-
EDIT: Double post.
Also, I just got back from a weekend in Montreal to visit friends and see the Grand-Am and Nationwide race there. I drove a steady 130 km/h for about 90% of the way from Montreal to Toronto. Way slower than European speeds, but it was comfortable and the road was very well maintained... In Ontario. Quebec has some infrastructural problems, to say the least.
Also, this has nothing to do with the thread topic.
-
[quote=Kitdy;973734]Also, this has nothing to do with the thread topic.[/quote]
Yes, please. Can we keep this thread to the hardware, not the software behind the wheel?
[quote=Ferrer;973403]Another thing in favour of german cars, as far as driving is concerned, is that they don't seem to have suffered from the supersizing trend as much as other cars.[/quote]
Are you saying that they are still as engaging to drive or that they haven't grown as much as others?
I haven't driven a contemporary German car, but they certainly have grown in weight ad size. I would say that they are a more pure drive because everyone is trying to build a German car, however the Germans have been doing that for the past century so they have a bit of a head start.
-
[quote=f6fhellcat13;973744]Are you saying that they are still as engaging to drive or that they haven't grown as much as others?
I haven't driven a contemporary German car, but they certainly have grown in weight ad size. I would say that they are a more pure drive because everyone is trying to build a German car, however the Germans have been doing that for the past century so they have a bit of a head start.[/quote]
Growth thing.
The Hyundai is a big car, especially you consider width, and the Lancia is downright massive. The Germans on the other hand seem to make their cars relatively compact. The 3er for instance is about the same size as the Delta, and far narrower IIRC.
-
[quote=RacingManiac;973658]Yeah no kidding, I saw a woman on my drive to work doing a U-turn into traffic while still texting on the freaking phone....[/quote]
Distracted drivers are scary drivers. Agreed.
[quote=henk4;973661]I had a good discussion with a member of the California Highway Police the other day while waiting for the Pebble Tour Cars to come by. The use of the cell phone while driving seems to be one of things that they very keenly after and a ticket is about 200 dollar (first offence). He also mentioned that not wearing a safety belt was still an issue. He once had stopped a man who said his belt did not work, because when pulling it down it got stuck. It already did not work for 14 years...however the CHP officer gently pulled the belt down, et voila, it worked. Yet the driver said he had no intention to ever use it...[/quote]
NY made it a bigger deal now, they can pull you over just for being on the phone. Before it had to be that you could only get pulled over if you had other violations in addition to being on the phone.
However, there was a massive ticket fixing scandal and cops don't pull you over for stupid stuff anymore. I heard it's a sort of protest.
I think it's a sad state of affairs right now, the car. Especially when Ford is focusing on bringing internet into cars. I think that's more of a marketing thing- "Hey look how cool our cars are, we have internet! So you can go on Youtube while driving at 100 mph and check your texts all at once to save time while your 6 kids are pacified by the 24 DVD players and screens in 4 rows behind you!"
Did anyone think that a moving car is actually a projectile?
I haven't even mentioned the fact that getting a license I think is way too easy...
-
I think its stemming from the insecurity of the automotive sector. The phones, the tablet, the TV and other consumer electronics are constantly getting newer, better, and faster. While cars, to you and me who are enthusiasts, are getting better also, but to average consumer, they want more gadgets and the flash. So car companies are just doing the same to match...
-
Are they actually getting better, even to us?
-
Your lofty standard not withstanding, yes.....IMO, unnecessary romance to "good 'ol days" need not apply.
Bigger car(+ or - is subjective), more power, better fuel economy, more accessible performance, better reliability. They are measurable metrics, and the newer cars are better than before. Yes they are gaining heft and the increases are incremental, but at the same token the regulation are getting more stringent in emission control and safety, and the OEs are meeting them and still improving on those metric.
-
Surely, and you even forget safety, comfort, ease of use, kinder to the environment, etc.
But everytime I drove a friend's 1991 Polo GT I was reminded what it is that I like about cars. It was a steering wheel, some pedals a gear lever and little else mattered. It had power nothing and you had to do pretty much everything. I have to say, even if it wasn't particularly good example of an old car, I enjoyed pretty much every occasion behind the wheel.
I'd even say that if it's for anyone that cars are getting better is for general public not enthusiasts. Because were cars have progressed greatly is as a means of transportation. But as something to enjoy, to feel, to have fun in, to be connected, have they progressed as much?
-
My metric of fun is kinda skewed. My memories of cars are generally Japanese econoboxes, from the cars my parents drove in Taiwan, or the Camry that we got when we moved to Canada. The first car that was "fun" was a G35. But all that was out the window once I get to drive the FSAE cars. Needless to say nothing else is as fun until I get to drive something like an out and out race car. What I am driving now is plenty fun, tossable and easy to live with. How that may compare to the past I have no clue.
As I said though, the standard for which cars are built and designed have moved on. The simple box with a steering wheel and 3 pedals cannot be made the same as they used to. The need to meet fuel economy standard drives the need to electrify many items and as a result driver might be less directly connected. But I think OEs are making good strides in getting cars to work well under the circumstances.
I have to say though, driver aids are PITA....in the GTI they can't be off completely....
-
Well let me put it this way, is the Jaguar XF 4.2 I drive from time to time more enjoyable than the little 1.3 litre Polo GT was? The Jag is certainly more powerful, faster, louder, and it has rear wheel drive. But as I said the Polo feels more direct, a purer experience. It's not about performance, but about being involved in the process of performance. In that aspect it doesn't matter whether you drove a Japanese econobox or a BMW M3 E30, the principle still stays the same.
Thankfully not all is lost. There are still cheap and cheerful cars to be enjoyed, like the Renault Twingo, the Toyota Aygo or maybe this new recently presented Volkswagen city car. Even the Hyundai we have is quite good fun, and other than ABS and power steering it has no driver aids whatsoever. However, I'm worried than other than basic transportation we may very well have lost the battle forever.
-
Actually that is interesting, I was also thinking about stuff like that. I drive a 3 door hatch right now, its small car, not that fast, relatively light on its feet(by US standard, probably obese by EU standard). The car is nimble, tossable, I can charge at a green light right turn, or drive spiritly on the rare nice piece of road I see with little worry or consequence(relatively speaking). I go to autoX on weekends and still trundle around town normally and get decent(not great) gas mileage. I look at cars like 370Z, or Corvette, or Camaro or something, all of which are probably faster and more grip, and RWD and so on. But I can't see myself doing the same thing I do now with a hatchback. I can see I can get that satisfaction of stumping on the gas and push back in my seat, but I can't see me enjoying that nimbleness that I feel with the car now. I drive my dad's G35 sometimes even now, and no contest that is just plainly a faster car, but it doesn't shrink to you or make you feel in totally in control. And I just won't push it as much as I'd with my GTI. And the G even has sticker summer tire....
Now in my current life situation, being no kids, single, renting an apartment and have a steady income. I have no incentive of getting a bigger car, even if it means a faster ride. What I have now works well for me. I guess as my priority changes that might change, it'll move me to a bigger car, and if I can afford it a bigger performance car. And when your life situation moves to a point where you can have a "toy", then those fancy sportscar will come in play....
On that note, a 2nd car to have for me if I can afford it that I can see being a hoot to own and fully exploit, maybe something like a S2000. In my situation if I have more dough to spend, a RS3 or 1M might be fun....or cheaper, the rally style car like STI or EVO, as I am still very much intrigued by them....
-
No Genesis Coupe for you RM?
-
No likey the penis shape side window.....lol
I still have some cultural based prejudice to Korean cars also.....
-
[quote=RacingManiac;973854]Actually that is interesting, I was also thinking about stuff like that. I drive a 3 door hatch right now, its small car, not that fast, relatively light on its feet(by US standard, probably obese by EU standard). The car is nimble, tossable, I can charge at a green light right turn, or drive spiritly on the rare nice piece of road I see with little worry or consequence(relatively speaking). I go to autoX on weekends and still trundle around town normally and get decent(not great) gas mileage. I look at cars like 370Z, or Corvette, or Camaro or something, all of which are probably faster and more grip, and RWD and so on. But I can't see myself doing the same thing I do now with a hatchback. I can see I can get that satisfaction of stumping on the gas and push back in my seat, but I can't see me enjoying that nimbleness that I feel with the car now. I drive my dad's G35 sometimes even now, and no contest that is just plainly a faster car, but it doesn't shrink to you or make you feel in totally in control. And I just won't push it as much as I'd with my GTI. And the G even has sticker summer tire....[/quote]
I think we should then separate advancement in terms of transportation and advancement in terms of feel. In the former I think the car industry has made definite progress, but I'm not so sure in the latter, at least in the last 15 or 20 years. Clear examples of this are the New Mini Mk 1 and Mk 2, and the three generations of Ford Focus. Each time they substituted cars they improved, but some of the magic was lost. And magic is what enthusiasts search for in a car. It doesn't matter if it's a 15 grand econobox or a 1 and half mill supercar.
[quote=RacingManiac;973854]Now in my current life situation, being no kids, single, renting an apartment and have a steady income. I have no incentive of getting a bigger car, even if it means a faster ride. What I have now works well for me. I guess as my priority changes that might change, it'll move me to a bigger car, and if I can afford it a bigger performance car. And when your life situation moves to a point where you can have a "toy", then those fancy sportscar will come in play....[/quote]
But what if you can't afford two cars? Or even one expensive car? Then you have to choose very carefully because you might end with something fast but uninvolving and numb. And it seems that as time goes by options are actually dwindling, not increasing.
[quote=RacingManiac;973854]On that note, a 2nd car to have for me if I can afford it that I can see being a hoot to own and fully exploit, maybe something like a S2000. In my situation if I have more dough to spend, a RS3 or 1M might be fun....or cheaper, the rally style car like STI or EVO, as I am still very much intrigued by them....[/quote]
Nah all of those are far too complicated, complex, and have too many devices to remove the human element from the equation. Except the Honda and perhaps the BMWs. But without getting too much into the discussion, four wheel drive is bad place to start...
-
See thats what I think your standard is too lofty and unrealistic. The driver is being shielded more from the actual connection, but that is not the choice of the OEs to do that, more they are forced to do that due to the governmental requirements. They have a gross trickling effect on everything on the car. The cars got heavier, it has more impact protection, that requires heavier duty brake, requires more brake boosting, requires more power assist in steering. New CAFE-style standard, requires durastic boost in fuel economy, leads to electrification of many accessories, leads to the disconnect of the electro-power steering. You CAN'T actually build that car from past anymore.
At the same token, much of the past "feel" may well be dynamically flawed but giving it "character". Old school turbo charged car for instance, without much of the modern boost controller of sophisticated electronic tuning, they may be laggy or peaky, but when they kick in you feel it. Is that a disconnect to human element, or is it just bad technology side effect? Or the old torque steer wonder that are being cured nowadays by new front end geometry design? Or old cars with sport suspension tuning that weaves and bobs down the road, but handles great in corner? A lot of these are gone because modern, passive shocks(not electronic) have found ways to achieve better performance in ride and handling(frequency depended damping). What about 911s....
I feel a lot of what you are asking is to stop progressing and just build cars from decades ago. And that I just cannot agree with as an engineer and as a car enthusiasts. You cannot ignore the stuff you learn and not improve on stuff that has flaws....that's just not progress....
I more than agree though that some of the cars now just have way more stuff than you need, the gaziilion TCS/ESP setting, or the super torque shuffling diff AWD cars. But I don't you a modern enthusiast is lacking choice in those regards. For every AYC Evo/STI out there you still have a 370Z, for the RS3 out there you still have Focus RS. For the M5s out there you still have a CTS-V, for the GTRs out there you still have the ZR1, and for the 458s out there you still have a GT3RS. If anything you have more choice to what kind of performance car that you want. Instead of being just limited by what is possible.
-
I just want to make it clear that I'm not against progress. I'm all for clever engineering solutions, and cars like the Toyota iQ, the Mitsubishi i or the Audi A2. I find direct fuel injection or full LED lights as good things, and things I want to have in my car. I even think that the Honda CR-Z could be a very good concept given some development. Even traction and stability control can be good done properly.
What I am against is about progress that detracts from the driving experience. I mean things like active steering, lane departure warning and all those sort of things. If you can't drive properly you shouldn't be driving in the first place, and I think it's better to pay full attention rather than rely on those systems. Those systems can give average people a false sense of security, and that's not a good thing.
And then there are those gadgets which are simply unnecessary. Things that have already been mentioned here like internet connectivity. I do not want to enter internet in my car. It's not a mobile work station, or a room in which to see my e-mails. It's car and it's meant to be driven. All, so-called, progress that does not contribute to the driving exprience is not really progress in my opinion.
In other cases though it's really a lost battle because of regulations. Like fuel economy standards which mandate electric everything, and as a result feel undeniably suffers. Altough, fuel economy has a desired side effect, which is trying to make everything lighter, and that's a good thing. This also has a side effect, which is bringing investigation in newer lighter and stronger (that's thanks to the safety regulations) materials, and this again is the sort of progress I'm all for and that I want to have in my car.
Thankfully, as I said, in Europe we still have pretty basic cars, which means that even if they don't feel exactly the same we can still experience some of that old magic. They also bring basic equipment, basic engine, basic everything, which means they aren't further weighted down with unnecessary equipment and that their tyres still have normal sizes and not the width and diameter of a 400bhp sportscar. You can even experience this in relatively recent, fast, powerful cars like the Mk 1 New Mini.
-
[quote=Ferrer;973902]
What I am against is about progress that detracts from the driving experience. I mean things like active steering, lane departure warning and all those sort of things. If you can't drive properly you shouldn't be driving in the first place, and I think it's better to pay full attention rather than rely on those systems. Those systems can give average people a false sense of security, and that's not a good thing.
[/quote]
The same was said when the safety belt was introduced, and driving with a belt is still considered in some cultures as definitely uncool, and a proof that you can't drive.
P.S : I have my lane departure warning system permanently switched off, as it starts to work when you do not use your indicator when switching lanes, which is rather irritating.
-
Having driven my father's 2011 Infiniti M with all those gizmos, I am glad it comes with a button to switch them all off....
IMO they can have all the stuff they want just so that they can list them in a feature set(or better yet, make them optional, in this case the car was bought off a deal and came with all the stuff loaded for lots of $$ off sticker), as long as you can switch them off its fine with me...
-
Europeans are better than Americans because they choose the option in their cars wisely.
[url="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/08/why-doesnt-europe-care-about-infotainment/"]Why doesnt Europe care about infotainment?[/url]
Discuss.
-
[quote=Ferrer;974483]Europeans are better than Americans because they choose the option in their cars wisely.
[url="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/08/why-doesnt-europe-care-about-infotainment/"]Why doesnt Europe care about infotainment?[/url]
Discuss.[/quote]
Ford just thinks it'll set themselves apart from the pack.
Their products are actually pretty decent, but I couldn't give a rat's ass about their SYNC garbage.
-
Hows the usage of "Smartphone" in EU? Smartphones are so prevalent now in US its important for all these integration to every aspect of consumer's like, including cars.
And what constitute infotainment? Don't most VW now have some kind of multimedia enabled touchscreen system?(I don't but I am cheap and I buy the cheapest pacakge)...
-
I don't know about the actual figures but I know both people with and without (including myself) smartphones. I'm not sure it is 50/50, but it could be easily 65/35.
Also there's the small problem of American systems not actually coping with European speeds...
[url="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/08/31/ford-sync-modified-for-autobahn-speeds/"]Ford SYNC modified for autobahn speeds[/url]
-
The 991's Ring time made me think of something; are cars currently getting quicker at a faster rate then they ever have?
It seems every minorly performance-oriented car is chopping seconds off of its zero to sixty and slashing tens of seconds off its Ring times, if its manufacturer is into that sort of thing.
Surely tire technology is partly to blame, but I would guess that the majority of this new speed is coming from the further integration of electronics into all of a car's driving systems. Will objective performance plateau once again when this integration is total and complete?
-
Speaking of which, it's interesting how the Nissan GT-R vs. Porsche 911 vs. Corvette ZR1 battle waged in 2008-9 set off this fervor over mid 7's yet a mid 7' two-three years later is basically "average" for a performance road car. Now you have the Lexus LF-A setting a 7:14 and a Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR setting a 7:12.
-
Well, I'm not entirely sure electronics have improved the performance. I mean would an experienced racing driver be faster with the electronics on or off, in a road car? What they have definitely made, though, is performance more accessible for useless driver. Stepping into a Ferrari 458 and going very fast without getting killed or destroying the car is very easy, even if you are plastic surgeon in California, thanks to the flappy paddle gearbox, the multiple-way traction control, ABS, stability management programme control, electronic diff and so on. Try doing the same in a Lamborghini Countach LP400S and the outcome wouldn't probably be the same...
As a personal opinion making performance so accessible, even in seriously focused sportscars is wrong. High performance driving is something that should be achieved after a period learning, followed by hard work to understand what makes your car go fast and what actually slows you down. It should be an achievement in a way, something that requires an effort, not something you replicate from what you do as if you drove in the Play Station.
-
[quote=Ferrer;975197] High performance driving is something that should be achieved after a period learning, followed by hard work to understand what makes your car go fast and what actually slows you down. It should be an achievement in a way, something that requires an effort, not something you replicate from what you do as if you drove in the Play Station.[/quote]
and subsequently should only be executed in the confined areas of a racetrack.
And for your information, the Spaniar Luis Ordonnez, who won the play station contest some years ago, and was rewarded with a seat for this years 24 hours of LM race, is now the fastest driver of the team he is driving for. So yes, it is possible to get to grips with speed behind a console.
-
I know about Lucas.
I also think that performance driving can be executed safely even in open roads, and that the same principles of understanding and feeling the car still apply.
-
[quote=Ferrer;975218]I know about Lucas.
I also think that performance driving can be executed safely even in open roads, and that the same principles of understanding and feeling the car still apply.[/quote]
probably your roads are more open than ours...
-
Well, it's funny you should mention that. Today I went about 80km north of Barcelona and once off the motorway you had to take a country road which allowed a relatively high average speed but that has corners you have to take care of. We were a group of four cars, a Toyota Avensis estate, a C4 Grand Picasso, a Fiesta diesel and me in the i30. You were maintaining a good rythm, rarely going below 100km/h.
I never had to break, while on the other cars brake lights came on randomly. They also drove rather fast on the straights but didn't seem to be able to take corners fluidly (except possibly the chap in the Ford). I'd dowshift to get more engine-braking and therefore no need for brakes at all.
So see, you can still enjoy motoring while not going [I]that[/I] fast.
-
[quote=Ferrer;975220]Well, it's funny you should mention that. Today I went about 80km north of Barcelona and once off the motorway you had to take a country road which allowed a relatively high average speed but that has corners you have to take care of. We were a group of four cars, a Toyota Avensis estate, a C4 Grand Picasso, a Fiesta diesel and me in the i30. You were maintaining a good rythm, rarely going below 100km/h.
I never had to break, while on the other cars brake lights came on randomly. They also drove rather fast on the straights but didn't seem to be able to take corners fluidly (except possibly the chap in the Ford). I'd dowshift to get more engine-braking and therefore no need for brakes at all.
So see, you can still enjoy motoring while not going [I]that[/I] fast.[/quote]
Of course, but I thought we were talking about high performance driving, and that is hardly what can achieve in an i30....and, em, not any villages along the roadside?
-
Nope, no villages along the way, altough you do eventually arrive at one. It isn't a very long road, 10km I'd say.
I also disagree that performance driving depends on what you are driving. It depends on the way you drive, in my opinion.
-
[quote=Ferrer;975242]
I also disagree that performance driving depends on what you are driving. It depends on the way you drive, in my opinion.[/quote]
Well, if you are in some econo box or fat FWD sedan or crossover, you really don't have much confidence behind the wheel. I know this feeling well. Try driving some horrid Buick Rendezvouz on some lovely twisty roads. It really scares the piss out of you. Of course, my driving experience is not as great as some of the more experienced drivers here, but I do have enough to feel steering, brakes, throttle, the slush box, and cars like that will not allow you to have fun behind the wheel.
-
[quote=Ferrer;975197]Well, I'm not entirely sure electronics have improved the performance. I mean would an experienced racing driver be faster with the electronics on or off, in a road car? What they have definitely made, though, is performance more accessible for useless driver. Stepping into a Ferrari 458 and going very fast without getting killed or destroying the car is very easy, even if you are plastic surgeon in California, thanks to the flappy paddle gearbox, the multiple-way traction control, ABS, stability management programme control, electronic diff and so on. Try doing the same in a Lamborghini Countach LP400S and the outcome wouldn't probably be the same...
[/quote]
I don't know about that, Driver's Aids is one thing, chassis dynamic control is something else. And the line between the 2 is blurry at best. Much like the whole argument with 458 being more "alive" vs the McLaren. The E-diff and magnetic ride control still works in maximizing the performance envelope of the car even if the driver is powersliding to his heart's content. The car is still flattering the driver. And there is no question its making him faster, whether he is a F1 superstar or Joe Blow Dentist. Can Nigel Mansell drive faster than his Williams did without his active suspension equipped, ABS assisted, automatic gearbox shifting and traction control optimized car? I very much doubt that....
Subjective performance-wise it may be a different story. You might feel more involved in a dumb car where you are doing everything to make it go fast at the limit, than a smarter car with its performance envelope so high that at legal speed its just not thrilling....
-
[quote=Ferrer;975242]Nope, no villages along the way, altough you do eventually arrive at one. It isn't a very long road, 10km I'd say.
I also disagree that performance driving depends on what you are driving. It depends on the way you drive, in my opinion.[/quote]
my performance driving in a 2CV was legendary...
-
Moarer is betterer.
[url="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/10/27/next-gen-viper-may-get-8-7-liter-v10/"]Next-gen Viper may get 8.7-liter V10[/url]
Who cares about emissions...
-
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! Five-hundred thirty one cubes of engine!
I am no big fan of the Viper, but reading that made me chuckle, which I suppose is kind of the point of a car like this. It is also nice to see that among the ranks of the legally insane, there are those who are still loath to force their induction.
-
Getting close to the kind of number that the pre-war car gets...
-
[quote=f6fhellcat13;976725]Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! Five-hundred thirty one cubes of engine!
I am no big fan of the Viper, but reading that made me chuckle, which I suppose is kind of the point of a car like this. It is also nice to see that among the ranks of the legally insane, there are those who are still loath to force their induction.[/quote]
Bah, forced induction is for the weak.
-
-
Just a bump on this thread.
Saab is dying and will be dead soon enough- luckily the museum is staying put.
What are your thoughts on the next company to die?
My opinion would be Mitsubishi. Other than the Evolution and perhaps the electric car that I don't care for, their products are garbage.
The Galant and Eclipse barely represent what awesome products they stood for.
The Lancer is an okay econobox, but there are better options.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries would still be around making trucks and all, but their car company's products are very weak.
Comparing Mitsubishi to Subaru, it's a very big contrast. Subaru products are desirable and at least sell- the BR-Z is going to be very hot, the STI and the Legacy are both good cars. The Tribeca, maybe not, but some people like it.
Both make heavy machinery, but as a lineup the Subaru lineup is definitely stronger.
On a side note, I am still concerned about Honda as a company. They seem to have lost their bearings as to their products. The Korean automakers are very strong now, and rightly so. The earthquake and tsunami did not help at all.
The new Accord better be a stronger product or else they'll be in big trouble. The new Civic is lackluster. On a high note, the new Accord may mean that the Crosstour will not be renewed. I also hope the ZDX is axed.
One thing to look forward to is the ILX. Not sure what's wrong with the TSX name, but at least it looks attractive. I still hope it's priced accordingly, or else it won't sell either.
The NSX may end up like the original NSX- doomed to fail, especially if it's too expensive and too technologically laden. Even if it's made to be built in small numbers, a high price is not the way to go, especially when it'll probably be around the price of a GT-R.
Another point to touch upon is GM. The Volt isn't selling well. No surprises there right?