Where did all the real "Super" Sports Cars go?

"The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL" (tokyobayaqualine) 06/08/2014 at 11:13 • Filed to: Driving, sports cars, engagement, feeling, racing, TokyoBayAquaLine

51

100

Forward: This is an opinion piece. Note that all that I've written here forth is nothing more than an opinion. And as you know, opinions are like... Well... You get the picture.

We live in a great automotive age, don't we? Carbon Fibre can be utilized to make a car lightweight and agile, while also strong and resilient. Engineering has given us the opportunity to accelerate from a dead stop to 60mph, in less than 3 seconds... All while providing daily drivability. Transmissions that require little effort to shift with give us smooth, powerful acceleration all the way through the rev range. And engagement... Is at an all time low.

What's that you say? Bull shit? Oh, but how I beg to differ.

You may say that the sound of a Lamborghini Huracan's exhaust sends chills down your spine. And I believe you. You may say that the way an SLS AMG loses itself in a corner in a controllable drift, is exciting and euphoric. You may also say that the way a 458 Speciale brakes is ungodly, or that a GT-R's acceleration is neck snapping.

But all of these things are controlled by three central driver commands: Stop/Go/Steer.

And although what you think you're experiencing is engagement, because you make the decision as to whether it will happen, it's nothing more than careful trickery. It's an "illusion" of sorts, to guide you into THINKING that you have control.

But you don't.

The GT-R's transmission can be put into full auto mode and still record a sub 3 second 60 time. A 458's brakes are the most high tech ceramics on the market - of course they brake well. The SLS can be controlled by drift... Because it's tires are perfectly mated to it's power levels via levels of adhesion and grip. Huracan's exhaust? It's programmed to sound that way.

All of these are not things that you are "Engaging" in, or "Facilitating". These are the outcomes of other peoples desires to make you "feel" engaged and like you have the power of.

Let's take a drastic spin to the other side of the sports car spectrum, shall we?

The Subaru BRZ is a cheap, $25,000, RWD, manual transmission equipped, 4 cylinder, boxer engined machine. It makes 200HP, and can barely heave it's way to 130MPH.

How many unhappy BRZ owners have you met? How many "bored" BRZ owners have you met?

How many unhappy Ferrari owners have you met or heard of? How many of them have you heard about being "bored" with their cars?

This is interesting, isn't it?

A Ferrari owner of course, buys his car because it's the pinnacle of automotive technology and speed, at his fingertips. Its illustrious company history has manifested into the product he sits in lovingly, as he revels in the quick, effortless downshifts that prompt him to go faster and faster. But he's tricked, because he's not enjoying the driving (Shifting gears, modulating throttle, heel/toeing, e brake drifting, brake fade) experience... He is only enjoying the outcomes (Sound, feeling, vision) of such an experience.

The reason the BRZ owner is happier than the Ferrari owner is simple. He buys the BRZ to be stimulated and co-active in the cars abilities. The Ferrari owner only buys it to revel in them.

In my opinion, this is not what a sports car is. As enthusiasts, we should not endorse the idea behind this. We should unite, and try to communicate with our cars - to be one with their abilities, and to hone them to our personal best, and eventually, their personal best, not have the maximum of their abilities at our fingertips for whenever we deem necessary.

Instead of the rider riding the stallion we, as enthusiasts, should be the tamer. As a tamer, it's our responsibility to be inherently connected with the vehicle we are trying to tame. To be in control of all aspects of it's drivability and to be conscious of any faults that may arise from pushing "too hard".

But we have lost this sense of superiority. Machine, has overtaken man, and as such, the actual sense of occasion of getting behind the wheel of a car and reigning it all in, on your own, conscious of a cars flaws and weak points, has also dissipated.

Bring it back.

Bring back the super sports cars.

Let them be proof that power is nothing without REAL control, and that there is a vast difference between being engaged, and allowing for engagement.

EL_ULY > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:20

7

you have made a strong case for the Agera R, Huayra, and especially the Venom GT because manual trans. Though, like the others including a pure beasts like the 911 Turbo and new Z06, a lot will just sit there at the owner's home or be driven to some smug bistro on Saturday and never see action :'(

PS9 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:21

41

How many of these 'boring' modern supercars have you personally driven?

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:24

8

I agree completely. Give me the carbon fiber, ergonomics, and improved (albeit one-setting) suspensions. But give me a smooth, N/A engine (or a raw one of any variety), an ACTUAL manual transmission, and good pedal/steering feel. RWD too, while we're at it. (This is a huge pipe dream, obviously, but if we cease to care about driving, we cease to care about cars. Driving IS involvement.). If I'm a dinosaur of automotive tastes, so be it. Not even the approaching meteor of perfection and technology can change that!

dogisbadob > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:26

2

Solution: get a cheap Yaris or Mirage :p

The GTR has always been about high tech, so that one gets a pass. It was always just the real life Gran Turismo. The car and the video game are one.

A Ferrari owner buys his car just because of the brand name, stupid "collectors" just sit on them and keep them locked in heated garages, occasionally driving 25 mph or *gasp* highway speeds to and from some showcase thing.

I'm surprised at no mention of BMW's fake engine noise through the speakers, and how could you talk about fun without the Miata? :p

Where does the NSX fit in all of this? The first everyday supercar. It wasn't overteched like today's hypercars, but supposedly it's almost as easy to drive as an Accord, and of course it has the famous Honda quality and reliability.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PS9 06/08/2014 at 11:27

12

I wouldn't make a list to show off, but I will say I've driven quite a few of them.

I think if you're asking me though, you've missed the point entirely... The point being that in order to truly enjoy a sports car, you have to be in control of every facet of the driving experience, and be aware of all it's eccentricities... Not have a perfect specimen of a machine at your disposal to "Go fast" whenever you want to.

jkm7680 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:31

5

Times are changing.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > dogisbadob 06/08/2014 at 11:31

3

If you ever get the opportunity to drive an NSX on a winding mountain road, do so.

It behaves like the feet of a ballerina... Every flick of it's centrally weighted wheel sends instant response to the front wheels, while simultaneously offering instant road feedback to you. As you shift down hard, the rear swings out ever so slightly... But it's controllable... And you can enter the corner mid drift.

The original NSX is bar none one of the best drivers cars ever made as well, in terms of feedback and control.

Honda has butchered the acronym.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > jkm7680 06/08/2014 at 11:35

0

Sp just because they're changing, we should be less in control?

Isn't this still a world that puts man before machine? Or am I mistaken?

A car is an amalgamation of Teutonic and electronic parts. The moment we start to let it decide how to unleash it's abilities without flaw is the moment we give over control.

It's the imperfections that make the driving experience so perfect in a real sports car to begin with.

PS9 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:36

19

I think if you're asking me though, you've missed the point entirely.

No, I haven't. You're not really in a position to say what kind of engagement the driving experience offers you without having experienced driving the car. Your opinion remains unqualified without objective information. "Look at all the computers on this spec sheet" is not enough.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:39

3

I'm not sure that's such a big deal. Take the new Porsche 911. Every old-fashioned purist will not stop complaining about how insanely, ridiculously high tech and complicated it is, and how it looses everything to computers. Yet everyone who actually drives one will tell you it's one of the best, most entertaining, and most engaging driving experiences they've ever had. I had a ride in an 80's 911, I think it was a turbo, a few years ago, and let me tell you, the damn thing felt like a truck.

jkm7680 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:41

0

Demand, it's seemingly new generation of buyers who have different wants.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PS9 06/08/2014 at 11:45

27

So what you're still looking for is... A list? I've driven F430's, F40's, an Enzo a short distance, a couple 458's, a Murcielago (twice), an MP4-12C, more GT-R's than I can remember, PDK Porsches up the whazoo, and far many more than I can comprehend at this moment, right here, right now.

It's not about what I've driven, it's about what I've taken away from those experiences. And what I've taken from those experiences is a continual and gradual lack of "flaws" that make a car and the experience it offers, "special".

What I'm suggesting is a car that engages the driver on every level, and has unique characteristics that you have to "hone in".

A 458 is so easy to drive fast that my mother can do it. I know that, because I've seen her drive an F430 fast, no problem, at a $105 Supercar drive day.

I'm suggesting that REAL sports cars should not just be "Get in and go." They should be "Get in, and get involved".

Stradale > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:46

4

Just a bunch of generalizations....

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Stradale 06/08/2014 at 11:47

0

What exactly do you mean?

PardonMyFlemish16 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:47

19

The point being that in order to truly enjoy a sports car, you have to be in control of every facet of the driving experience, and be aware of all it's eccentricities... Not have a perfect specimen of a machine at your disposal to "Go fast" whenever you want to.

This is just your opinion, and not really indicative of any absolute truths or facts. Don't get me wrong, I drove and hate the GT-R, but I also drove and enjoyed the 458. A car's character is way more than how much direct control you have over it. Is a car not worth driving if it has ABS? DBW throttle? TCS? Where are you driving something like a 458 close to its limits on a regular basis? Are you even close enough to being a good enough driver that its systems would "get in your way"?

Look I am all for more interesting cars. But interesting and analog are not mutually inclusive concepts... i.e. there are plenty of interesting "digital" cars (i.e. anything made after ~2002) and plenty of boring analog cars. The whole "control" thing is just meaningless internet speak. Me personally, I would rather have a car that is just as characterful and engaging as an old car, while also being way more usable and accessible. That's more important to me, than my car fitting the ideals of some dude I will never meet who probably can't afford any of the cars he is demanding be uprooted and changed to his irrational likin

FizzerFZ1 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:50

1

Solution = Caterham 7? =P|
Get a chassis...choose you're own powerplant, tranny, bouncy bits...etc etc.

blahrgen > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:50

4

they dropped down to the <$50,000 price bracket.

technology's advanced to the point where a >$200k car can't be handled safely at its limits by a regular human. and if you don't build a car to its limits, you're not beating your competition. so they are required to eliminate the human factor to keep up with the competition.

meanwhile, you can get a sports car today that will beat the supercars of old.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/08/2014 at 11:51

1

The "truck" feel was part of the 911's character. It was just engineered to meet all demands in such a German way. The technology, then, is inevitable. I definitely wouldn't kick a manual 991 out of bed, but I'd still probably sell it to get an air cooled Porsche and some other cars. If I had to choose between a classic and new 911, not being able to sell either, it would be classic every time because you're so much more involved in the driving experience.

Gene Sanchez Leeds > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:53

1

As someone who also has an impressive list, I completely agree with you. To me the perfect example of this has always been the 911Turbo. It can do everything almost better and faster than anything else out there. Yet my grandmother could drive it comfortably. This simply doesn't work for me. This is why I currently drive a tuned JCW Mini Cooper. Although truth be told I'm looking forward to getting in my wife's C7Z06 when she gets it. With all that torque it should require some kind of actual driving ability. :)

VRYALT3R3D > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:54

10

dogisbadob > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:55

6

Wow you're so lucky to have driven those cars!

If you want a car that's involving to drive, you'd love this one! You constantly have to correct for the poor alignment, and know just how to modulate the brakes so you're not shaking every time you stop, and of course, know just when to hit the gas and how hard to minimize the exhaust noise if there are cops around. Oh the joys of having motorcycles around, and bonus if it's a Harley! Even though you may not normally like their bikes, today they're a godsend because they mask your porous muffler!

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 06/08/2014 at 11:56

0

Granted, I haven't driven a new 911. But have you?

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 11:57

12

If you're consistently seeking the simplest form of "Speed", with nothing more than a prod of a throttle, then how can you call yourself a car enthusiast? Should a car enthusiast not revel in how much of the driving experience they control and are in command of? Shouldn't that be the "experience"?

Otherwise, aren't you just "holding on for the ride"?

Oh sure, you can tell yourself it's engaging because it's raunchy and loud and sexy... But again, those are visual and auditory sensory impulses. Shouldn't sports driving be an almost excerise?

These are things you have to ask yourself as a driver... Do you want the easy fast? Or the fun fast?

Do you want a car that makes you feel like "Man, I just got here in under 5 minutes... And it was so much fun and rewarding because I beckoned every ounce of power out of my car"?

Or do you want the car that makes you feel like "I just got here in under 5 minutes. My car could do it faster. I was just too chicken shit to go faster"?

djmt1 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:58

8

How many bored BRZ drivers are there?

How many tuned BRZs are there?

Same answer.

Also if you want a "super sports car", this is it.

66671 - 200 [METRIC] my dash > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 11:58

1

I have nothing else to say other than you said it better than I ever could. All this is just yes.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > dogisbadob 06/08/2014 at 11:59

1

Put a Chevy Small Block in there with about 440HP, and I'd totally do it. That car looks to be full of character.

kyle242gt > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:00

1

Did any point out that it's more fun to drive a slow car fast than to drive a fast car slow? I had way more fun in my Miata than SC'd M3. 80 911 was more fun to drive (but not live with) than my CTSV.

PardonMyFlemish16 > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 06/08/2014 at 12:01

0

Lol. There are plenty of cars like this for sale. Many affordable performance cars are of this configuration. The ideal modern performance car (991 C2S IMO) is of this configuration. So why judge the whole realm of performance cars by a bunch of supercars you will never be able to afford anyway?

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > djmt1 06/08/2014 at 12:01

0

People tune their BRZ's to personalize them, or add power, not because they're boring cars to drive. They do it to seek more reward out of the "experience".

ToastedTires > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:02

0

The BRZ owner I beat to highway speeds in my 16 year old grand cherokee wasn't exactly smiling.

My first car, I could tell you exactly how much grip was left at each corner by the seat of my pants. I never felt do connected to a car. It was awful. I never want to feel connected with a slow, weak car ever again.

J-Tenno > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:03

4

Jalopnik has such a passionate and opinionated reader base that by expressing your opinion you are bound to get almost flamed for it. People are too passionate sometimes, almost inhibiting your right for an opinion, attacking it ferociously and debunking every argument you make to support your opinion.

A while ago someone commented how some teenagers like to photograph a stanced Accord instead of a fully restored Impala from x year. So what? Is the stanced Accord somehow inferior to the Impala? Certainly not in the eyes of the teenagers.

That's the thing I least like in the Jalopnik community. Let everybody have an opinion and if you want to have a conversation about it, do it in a calm, civilized way, not in an arrogant, nigh aggressive way.

Having said that..

Great read, it's true that some cars seem to be more in control of the situation than the driver itself, but what about the cars like the Zonda, Koenigseggs, Morgans etc.

I think those are the new "real super cars" of today, maybe we should coin these more "mainstream" super cars "luxury super cars" or something similar. They certainly do not lack the "super" part.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/08/2014 at 12:04

4

Fortunately not! I can't even imagine how terribly boring it must be ;).

In all seriousness, I've ridden in a late 996 and early 997 and both were really nice. I could assume, though, they were nowhere near as intimate as the 964 I drove. Better, but not old, is basically the only way to describe these situations. Porsche sells 911s to rich guys who want to look cool, and makes enthusiasts' cars to make said rich guys feel cooler and thus want the product more. It's pure coincidence, IMO, that they sell cars to car guys haha. But luckily that means exciting-to-drive Porsches for a long time to come. Just not as characterful, perhaps.

djmt1 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:05

5

They seek more because they are bored with what they got. Personalising a car consists more of decals and rims then turbo kits. Given that there are so many cars available, it would make more sense to buy a car that matches them better.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > djmt1 06/08/2014 at 12:08

0

I disagree strongly with that statement. Having lived in the country that seemingly invented car personalization as we know it (Japan), I can tell you that people personalize their cars to make them more of "their own", and to differ from everyone else. Either that, or to seek more advanced sensory rewards out of the driving experience. That's it.

They certainly don't modify them to diminish that experience. Only to enhance it.

Oomfoofoo > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:08

0

Turn off all traction control and other electronic nannies. Was that so hard?

boxrocket > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:09

0

Personally I appreciate the computers and stuff, as they make taking the car closer to its limits less potentially deadly and hazardous. Stories and experiencing driving ooooold 911s and the literal snap-oversteer that could send you into a wall with little to protect you but thin sheetmetal versus driving a current one, or driving a Testarossa around a track and feeling like it might break loose at any moment but feeling relatively safe and being able to chase faster lap times and higher trap speeds in a Cayman S, or throwing a nose-heavy old Jag into a corner and having it scream and go squirrelly mid-apex versus being able to clip the apex and floor it out the same corner in a V12 Vantage; totally different experiences, but in the newer cars there is less threat to self and the vehicle - especially those that cost as much or more than many houses - and while some may argue there is or isn't less skill involved (I personally think it's a focus on different skills, notably focusing on the added weight and potential grip and power than reminding oneself that one tiny mistake will send you through the K-rail). Just as we don't typically have new roller coasters made from wood (and those that are are much better engineered than those of old) and modern planes use computers and more instruments than their ancestors, adding computers and technology doesn't negate or neuter the experience, it makes it more enjoyable by knowing there's less risk of ending one's only life just for some thrills and excitement.

Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:10

3

Sports cars at no point have been about being "engaging". Super cars have always been a game of numbers. The highest of technology to create the best numbers. The fact the cars are becoming less in control just shows the weakness of the human component.

Super car production always been a contest between the manufacturers. They don't care about the human component.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > J-Tenno 06/08/2014 at 12:10

1

Absolutely. I'd be tempted to call them "Luxury super cars" because they cloud you in this aura of civility while also offering retarded levels of power and anarchy at your disposal, whenever you should so choose.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:11

1

I always figured that I'd buy old cars and leave the super cars/high end sports cars to guys who have oil spurting out of their back yards. There are definitely gems still—I convinced my mom to buy a used E89 Z4 30i Msport, and thanks to a 6MT, N/A I6, RWD, and other fundamental aspects of the car, it mainly has technology only when you want it (TCS off, etc). I always like to jump in the ring when these posts supporting intimate driving experiences come up, though, because as an enthusiast it's fun to make noise over things you can't change and don't affect you.

1111111111111111111111 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:11

1

along with handing back controll to the driver it should make them more approachable money wise

Michael Zaite > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:11

6

"A car is an amalgamation of Teutonic and electronic parts. "

A German car perhaps.

jalop1991 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:12

1

Go ahead, put yourself in a 930 and hammer it around the track of your choosing.

I dare you.

There's a reason why you don't, and why cars are what they are today.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > boxrocket 06/08/2014 at 12:13

0

I'd rather end my life doing something I love than end it having a heart attack over dinner, alone.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Michael Zaite 06/08/2014 at 12:15

3

Ah yes, you are right. I misspoke. I meant mechanical and electronic parts.

Why the hell did I write Teutonic?

Yeesh.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > jalop1991 06/08/2014 at 12:15

0

**Correction

There is a reason why I have driven a 930 hard, many a time, and have lived to talk about it.

Michael Zaite > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/08/2014 at 12:16

3

Dont forget the part where it was trying to kill you. I think most peoples disappointment with modern 911's is the fact that the car doesn't feel homicidal anymore.

So is "Engaging" really the experience of trying not to kill yourself or the car constantly? Some of the Classic super sports cars could be expensively broken just by looking at them wrong. And most of them could get you upside down wrapped around a tree due to an ill timed sneeze.

djmt1 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:17

1

You are entitled to disagree, that is the whole point of a forum but how does modifying lead to a diminished experience? Your statement is backing up my view that tuning is for when your car isn't satisfying enough and you want more as opposed to helping me see your side.

I've driven a BRZ and I was bored stiff, though that was probably due to the Atom but that said I still enjoyed the 306 GTI, so I fully get why so many people modify BRZs because from my experience it's appeal is drifting but the thing is not everyone enjoys drifting.

ClassicDatsunDebate > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:17

0

I think that as sports cars get more technological, the threshold of where "engagement" happens pushes out. You can drive a BRZ or a vintage sports car closer to their performance limit therefore you are more engaged. How often are we lucky enough to push a 458 or 911 to its limits. To me, driver engagement is in direct relation to how close you are to the car's performance potential.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:17

2

The last part of your post is nothing more than speculation.

61hp > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:18

1

Never driven one, or even seen one, but the Noble 600 seems to be what you are saying is missing in the world.

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:18

2

I see what you're getting at. The latest hypercars with their electronic nanny systems and automatic "automated manual" transmissions practically drive themselves.

So in response to that, I suggest these cars for you:

-Dodge Viper

-Lotus Elise S

-Something from Radical: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_S…

-Caterham 7 CSR

-Ascari KZ1

-Ariel Atom

The super sports cars still exist. It's just that with the way technology has progressed, the fastest ones, when put in the hands of a non-professional driver, will be the ones with all the built in nanny systems and automation.

alan666 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:18

0

What about Pagani & Koenigsegg ?

Don't forget that a lot of the tech in cars now is mandatory.

Notengaginglololol > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:19

2

I drive a 500bhp 75 280z with a built 2001 Z06 LS6 engine and T56 6 speed daily. It is all motor, no forced induction. The 280z doesn't have traction control, it doesn't have modern safety features, and it doesn't even have power steering. It drives like a mini version of a Lamborghini Diablo. It is as raw and demanding as the Diablo, only slightly less likely to spin back first than the Diablo. I also have a 2005 maxima with a 3.5 v6 and no performance work done to it. Realistically, most of the people I know who did not grow up racing would win on a track with that Maxima over my 280z. It would take 2 turns for someone unfamiliar with my Datsun to end up in a wall or off the course, yet as big and boring as the Maxima seems, it is still fast, and it is significantly easier to not destroy and not kill anyone in. Your demanding to "Be Engaged" is a very loose terminology. Your everyday driver is engaged with that Maxima still, it is taking them to their limits, and cars are made for MASS APPEAL, not to sell to pockets of collectors or enthusiasts. My 280z is significantly more engaging than 95% of people want their car to be, and you can buy a CAMARO, MUSTANG, or CHALLENGER that will have more than 600 bHP on it and the ability to turn off safety controls, which makes them even more engaging than my tiny and powerful Z. Tracking any real car is engaging, I can scare you in a Ford C Max and have the time of my life, and it will be VERY engaging. I will have to fight for every ounce of control. But at what point does fighting the car stop being "Fun" and become less fun than driving a car that is able to take corner with speed and ease. I am an older Jalopnik and I have bounced around and drove 50 years worth of everything from exotics to clunkers and RHD diesels we don't get, and these modern cars are the pinnacle of auto making. If you want something raw and visceral, you have many choices available, and a lot of the creature comforts can be turned off. The biggest complaint about these cars is the electric power steering, but if you really want to be engaged why, are you driving a car with power steering in the first place? That seems like it takes away too much from your "Racers Edge" that you so severely desire.

Michael Zaite > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:20

1

Plus

All the I just crapped my pants "engagement" and all the time spent fixing as the old Super Sports Cars of the past.

sm70- why not Duesenberg? > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 06/08/2014 at 12:21

2

I love old cars, and I know enough about the old-car "emotion" to know that I will never in a million years convince anyone who is set on old cars that a new car can have even a fraction of the passion and emotion and experience of an old one. But the fact is; old cars have this passion and engaging driving experience because they aren't as technologically advanced. There are good points and bad points, but I can't stand when people say, "Sports cars and driver's cars are dead because everything has computers and technology!" That simply isn't true. There are lots of very entertaining modern cars out there, and anyone who denies that hasn't driven one.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Michael Zaite 06/08/2014 at 12:21

0

Good question. I don't think it's about how "close to death you are"... Again, it's about how involved you are in keeping the car doing what you ask of it. You can enjoy that aspect of a 930 Turbo without pushing it to the ragged edge... And that's what makes it a good car.

945T > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:23

1

while I agree to a point, I wonder how people felt about these cars in the late '80s/early '90s when they were the hottest newest thing and the pinnacle of technology - and how many people wished for a return to the simpler, more raw cars from the '60s, etc...

Goshen, formerly Darkcode > Dwhite - Powered by Caffeine, Daft Punk, and Corgis 06/08/2014 at 12:24

2

You do deserve the golden star for pointing out that. Supercar design has indeed been a pissing contest since ever. However, it is also true that manufacturers are shelling the emotional factor more and more lately.

A jet fighter isn't designed to be cool or fun. A jet fighter is designed to perform, handle and destroy the enemy. However, in the meantime, observers may find it cool, and pilots may find it fun to pilot. Was it designed for those functions? No. Do those functions attribute it more value? Yes. Same for supercars.

Goshen, formerly Darkcode > VRYALT3R3D 06/08/2014 at 12:25

1

Unfortunately they'll be killing it soon due to flat sales and fascist air and sound pollution regulations.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Notengaginglololol 06/08/2014 at 12:26

0

I am in no way suggesting a racers edge, or the ability to drive a car feeling like imminent death is around the next apex.

I'm suggesting a car that makes you FEEL engaged even when you're not on the racers edge. A car like a Miata, where you can go into town at 40mph and still feel a great, rewarding, driving experience... And still feel like you're part of that experience.

I'm saying that supercars used to provide this level of tactical feedback. Now they offer a high level of speed and power, but little connection to the driver.

945T > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:27

4

It was extremely interesting to drive a 991 C2S Coupe with the seven speed manual, and a 991 C2S Cabrio PDK a week apart, same roads, etc... The coupe was sublime. And while the cabrio may have been faster, it was not anywhere near the same. These were the owner's demo cars at a dealership I worked at.... And the owner constantly lamented over how he missed his coupe for months afterward. The cabrio, comparatively, was just shit to drive.

Goshen, formerly Darkcode > Michael Zaite 06/08/2014 at 12:27

0

Imagine John Hennessey selling LT4-swapped MX-5s as semi-production cars.

djmt1 > Manwich - now Keto-Friendly 06/08/2014 at 12:28

0

I second the Lotus, Caterham and Atom, from my experiences with them they are all amazing and I'm a one car guy so I usually hate stuff like that.

literacola > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:29

11

So you dislike progress and diversity in the sports car marketplace? The way you wrote this article, it looks like what you wish for is that every car out there is essentially the same thing with a different badge. Sounds lame. There are still manual 911s. If you want to disable the nannies in any modern car, you can. The only "fake" exhaust note out there is in the M5.

Buying something slow and old tech does define an enthusiast - there is always someone out there with something slower, scarier, and more manual. I work with people that gripe about how modern racing is too easy because "you don't have to manually [with a hand pump] maintain fuel pressure." While I understand their enjoyment of being involved with more of the systems on a car, I prefer to focus on fewer inputs.

Every year, cars get simultaneously faster, safer, and more efficient. Disliking that is some next level hipster idiocy. If you like old cars, then go drive old cars. Stop lamenting the fact that new cars are different than old cars. That's what makes them new.

ljksetrightmemorialtrophydash > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:29

1

So pull your ABS fuse, bolt on a set of used bald tires, and dial in some positive camber and toe-out.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > 945T 06/08/2014 at 12:29

0

You make a very good point. But also remember that we lived through the death of analog and the birth of digital, in the form of the internet.

We went from relishing in those analog experiences, to seeking the rewards of them in digital form.

The car guys from the 60's weren't all to different from the car guys of the 90's, the only difference was in the quality of construction (Cars of the 60's were certainly more solidly built than cars from the 90's).

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > sm70- why not Duesenberg? 06/08/2014 at 12:32

2

You're right, and that's what I meant by "better but not old." Being an driving nut means wanting to do more yourself, enjoying every input and every instance of road feel. When I talk to older guys who work at an air cooled Porsche shop, for instance, they admit to not really seeing the appeal to going faster vs having more fun, but don't have any real quibbles with new cars because they have their vintage cars. I say, as people who like to drive and really control cars, it's our duty to restore/preserve the cars that can give us that special feeling of really commandeering the cars so that automotive enthusiasm doesn't completely turn into specs sheets and sheer technological development. I'll take visceral and thrilling over fast and efficient any day sitting behind the wheel, but I can respect a car that is a merger of both, i.e. some 991 variants, the Zondas, etc.

Renescent > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:32

1

I think the biggest difference between then and now is drive-ability. Older super cars were art, today's 'super cars' are functional in the day to day. Today's society of car nuts would lose their shit if they had to open the scissor door and sit on the sill to back into a parking space.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > literacola 06/08/2014 at 12:33

0

1. You're suggesting that I'm a hipster. Which I'm not.

2. You're suggesting I'm an idiot. Which I'm not.

3. You're talking about reaping the rewards of a digital manifestation of commands and parts. I'm talking about feeling that reward on a much lower level even in the most mundane slow use of analog engagement.

It's not about how fast the car is for me. It's about how it makes me feel behind the wheel... What it allows me to do and be in control of.

PardonMyFlemish16 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:34

11

You are mischaracterizing me and putting words in my mouth to bolster your POV and paint everyone who disagrees with you a certain way. I'm not going for it. Check my Oppo articles and you can see where my head is really at.

You seem to be more concerned about what a car is than how it drives. And you have a big problem with confusing your opinions and desires as absolute indisputable truths. "Should a car enthusiast not revel in how much of the driving experience they control and are in command of? Shouldn't that be the "experience"?" Ummmm, I think that depends on the enthusiast. "Shouldn't sports driving be an almost excerise?" If the person driving the car wants it to be. Etc. etc. All these questions you are asking rhetorically are actually legitimately open ended questions with various answers. If someone wants a car that is nothing but a spec machine, fine, that is their choice.... you in all your sactimonous high and mightiness can't judge them on that.

My only beef is when we are robbed of choices. I don't like direct injection turbocharged engines, but as long as I can choose an NA engine, I don't mind. But if someone says a DI-T engine is inherently or objectively superior, then I have a problem. If someone talks about how DSGs are the only way forward, I have a problem. You are just the analog, "purist" equivalent of those "specs over everything" assholes, and are just as insuffrable and incapable of separating your opinions from truths/facts. The driving experience "should be" whatever the person behind the wheel wants it to be, and everyone should have the freedom to choose the experience they want without judgment. Just don't push what you think should be onto others as some kind of unarguable truth.

PardonMyFlemish16 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:35

0

What post?

ICantStandNewJalopnik > VRYALT3R3D 06/08/2014 at 12:35

6

This is exactly what I came to post. This article should say, "Oh, besides the Viper." The magazines/media ripped the poor thing apart because "it is too wild" and it "takes a lot of skill to get the performance out of it." Well, that's the point what what's trying to be made here.

Drive the car. Don't let it drive you.

boxrocket > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:37

1

I'd rather (as I have done countless times) keep doing what I love over and over again without worrying that the next turn might be my last because the car I'm driving (or a passenger on) is almost actively trying to kill me. Take an old Porsche or Italian "super car" - or even top-spec muscle cars - to a track and push them as close to their limits as you're able, or if you're unable, ride along with someone who can. If your fireproof underwear isn't at least slightly soiled, I'd be surprised. If that's not exciting enough, go in an even older "super sports" car, and try again. The last time I did, I walked away thinking, "Well, that was exciting, but never again. I have too much to live for."

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:38

1

Perhaps you're right. But I'm not pushing it by having an opinion. You're simply offended by it because my opinion doesn't match yours.

In no way did I tell you that you were "Doing it wrong". Only that I disagreed with your state of mind and your ideals of what driving should be about.

Yes, I am an analog purist. Does that mean I don't appreciate modern super cars? No, because I do. But I appreciate engagement over reward.

And that's the point I'm trying to make.

MaWeiTao > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:38

2

Personally, I think this argument is bullshit. Imagine going back to the early days where simply crank starting a car could break your arm. It doesn't get more brutal than that. Think back to the days of manual transmissions before synchros. People bitch about dual clutch transmissions but forget that manuals don't take much effort to operate anymore. They offer more gears so you don't have to worry about falling out of the power band, they rev match for you and help you up hills. I suppose the extra pedal and moving a stick around allows the delusion that you've got more control over your car than if you were just flicking a paddle.

Does any of this make modern cars inferior? No, because it allows the driver to focus on the most important aspect of the experience; driving. The feel and communication is appealing, but subjective and irrelevant to the driving experience. If those things mattered so much modern cars wouldn't be so decisively outperforming cars of old by every single metric imaginable.

By this rationale we should be throwing out laptops, tablets and smartphones in favor of a classic beige 1985 IBM PC. It doesn't get much more elemental than that. Trust me, you'll feel a lot more connected to your PC if you're tinkering around in DOS.

Yes, I might agree that we've lost something, but we've gained so much more.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:39

1

"That's more important to me, than my car fitting the ideals of some dude I will never meet who probably can't afford any of the cars he is demanding be uprooted and changed to his irrational likin".

This is both speculative, and rude.

This post. ^

Next time, don't harp on me about being stuck in my ways or "putting words in your mouth" when you yourself can't even be civil.

PardonMyFlemish16 > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 06/08/2014 at 12:40

2

There are plenty of modern "analog" gems. M235i, Miata, Mustang, Febreeze twins, Corvette, 911, Cayman/Boxster, etc. And even "high tech" cars like the STi, 458, EVO etc are still damn fun and raw despite being tech. Plus there are plenty of old simple sports cars "spurting oil out of their backyards". So I think the wholesale slamming of tech/modern cars is just cheesy. There are plenty of fun modern cars, both analog and digit

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > MaWeiTao 06/08/2014 at 12:42

0

I'm not saying we should have crank starts (Really? REALLY?).

I'm saying that the driving experience should offer some level of analog input. Otherwise, all it is, is an experience... And not really "driving" per say.

TheSergeMeister > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:45

4

what kind of a loser are you to actually say "how can you can yourself a car enthusiast"

I cant drive manual so I guess ill never fully be a part of the car change gear, does that man im not a car enthusiast? No. Shut up with your stupid opinion. You're telling me a countach exhaust note wasnt designed? What they just stuck the engine in there and hooked some tubes up hoping itll sound good? Dipshit.

PardonMyFlemish16 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:45

1

No, I am fine with a difference of opinions. I am also an "analog purist" to a large degree. My car and bike are pretty "raw" by modern standards. I've driven a few of the high tech cars and I don't like them.

What I don't like you acting like your opinions are facts, or that you know better than folks who like different things than you, which is pretty much what you have done through this whole post. You like "pure analog" cars, cool. But don't talk like folks who prefer other things do so because they are "being fooled" into enjoying it. Newsflash... people might like different things than you, and there is nothing wrong with them for doing so.

PardonMyFlemish16 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:46

1

Can you afford any of these supercars you deem not pure enough?

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:46

0

The slamming of it is cheesy, but the huge boner the automotive media gets over it is too. There is a middle ground that we should be in, and it consists of the cars you just mentioned. Still, as a gear head, there is great reason to own a classic vehicle of some kind if only to meet your hero or take the hobby to a real-world level (although more so because they provide and irreplicable experience). In that regard, cars are truly similar to music.

Doctor-G-and-the-wagen > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:47

2

So basically every car got a lot better through heavy use of technology, and now that every car is super no car is.

czechmonsterdeux > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:47

1

The era of the "Driver's car" is gone. It's all electronics and every moron thinks they can drive. Put them in a Noble and see what happens.

Wufnu > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:48

0

No true Scots... car.

PardonMyFlemish16 > JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 06/08/2014 at 12:48

1

I agree. Older cars definitely have their charms and give people context. But new cars do too.

Stradale > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:50

2

The reason the BRZ owner is happier than the Ferrari owner is simple. He buys the BRZ to be stimulated and co-active in the cars abilities. The Ferrari owner only buys it to revel in them.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

How many unhappy BRZ owners have you met? How many "bored" BRZ owners have you met?

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

How many unhappy Ferrari owners have you met or heard of? How many of them have you heard about being "bored" with their cars?

Et cetera.....

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > TheSergeMeister 06/08/2014 at 12:51

4

What in the name of...

No wonder you can't drive a manual. You can barely communicate in English properly.

And uh, yeah... They bolted an exhaust to the Countach, in an effort to increase power. It had nothing to do with sound, smarty pants.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:53

1

I could walk into a dealership tomorrow, with a $15,000 deposit on a 991, GT-R, or whatever. I'd take out my line of credit, and risk it, but yes... I could.

What do my personal finances have to do with this argument, at all?

literacola > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:57

2

I'm not sure what you're getting at with driver feel. Your steering wheel isn't any less attached than it used to be. In most cars, this is true of the brakes as well. Beyond that, there are varying levels of suspension setups that will absolutely change how the car responds to the road. I suppose your perception of that response is largely dependent on the seat and the sensitivity of your butt.

None of that has changed. With the exception of traction control and ABS, cars are doing the exact same things they used to do. They're just doing them better. You're upset that they're doing them better, and that's why I called you out for taking part in some hipster idiocy. We all enjoy shitty things for their shittyness, but complaining about nice things for being nice makes you look dumb.

Michael Zaite > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 12:59

0

The thing is Supercars were never about engagement, they were about speed. Old supercars were engaging due to technological limitations at the time for a given amount of fast, it was a weakness of the style not a virtue. Computers and big brakes let the car go faster, faster is the only point in supercars.

A user needs to decide on What experience they want, not what Style of car they want.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 12:59

0

I'm not acting like my opinions are fact. I'm saying that facts are facts.

As we've progressed into a more digital age, we've seeked the rewards of analog work... Hence why cars provide those rewards in through a digital medium.

Do I have a right to say that someone can or cannot like new super cars? No. They can like whatever they want. Will I agree with it? That's entirely personal... And they don't have to agree with me if they don't want to.

The facts are there. It's up to you, and the other enthusiasts only content with the rewards they reap, to see that before this generation of supercars came along, they offered the same "rewards" with minimal analog engagement, and even minimal speed. They gave you that feeling of being "exhilarated" and on the edge, even at 40mph.

At 40mph, a 458 feels like it's dawdling. At 40mph, a GT-R feels asleep. At 40mph, a Countach feels like it's alive.

If you prefer the former, that's fine. If you prefer the latter, that's fine.

I prefer the latter myself.

And that's what I'm getting at.

You're allowed to have your opinion, but don't question my finances, my motives as to writing the article, or the reasoning behind my own personal opinion without expecting an argument - because you bring it on yourself.

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > PardonMyFlemish16 06/08/2014 at 13:00

0

definitely. Only old cars can have such distinctive feel, and mostly only new cars can have such great tech, safety, and usability. But only when automakers blend some classic feel with modern refinements and innovations and you end up with cars like the Cayman, M235i, etc. that are fun to drive and easy to use.

Notengaginglololol > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 13:01

1

No, they did not. Supercars of the old days were not daily drivers. They were made for track days, hence why they have reputations to catch fire. They were not for cruising at 40 in the city, feeling engaged, and having fun. What you are describing is a sports car or a roadster. Are you sure you have drove all these cars you claim to have? An F40 at 40mph is not fun and engaging, it is painful and awkward. A Diablo at 40 is not fun. What supercar are you referring to that feels fun and "engaging" at 40 mph? I hate to tell you, this article sound like you specifically wrote it hoping to use Jalopnik keywords. "Engaging" like a Miata? You are talking about why are supercars not super anymore. A Miata is a basic sportscar, it drives like a Miata. If you show me a supercar that drives like a Miata I will show you a sucker who got took to the bank. You know why the Miata feels good at 40 mph? It was engineered to, kind of like how that F40 is engineered to feel good at 140 mph. All bushings and suspension must be stiffer, everything has to be dialed up to 11 on a true supercar, which inherently makes it not like a Miata at 40mph. It cracks me up you think a BRZ owner is happier than a Ferrari because it is more "Engaging" . No. If you can afford a Ferrari, and can afford to drive it like you would drive a BRZ, you will see it is INFINITELY more engaging than a BRZ. Do you own a BRZ? I did. I sold it after 3 months. It was nothing special, just a fun toy. A super car by definition is SUPER, not average or fun for beginners. I want my supercar to perform on the track where it belongs.

Yossarian > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 13:02

1

By all accounts, modern suprr /hyper cars are just as engaging and even more fun. 3 pedals doesn't mean more engaging.

BTW I'm a manual BRZ owner.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Notengaginglololol 06/08/2014 at 13:05

0

This is a very good point. Yes, I've driven an F40 (and at more than 40mph). While it felt like a handful at 120mph even (Which was my limit on how fast I'd take it to), at 40mph it did feel like a scary, raunchy, half built death trap. And that's what gave it character.

The reason I put it in the same league as even a BRZ is that at any speed you get the sense of what the car was all about. It wasn't civility waiting to be unleashed into insanity... It was insanity (or in this case, "engagement"), clearly there to be taken and enjoyed.

dr861 > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 13:05

1

A Ferrari owner of course, buys his car because it's the pinnacle of automotive technology and speed, at his fingertips. MMM.... not so much anymore. At this point you can buy a lot more cars for a fraction of the price that will perform as well as most ferrari's. The F12 IS a pinnacle car, but the flagship v12 is never the best seller.

That being said, I'd have to disagree with you about most supercars today. Maybe a third pedal would be more fun, but I personally didn't love the world of old Supercars. They were hard to drive, most normal men can't fit in them, and since I am not normally sized, I appreciate that I can fit in a Ferrari Italia. Something tells me I wouldn't be able to snuggle into a Testarossa. Hell, if you wear larger than a size 12, you're going to have trouble driving most old porsche's, with their pedal boxes about 8 inches more inboard than you would like, and clutch, brake, and gas are almost so close they're touching.

If old supercars were designed so people could fit in them, I would drive them more often, but since they are beyond my dimensions, I'm left only being able to drive brand new supercars. I don't have any problem with that.

Also there's something to be said for making a $300,000 car easier to drive. You have enough to worry about in normal traffic, with all sorts of people tail-gateing you, taking pictures while they are driving, trying to race and swerving into your car, etc. It's kind of nice just to slap that sucker in Auto mode and just keep your head on a swivel. As opposed to pressing down Thor's clutch, missing a gear, fucking up rev matching, oh and look an asshole in a camry is charging right towards me.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > literacola 06/08/2014 at 13:09

0

Engagement in this context is the amount of skill/effort/movement required to operate the vehicle at speed.

My original article has nothing to do with "doing it better" or the end result of the manifestation of tactical engagement of driving... Only the actual act itself and how engaging and rewarding it is to the driver at any speed.

If you still don't get the point I was trying to make through that paragraph, then I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Justin is driven > The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL 06/08/2014 at 13:13

4

I agree 100%, but the problem is that achieving that kind of bond and that kind of control is hard. People don't want hard for their $200k+. They want pantomime, spectacle, and for everyone to know exactly how much they spent.

Its the same reason people shit on the Toyobaru twins but likely couldn't really reach their limits around a circuit anyway. They're easy cars to drive, but hard to master, so people generally write off their slowness as "oh, it needs more power". Most guys, most of the time, cannot fully exploit even a stock FR-S.

The-Ever-Socially-Apathetic TBAL > Yossarian 06/08/2014 at 13:13

1

My original article isn't about the inclusion of manual transmissions. Manual's add to the fun, sure. But I meant driver satisfaction in any situation, at any speed. Which the BRZ provides, even in rush hour 20mph driving, vs. A 458 that feels dead and bored in 20mph rush hour jaunts.