Danger is your middle name?

[Danoff]

I was reading through this account of what it's like to own an air cooled 911. I still don't get the draw behind air cooling specifically. I get that he likes it old and raw and unrefined. But specifically what's the draw for not having a radiator? I mean... if the draw is that it's less complex and so there's less to go wrong, that's kinda outweighed by a car where things go wrong a lot and expensively - but this is all a digression. What I really want to talk about from that article is one sentence:

"Deep down in every car enthusiast, there is the need to do dangerous things and conquer them."​

No. He's wrong. I'm a car enthusiast and I do not have that need. I have absolutely no desire to do dangerous things because they are dangerous. I do sometimes have a desire to do dangerous things for other reasons. But those reasons have to outweigh the additional risk. The danger is not a draw for me personally.

I get it though. I've watched Fight Club, I understand that desire to tap some inner perspective on the scarcity of life's moments, and to remind yourself that you are mortal by bringing yourself to the precipice and looking over. I understand that idea of grounding yourself in in the present by reminding yourself that there may be no tomorrow - and I love that people do that actually. I'm just not one of those people.

Skiing is often like this as well. I ski, but I have no desire to conquer the mountain. I ski for fun and exercise, not for danger or for accomplishment. I don't care if I don't do all of the crazy runs, it's not a draw for me. I ski because I like the movement, I like the lateral acceleration and the beautiful scenery. I like the sounds and the sensations. I drive for the same reasons. I don't need to conquer the track, or the road, or the car. I drive because I enjoy it. I like the acceleration and the beautiful scenery, I like the sounds and sensations. It's not a test, it's not a workout, it's a vacation. I don't need to be faster than you, it's not how I judge myself.

I know I'm in the minority, both for skiing and for driving. I know that the danger is a draw for some people, but for at least one car enthusiast, I can say that I drive despite danger, not because of it.

So let me know what you think, is danger your middle name? Care to explain why or why not?

 

[Tornado]

No. He's wrong. I'm a car enthusiast and I do not have that need. I have absolutely no desire to do dangerous things because they are dangerous. I do sometimes have a desire to do dangerous things for other reasons. But those reasons have to outweigh the additional risk. The danger is not a draw for me personally.

That can't be true, because I'm sure you've driven that SW20 at least once.

 

[Danoff]

That can't be true, because I'm sure you've driven that SW20 at least once.

It has an eager feel to it which is contagious.

 

[MatskiMonk]

My (lack-of) understanding on the situation is that a situation of danger will trigger certain responses (typically fight/flight/freeze) which in turn causes the brain to release different chemicals, with dopamine being the one that people like. Some people enjoy roller coasters (for example), some people hate them, but for those who like it, it translates very directly to a natural high. I believe that in events where the brain is expecting physical pain to result, it also dumps endorphines in - which again, can be pleasurable. Enduring high stress levels can affect all this, and I'm puzzled by the role of adrenaline - I've tried to read a bit about this in relation to long term alcohol abuse and anxiety.

In short, I don't think it's a conscious thing for most people, somebody may lean towards danger simple because ultimately, it does make them feel good... I don't see why that would be linked to being a petrolhead.

 

[TexRex]

So let me know what you think, is danger your middle name?

Nope.

Care to explain why or why not?

 

[homeforsummer]

I was reading through this account of what it's like to own an air cooled 911. I still don't get the draw behind air cooling specifically. I get that he likes it old and raw and unrefined. But specifically what's the draw for not having a radiator? I mean... if the draw is that it's less complex and so there's less to go wrong, that's kinda outweighed by a car where things go wrong a lot and expensively - but this is all a digression. What I really want to talk about from that article is one sentence:

"Deep down in every car enthusiast, there is the need to do dangerous things and conquer them."​

No. He's wrong. I'm a car enthusiast and I do not have that need. I have absolutely no desire to do dangerous things because they are dangerous. I do sometimes have a desire to do dangerous things for other reasons. But those reasons have to outweigh the additional risk. The danger is not a draw for me personally.

I get it though. I've watched Fight Club, I understand that desire to tap some inner perspective on the scarcity of life's moments, and to remind yourself that you are mortal by bringing yourself to the precipice and looking over. I understand that idea of grounding yourself in in the present by reminding yourself that there may be no tomorrow - and I love that people do that actually. I'm just not one of those people.

Skiing is often like this as well. I ski, but I have no desire to conquer the mountain. I ski for fun and exercise, not for danger or for accomplishment. I don't care if I don't do all of the crazy runs, it's not a draw for me. I ski because I like the movement, I like the lateral acceleration and the beautiful scenery. I like the sounds and the sensations. I drive for the same reasons. I don't need to conquer the track, or the road, or the car. I drive because I enjoy it. I like the acceleration and the beautiful scenery, I like the sounds and sensations. It's not a test, it's not a workout, it's a vacation. I don't need to be faster than you, it's not how I judge myself.

I know I'm in the minority, both for skiing and for driving. I know that the danger is a draw for some people, but for at least one car enthusiast, I can say that I drive despite danger, not because of it.

So let me know what you think, is danger your middle name? Care to explain why or why not?

I'm pretty much with you on this. I don't do what I do for danger, and I'd say in general I'm a fairly cautious road driver because I want to avoid danger. I like driving quickly but my sense of responsibility and self-preservation is fairly high, so I generally save it for the track. And I do have a competitive streak and would love to go racing one day soon, but that's not really from a sense of danger either - that's more the primal urge to rise above the hoards.

I was thinking the other day about why I drive. The joy of driving quickly and feeling in control of a car is, I think being honest, probably only third on my list of priorities.

First is plain and simple freedom - the freedom to travel to where I want, when I want and how I want. The best things I've ever done have been road trips. I love cars, but in those situations, the car didn't really matter. If I were to pick the cars I've had the best experiences with, the list would include a knackered early 90s Chevrolet Astro and a similarly knackered mid-90s Citroen ZX non-turbo diesel estate, because the trips I did with them have given me far better memories than any fast drive down a twisty road I've done. But, importantly, I wouldn't have done those trips without a car, so that they were cars mattered more than what the cars were.

And secondly, it's time to reflect. It's another reason I like long drives. I can drive for hours simply enjoying being in control of the vehicle and using my spare capacity to just think about stuff. Again, the car here doesn't really matter, though actually I find less advanced and less refined cars are more pleasurable because you at least feel like you're going somewhere rather than being whisked along in a hermetically-sealed bubble.

Neither of those reasons involve danger but I'd be no more or less of a car enthusiast if they did.

My (lack-of) understanding on the situation is that a situation of danger will trigger certain responses (typically fight/flight/freeze) which in turn causes the brain to release different chemicals, with dopamine being the one that people like. Some people enjoy roller coasters (for example), some people hate them, but for those who like it, it translates very directly to a natural high. I believe that in events where the brain is expecting physical pain to result, it also dumps endorphines in - which again, can be pleasurable. Enduring high stress levels can affect all this, and I'm puzzled by the role of adrenaline - I've tried to read a bit about this in relation to long term alcohol abuse and anxiety.

I find this interesting, because it's obviously human nature to respond to those chemicals in that way, but I'm not sure whether it's necessarily danger that triggers it, or whether our bodies are simply so primitive in an evolutionary perspective that any number of things can trigger those chemicals that back at the dawn of time would have been fight or flight scenarios.

I like driving fast on occasion, I like driving on track and feeling the forces on my body, I like the feeling of being in control of a car, and many of those sensations dump chemicals in the way you describe. I suppose those activities all have an inherent danger to them, but I'd say that probably the sensation of speed (something the human body isn't really designed for) and the sensations of noise, vibration, tactile sensations through my hands etc are more to do with it - or the sense of achievement of stringing together a sequence of bends or catching a slide.

 

[Epic B]

I don't even want to actually get my licence. My parents don't even own a vehicle and I take transit too too around. I'm not interested in danger and hardly interested in normal driving either.

My legal middle name is actually Epic but that's beside the point.

 

[Akmuq]

 

[Carbon_6]

I'm pretty much with you on this. I don't do what I do for danger, and I'd say in general I'm a fairly cautious road driver because I want to avoid danger. I like driving quickly but my sense of responsibility and self-preservation is fairly high, so I generally save it for the track. And I do have a competitive streak and would love to go racing one day soon, but that's not really from a sense of danger either - that's more the primal urge to rise above the hoards.

I was thinking the other day about why I drive. The joy of driving quickly and feeling in control of a car is, I think being honest, probably only third on my list of priorities.

First is plain and simple freedom - the freedom to travel to where I want, when I want and how I want. The best things I've ever done have been road trips. I love cars, but in those situations, the car didn't really matter. If I were to pick the cars I've had the best experiences with, the list would include a knackered early 90s Chevrolet Astro and a similarly knackered mid-90s Citroen ZX non-turbo diesel estate, because the trips I did with them have given me far better memories than any fast drive down a twisty road I've done. But, importantly, I wouldn't have done those trips without a car, so that they were cars mattered more than what the cars were.

And secondly, it's time to reflect. It's another reason I like long drives. I can drive for hours simply enjoying being in control of the vehicle and using my spare capacity to just think about stuff. Again, the car here doesn't really matter, though actually I find less advanced and less refined cars are more pleasurable because you at least feel like you're going somewhere rather than being whisked along in a hermetically-sealed bubble.

Neither of those reasons involve danger but I'd be no more or less of a car enthusiast if they did.

I find this interesting, because it's obviously human nature to respond to those chemicals in that way, but I'm not sure whether it's necessarily danger that triggers it, or whether our bodies are simply so primitive in an evolutionary perspective that any number of things can trigger those chemicals that back at the dawn of time would have been fight or flight scenarios.

I like driving fast on occasion, I like driving on track and feeling the forces on my body, I like the feeling of being in control of a car, and many of those sensations dump chemicals in the way you describe. I suppose those activities all have an inherent danger to them, but I'd say that probably the sensation of speed (something the human body isn't really designed for) and the sensations of noise, vibration, tactile sensations through my hands etc are more to do with it - or the sense of achievement of stringing together a sequence of bends or catching a slide.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[HighSeasHoMastr]

I think for me, it's something more like escapism.

I never feel particularly in danger behind the wheel, even driving a 45 year old car at significant speeds on a track that was last updated for safety in the '70s with tarmac quality not much better than the local roads. It's always in the back of my mind that something could go wrong, but never enough to get in my head. I suppose it's a bit of arrogance and a bit of willful ignorance; I believe that my skills are good enough to keep me out of any trouble I would get myself into, and I believe that "it won't happen to me" in relation to mechanical failures, even though I know both of those things are probably not true. So, stated like that, I suppose yes, the danger is a factor. I just wouldn't say that's why I do it.

What keeps me coming back is the release. When I'm on the track, there's nothing else. There's the car and the feedback it gives me, and the track around me, and nothing else matters. Driving at 100% (or as close as you can get to it) requires near enough 100% concentration, so everything else just sort of falls away. When I'm out there, I'm not worrying about how bad tomorrow will be at work, or how much I'm spending in parts wear and gas, or thinking about that fight I had with my girlfriend. I'm just driving. It is exclusionary to all else. The total, visceral experience of it, the sounds, smells, g-forces, and internal push to go just that little bit faster is all-consuming. It doesn't matter if I'm in a fast car like my M3 or 911, something reasonable like my old 330i, or an electric go-kart at K1, it's about the feeling of total involvement, that every single part of your being is focused on one thing: faster.
That's what keeps me going to the track.


As for road driving, I guess I would reflect @homeforsummer thoughts. It's a nice time to reflect, to have some time to yourself, while still getting the feeling of freedom and exploration. I do enjoy a bit of sporty driving on the road as well, but I never get anywhere close to a pace where it becomes as all-consuming as it does on the track. I would say the sportier stuff on the road is just for a bit of fun, you get a little smile when you open up the taps or chuck it into a corner a bit don't you? No other reason there, it's just some good fun for a bit.

There's also the social aspect in both. Track days can be hugely social if you want them to; everyone is there for the same reason (more or less) so it's easy to make friends. The clubs around here are right strict about anything that looks like 'racing' on the track (as they should be) so the ability to really have a go with a friend is a bit limited, but it's still fun to see if you can keep up (or if they can!).
On the road I would say the social aspect is a lot higher. I'm in a club for old 911s and we do monthly drives and dinners, so there's a bit part of it that's just a social gathering of people who all happen to love old Porsches, which is great. The drives usually last several hours and get us out into some fun roads away from the city, and it's good fun to just have a little blast through the country with some mates, even if you're not going particularly quick.

I would say that I very much agree with the author of that article's sentiment though. I think modern cars are less fun to drive, regardless of if you're going quickly or not. Not because they're more dangerous, but because they just ask more of you. I think anyone who enjoys driving for its own sake enjoys the physical act of controlling a car, of knowing what actions you need to take to get the desired response, of feeling those inputs translated to reality by the car. You just get more of that in older cars.
One of the most fun cars I've ever driven was my old Beetle, and certainly not because it was dangerously quick...

 

[homeforsummer]

When I'm on the track, there's nothing else. There's the car and the feedback it gives me, and the track around me, and nothing else matters. Driving at 100% (or as close as you can get to it) requires near enough 100% concentration, so everything else just sort of falls away.

That's actually something I'd missed, and I'd say that's very true too. More than any sense of danger, it's that singularity of focus that I like about driving quickly, and particularly on track. While I like driving to reflect, I also like the aspects of driving that are nothing else other than driving.

You're also right about old cars/new cars. I'd say that on track, the good new stuff is every bit as good as the old, often better, mostly because it's generally less compromised and more focused. But on the road, where you're not using 100% of a car's abilities, I find older cars more engaging because they demand more of you than newer cars. You're exposed to more noises, more vibrations, you need to think more carefully about breaking, you've a more mechanical connection with the gearbox etc.

To add to what you said about the Beetle, one of the cars I enjoyed driving most this year was a Renault 4. I'd be surprised if it had more than 50bhp, and I'd be surprised if I drove it more than 50mph, but I felt more a part of the experience than in most high-performance cars I've driven this year.

 

[Danoff]

One of the most fun cars I've ever driven was my old Beetle, and certainly not because it was dangerously quick...

I had an old beetle... it might have been fun, and not particularly quick, but it was definitely dangerous. Probably the most dangerous car I've ever driven. Air bags? no. Seat belt pretensioners? No. Side impa... no. What's that smell? Gas. Where's the gas tank? In your lap. Does it have brakes? Kiiiinda...

 

[VXR]

I'm always enticed to wring the neck out of my Swift on the drive to my girl's house, which is a 30 mile mix of dual carriageway followed by two sets of lanes intersected by a small town. The first of the lanes is great fun and my car just loves to be extended in second and third. It can't use all of fourth since that would be nearly 100mph. The point being; if you get it wrong, it could be very dangerous as British national speed limit A-roads can be, but I do it because I have faith in my ability and having explored the car at speeds, I sense what it is doing in any situation.

I just can't help the adrenaline rush of it.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I think 'thrill' and 'danger' are used a little to interchangeably these days.

Perhaps back, in say, the 1950s it wasn't really possible to have a thrilling drive in a car without it being dangerous, I don't think that's the case with today's machines.

When I go for a spirited drive, I realize their might be danger, but I do my best to mitigate those risks....like not driving above my limit or anywhere close to the car's limit.