan )
I would entirely agree with you that the Series 1's major shortcoming is its crashworthiness .
rat rod , FezSpider and hornbaek -- I totally agree
Edited by carspath on Wednesday 4th March 22:56
Edited by carspath on Wednesday 4th March 23:00
Edited by carspath on Wednesday 4th March 23:15
Yes I read this all the time but no one seriously considering one, is also seriously considering the other one.
And actually an MX5 is not going to be as fun to drive as any McLaren and anyone who says different is not being honest or can’t really afford the McLaren. It’s a stupid argument they are too extreme.
If you said MX5 vs 135i it might be more credible. The McLarens are by all accounts, true drivers cars
And actually an MX5 is not going to be as fun to drive as any McLaren and anyone who says different is not being honest or can’t really afford the McLaren. It’s a stupid argument they are too extreme.
If you said MX5 vs 135i it might be more credible. The McLarens are by all accounts, true drivers cars
I have an NA MX5 as well as a 675LT & 430CUP and some other cars.
You can't compare them dynamically.
Yes the MX5 is a whole lot of fun in the right context but a 675LT it is not, or an Exige or an Elise.
An Elise is a sports car, probably the best budget sportscar ever made, followed by the MX5. It is not a supercar.
What connects McLaren, Lotus & the original MX5 design team is their enthusiasm, devotion and single minded approach to design & engineering. The story of the genesis of the NA MX5, S1 Elise & McLaren 12C are very similar and this is what appeals to me and connects the 3 cars rather than their differing levels of dynamic ability & performance.
I like a bacon butty at the local greasy spoon and sometimes I go to Bob Bob Ricard for Beef Wellington. I enjoy them both and they are both occasional treats. Do I enjoy one more than the other (yes actually) One is much better quality than the other, served in much more impressive surroundings and overall is a much more special experience . At the end of the day there are still good sports cars for enthusiasts at both ends of the spectrum and this is a triumph to be rejoiced.
Oh and **** yes I really do enjoy driving my Supercars.......The end.......
You can't compare them dynamically.
Yes the MX5 is a whole lot of fun in the right context but a 675LT it is not, or an Exige or an Elise.
An Elise is a sports car, probably the best budget sportscar ever made, followed by the MX5. It is not a supercar.
What connects McLaren, Lotus & the original MX5 design team is their enthusiasm, devotion and single minded approach to design & engineering. The story of the genesis of the NA MX5, S1 Elise & McLaren 12C are very similar and this is what appeals to me and connects the 3 cars rather than their differing levels of dynamic ability & performance.
I like a bacon butty at the local greasy spoon and sometimes I go to Bob Bob Ricard for Beef Wellington. I enjoy them both and they are both occasional treats. Do I enjoy one more than the other (yes actually) One is much better quality than the other, served in much more impressive surroundings and overall is a much more special experience . At the end of the day there are still good sports cars for enthusiasts at both ends of the spectrum and this is a triumph to be rejoiced.
Oh and **** yes I really do enjoy driving my Supercars.......The end.......
Edited by Bispal on Thursday 5th March 08:07
rat rod said:
jakesmith said:
What, on a supercar sub forum? Sorry but what a load of rubbish, as if anyone who has £150k on hand to buy a car is going to buy an MX5
As a second car maybe just like Chris Harris drives a elderly 2 cv CitroenI like having a silly little car every now and again like a Smart Brabus Roadster, but it was alongside 2 other more sensible vehicles
jakesmith said:
rat rod said:
jakesmith said:
What, on a supercar sub forum? Sorry but what a load of rubbish, as if anyone who has £150k on hand to buy a car is going to buy an MX5
As a second car maybe just like Chris Harris drives a elderly 2 cv CitroenI like having a silly little car every now and again like a Smart Brabus Roadster, but it was alongside 2 other more sensible vehicles
I have read with some interest this thread, and I would wholeheartedly agree that driving a slow car fast can be as, if not more rewarding, than driving a fast car slow. I had that experience years ago at a track in Sonoma, California where after spinning my De Tomaso Pantera twice on a wet track, I headed to the nearest rent-a-car store and got a 6 cylnder Mustang with a governor on it that wouldn't allow it to rev at more than 4000 rpms. Learning how to drive that car keeping it up in the rev range was the most fun experience on the track I had ever had. My 600 hp Jaguar XKR is quicker, easier to drive, and even more nimble than my Pantera, BUT...on an early Sunday morning blast through the canyon roads around Los Angeles with no traffic, sitting just inches off the ground, with a 500hp snorting V8 sitting 6" behind your head, rowing through a very mechanical 5spd gearbox, there is simply nothing like it!. There is room for both experiences and both can be equally engaging.. My cousin, who has had some great cars in his past, still insists his old MX5 was the most fun to drive car he's ever owned. And he loves his Toyota MR2 as well. Have one of each! 
tberg said:
My 600 hp Jaguar XKR is quicker, easier to drive, and even more nimble than my Pantera, BUT...on an early Sunday morning blast through the canyon roads around Los Angeles with no traffic, sitting just inches off the ground, with a 500hp snorting V8 sitting 6" behind your head, rowing through a very mechanical 5spd gearbox, there is simply nothing like it!.
How have you managed to get 600bhp from a Jaguar XKR and 500bhp from a Pantera GTS? Genuinely interested to read what modifications you've done to get both to these figures.
As to my Jaguar, it comes from the factory with 510, and with a pulley and tune, along with an X pipe replacing the resonator, you are close to if not over 600hp. Obviously, the same motor in the F-type R is priducing 550-575 from the factory and in the Lister F-type 666hp. As for Pantera, when I did the restoration/modification on my car a couple of years ago, we transplanted a built and stroked 351 Cleveland with about 500hp into the car along with fuel injection and a number of other upgrades.
Supercars from the 70's and 80's ( and I suspect that you could go back to the immediate post-WW1 era of Bugatti and Bentley -- but I have no experience of these cars ) give you unadulterated thrills .
The advent of automotive nanny electronics immediately created a filter between the driver and the tarmac .
Manufacturers , especially the small volume , bespoke car makers , have to ( together with govt safety legislation ) make what the market wants .
And the punters want toys , mostly totally unnecessary toys .
Always amazes me that people put expensive stereo systems into sportscars and supercars .
But WHY ?
What' wrong with the noise of timing chains and exhaust pulsations ?
Can you really hear your music when the car is moving ?
And would you really choose to sit in a stationary car just to listen to music ?
Just one , admittedly blatant , example .
You get so much honest and visceral stimulation in an electronics-free 80's supercar , compared to its comparable 2020 counterpart . Sure its much slower , and pulls less G's in the corners , but big , wide , heavy supercars were never designed for track use anyway .
By definition , supercars are road cars , not track or race cars . Yes , the manufacturers might / will try and convince you that they have made a slightly lighter , slightly more powerful , and very much more expensive variant , which is a '' track special '' , but that is just an end-of-the line marketing ploy to extract every last penny from an outgoing model .
It really shouldn't take anyone in , but sadly it never fails to do so , and usually at great and unnecessary expense !!
The advent of automotive nanny electronics immediately created a filter between the driver and the tarmac .
Manufacturers , especially the small volume , bespoke car makers , have to ( together with govt safety legislation ) make what the market wants .
And the punters want toys , mostly totally unnecessary toys .
Always amazes me that people put expensive stereo systems into sportscars and supercars .
But WHY ?
What' wrong with the noise of timing chains and exhaust pulsations ?
Can you really hear your music when the car is moving ?
And would you really choose to sit in a stationary car just to listen to music ?
Just one , admittedly blatant , example .
You get so much honest and visceral stimulation in an electronics-free 80's supercar , compared to its comparable 2020 counterpart . Sure its much slower , and pulls less G's in the corners , but big , wide , heavy supercars were never designed for track use anyway .
By definition , supercars are road cars , not track or race cars . Yes , the manufacturers might / will try and convince you that they have made a slightly lighter , slightly more powerful , and very much more expensive variant , which is a '' track special '' , but that is just an end-of-the line marketing ploy to extract every last penny from an outgoing model .
It really shouldn't take anyone in , but sadly it never fails to do so , and usually at great and unnecessary expense !!
Another amusing point is that manufacturers make the track-focused variant, usually at the end of the production run, e.g. SV/SVR, RS/Clubsport, CS etc... These are stripped of some creature comforts to make them lighter (= performance) and the selling price goes up! Then people think that they are the next must-have, and when they have them, they complain that the suspension is too harsh and the interior too sparse...
On the subject of interiors, people don't realise that alcantara is way cheaper than leather as a raw material - yet we get charged a hefty price for having it as an option...
On the subject of interiors, people don't realise that alcantara is way cheaper than leather as a raw material - yet we get charged a hefty price for having it as an option...
Larry5.2 said:
On the subject of interiors, people don't realise that alcantara is way cheaper than leather as a raw material - yet we get charged a hefty price for having it as an option...
Yep, so who are the fools?!! 
Oh, and to add my two cents worth, there are some cheap fantastic cars and the MX5 is one of them. You wouldn't buy one 'instead' of a supercar but plenty of people might have one in the stable.
Larry5.2 said:
Another amusing point is that manufacturers make the track-focused variant, usually at the end of the production run, e.g. SV/SVR, RS/Clubsport, CS etc... These are stripped of some creature comforts to make them lighter (= performance) and the selling price goes up! Then people think that they are the next must-have, and when they have them, they complain that the suspension is too harsh and the interior too sparse...
On the subject of interiors, people don't realise that alcantara is way cheaper than leather as a raw material - yet we get charged a hefty price for having it as an option...
Do you not think that creating a bespoke spec, which involves design and engineering, getting the product to market including testing & tuning, and marketing / advertising / PR, costs money, and there is less of an economy of scale on a smaller run?On the subject of interiors, people don't realise that alcantara is way cheaper than leather as a raw material - yet we get charged a hefty price for having it as an option...
Re Alcantara, again, if you make 50,000 steering wheels out of something expensive and 50 out of something cheap, how confident would you be that the unit price of the one made of the cheaper material would be lower than the mass produced one made of more expensive material, especially in the context of deviating from a common to a rare option on a massive industrial production line?
I'm not saying you're wrong on either count but it's possibly more nuanced than you make out
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff