Unpopular Opinions- Cars in General

[CarreraGT]

So it is fun. What were you expecting from a 2.0 litre 4 cylinder which only produces 197 bhp plus I don't think the sole purpose of the car is to do 0-100 times as the top speed is only 130 and with a short gear ratio so you aren't expecting any speed records.

As a base model, that's fine. But I, like most, was expecting (or hoping) for a more powerful version to come along (i.e. turbocharged) with closer to 250hp and some descent sized tyres. That would make the car a hell of a lot more fun. Conversely, I could deal with the fact that the car is slow if the engine at least had some character to it. But the fact is, the engine feels and sounds boring.

I take it you own one of these things given your defensive position (note that this thread is supposed about unpopular opinions, so don't get too riled up...).

And I stand by my previous statement: 0-100 in 7+ seconds is not fast. I don't care about top speed

 

[Eunosthedeer]

Modern German cars whilst well built just look boring and uninteresting.

They looked a lot better and more charismatic back in the 90's

 

[Clark]

I like the Toyota Auris.

 

[lxmmy]

I take it you own one of these things given your defensive position (note that this thread is supposed about unpopular opinions, so don't get too riled up...).

No. But I don't see why not for the price.

You are right about I shouldn't get riled up after these points.....

3. Dual clutch gearboxes are no fun

4. Emissions regulations are ruining modern engines

 

[CarreraGT]

No. But I don't see why not for the price.

You are right about I shouldn't get riled up after these points.....

I'm confused... Are you agreeing? Disagreeing?

 

[lxmmy]

I'm confused... Are you agreeing? Disagreeing?

I'm hinting that I shouldn't take you serious.

 

[Neddo]

Driving schools should use cars with no assists too TBH.

 

[lxmmy]

Driving schools should use cars with no assists too TBH.

Assists exist for the main priority of safety and to put a first time learner in a car with no power-steering, ABS and traction control is just purely ridiculous as it just poses a danger to themselves and others around. Road safety is something not to take lightly.

 

[Tornado]

I don't get why people are perceiving the car to be quicker than it actually is. On paper it has near enough the same performance stats to a Lexus IS200T which can be categorised as a 'mid-size' saloon with both having a 2.0L - 4 cylinder engines but the 86GT being naturally aspirated.

On paper it should completely waste this:

Not only does it not, but the thing doesn't feel like it has any power until you get past about 5500, it never sounds particularly good no matter how deep you go, and about a third of the rev range feels unusable unless you are absolutely pinning it in the lowest possible gear. It all combines to make a car that feels slower than it actually is, and it isn't impressively quick to begin with. I can't contend how much fun you can have when throwing it around corners sideways because I wasn't given the option, but that engine/drivetrain combo is not good considering it was essentially a clean sheet for the car.

The point I was making is that it is quite harsh to say the car is 'too boring and slow' because it didn't satisfy someones need for speed in a straight line but to be put through its paces around the corners.

I daresay you would have a more difficult time finding a review of the car that satisfied anyone's need for speed.

 

[R5]

Driving schools should use cars with no assists too TBH.

...

Why?

 

[Neddo]

Assists exist for the main priority of safety and to put a first time learner in a car with no power-steering, ABS and traction control is just purely ridiculous as it just poses a danger to themselves and others around. Road safety is something not to take lightly.

I know. Maybe it would be good to know, because not all cars have them. I didn't say that beginners should immidietly get a car like that but after some time they should be able to handle cars like those too. It's possible that assists won't work so driver should at least be able to get a car to safety.

 

[Tornado]

...

Why?

Putting a student driver in a car with a backup camera, blind spot monitoring and parking sensors isn't going to do them much good if the cars they will actually be driving once they get their licence will probably be a 15 year old Taurus or whatever. The logic isn't terribly far removed from the countries that have different licence tiers for things like manual vs automatic transmissions or engine power. Whether it holds up would likely have to do with the effort put into actually teaching.

 

[lxmmy]

Putting a student driver in a car with a backup camera, blind spot monitoring and parking sensors isn't going to do them much good if the cars they will actually be driving once they get their licence will probably be a 15 year old Taurus. The logic isn't terribly far removed from the countries that have different licence tiers for things like manual vs automatic transmissions or engine power.

We are not allowed parking sensors or cameras here. As the practical test consists of an instructed drive, independent drive and a maneuver to which it is either a three point turn, reverse park and parallel parking and they must be performed independently and the learner must follow guidelines such as constantly using mirrors and checking blind spot while performing the maneuver. If you do not follow those guidelines you simply get a minor and do it too many times it will equate to a fail.

It's possible that assists won't work so driver should at least be able to get a car to safety.

Modern cars are vigorously tested to eliminate these problems and for the older cars the yearly M.O.T checks are there for a reason. Plus, on the test just before you even got into the car you are asked a series of questions to make sure the car is safe to drive and also to demonstrate if the assists are working.

 

[Neddo]

Modern cars are vigorously tested to eliminate these problems and for the older cars the yearly M.O.T checks are there for a reason. Plus, on the test just before you even got into the car you are asked a series of questions to make sure the car is safe to drive and also to demonstrate if the assists are working.

well..... where I live no questions asked lol

 

[AlvaroF]

I don't disagree with @Neddo that much as I've had a few scares with my grandmothers Ka which has 0 assists and I had absolutely 0 clue how to deal with them. I think it should be obligatory to have tests to teach you to deal with such scares in a closed course.

 

[lxmmy]

I've had a few scares with my grandmothers Ka which has 0 assists and I had absolutely 0 clue how to deal with them.

Common sense is to reduce speed and put it into a lower gear plus I think you should have the car checked for any faults in the the suspension, brakes and tires because driving a car like that on public roads is concerning.

Plus, is that the insurance premiums on cars which are old and had a history to which it had faults or had been in an accident in the past they will charge hugely for first time drivers so doing these tests really aren't worth it and now many manufacturers offer a finance package to enable first time drivers to able to afford decent first cars.

 

[a112]

Assists exist for the main priority of safety and to put a first time learner in a car with no power-steering, ABS and traction control is just purely ridiculous as it just poses a danger to themselves and others around. Road safety is something not to take lightly.

All people should learn how to drive in a load of mechanical junk that isn't necessarily in good condition.

Also, people should learn how to do fast road driving in driving school.

Not much people that sell new cars, insurance and medical stuff would benefit from this though.

 

[lxmmy]

All people should learn how to drive in a load of mechanical junk that isn't necessarily in good condition.

No one can stop anyone buying an old car and learning in it but nearly all and if not every certified learning/driving schools have new(ish) cars because they are a whole lot more reliable than 'older' cars in order the instructor to make a living as the car has to be in constant working condition, lets not forget this is a business and not some form of driving experience.

Also, people should learn how to do fast road driving in driving school.

They do.

Not much people that sell new cars, insurance and medical stuff would benefit from this though.

Not really, because in the end you will still need to buy insurance.

 

[R5]

Putting a student driver in a car with a backup camera, blind spot monitoring and parking sensors isn't going to do them much good if the cars they will actually be driving once they get their licence will probably be a 15 year old Taurus or whatever. The logic isn't terribly far removed from the countries that have different licence tiers for things like manual vs automatic transmissions or engine power. Whether it holds up would likely have to do with the effort put into actually teaching.

The wording of Neddo's posthe (and reply) made it sound like he'd want cars to be without basic things like ABS, not just without parking assists (which is surely not allowed anyway.)

 

[Neddo]

The wording of Neddo's posthe (and reply) made it sound like he'd want cars to be without basic things like ABS, not just without parking assists (which is surely not allowed anyway.)

Well if you learn to drive without assists, they aren't the burden if they exist. Problem is the opposite. Most people have cars with abs only.

 

[lxmmy]

Well if you learn to drive without assists, they aren't the burden if they exist. Problem is the opposite. Most people have cars with abs only.

This is a question out of the blue but do you even drive?

 

[AlvaroF]

Common sense is to reduce speed and put it into a lower gear plus I think you should have the car checked for any faults in the the suspension, brakes and tires because driving a car like that on public roads is concerning.

Plus, is that the insurance premiums on cars which are old and had a history to which it had faults or had been in an accident in the past they will charge hugely for first time drivers so doing these tests really aren't worth it and now many manufacturers offer a finance package to enable first time drivers to able to afford decent first cars.

The car is flawless as my grandmother takes really good care of it. And you are missing the point. The car came as standard without ABS, TC or assisted steering. All my scares were on wet roads and I wasn't even going that much above the speed limit (5km/h over) and I had a hard braking and the wheels locked up, pretty scary. Or the time I lost the front of the car in a roundabout just because.

There are so many skidpads and closed infrastructers that the driving schools could use to teach first time drivers how to behave in situation like the ones I was involved. They shouldn't be a "recommend extra course"~, they should be obligatory.

All people should learn how to drive in a load of mechanical junk that isn't necessarily in good condition.

They shouldn't. A car is to be well mantained and well kept. If a person fails to keep good care of their car it's their fault.

Also, people should learn how to do fast road driving in driving school.

They do.

They don't. That's why they need to implement obligatory closed course tests (either defensive of offensive driving).

When I learnt to drive I never ever gone over the speed limit, never overtook a person on the move. I only learnt to park without aids of sensors and cameras (they're allowed, but my instructor turned them off).
Only when I had my motorcycle license my instructor (different from the first) took me to some back roads with no traffic and told me to ride fast and keep up with him. They should do this for every vehicle.

 

[lxmmy]

All my scares were on wet roads and I wasn't even going that much above the speed limit (5km/h over) and I had a hard braking and the wheels locked up, pretty scary. Or the time I lost the front of the car in a roundabout just because.

Reinforces my point in the importance of why assists are vital to road safety. Also, that is hard to believe that you had lock up at 3mph and if you did then that is definitely not road legal or as you say 'flawless'.

They don't. That's why they need to implement obligatory closed course tests (either defensive of offensive driving).

Maybe different for you but most test routes consists of either dual carriageway or a 60 mph road.

When I learnt to drive I never ever gone over the speed limit,

.....because it's illegal.

 

[R5]

Well if you learn to drive without assists, they aren't the burden if they exist. Problem is the opposite. Most people have cars with abs only.

Well why should driving schools spend money maintaining both modern cars and older cars when, as you said, most people have cars with ABS anyway.

If you want to learn in a beater, don't go to a driving school.

 

[Switcher]

Well if you learn to drive without assists, they aren't the burden if they exist. Problem is the opposite. Most people have cars with abs only.

Guess what?

Not everyone is a pro driver who can do that.

 

[wvmgmidget]

You all have to go to driving school? That sucks.

 

[Neddo]

This is a question out of the blue but do you even drive?

Does it matter? Many people don't have cars that are young. Even assists can make mistakes. And I don't want assistless cars too.

 

[CarreraGT]

I'm hinting that I shouldn't take you serious.

I think you've missed the brief entirely...

 

[lxmmy]

Does it matter?

Yes. Because you are the one suggesting learners should be able to drive cars with no aids.

Many people don't have cars that are young.

Look through my last few posts because I responded to that kind of statement.

I think you've missed the brief entirely...

What brief? Nothing in the OP to suggest that I can't respond to your opinions.

 

[Tornado]

The wording of Neddo's posthe (and reply) made it sound like he'd want cars to be without basic things like ABS, not just without parking assists (which is surely not allowed anyway.)

Even based on the typical random stream of consciousness nonsense that Neddo expresses in this subforum, it seems much more reasonable to assume that when he says "Driving schools should use cars with no assists" that he is referring to the types of assists prevalent (and even more recently, mandated) in cars from the past ten years (that students probably wouldn't be driving once they finished testing); than to immediately jump to the conclusion and argue as if he's talking about teenagers in driving school should learn to drive in cars that don't have assists that have been prevalent in cars for closer to thirty.