Where does the fun come from?
Discussion
From this thread;
More realistically, do you care about steering feel, or is it enough that the car goes where you point it? Do you want to need to think about the engine's power delivery, or do you just want torque at cruising revs so you can stamp on the loud pedal and go? Do you want a car which will spit you off the road if you do something stupid, or would you rather that traction and stability systems made it foolproof?
Do you believe that there is a trade-off between driver involvement and ease of use / labour saving features, and if you think that driver involvement is unimportant, just what is it that you do like about driving?
SWoll said:
The autos arent fun argument always makes me laugh. How much of the "fun" of driving is down to the method in which you select what gear you are in FFS?
A fair question - how much does come from changing gear - or from steering, accelerating, braking? Which bits would you gladly lose? Would you be happy just steering if the car could accelerate and brake itself? Or just controlling the accelerator and brake if the car could steer itself? Or just sitting in the car while it drives itself, provided it kicks you in the back every time it accelerates?More realistically, do you care about steering feel, or is it enough that the car goes where you point it? Do you want to need to think about the engine's power delivery, or do you just want torque at cruising revs so you can stamp on the loud pedal and go? Do you want a car which will spit you off the road if you do something stupid, or would you rather that traction and stability systems made it foolproof?
Do you believe that there is a trade-off between driver involvement and ease of use / labour saving features, and if you think that driver involvement is unimportant, just what is it that you do like about driving?
To me, fun is about doing as much of the work you can yourself. I just enjoy having lots of things to do, so when it all comes together (ie taking a corner fast and getting line, revs and the change perfect - so rarely in my case) you give yourself a wee pat on the back.
Also it's not nesc the changing of the gear, but being the one who decides on what gear you are in - I don't know anything about modern autos to be honest, but older ones I have driven are pretty dim witted.
Also it's not nesc the changing of the gear, but being the one who decides on what gear you are in - I don't know anything about modern autos to be honest, but older ones I have driven are pretty dim witted.
Vocal Minority said:
To me, fun is about doing as much of the work you can yourself.
This.I mean, you can get in a car with the world's collection of computers and push the go pedal and let it decide how much power to put down and so on and move a lot quicker than I perhaps can in my 5.0 TVR point to point.
But I think I have more fun.
Theres much more to it that what is mentioned above in my oppinion. Amongst other more PH cars I have a 1997 Pajero.
Its a 2.8 LWD diesel with an autobox
The steering is very vague
Its slow
Its noisy as its on big mud tyres
The autobox is confused because the tyres are much larger than standard
But, I love driving it. I love driving it as much as I like driving me Elise. Something about it is just so comical that its fun. Plus the fact that I can turn off down a byway and drive through a load of mud. When parking where there are concrete curbs separating different parts of the car park I can just drive over them. I let a friend of mine drive it who is also a big petrol head after we had just been for a spin in his carerra and he had the same experience, he was grinning from ear to ear. Its great fun to drive. Yet on paper due to the 'stats' above, it should be hideous.
Likewise when I had a 1L micra as a courtesy car (i know!) i couldnt stop laughing the whole time.
It depends if you consider involvement and fun as one and the same. In my oppinion, they dont neccessarily go hand in hand.
Its a 2.8 LWD diesel with an autobox
The steering is very vague
Its slow
Its noisy as its on big mud tyres
The autobox is confused because the tyres are much larger than standard
But, I love driving it. I love driving it as much as I like driving me Elise. Something about it is just so comical that its fun. Plus the fact that I can turn off down a byway and drive through a load of mud. When parking where there are concrete curbs separating different parts of the car park I can just drive over them. I let a friend of mine drive it who is also a big petrol head after we had just been for a spin in his carerra and he had the same experience, he was grinning from ear to ear. Its great fun to drive. Yet on paper due to the 'stats' above, it should be hideous.
Likewise when I had a 1L micra as a courtesy car (i know!) i couldnt stop laughing the whole time.
It depends if you consider involvement and fun as one and the same. In my oppinion, they dont neccessarily go hand in hand.
PaulB81 said:
Theres much more to it that what is mentioned above in my oppinion. Amongst other more PH cars I have a 1997 Pajero.
Its a 2.8 LWD diesel with an autobox
The steering is very vague
Its slow
Its noisy as its on big mud tyres
The autobox is confused because the tyres are much larger than standard
But, I love driving it. I love driving it as much as I like driving me Elise. Something about it is just so comical that its fun. Plus the fact that I can turn off down a byway and drive through a load of mud. When parking where there are concrete curbs separating different parts of the car park I can just drive over them. I let a friend of mine drive it who is also a big petrol head after we had just been for a spin in his carerra and he had the same experience, he was grinning from ear to ear. Its great fun to drive. Yet on paper due to the 'stats' above, it should be hideous.
Likewise when I had a 1L micra as a courtesy car (i know!) i couldnt stop laughing the whole time.
It depends if you consider involvement and fun as one and the same. In my oppinion, they dont neccessarily go hand in hand.
Interesting - is it just as much fun if someone else drives?Its a 2.8 LWD diesel with an autobox
The steering is very vague
Its slow
Its noisy as its on big mud tyres
The autobox is confused because the tyres are much larger than standard
But, I love driving it. I love driving it as much as I like driving me Elise. Something about it is just so comical that its fun. Plus the fact that I can turn off down a byway and drive through a load of mud. When parking where there are concrete curbs separating different parts of the car park I can just drive over them. I let a friend of mine drive it who is also a big petrol head after we had just been for a spin in his carerra and he had the same experience, he was grinning from ear to ear. Its great fun to drive. Yet on paper due to the 'stats' above, it should be hideous.
Likewise when I had a 1L micra as a courtesy car (i know!) i couldnt stop laughing the whole time.
It depends if you consider involvement and fun as one and the same. In my oppinion, they dont neccessarily go hand in hand.
I think the fun for me is partly being in control of a large piece of metal but being able to get it moving how you want it, and when it doesn't you work out what went wrong and teach yourself to do it better. And partly adrenaline.
I have never driven an auto quickly but I imagine with it being not quite as involved that I wouldnt enjoy it as much.
I quite enjoy driving my Dads Defender, no driver aids, no steering feel, lots of understeer... But as much as you might not believe it if you have never tried, you really can get them moving. You're never going that fast but if you're committed and get the right line you can carry speed through the corners. Just don't expect to be able to stop quickly on mud tyres, definitely not if its a bit wet.
I have never driven an auto quickly but I imagine with it being not quite as involved that I wouldnt enjoy it as much.
I quite enjoy driving my Dads Defender, no driver aids, no steering feel, lots of understeer... But as much as you might not believe it if you have never tried, you really can get them moving. You're never going that fast but if you're committed and get the right line you can carry speed through the corners. Just don't expect to be able to stop quickly on mud tyres, definitely not if its a bit wet.
Lots of power is a very difficult thing to leave undisturbed.
Only racetracks (after the WU laps) or computers offer reliable levels of grip. Split second PDK gearshifts with Down Shift Rev Matching make a car more capable, also both hands on the wheel is very helpful on the brakes with wide fronts, bumpy roads and a quick rack.
Only racetracks (after the WU laps) or computers offer reliable levels of grip. Split second PDK gearshifts with Down Shift Rev Matching make a car more capable, also both hands on the wheel is very helpful on the brakes with wide fronts, bumpy roads and a quick rack.
Edited by 1point7bar on Monday 14th May 22:58
It's no one thing, but the way the whole adds up. Within that remit I could give up all sorts of small aspects for the sake of balance. And it works both ways.
Anecdote for amusement:
My 'daily' is a BMW E34 540 auto, which is just lovely - hewn from granite, still satisfyingly robust to drive, and to hustle - despite 3.6turns lock to lock on a worm&roller steering box! Stealthily capable of 'brutal-quick' to most passengers, but also the perfect long-distance loafer precisely because it is an auto and not pin-sharp or lumpy to the point of boring/ tiring. And you know what? I've had it 4.5 years, if I wanted a manual I'd have bought/installed one by now. But thiss'uns exactly right as it is. Still the car for all reasons.
I also have a BEC, which is spring-loaded,box-of-frogs mad, an utter assault on the senses like 20mins in the spin dryer at time, almost uselessly-fast on the road and a frustration in traffic. It IS the complete antidote to autos, to having a job, to living. As such it's the rather more significantly flawed of the pair, though a more-PH car. And addictive. But I'll take the E34 to Skye, thanks.
Anecdote for amusement:
My 'daily' is a BMW E34 540 auto, which is just lovely - hewn from granite, still satisfyingly robust to drive, and to hustle - despite 3.6turns lock to lock on a worm&roller steering box! Stealthily capable of 'brutal-quick' to most passengers, but also the perfect long-distance loafer precisely because it is an auto and not pin-sharp or lumpy to the point of boring/ tiring. And you know what? I've had it 4.5 years, if I wanted a manual I'd have bought/installed one by now. But thiss'uns exactly right as it is. Still the car for all reasons.
I also have a BEC, which is spring-loaded,box-of-frogs mad, an utter assault on the senses like 20mins in the spin dryer at time, almost uselessly-fast on the road and a frustration in traffic. It IS the complete antidote to autos, to having a job, to living. As such it's the rather more significantly flawed of the pair, though a more-PH car. And addictive. But I'll take the E34 to Skye, thanks.
People derive fun from different things, a new Evoque owner will enjoy being seen in it, the quality and impressing people, probably not all that bothered about how it changes gear.
I think we over quantify things as Petrolheads and buy cars based on what we think we should enjoy, we get all scathing about the "civillians" and their pathetic, weedy choices and scoff at how they buy them for tedious or trivial things like image, economy, price or being comfy, how they completely ignore engine noise, handling and the ability to skid the rear tyres.
I have a 944 and they are fairly "PH", my brother in law buys grey diesel Audi's and I think how tedious but in reality they are nice cars and my 944 is a bit of a needy, rattly old guzzler that in reality probably isnt that much faster than an A3 diesel, sometimes I wonder who are the mad ones.
I think we over quantify things as Petrolheads and buy cars based on what we think we should enjoy, we get all scathing about the "civillians" and their pathetic, weedy choices and scoff at how they buy them for tedious or trivial things like image, economy, price or being comfy, how they completely ignore engine noise, handling and the ability to skid the rear tyres.
I have a 944 and they are fairly "PH", my brother in law buys grey diesel Audi's and I think how tedious but in reality they are nice cars and my 944 is a bit of a needy, rattly old guzzler that in reality probably isnt that much faster than an A3 diesel, sometimes I wonder who are the mad ones.
otolith said:
A fair question - how much does come from changing gear - or from steering, accelerating, braking? Which bits would you gladly lose? Would you be happy just steering if the car could accelerate and brake itself? Or just controlling the accelerator and brake if the car could steer itself? Or just sitting in the car while it drives itself, provided it kicks you in the back every time it accelerates?
More realistically, do you care about steering feel, or is it enough that the car goes where you point it? Do you want to need to think about the engine's power delivery, or do you just want torque at cruising revs so you can stamp on the loud pedal and go? Do you want a car which will spit you off the road if you do something stupid, or would you rather that traction and stability systems made it foolproof?
Do you believe that there is a trade-off between driver involvement and ease of use / labour saving features, and if you think that driver involvement is unimportant, just what is it that you do like about driving?
You don't change gear in a go-kart, or most quads or off road buggies, are they also not fun?More realistically, do you care about steering feel, or is it enough that the car goes where you point it? Do you want to need to think about the engine's power delivery, or do you just want torque at cruising revs so you can stamp on the loud pedal and go? Do you want a car which will spit you off the road if you do something stupid, or would you rather that traction and stability systems made it foolproof?
Do you believe that there is a trade-off between driver involvement and ease of use / labour saving features, and if you think that driver involvement is unimportant, just what is it that you do like about driving?
A car is basically a number of different ingredients. The steering, brakes, gearshift, chassis balance and that elusive 'character' all come together to make a car what it is. Whether that's fun or not depends on a whole host of things.
I don't think anyone can realistically single out one element of these ingredients and say it either makes or breaks a car. Take the 4x4 argument for one. Very few 4x4s actually 'handle' in the tradition sense. Many (Defender/old Land Cruiser) are crude and incredibly unrefined, but it's the character and general ability that make it fun. In fact this goes for any 4x4. There's just something hilariously entertaining about sitting in 1-2 tonnes of metal driving up some silly incline surrounded by trees and rocks. There is zero chassis balance, gear shift quality or indeed steering feel required for this....and yet its still 'the thrill of driving' to coin a phrase
Taking this back to the origin of the argument (auto 'boxes) I don't honestly think that anyone can say this element alone can ruin a car. Far from it in fact. A Nissan GTR is the absolute definenition of electronics beating physics. The whole appeal of the car is its unbelievable ability to steer, accelerate and brake using every last bit of grip from the tyres. It therefore stands to reason that a dual clutch 'box suits its character. If anything, I think a manual would absolutely ruin it.
It's all a matter of perspective, but with modern cars, nothing is every truely bad. The latest generation of Autos are neither dim witted or crude. Leave them in auto and annoyingly, they seem to do a better job at shuffling gears than a human, but stick them in manual mode and you'd honestly think you were in a sequential race car. OK, so you're not using your left foot as much, but does it make the car less fun? Absolutely not. Would I want to see all cars with an Auto? Of course not? A Caterham with a torque converter, no matter how good it is, just wouldn't work....in the same way that a C63 AMG wouldn't work with a manual. Is one more 'fun' than the other? No not really....they're just different types of fun. Ultimately, there is no metric measure of that fact....precisely why humans still design cars and not computers!
I don't think anyone can realistically single out one element of these ingredients and say it either makes or breaks a car. Take the 4x4 argument for one. Very few 4x4s actually 'handle' in the tradition sense. Many (Defender/old Land Cruiser) are crude and incredibly unrefined, but it's the character and general ability that make it fun. In fact this goes for any 4x4. There's just something hilariously entertaining about sitting in 1-2 tonnes of metal driving up some silly incline surrounded by trees and rocks. There is zero chassis balance, gear shift quality or indeed steering feel required for this....and yet its still 'the thrill of driving' to coin a phrase
Taking this back to the origin of the argument (auto 'boxes) I don't honestly think that anyone can say this element alone can ruin a car. Far from it in fact. A Nissan GTR is the absolute definenition of electronics beating physics. The whole appeal of the car is its unbelievable ability to steer, accelerate and brake using every last bit of grip from the tyres. It therefore stands to reason that a dual clutch 'box suits its character. If anything, I think a manual would absolutely ruin it.
It's all a matter of perspective, but with modern cars, nothing is every truely bad. The latest generation of Autos are neither dim witted or crude. Leave them in auto and annoyingly, they seem to do a better job at shuffling gears than a human, but stick them in manual mode and you'd honestly think you were in a sequential race car. OK, so you're not using your left foot as much, but does it make the car less fun? Absolutely not. Would I want to see all cars with an Auto? Of course not? A Caterham with a torque converter, no matter how good it is, just wouldn't work....in the same way that a C63 AMG wouldn't work with a manual. Is one more 'fun' than the other? No not really....they're just different types of fun. Ultimately, there is no metric measure of that fact....precisely why humans still design cars and not computers!
Edited by ArosaMike on Tuesday 15th May 10:08
Edited by ArosaMike on Tuesday 15th May 10:08
otolith said:
300bhp/ton said:
You don't change gear in a go-kart, or most quads or off road buggies, are they also not fun?
Would they be more or less fun with a gearbox? depending on where they were being used and what sort of engine. I suspect very long gearing would make having gears pointless and very short gearing could end up being too frantic and a total pain to be in the right gear. Also if you wanted a full manual and clutch pedal then it'd make the pedal arrangement on a kart rather interesting if you don't have much space.Personally I do like manuals, however I guess my stance is, that having an auto doesn't automatically make it no fun, it just shifts the dynamic of the vehicle.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff