Just something about em.

[Rage0329]

I don't think @Danoff was speaking literally about top speed alone, more the act of driving a slower car fast tends to be move involving than driving a fast car, because you can use more of its performance more of the time, and its limits - and therefore the point at which you feel like you're getting the most from the car - are so much more approachable.

Interestingly though, I've had an experience pretty much opposite to yours. A year or two ago I drove a Mk1 Golf GTI to Wolfsburg for a feature I wrote. On the way back, I drove a Golf Clubsport.

The journey to Wolfsburg was so much more fun and memorable than the drive back. The fastest I ever went was about 115mph...

View attachment 686782​

...though the car was indicating a bit higher than that! It took plenty of effort to get there (on a derestricted section of autobahn, I hasten to add), and it's not the car I'd choose if I had to do so every day, but it felt a bit adventurous.

On the way back, my cruising speed was somewhere between 120-130 in the Clubsport. It would get there and hold it pretty easily. And I really can't remember much of the journey back. I was travelling demonstrably faster, but the sense of speed was so much less apparent.

I agree that faster cars tend to be better engineered (at least, better engineered for going quickly), and admittedly the fact I've never owned a properly fast car is more down to my budget than any desire.

But I could certainly buy faster cars than the ones I've owned for the money I do spend on cars - I just choose not to. My two current cars have no more than about 220bhp between them but they're entirely about feel and feedback. No traction control, no ABS (ABS and TCS are both very good things, but not really necessary in cars I drive solely for fun now and then), skinny tyres (185s for one, 175s for the other). One doesn't even have power steering, and no conventional modern car I've driven (I'm excluding Caterhams etc) has more steering feedback (not all non-PAS cars have great feedback - the Golf GTI above didn't - but this one does).

I want to be able to reach a car's limits, or at least feel like I'm approaching them. Safely. And the only way you can do that on the road is by having a car with fairly low limits. On a track? Different story. Fast cars can be brilliant fun.

I understand your point about being able to reach a car's limits. That's what I felt with the Opel, haha. Different horses for different courses, as the saying goes. In my work and travels I just tend to find myself at the lower end of cars, unless I'm paying out of pocket for something better. I've driven more average but new cars from rental lots than I could count realistically on fingers and toes. Some I got to enjoy on a relatively twisty road, but most, no. Typically just highways getting from A to B. The fun things I've managed to rent... Mustang GT, Camaro SS, Challenger R/T, C63 AMG, E63 AMG, C7 Stingray. Those were all fun, for me, nowhere near their limits. I really think it comes back to the design philosophy of the car. If the car was intended to be sporty to begin with, then it's fun no matter what.

Obviously slow car slow is no good. Fast car slow can be pretty frustrating too. Some cars make you feel like you're going fast through involvement rather than fear (an example of feeling fast through fear would be shuddering or twitching). It could be engine noise, a convertible with the top down, responsiveness at slower speed.... and for some cars I swear it's just intangible. One of the most fun times I've ever had driving a car on the road was with a '93 NA MR2. If I'm reading wikipedia correctly, that car had 135 hp when it was brand new, and I did not drive it when it was brand new. I can't tell you exactly how it did it, but it made everything fun.

Agree with you on the NA. NA > Turbo. I've yet to try a Miata / MX-5. I want to. I think I'd really enjoy it on a Canyon Road, a Mountain Pass. But my fear is... It'd leave me wanting for torque. The fast car slow, been there, done that, in a 6 speed too. I made some nice gaps behind me in traffic though. I feel as though the cars that make you feel like you're going fast through involvement, are lying to you. It's the kind of dishonesty I despise in cars. It's like cars that look fast, but aren't fast at all. I just returned a Ford Fusion Hybrid to Hertz in Chicago. When you start the car, it's quiet, just in EV mode. The torque comes on FAST! Rest of the time it feels like a sponge though.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I've yet to try a Miata / MX-5. I want to. I think I'd really enjoy it on a Canyon Road, a Mountain Pass. But my fear is... It'd leave me wanting for torque.

You're right about the torque... but they hold their speed in turns incredibly well and the notchy/racy gearchange is so much fun that you don't care about keeping the revs in the sweet spot.

 

[homeforsummer]

If the car was intended to be sporty to begin with, then it's fun no matter what.

Ah, you see I definitely don't agree with this. Too many performance cars I've driven are only fun if you drive them very quickly indeed, and given the limits of modern vehicles this means doing speeds on public roads that can't be mentioned on this forum, and doing corner speeds that are completely inadvisable when you can't guarantee what's up ahead.

Even a ~200bhp supermini (subcompact for those of you in North American - think Fiesta ST, Mini Cooper S) can cover ground at a huge rate these days, and by the time you start getting to the ~300bhp hot hatches (most of which can get to 60mph - in the UK, the non-motorway national speed limit - in the fives) there's already far more performance than you could realistically use responsibly on the road, if you wanted to use the full extent of the car's capabilities.

The Golf R is my perfect example of this. About 300 horses, all-wheel drive. On a really fun, really tricky road, it's pretty remarkable - fast, good balance, great adjustability in the chassis, brilliantly damped, pretty good steering, nice responses, strong brakes etc.

But you have to get your kicks from going fast alone, because at anything less than driving it very hard indeed, it's just not interesting to drive. Back off the pace and the steering feel disappears, the noise is uninteresting, the brakes feel over-servoed, the ride is just firm rather than well-damped. And given that driving it at even half what it's capable of you'd be the quickest thing on the road most of the time, it just ends up being completely uninteresting.

The first Ferrari I drove was a 488 GTB. Remarkable car. And occasional bursts of acceleration aside - which again, involves breaking laws if you're to do so on the road, since at full noise it'll break any speed limit in the world in roughly five seconds from a complete standstill - it was disappointingly boring. Corners at road-going speeds are completely unchallenging for it, and when you're just cruising along you might as well be in anything - it's quiet, has an automatic gearbox... I was very fortunate to drive one at Fiorano a month or two later and there it was completely different, and one of the best driving experiences I've had - but only on track.

Now I think the list you mentioned (Corvettes, AMGs etc) is notable for all of those cars I think feeling inherently special in the first place. They all have something intangible about them (or, tangibly, all have quite characterful V8 engines) that makes them a little more interesting to drive even when you're not going quickly. I drove a Lexus RC F the other day and I'd throw that onto the list too - naturally-aspirated V8, makes a great noise, and while it's not involving at low speeds, it makes up for it by feeling like a luxury car. And you can appreciate luxury whatever speed you're doing.

I suppose it all depends on what you physically get your fun from.

For me, it's entirely about feedback and interaction with a vehicle. Most modern vehicles are quite poor on the interaction thing full stop, but some do it well provided you're going fast enough. But if going fast enough means constantly having to drive at inadvisable or illegal speeds, I'd prefer to take the slower (which usually means older) car that offers me interactivity at regular speeds.

I should add, just for clarity, that I don't simply like slow cars full stop. Most modern slower cars don't have the feedback I crave either...

 

[TVR27]

Everything is made out of cheap plastic and all the new cars look the same. I haven't seen anything I really like since the 90's and early 00's. Motorsport is really boring now.

 

[TheCracker]

Modern cars, as well as being quick, reliable and generally not in any way bad any more (as mentioned by HFS above) are also rather homogeneous. They are all either small-medium front engined and predominantly front wheel drive or front wheel drive-based, larger front engined, rear or four wheel drive or front engined rear drive sports cars. You get a few oddities thrown in, but 95% of cars on the road fall into those well-trod categories.

When i first learned to drive, in the late 80's, early 90's i always had use of parents cars when needed, so never bothered with my own. But i had friends who had cars that i often got to drive - a BMW 2002, a Fiat X/19, a Beetle and a MGB GT. All of which were 'old cars' even back then and all of them, as you'd expect cars owned by 17/18 year olds, were quite knackered. They were no quicker than the Escorts, Fiestas, Carltons, Mondeos etc that our parents owned, but they were all several magnitudes more interesting to drive. You could explore the higher limits of their performance and handling abilities without actually travelling all that quickly. Relatively speaking so. I'd imagine that they'd all feel completely alien to drive these days.

 

[Rage0329]

Now I think the list you mentioned (Corvettes, AMGs etc) is notable for all of those cars I think feeling inherently special in the first place. They all have something intangible about them (or, tangibly, all have quite characterful V8 engines) that makes them a little more interesting to drive even when you're not going quickly. I drove a Lexus RC F the other day and I'd throw that onto the list too - naturally-aspirated V8, makes a great noise, and while it's not involving at low speeds, it makes up for it by feeling like a luxury car. And you can appreciate luxury whatever speed you're doing.

I suppose it all depends on what you physically get your fun from.

For me, it's entirely about feedback and interaction with a vehicle. Most modern vehicles are quite poor on the interaction thing full stop, but some do it well provided you're going fast enough. But if going fast enough means constantly having to drive at inadvisable or illegal speeds, I'd prefer to take the slower (which usually means older) car that offers me interactivity at regular speeds.

I should add, just for clarity, that I don't simply like slow cars full stop. Most modern slower cars don't have the feedback I crave either...

I understand exactly where you're coming from. I think it's a case of what you're used to seeing, what you're around, the roads available, and the distances you have to travel. None of the cars that you describe from the Fiesta ST up to the Golf R, would be any fun at all for kind of driving and the distances I typically drive in a year in the U.S. Typically long distance, highway miles, then short A to B, i.e. to work and back to hotel. If I could take them on a twisty road (which can be hard to find), they might shine. Those cars that are more involving and require more driver attention (older ones you're talking about) would just lead to fatigue sooner over those non-stop 4-6, even 8 hour drives across the U.S. Roads are also more narrow in the U.K., distances you need to travel are much shorter. In fact roads here in Germany (I'm in Germany atm) are narrow in general but for the autobahn. The Golf GTI I rented, it was pretty fun, but not FUN enough, for me anyway.

I've driven the 458 Italia, SLS AMG, Nissan GT-R, and Huracan at a track in Vegas, and like you say it's a totally different experience to street use. They all have a different interpretation of what feedback should be. I would say that modern cars have been massaged, tuned, refined to the point where they're simply appliances for the masses which is why you don't get what you're after. At least not until you're paying big money for something with some track focus, or complete track focus. Where the driver comes before most of the creature comforts that most people expect these days.

I would say my Viper is the most involving car, I've ever driven, even in typical driving situations, it's a relative comparison though. Hydraulic steering, I can feel what each tire is doing. No turbos, so no lag. I'm sure though you've got a far wider experience of cars old, new, and from all across the spectrum.

 

[homeforsummer]

Everything is made out of cheap plastic and all the new cars look the same.

No it isn't, and no they don't.

I understand exactly where you're coming from. I think it's a case of what you're used to seeing, what you're around, the roads available, and the distances you have to travel. None of the cars that you describe from the Fiesta ST up to the Golf R, would be any fun at all for kind of driving and the distances I typically drive in a year in the U.S. Typically long distance, highway miles, then short A to B, i.e. to work and back to hotel. If I could take them on a twisty road (which can be hard to find), they might shine. Those cars that are more involving and require more driver attention (older ones you're talking about) would just lead to fatigue sooner over those non-stop 4-6, even 8 hour drives across the U.S. Roads are also more narrow in the U.K., distances you need to travel are much shorter. In fact roads here in Germany (I'm in Germany atm) are narrow in general but for the autobahn. The Golf GTI I rented, it was pretty fun, but not FUN enough, for me anyway.

I've often said on this forum that in the UK, I think somewhere around 200-250bhp is the sweet spot for performance cars. It's enough that you've got plenty of performance for overtaking, for easy highway cruising, for getting up to speed, and enough performance simply to have fun with (in a light enough car, at least), but not so much that you can't go through a few gears without smashing through a speed limit and constantly worrying about your license.

In the US or in Germany you could probably add another 100-200bhp to that figure due to either empty enough roads for the former or derestricted autobahns for the latter. That said, while I've not given much thought to what kind of car I'd own if I lived in the States, I doubt my taste in cars would change much, nor the places I enjoy driving. I've driven enough canyon roads around LA to know that the cars I currently own in the UK would be equally fun out there! Though a few of the hills might call for a little more power, at least...

For me I don't think the fatigue thing really comes into play. Another point I've made before is that I've been less tired after eight-hour journeys on the highways in the States than I have after two or three-hour trips in the UK. I did something like 2000 miles in a couple of weeks in an old Chevy Astro in the US back in 2013 (the one in my avatar, actually) and didn't bat any eyelid, despite its relative lack of modern comfort, convenience or features. Or performance.

A newer car would probably have made things much easier (and it wouldn't have kept overheating) but I doubt the experience would have been the same.

Was quite glad to be in a modern car on my three-hour (which should have been two hours) trip to the airport the other day though. As you say, it really depends on where you're driving. My ideal balance really would be a modern, comfortable and decently-powered car for the commute, and something simple, older, with more feedback for fun drives on weekends.

 

[Scaff]

So we all know how far cars have come. They have progressed into incredible capable machines. We are are power levels never before seen, we've reached great levels of efficiency, safety, comFort and what have you.

But is it just me, or is there nothing exciting or appealing about them anymore. We all know about how I prefer everything old school. There's just something about the sound, styling etc that new vehicles just don't appeal. Am I alone in this?

Most of my 'leisure driving' these days is with my father and brothers and exclusively in older series Land Rovers on either closed roads, green lanes or the gravel areas around my fathers yard.

Between us we have managed to build up a rather silly collection of Series 2 and 3 Land Rovers, all of which are far more fun off road than anything modern.

That said for a daily drive I do love my V40, I spent enough years in cars without AC or effective heating to love those.

So for me it varies depending on the circumstances and situation.

 

[05XR8]

Answering the OP, you're not alone. I can actually compare my past '69 Cutlass S, to my now '03 Charade.
Both brought smiles to my face. The Cutlass was awesome. Not just the 455cid, but the pillarless windows. The "S" emblem embroidery in the fabric seat backs. The taillight design and the vinyl roof.

The Charade is a tardis. Moves smartly. Comfortable. Sounds like a mini truck at idle. It too has character. So, something like a VW UP!, new kei cars, my old '13 Megane, may not have that old school flavor, some still possess the little quirks and details like cars in the past.

 

[homeforsummer]

So for me it varies depending on the circumstances and situation.

That's definitely a good point. Drove back from Gatwick last night. Three hours door-to-door, dark, loads of traffic, queues past Heathrow, cold outside.

Was in a Golf GTE - smooth ride, quiet, comfortable seats, automatic, doesn't use much fuel, easy to see out of, good stereo, highly unlikely to break down.

I'd not liked to have done the same trip in my Rallye. But then the Golf is a bit dull on a country road where the Peugeot is brilliant, so the situation would be reversed there.