Go fast or Feel fast - Which one do you REALLY want?

[FlatBlackCaddy]

As I clicked through the gears and watched the speedometer climb, it got me thinking. The speedometer climbed rapidly past 80, 90, 100. Clicking the large paddle with my right hand yielded another sprint up the tachometer; 110, 120,130. Traffic got in the way and I let off and coasted back down to freeway speeds, selecting 6th gear and going with the flow as other motorists competed their passes and moved back into the right lane. Reaching for the left paddle I give it 3 quick clicks, and we're off again.

After a few runs on the freeway and a few jaunts around some scenic, and of course twisty, back roads I begin to make my way back to the dealership. Discussing the aspects of the car with the salesman, I finally belted out a line that really summed up what I was feeling. It's like a really really fast Maxima. The car rode exceptionally well over broken pavement, fit and finish was solid and there was never a creek or groan from the chassis. The interior was spacious and loaded with luxury features. It was just like any other car, a fact that was even more apparent when the salesman stated that the previous owner used it as a daily driver.

Once I arrived at the dealership I parked the car in front of the service bay, as requested, and hoped out. After a few moments of chit chat with the salesman and contact information was exchanged I made my way over to my car and headed off.

I drove a few vehicles that day, and the results where surprising. Yet after pondering the days events and the different cars I encountered, I really shouldn't have expected anything less.

I'm getting tired of fast car, not all of them. Just the ones that seem to BE fast but don't FEEL fast. It sounds odd, but looking down at the speedometer and seeing it climb rapidly doesn't (itself) do much for me. I want alot more of the feel, the interaction, the feedback and the FLAWS of being fast.

The cars I drove that day were a mixed bunch.

A brand new FR-S gleaming in Firestorm red was the first car of the day. After a nice little spin and talking "rough" numbers with the salesman It was by far the car I would have signed papers right on the spot.

Traveling down the street my next encounter was in the form of a used, albeit pretty much new, 2004 Porsche Boxster S with only 10K on it's clock. While I've driven boxters before, this car continues to be on my permanent shopping list. So just about any time I'm looking to sign papers on my next car, this is always an option. Whether I'm shopping for a bare bones commuter or a classic Icon, it's on the list. While they are a fast and capable car, it still seems to me to be missing some of the feeling of "rougher" cars like the miata. Smoother, germanic, controls mask that ultimate and unfiltered connection to the car that the average buyer just can't and won't be bothered with. Still a fantastic car that will always be on my list.

The final car was the subject of this whole thread, and the reason to pose the question. A question that I can FINALLY answer for myself, and mean it.

The Nissan GT-R is a phenomenal piece of work, everything about the car is about GOING FAST. Reviews, comparisons and shootouts from around the world confirm this. Nissan set out to do it and they did it well. However to me it just gives me nothing as a driver, other than a rapidly moving speedometer to watch and a overly complicated way to change gears. With each flip of the paddle I get a slight pause and then am treated to another 30 miles of "follow the rapidly rising speedometer".

On the way home I took some back roads in the EVO, and hit a few on ramps with gusto. Hitting 100MPH at the end of an on ramp, and dancing through the corners was a nice way to fulfill the few remaining urges of speed I had left over from my test drives. After the road straightened and I relaxed back into the pace of a typical commute I pondered some more.

To me, on the street, the GT-R offers NOTHING more than my Evo. The speed it offers is offset by it's shortcomings in many other areas, albeit by design.

I'm not being delusional, I'm not stating that a GT-R isn't fast. I'm not stating that my STOCK evo would take it around the ring or any road course in America. Magazine reviews are certainly one thing and track times as well, but .5 second to 60 doesn't mean much on the street. It's negligible in a street drag race and more so almost unnoticeable on back roads where power is barely in the top 3 when it comes to enjoyment.

After all this, as a enthusiast I certainly do fear for the future of the automobile. After experiencing "technology" fast I worry what will become of performance cars. With the GT3 going to a automated manual it looks like this will be the future. I for one, can't help but think that one would find much more pleasure in a 370 than a GT-R. I bet even Nissan knows this. I just hope we still continue to get good options and don't see the WHOLE market follow the path of the top rung sports cars.

So, which one would you want?

The question isn't between a yugo and a ferrari, don't think of any car/model specifically.

I think you know my vote.

That's my .02


Edit:

To avoid confusion, think of it more as.

go fast - speed being the top priority, willing to overlook other shortcomings and simply be fast.
feel fast - speed is there, but sacrificed outright for driver enjoyment/involvement.

[MexicoCityM3]

I want both, but feeling fast > being fast in most cases.

[GoCougs]

Fear for the future of the automobile? Nah. Cars are better than ever in every single regard, including driving enjoyment. C7 vs. C4? S197 vs. Fox body? No contest, mang. Ditto for cars today being utterly outclassed 10-20 years from now in every single regard.

[Raza]

Thank you.  I was beginning to feel like I was going crazy. 

Sensation is the most important to me.  Fun isn't on a spec sheet and it's not in a lap time.  Fun is fun.  You can be fast and fun, slow and fun, of medium speed and fun.  There's no equation for it. 

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Thank you.  I was beginning to feel like I was going crazy. 

Sensation is the most important to me.  Fun isn't on a spec sheet and it's not in a lap time.  Fun is fun.  You can be fast and fun, slow and fun, of medium speed and fun.  There's no equation for it. 

You're not crazy, look no further than the Mazda Miata. It is the very definition of slow and fun, and it's heralded by auto enthusiasts everywhere.

I just hope that the automakers don't loose site of us in favor of magazine comparisons.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Fear for the future of the automobile? Nah. Cars are better than ever in every single regard, including driving enjoyment. C7 vs. C4? S197 vs. Fox body? No contest, mang. Ditto for cars today being utterly outclassed 10-20 years from now in every single regard.

I fear the weight and isolation from the machine, not the advancements themselves.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

I want both, but feeling fast > being fast in most cases.

Obviously, who doesn't want both.

I'm willing to give up speed, but I won't give up the essence of driving and the involvement.

[SVT666]

You pretty much summed up what I was trying to say in the LaFerrari thread.  One reason I really love the Mustang is that I get the best of both worlds.  The acceleration is very quick and the car can be very quick on a twisty highway, but you don't need to be going supersonic speeds in order to have a lot of fun...but it is capable if you want to though.  The GT-R, on the other hand, isn't really fun unless you are going absolutely berserk.

[SVT666]

By the way, the tach doesn't register your speed.

[SVT666]

Fear for the future of the automobile? Nah. Cars are better than ever in every single regard, including driving enjoyment. C7 vs. C4? S197 vs. Fox body? No contest, mang. Ditto for cars today being utterly outclassed 10-20 years from now in every single regard.

Shitty cars are shitty cars.  Speed has nothing to do with which is more fun in those cases.  Better example is late 90s M3 vs 2012 M3.  The new one is much much faster, but the old one is much more fun.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

By the way, the tach doesn't register your speed.

Went back and edited it, just for you.

[Northlands]

I'm definitely in the "feel fast" camp. I've been in a few quick cars where you feel sheltered from the activity you just put yourself into ( even at 80-100 mph). I don't want it to be so desensitized. Making it easy to drive at higher limits is one thing, but it sort of makes one lose respect for just how quick you are moving.

[Cookie Monster]

Feeling fast is way more important.

[12,000 RPM]

Feel for me. Exactly why I ride. And why I don't think I will get anything bigger than a 650 for a long time. Nothing to gain from it and I'm not good enough to use all this bike's power, let alone one with 2-3x the horsepower.

The real problem is street car performance is too far beyond normal human ability (and what is legal on the street but that's another thread). So for manufacturers to reconcile man's incessant need for the biggest and baddest (or in this case fastest) has forced manufacturers to remove humans out of the equation to keep us safe. Can you imagine if Nissan had made something as fast as the GT-R, but with RWD and no traction control? Journalists would die on test drives. So like Raza said... they take the stuff that makes race car drivers fast, and put it in to keep people from fucking killing themselves.

Strangely and sadly it seems the more you want to be involved in the driving experience, the less you should spend on a car. Maybe one day someone will come up with a way to quantify driving experience. But until then it will just be magazine test headlines and spurious connections to race car technology. No thx.

[GoCougs]

Shitty cars are shitty cars.  Speed has nothing to do with which is more fun in those cases.  Better example is late 90s M3 vs 2012 M3.  The new one is much much faster, but the old one is much more fun.

And 1999 Mustang GT vs. 2012 Mustang GT? No contest which is the better car in every single regard both objective and subjective. New cars >>>>> old cars.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

And 1999 Mustang GT vs. 2012 Mustang GT? No contest which is the better car in every single regard both objective and subjective. New cars >>>>> old cars.

That's one hell of a statement.

It's wrong BTW, true in some/most cases but not in the context you're using(as a blanket statement).

[GoCougs]

I fear the weight and isolation from the machine, not the advancements themselves.

I've never driven or ridden in an older car and thought, "Man, this is more fun than its new version." Chassis stiffness, handling, NVH, squeaks and rattles, etc., are all WAY worse with the older versions. It's only fun when the car is purposefully less fun to drive (like a classic muscle or pony car).

[hotrodalex]

And 1999 Mustang GT vs. 2012 Mustang GT? No contest which is the better car in every single regard both objective and subjective. New cars >>>>> old cars.

Because 90s Mustangs are flimsier than a wet noodle.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

I've never driven or ridden in an older car and thought, "Man, this is more fun than its new version." Chassis stiffness, handling, NVH, squeaks and rattles, etc., are all WAY worse with the older versions. It's only fun when the car is purposefully less fun to drive (like a classic muscle or pony car).

So you would never take an older version of anything?

If given the choice you would take a 3rd gen eclipse over a second?

You would take a 996 over a 993?

You would take a F360 over a 355?

[dazzleman]

I want both, but feeling fast > being fast in most cases.

[12,000 RPM]

Mustangs are an exception. They are cheap enough that they still have to depend on feel and fun to sell.

Cougs wouldn't buy a car out of warranty, so questions like "993 vs 996" are irrelevant. Also LOL @ NVH being a talking point in a discussion about driving engagement.

[GoCougs]

Because 90s Mustangs are flimsier than a wet noodle.

And so are '90s Corvettes and '90s Camaros and '90s 3ers and on and on and on...

[12,000 RPM]

And so are '90s Corvettes and '90s Camaros and '90s 3ers and on and on and on...

Theres more to the driving experience than chassis rigidity...

This is why the E30 M3 is selling for more than the E36 M3, which is much more rigid, refined, fast, grippy, etc.

[GoCougs]

So you would never take an older version of anything?

If given the choice you would take a 3rd gen eclipse over a second?

You would take a 996 over a 993?

You would take a F360 over a 355?

I'd only take something older specifically because it was by definition crappier to drive - I'd give pause between a 1970.5 Camaro Z-28 vs. a 2013 Camaro SS (but would probably go with the latter).

Don't know anything about the Eclipse. I like the looks of the 993 but air cooled? No way. The F355 was the watershed car for Ferrari but the F360 is better. Be advised I've only ridden in the first two and never been in the last. 

[SVT666]

Cougs doesn't think steering feel matters, so I'm not surprised he doesn't get it.  Ignore him.

[GoCougs]

Cougs doesn't think steering feel matters, so I'm not surprised he doesn't get it.  Ignore him.

Ha, ha, gotcha with the Mustang thing .

[hotrodalex]

And so are '90s Corvettes and '90s Camaros and '90s 3ers and on and on and on...

But they aren't ruined by it.

[Onslaught]

I think everyone knows my answer for this one. Oh, and some older versions of cars are better. Take the NA vs NC miata. Both rattle and feel cheap and one of them is way more fun the the other.

[SVT666]

Ha, ha, gotcha with the Mustang thing .

You didn't get me with anything.  The old Mustangs were pieces shit in stock form.  The suspension was terrible.  My Mustang was great fun, but only after I replaced the entire suspension.

[hotrodalex]

You didn't get me with anything.  The old Mustangs were pieces shit in stock form.  The suspension was terrible.  My Mustang was great fun, but only after I replaced the entire suspension.

Same with my El Camino. 3 inch drop, sway bars, and slightly stiffer springs did wonders. If I got rack and pinion steering it would be even better.