Cars are fat.

"t_s" (t_s) 02/17/2014 at 06:17 • Filed to: None

1

17

Here's my car parked next to the smallest Audi currently available. I am unhappy.

spanfucker retire bitch > t_s 02/17/2014 at 07:25

1

Cars these days are faster, more fuel efficient and safer.

I'll take them over your opinion of them being "fat."

t_s > spanfucker retire bitch 02/17/2014 at 07:32

1

A Mk7 Golf GTI has broadly the same horsepower and takes 6.5 seconds to get to 60, which is 0.7s slower than a Euro-spec 911SC. It does, to your point, reach a higher top speed of 246 km/h compared to 235. Safety and efficiency are considerations for vegetarians and communists and therefore of no interest to me.

Milky > t_s 02/17/2014 at 07:38

1

Yes cars are fat, but IMO its nice knowing if something ever goes wrong I won't just die. My first car had no airbags and probably no crumple zone and my previous two cars only had 1 airbag.

spanfucker retire bitch > t_s 02/17/2014 at 07:40

0

Uh huh. And I just bet you never wear a helmet when you take that car out for track days, right? And to hell with those pansy fucking rollbars! Those are for commie vegetarians! And what right minded speed demon would give a shit about fuel efficiency? Not LMP or FIA, that's for god damn sure!

t_s > spanfucker retire bitch 02/17/2014 at 07:41

6

Your sense of humour bypass is in full effect good sir.

spanfucker retire bitch > t_s 02/17/2014 at 07:51

0

I do my best.

duurtlang > Milky 02/17/2014 at 07:55

1

My first car was safe for the era (introduced: 1983), and probably had some rudimentary crumple zone but certainly no airbags. What it did have was good visibility all around, which is somewhat to horribly lacking in modern cars. It also communicated to the driver what was happening, while most modern cars seem to shield you from everything.

Modern cars have clear advantages and I'd rather be in a modern car in a crash, but not every change has been for the better. Moreover, I'd argue an older car (with ABS) is sometimes better capable of avoiding a crash.

Jayhawk Jake > t_s 02/17/2014 at 08:07

0

Damn, a modern GTI is only 0.7s slower to 60 than a 911? That's pretty impressive

t_s > Jayhawk Jake 02/17/2014 at 08:10

1

The modern GTI will probably also repeat the 6.5s time ad infinitum, whereas the Porsche will explode the second time you try...

LeadfootYT > spanfucker retire bitch 02/17/2014 at 08:22

1

Safer is an advantage, yes. But they're also piles of plastic and electronics, and don't offer a driving experience at all. They're just carriages for boring people to putter around with their iPods plugged in and playing non-offensive, forgettable music and wondering when they can Instagram their next meal.

I'll stick with my E24s and W124s, thanks. Perfectly safe, particularly the Mercedes, and from a time when you paid for real comfort, not for more equipment to break.

Jedidiah > t_s 02/17/2014 at 09:15

2

I really hate modern cars. Ugly, heavy, plastic-ridden, and near impossible to work on. Factor that in with monthly payments and putting up with the dealerships and you have a recipe for misery.

I'd rather be in an "unsafe" car that I can keep running for a long time than be stuck in a ipod safety-cage with poor visibility.

Milky > duurtlang 02/17/2014 at 09:20

0

Ehh I'd like to challenge some things you said. Like communicating more to the driver, if we're comparing a beige FWD family sedan of the 80's to a modern one I can't imagine there being anymore communication.

The visibility thing is also a touchy subject for me. Yes my first car was a jeep cherokee that had greenhouse for days …. but the crossfire I have now is notorious having crap visibility, and I get on just fine. Really I see everything I want to forward and the mirrors show just about everything behind me. Plus I like the looks.

Jedidiah > LeadfootYT 02/17/2014 at 09:23

0

I agree with everything you just said. Modern cars have a longer average life expectancy than older cars, but they have to sense of longevity. More stuff to break, not easy to work on by yourself, and tons of plastic that decays quickly and is expensive to replace. It's a shame too; I like cars that are timeless, maintainable machines and most modern cars are disposable ipod accessories.

CPT Speedbump > t_s 02/17/2014 at 10:44

1

I have a small classic and a fat modern sports car, so I feel like I'm in a good place :P

Biapilotaceman > t_s 02/17/2014 at 11:47

1

On the upside, you have a gorgeous air-cooled 911! :D

HFV has no HFV. But somehow has 2 motorcycles > Jedidiah 02/17/2014 at 18:37

0

That poor visibility is the worst part. I had a 91 Civic that I could see everything out of, compare that to a post 04 Civic which wont let you see anything behind you. No wonder everything has a back up camera now.

samssun > spanfucker retire bitch 02/21/2014 at 19:42

0

Cars have been orders of magnitude safer for over a decade now. Having bureaucrats ratchet safety requirements every year so that the world's safest car from 5 years ago would now fail miserably is ridiculous. Is anyone in a 2000 Accord driving a deathtrap?

Weight is an all around loser to everything a car does. Yes cars tech has advanced to mitigate the penalty, but when a "midsize" or "compact sedan" weighs 3800+ pounds, everything it does has to overcome that extra 600 pounds of junk. The current S4 is a great car, but would be a phenomenally better driving experience, with better mileage, and great safety, if it weighed 3200.