involvement vs objective capability

Matt82

Matt82

Matt82

Soldato
Joined
13 Mar 2004
Posts
16,649
in terms of enjoying driving a car which is the most important? the ability to get from point a to b as quickly as possible or to have maximum involvement whilst doing it
 
Both, the 'trendy' new thing of having no interaction with your car or the road in new cars is so irritating!

Likewise, an acceleration time of more than 13-14s to 60+ also grinds very very quickly :(
 
rover416i said:
Both, the 'trendy' new thing of having no interaction with your car or the road in new cars is so irritating!
Click to expand...

without involvement, then thats just objective capability. set launch control and go, no skill in actually getting it off the line etc

so without involvement, is it boring? or the fact that you got from a to b quickly, is that fun, even though you had no involvement in what just happened
 
I think I get what rover416i's referring to, having just had a Fiat Bravo 1.9 multijet diesel... something - it claimed to have 120bhp but felt massively underpowered for that.
It was full of AIDS...not driver aids, but Bad AIDS. Well, it was full of toys, and electronic stuff, like auto windows, cruise control, climate control, windows media type HU.
All of these were arse and didn't work properly, particularly the HU.

The worst thing was the handling, though. It wallowed all over the road, bounced round corners and I nearly ended up in the passenger footwell several times when going round roundabouts, the seats were so rubbish.

It also had a "City" button to make the steering even lighter, which was completely pointless given that it was already light and gave no feedback whatsoever.

So it was slow, and crap. I know exactly what no interaction with the car or road feels like now. It's not good.

I'd prefer both. I don't want super performance megafast car-ness... if I'm completely disconnected from what the wheels are doing in relation to the road. But nor do I want something that handles like a go cart, but is slow.

Something in the middle would be nice.
 
A lot of people like being able to get as quick as possible from to a to b and find this fun, this is where Evos/Scobbies are king they don't really handle all that well as standard however make up for it with massive amounts of grip and traction.

You then get people who like driver involvement this is where a Cayman S comes in being superb where you feel at one with the car when you start pushing into the corners something where a TTRS which is faster point to point and round a track is not.

It just depends on the driver really it is a tough one for me I found the Cayman S superb yet with our roads being wet/slippy/covered in snow/ice for more than 6 months of the year a car with less involvement around 90% there and the faster everyday car may be the better day to day car for me. It all comes down to where you want to make the compromise.
 
It's a balance that changes with mood, the type of car or purpose. If I want a motorway chugger then its ability to cosset me from A to B as quickly, safely and comfortably as possible is key. If I want a sports car then involvement to me at least is vital, or else it becomes a pointless exercise as simply going quick soon becomes monotonous. Most people would get into my current car and think it was fantastic which by any objective measure it is. To me however the competence takes away somewhat from the experience which means it’s not the sort of car I find myself getting up early to simply drive, something other cars I have owned have made me do.
 
it's often remarked that the 911 turbo is the quickest way from point A to point B in any given conditions, and for a daily-use supercar there really is no other. compared to 99% of things it's incredibly involving too...

but then there is the GT3
 
Saytan said:
it's often remarked that the 911 turbo is the quickest way from point A to point B in any given conditions, and for a daily-use supercar there really is no other. compared to 99% of things it's incredibly involving too...
Click to expand...

Was ;)
 
You need to either turn off TC and flick /R/R or push a lot harder than most would feel comfortable with. Finding its limit is an interesting and engaging experience.

If it were that uninvolving, I don't think it would have the accolades and praise that has been heaped on it. Uninvolving compared to a GT3, yes, but they are two different beasts which the majority of the "uninvolving" journo comments make clear.
 
Last edited:
Grabbing it by the scruff of its neck usually results in feeling like you've got an epileptic starfish down the back of your boxers.
 
It does depend on my mood, but generally speaking involvement every time. Ultimate grip/handling ability/speed comes second to how much fun I'm having.
Which is why, when we were looking for cars for Kate, the Impreza left me feeling deflated and the 200SX elated.
 
I've had stuff that takes longer than 13 seconds to 60, but because of the noise, controls and handling, had an absolute hoot doing so (in that you have to work to try and get the best out of it) :D
 
I'd rather enjoy a drive than get there in the shortest time possible.
My mk2 escort's handling was fun in so far as it was impossibly tail happy and spat the dummy at every opportunity.
It was stock running gear and a bog standard 2 litre pinto.
The Manta is a completely different animal. It's got twice the power, weighs only a fraction more, but is far more planted with the uprated susspension.
It's far more predictable, has the power on tap for when I feel a hooligan episode comming on. controlled fun :D
Think i'll be sticking with my Manta for a while yet.
Fast enough to see off most modern hot hatches etc, gorgeous styling, rwd goodness, and dirt cheap insurance :)
 
Lopéz said:
It does depend on my mood, but generally speaking involvement every time. Ultimate grip/handling ability/speed comes second to how much fun I'm having.
Click to expand...

icon14.gif
:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom