Best Rear End

  • Thread starter Carbonite
  • 776 comments
  • 106,423 views
Yeah but you have to get one without the crummy GM-sourced 3 speed auto.

I'd rather have a Mondial, as well.
 
Tatra 603, outfitted for racing.
besonders-die-beiden-auspuffrohre-die-aus-dem-orangen-tatra-603-b6-herausragen-haben-die-ausmasse-zweier-posaunen-.jpg


(Note: For those unaware, the V8 in the 603 is air-cooled, and those cavernous tubes sticking out of the rear are actually there for more efficient cooling of said engine rather than oversized exhaust tips.)
 
Beeblebrox237
I don't mean to be offensive, but are you old enough to drive? That, to me, sounds like a comment from someone who hasn't really driven much and isn't in a position to realise that a really poor car that looks great will be awful to drive all the time, not just on the track. A really good car is as fun to drive at 10 mph as 100 mph.
Click to expand...
I'd not completely agree with this sentiment. I've driven dozens of cars that are fantastic flat-out but rather dull at regular speeds - Volkswagen Group performance cars in particular are very good at being fun when driven quickly, but the rest of the time feel little different to the basic 1.6 diesel found further down the range.

On the opposite side of the coin, most classic cars are actually pretty crap. They don't go, they don't stop, they don't grip, the steering is generally heavy, the gearbox recalcitrant, following a crash the emergency services would have to extract you with a sponge and they're constantly breaking down. But you can feel more involved in the driving experience going to the shops than you would in ten thousand miles of driving a Golf GTI.

The Mito in the previously quoted post is a good example of a car I'd be tempted to get over its rivals despite the fact it's not as good as many of them. In normal driving, commuting, down a motorway or even at seven tenths along a country road, there's very little to choose between the current crop of superminis. Given that for most people 95% of driving would be like this, buying a style-over-substance Mito makes a lot of sense as you're not really losing out on anything - boot space, ease of use, comfort, equipment, even reliability. Modern cars are generally good enough that you aren't punished for selecting something on style alone.

Sure, a Fiesta drives better when you start driving like a loon, but the rest of the time it's still a Fiesta. It's still a bit ugly, it still has the world's naffest dashboard, and when you leave your house each morning you'll see five dozen other Fiestas identical to yours.

I love driving, I love discovering the nuances that make a truly great car as good as it is, but I'd absolutely drive something day-to-day that put style over substance. My personal ethos for cars is that I'd rather drive something interesting than something good. An interesting car is interesting whether you're driving it, whether you're stuck in traffic, whether it's parked at a car show, or whether you're just thinking about it sitting in the garage. A good car is only good when the planets align and you're on that perfect bit of road.

Anyway, contributing (with a car some might say was style over substance):

14-3-800.jpg
 
I suppose I misused the word good, from a factual standpoint. For me, a car simply cannot be a good car unless it is interesting and reasonably charismatic. Factually, the Prius is a great car. But from an enthusiast's standpoint it's not very desirable. Equally, the F40 was a shoddily built and temperamental Italian car but is known as one of the greatest supercars of all time.
 

Latest Posts

Back