A question on what makes a "driver's car"

"themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles" (themanwithsauce)
08/25/2013 at 02:00 • Filed to: None

I've seen quite a few people question the viper's result in the MT "Driver's car of the year" 2013 test. Which is definitely fair as it was the quality issues that held it back, not necessarily the performance. However, I think a lot of people commenting on this site don't have a true understanding of what it means to be a proper "driver's car"

Here is a quote taken from someone on this site " I personally am in the camp that the Viper is much more of a driver's car than the Carrera 4S. But I also don't think driver's cars have to lack precision. See Caterhams for example. For me, having little to no electronic assists is mandatory for pure driving experience."

Let's go over the two points I feel like we need to clarify here for all of you who have never stared down a wall at full tilt in a car before

1) Being lacking in precision makes it a TERRIBLE car to drive at speed automatically. Example - Shelby Cobras are *fun* not necessarily *good* to drive on a track. In terms of entertainment value, a car that is imprecise can certainly be fun but it is in no way something I can rely on.

2) Caterhams are ridiculously precise unless you assembled your kit like a gorilla. Sorry to bang on about this point but seriously?!?!?!?! How do you not consider the caterham a precise car? What the hell planet does this jalop live on that the caterham is imprecise?!?!?!

Am I alone in this? Please other people with racing experience comment on this - Does a car being "imprecise" or "random" make it a better driver's car than a car that might be difficult to do 10/10ths with but is "consistent" in terms of how it behaves?

DISCUSSION (8)

The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123 > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/25/2013 at 02:24

I think a car can be a driver's car without being a fully competent race-worthy car. Again the purity of the car as well as a focus on what the driver wants and not things like dvd entertainment to keep passengers happy.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123
08/25/2013 at 02:31

I agree that it doesn't have to be a "track-only" type of car. But I place my focus on the random handling. To me, that means a car is awful for driving hard. There is nothing worse than a car behaving randomly at the limits. Hands down, if the new viper truly does behave like that, the viper is a terrible driver's car because of it.

Plus having luxuries does not make it a bad driver's car either. If that was the case, then nothing with A/C would make the cut. The car being comfortable is actually separate from the car being good to drive.

The Opponaut formerly known as MattP123 > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/25/2013 at 03:05

As long as they are luxuries that benefit the driver and make for a more enjoyable experience.

As far as being able to control the car at it's limits... A true driver knows the limits of their car (such as a brutish Cobra). The more a driver does and the less a car does for you, the more it becomes a driver's car.

Mikeado > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/25/2013 at 04:25

A "driver's car" is, to me, a car that is designed for driving in a purer sense. Precision isn't the only point of definition, it's often as much about "feel" and/or being a car that you have to consciously drive, be it trying to work with a 911's difficult weight balance, or changing gear more often to keep an F40 on boost and avoid the immense turbo lag killing the speed out of corners. Not that I've personally dealt with either of those...

Basically, it should be a car that rewards you for trying. Something completely wayward like a Cobra 427 isn't a driver's car, but something that gets better the more or the harder you drive it is. Yes, it should definitely handle well, but you should also enjoy driving it fast as well.

ja9ae > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/25/2013 at 07:22

I know what you mean, but predictability at 10/10ths is rather more the definition of racing car, rather than drivers car?

Barbarian772 > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/25/2013 at 11:43

He never called the Caterham imprecise.... He just said that it's a great drivers car although it doesn't lack precision....

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > ja9ae
08/25/2013 at 12:58

I don't think it's at all exclusive to a racing car. When you've got cars like the lancer evolution or WRX STi or the corvette Z06/Z07 which are pretty attainable road cars that can be beasts at their high (for a road car) limits then I think being able to go into a turn confident in what the car is going to do is a very big part for a driver's car.

marshknute > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles
08/28/2013 at 21:51

I think that you are failing to grasp this particular meaning of the word "precision." It's not about having the lowest inertia like a Caterham, but rather the car's ability to communicate to the driver and encourage the driver at any level of driver input. It should be every bit as communicative at 2/10ths as it is at 10/10ths.

A Driver's Car is precise in the sense that it is a car whose chassis is so fine-tuned, so responsive, and so communicative, that the driver can place the car exactly as desired. It has the ability to oversteer, understeer, or grip at a moment's notice, but leaves the decision up to the driver.