Brute force vs precision and feedback

[MrH]

You stated you can't get both in an affordable car.  I gave a list of cars that provide both that are affordable.

Affordable is subjective.  Some of us aren't quite rollin in the dough yet.  But yes, I guess it is possible.  But then again, precise and powerful are subjective too.  I don't think I'd consider some of those cars very precise, but all are plenty powerful for me.  We just have very different priorities when it comes to cars, and I think this thread makes that pretty obvious.

For example, I really have zero interest in any of the pony cars.  The new Mustang GT is the only one that even remotely spiked my interest, but even then, there are a lot of cars much sharper, but significantly slower that I'd prefer.

[SVT32V]

Fundamental things like handling dynamics can only go so far with what you're given.  The sky's the limit when it comes to power.  Besides, how much power can you use day to day?  An NC Miata has 170 hp.  That can shoot through traffic about as fast I can safely do it.  But the steering feel and turn in is something I can appreciate constantly.

Even test driving a GTI with 200 hp, I was chirping the tires everywhere I went.  You're traction limited with a lot of higher powered stuff at street legal speeds.

You see you are just arguing agianst the point that it is easier to make more something more brute force than increase handling.  The 2.0T doesn't have the driveline/suspension to put power down, mainly because it is fwd. However, 200 hp in rwd car is not even approaching difficult on street radials.

Shooting through trafic at 10/10ths is assinine and incredibly dangerous, how handling can you really use day to day.

[MrH]

You see you are just arguing agianst the point that it is easier to make more something more brute force than increase handling.  The 2.0T doesn't have the driveline/suspension to put power down, mainly because it is fwd. However, 200 hp in rwd car is not even approaching difficult on street radials.

Shooting through trafic at 10/10ths is assinine and incredibly dangerous, how handling can you really use day to day.

200 hp is plenty in everyday use for a car that light.  I don't see the appeal of a car with more in daily driving.  You can't use it.

[SVT32V]

200 hp is plenty in everyday use for a car that light.  I don't see the appeal of a car with more in daily driving.  You can't use it.

A camaro's handling is plenty for everyday use and accelerating like a bat out of hell is a blast everday that gets the adrenaline going.  Anything with better handling is just not going to be used everyday, it just isn't possible to blast around a corner at .99 gs on a public road.

Like I said different strokes and different cars with different design aims.

[GoCougs]

I tend toward brute force. Simply put, it's more American and it's more manly.

To me there's a point though - a car any faster than ~13.0 sec 1/4 mile is hard/dangerous/criminal to fully unleash on most any street.

Either way I don't care much for handling, feel, precision, whatever. I stop caring after basic competence in handling, relatively good ride and low road noise.

[sportyaccordy]

A camaro's handling is plenty for everyday use and accelerating like a bat out of hell is a blast everday that gets the adrenaline going.  Anything with better handling is just not going to be used everyday, it just isn't possible to blast around a corner at .99 gs on a public road.

Like I said different strokes and different cars with different design aims.

Handling isn't defined exclusively by one time peak metrics like skidpad gs and slalom speeds. Handling can simply be taking an off ramp at more than 30 MPH, or not braking for a turn. While a Camaro might have the specs to pull whatever #'s are necessary it might not necessarily inspire the confidence to do so.

On a mountain road or w/e, I can't imagine an F-body, especially one with a decent amount of power, being as much fun as something like a 3 series. That's the difference I'm talking about.

[SVT32V]

Handling isn't defined exclusively by one time peak metrics like skidpad gs and slalom speeds. Handling can simply be taking an off ramp at more than 30 MPH, or not braking for a turn. While a Camaro might have the specs to pull whatever #'s are necessary it might not necessarily inspire the confidence to do so.

On a mountain road or w/e, I can't imagine an F-body, especially one with a decent amount of power, being as much fun as something like a 3 series. That's the difference I'm talking about.

Sporty have you ever driven a pony car?  I doubt it, or you wouldn't make such a statement. Most pony cars can take a ramp at speeds that are illegal and will feel fun doing it. Pony cars haven't been poor handlers for many years even if that is not their claim to fame
How often do you find yourself on a mountain road vs at a stop light or nice stretch of open road where it would be fun to put the hammer down? That is what I am talking about.
At the end of the day a 335 will always be more fun than a 328 and a 135 will always be more fun than a 128.
If you are on these boards, I would imagine you like both.

[Raza]

I tend toward brute force. Simply put, it's more American and it's more manly.

To me there's a point though - a car any faster than ~13.0 sec 1/4 mile is hard/dangerous/criminal to fully unleash on most any street.

Either way I don't care much for handling, feel, precision, whatever. I stop caring after basic competence in handling, relatively good ride and low road noise.

SVT32V is certainly right about this one thing, at least:  to each his own.  I think you're crazy for not caring about that stuff, but whatever works for you.  I think you're crazy for other reasons too. 

Also, another thing you have to consider is what's "fast".  I've got 200bhp in a 3200 pound car, which is good for a shot to 60 in about 6 and a half seconds and will hit 130 with relative ease. 

[Raza]

Between this comment and ripping into Teuton's career, you've been on a roll lately.

Haha, I totally forgot about that post!

[SVT666]

Haha, I totally forgot about that post!

How could you?  It's post of the year quality.

[SVT666]

SVT32V is certainly right about this one thing, at least:  to each his own.  I think you're crazy for not caring about that stuff, but whatever works for you.  I think you're crazy for other reasons too. 

Also, another thing you have to consider is what's "fast".  I've got 200bhp in a 3200 pound car, which is good for a shot to 60 in about 6 and a half seconds and will hit 130 with relative ease. 

I've got 180 +/- hp in my 2750 lbs car and I wish it had 225 or so.  It's an absolute blast to drive, but give me another 50 hp and it would be perfect.

[sportyaccordy]

I've got 180 +/- hp in my 2750 lbs car and I wish it had 225 or so.  It's an absolute blast to drive, but give me another 50 hp and it would be perfect.

Would you trade some of your car's handling for that though

[sportyaccordy]

Sporty have you ever driven a pony car?  I doubt it, or you wouldn't make such a statement. Most pony cars can take a ramp at speeds that are illegal and will feel fun doing it. Pony cars haven't been poor handlers for many years even if that is not their claim to fame
How often do you find yourself on a mountain road vs at a stop light or nice stretch of open road where it would be fun to put the hammer down? That is what I am talking about.
At the end of the day a 335 will always be more fun than a 328 and a 135 will always be more fun than a 128.
If you are on these boards, I would imagine you like both.

No I haven't driven an F-body. Being that you have though, would you say its handling compares to that of a same year M3?

I don't know that I ever said more power was a bad thing. I would love for every car I own to have as much power as its respective chassis can handle. But it would be more important to me for the chassis to be fully sorted out first. I don't think that's a strange or unrealistic viewpoint. Again I think some people here are missing what I was asking.

[SVT666]

Would you trade some of your car's handling for that though

Yes I would.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Yes I would.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

[SVT32V]

SVT32V is certainly right about this one thing, at least: 
I am usually right about most things.

Also, another thing you have to consider is what's "fast".  I've got 200bhp in a 3200 pound car, which is good for a shot to 60 in about 6 and a half seconds and will hit 130 with relative ease. 

To me that was adequately fast in the late 80s early 90s but it is certainly not on the fast side for a performance oriented car, if anything it is well on the slow side of the spectrum.

[SVT32V]

No I haven't driven an F-body. Being that you have though, would you say its handling compares to that of a same year M3?
Does every car have to handle like an M3 to inspire confidence enough to take an off-ramp beyond legal speeds? Does every car have to handle like a an M3 to be fun?
No, the camaro wouldn't handle as well but it would be faster and handle pretty good.


I don't know that I ever said more power was a bad thing. I would love for every car I own to have as much power as its respective chassis can handle. But it would be more important to me for the chassis to be fully sorted out first. I don't think that's a strange or unrealistic viewpoint. Again I think some people here are missing what I was asking.

No one said your view was unrealistic, what does fully sorted out mean, everything in engineering is a tradeoff based on goals, price etc.

[68_427]

I live in farm land, so I want my car to "handle on the straightaways".

[Eye of the Tiger]

I live in farm land, so I want my car to "handle on the straightaways".

[68_427]

Yes please.

[Rich]

It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

If I want to be excited by everyday driving, I drive the Miata - I can explore it's limits of adhesion turning onto a non residential road, and enjoy it because I'm not going extra legal speeds or putting anyone in jeopardy.  It loses grip at lower speeds, but its handling is better than the Mustang.  I can also floor it and redline it and do 3 fun shifts to get up to highway speed.  In the mustang, I can get maybe 2 shifts, and I need to be on the lookout for cops to avoid a "show of speed" ticket or whatever.

If I want a car that sounds good and looks good I drive the Mustang.  I can't open it up except when the speed limit goes from 45 to 65, which is fun, but other than that I like to drive it because it looks great and it coddles me with the most recent tech.  The limits are so high in it, that I can't get anywhere near them in this general area.  Now when I got to Miller motorsports park, that will be fun, because I can explore the car's limits

[SVT666]

See, even my SVT Focus requires extra illegal speeds to really be a blast.  It's fun at slightly more then legal speeds, but if I want to have an evil grin stuck on my face then I need to be travelling at ridiculous speeds.

[2o6]

Yes I would.

Then you'd have an SRT-4. 

[SVT666]

Then you'd have an SRT-4. 

No.  I didn't say I would give up all the handling ability, and the good looks, and the reliability, and my manhood.  I said I would give up some of the handling to get the extra power.

[2o6]

No.  I didn't say I would give up all the handling ability, and the good looks, and the reliability, and my manhood.  I said I would give up some of the handling to get the extra power.

This made me lol. 

[Vinsanity]

I'm still torn. On my car, I'd opt to improve the power instead of the handling, but I wouldn't sacrifice my car's handling from this point.

[Raza]

Adequately fast in the 80s?  80s Ferraris couldn't hang with my car today.

[sportyaccordy]

Adequately fast in the 80s?  80s Ferraris couldn't hang with my car today.

In the straights or twisties... but we are really talking about like 2-3 models out of a dozen or so here

[SVT32V]

Adequately fast in the 80s?  80s Ferraris couldn't hang with my car today.

An 87 mustang GT, 350 camaro, C4 vette, 2cnd generation eclipse turbo etc from the late 80s to mid 90s could put down a mid 6 sec 0-60.  Hell a tundra would pull your car on a straight.

Any 328 and above would destroy your car, a testarossa would leave you like you were standing still.

The only ferarri you would hope to hang with would be a 308.

For the 328 GTB
   1985-1989
   * 0-60 mph 5.5 seconds approx.
   * Top speed 166 mph

[ChrisV]

No I haven't driven an F-body. Being that you have though, would you say its handling compares to that of a same year M3?

Let's rephrase your qestion to get a bit of the falshood in the "more fun to drive a slow car fast" thing that's going on.

How about that same M3, but with the engine from a Citroen 2CV powering it?

There's a reason the M3 usually is also the most powerful 3 series in the lineup.

people who say "it's more fun to drive a slow car fast" are usually in one of 2 camps: 1) they've never driven a really slow car, or 2) are trying to justify owning a really slow car.

My own Porche 912 was a regional autocross champion, and routinely beat modded 911s in autocross and could hold it's own once up to speed on a twisty road course. Lots of suspension work and sticky tires made sure of it, with typical Porsche braking feel and some of the most telepathic steering feel ever in a sporting car.



But small children on bicycles and Chevette or Rabbit diesels could out-accelerate it. It really wasn't even fun in the twisties as there was zero accelleration out of a corner, and it was simply annoying after a while to not even be able to keep up with traffic off a light or up a hill.

The 911 I replaced it with wasn't as balanced in the corners, but in day to day use -and even on the track- it was simply more enjoyable to drive in due to the added power, even though it handled a bit worse.



Same body, same chassis, one handled a bit better, one had more power. Back to back ownership and the latter was simply the more enjoyable car to live with, as what it had could be used vastly more often.