I tend to agree. Although when I was 18, straight line speed was a lot of fun. Also a good way to kill yourself and other people. Street racing in 400HP cars is insane.
I still get a kick out of redlining my Alfa 166 in a little sprint. 0-100 kmh in about 8 seconds is not slow for a 1500 kilogram limousine, and the V6 makes for a most pleasing roar. But any idiot with a souped up Civic will do it faster. To which my reaction is, “At least I’m doing it in style”. 
I sometimes long for my first car. An 800 kilogram Peugeot 205, with a measely 75 BHP 1.4 engine. 0-100 in 10 seconds, and quicker through the corners than almost anything “normal” on the road. Tons of fun.
I agree that a car (and a lot of things) is an emotional purchase in a lot of ways, but I get the feeling you must live in an urban area with a very good public transportation system. You also seem to need to get places not carrying much and arriving whenever the bus sees fit to deliver you. Many people are not in those categories.
I ride the bus. Have two Corvettes, an Avalance, and a PT Cruiser. Bunch more money I’ve spent than I strictly needed to considering any 4 year old car with 75000 on the clock is only half way through it’s life and worth between $4k and $6k.
Us Americans lease our cars for 36 months, have another American buy it at half it’s new price, give it up at 100,000 miles 'cause they think it’s used up. And they get ferried south to Mexico where they go another 100,000-150,000 miles.
There’s a steady stream if used car convoys on I-25 heading south out of denver. It’s a rare thing to have a really used up car around here.
I think Coldfire isn’t exactly “bringing a knife to a gunfight”. I don’t think Sam Stone or Johnny L.A. are either. This isn’t pistonheads.com or grmotorsports.com but the automotive discussion here is around the level of the stuff you get at Car and Driver’s forums and certainly better than that on the Cartalk or Road and Track boards.
I’m a racecar design engineer. If this is a gunfight, I’m bringing a Thompson submachine gun and a large Lexan shield into combat against a bunch of guys with six-shooters.
Actually, at this time they CAN’T. Since the Sault Ste. Marie plant where the F-bodies were produced has been idled, GM can’t make a car named either Camaro or Firebird for a certain number of years unless they reopen that plant and reemploy those workers. The plant was at the end of its lifespan and going to be ruinously expensive to retool or update, so the decision was made to shut it down. Unfortunately, that also meant shutting down the F-bodies too. Check out the new GTO, though, for a taste of what could be coming up. Chuck some retro styling cues onto that bad boy and you’ll have a CAR! 
You maybe right about the reasons why Chevy killed the F-bodies, and why they won’t be bringing them back rightaway, but I’ve seen some concept designs for what would be the “next” Camaro (in theory), and well, I don’t think a pick up truck is going to sit well with Camaro fans.
NOT being sarcastic: I don’t understand your point. What you’ve said here is in opposition to what I said, how?
There are bright points of light (or heavier weaponry to follow the euphimism) on the board. (I’d add Tuckerfan to the list) But there’s a lot of ‘I don’t like automatic transmissions, automatic transmissions don’t belong in a racecar’ or ‘I don’t like Fords, fords suck!’ commentary that’s at best Ill informed. A lot of automotive opinion here is just that, opinion. It’s not backed up by background, pedigree, or experience.
I’m saying that pretty much ALL new cars are overhyped. If you compare NEED, a 5 year old F-150 crewcab with rubber mats, no A/C, and 100,000 miles on the odo will handle 99% of the population’s needs. A $3000 1992 Acura Legend would handle 99% of the population’s needs. (Grandpop’s got one, I did a timing belt and waterpump job on it. At 175000 miles EVERYTHING still works. I expect it’s easily good for another 90,000 miles). For every person that buys an SUV that truely needs it, 99 other buy it because they want one, not because they need one. I used our Avalanche yesterday to bring home a 4x8 sheet of lumber and some 2x4s…Convenient? Yes. Worth the additional $150 a mony for a SUV? No. It would cost me $30 to rent Home Depot’s pickup truck. Our family of four could easily get by with a 4 door sedan, but we’ve got the scratch, so the Av is a good vehicle.
ALL car purchase is based on hype. It’s rationalizable as ‘I want a more dependable car’, or ‘The warrantee is almost up’, but really it’s ‘I’m bored and want to get something else.’ or ‘I’d look, feel, be perceived better in a new/better/more expensive car.’
Hype is an advertising term. The automotive industry is well grounded in advertising. Have you ever really noticed what percentage of commercials on TV are car related? During the morning news it’s easily more than 50%. They’ve gotten very good at it.
Out of curiosity what does it cost ovah der? Relative to some of the compeition, Porsche and other high end similars?
I wanna think Top Gear mentioned 40000 pounds. (70 to 80k US at the time)
I agree with everything you’ve said, and I loathe Civics and Japanese cars in general, but I must conceed that they are reliable. Every legitimate measure agrees that they are very reliable cars, anbd that’s the key reason for their resale value. Still, I don’t think it’s worth the premium you pay for a plastic lunchbox.
Apologies if this doubleposts…it looks like the SDMB ate may last one.
Top Gear mentioned the C6 was 40k pounds, or roughly 75-80k US
Let’s not go down the path of trying to judge who is or isn’t qualified to comment on cars. Let the posts stand on their own, without appeals to authority or the credentials of the poster. On almost every subject on this board, raw amateurs mix it up with true professionals in the field. That’s what makes it special. (-:
This is a silly argument. The fact that an old used car will ‘work’ for people in no way means that measurable improvements in newer cars are ‘hype’. Of course no one ‘needs’ a new Lexus. We could all take the bus and ride bicycles. For that matter, all we really ‘need’ is a cave to live in an the occasional haunch of meat. Everything else is optional. When you start injecting what one ‘needs’ into the conversation, it just clouds everything. The same goes for discussions about ‘value’. Is a BMW 7-series ‘worth’ four times more than, say, a Ford 500? This is a subjective question with no correct answer. An economist would say it is for some thousands of people per year, given that they choose to make that decision.
The bottom line is that the last decade has seen a true renaissance in car manufacture. Cars are much, much better today than they were in 1990. The fastest Corvette ever made is the one made today. The average family sedan goes faster and handles better than the average sports car from 20 years ago. The addition of features like ABS brakes, stability control, multiple airbags, crumple zones, and other safety feature have made cars much safer. And gas mileage is way better for a given horsepower rating. The new Z06 Vette has 505 HP, and gets 27 mpg on the highway!
I got quite a bit of that information from Scott Settlemire, who managed the F-body division–I’m inclined to think he knows what he’s talking about…
And I also think the current price of gas is going to work in favor of more sporty cars, maybe a bit less in the displacement arena than before, but also fewer heavy pickup type vehicles getting greenlighted in favor of lighter, more fuel efficient vehicles. It is possible to make a fast as hell car that doesn’t guzzle gas and since Americans are pretty fond of their muscle cars I truly believe we’ll be seeing some interesting new developments in future.
What I really want to see is the 42V battery Delphi came up with in widespread use. Not only does a higher voltage system make it easier to power DVD sytems, powered and heated/cooled seating and other whoop te doo toys, it also paves the way for improving fuel economy by using the battery to operate the car as a de facto hybrid–shutting off the engine while idling at a light, then using electrical power to restart the engine when the accelerator is applied. Just that alone could make even full size pickups and SUVs a LOT more easygoing on the gas, let alone what it’ll do for passenger vehicles. It’s getting some resistance right now since repair shops will have to retool and reeducate to get used to the higher voltage sytems. Let the price at the pump continue to resemble forcible anal rape, though, and I figure most of the resistance will melt away… 
Agreed and conceeded.
But that’s precisely my point. Hype to one individual is practical to another. ‘Most hyped vehicle’ says more about the attitudes of the poster than it does the car they’re deriding.
Best, fastest, most powerful is a slippery slope. Practically as soon as you drive it off the lot, it’ll be second best. Further, if everybody thought the best car was the best car, there’d be one manufacturer for cars, one for sports cars, and one for sedans. The fact there are a multitude of manufacturers shows that there’s not one true best and not one true ‘most hyped’.
Take the OP’s example of the Mustang. When the Camaro was in production, the Mustang trailed in power and performance. But if you look at the numbers, the Mustang out sold the Camaro by a HUGE margin…and the V6 versons of BOTH cars sold much more than the V8 versions. So there must be something selling these cars other than all out performance. (And watch out if that Cobra next to you has oval inlets next to the fog lights…385 underrated hp from the factory and a simple pulley change to make 425-450).
This is MHO as a full-spectrum carslut:
Cars are GREAT. You’ll not find me slamming 99.99% of the cars out there. Why would I show up in my Corvette, then slam the guy in the 5 liter Mustang? He’s a car guy. I’d much rather deride the driving challenged soccermom in the mall that can’t drive, talk on the phone, eat, and yell at here kids at the same time. She thinks she can. But she can’t.
Based on my example above, I’d kinda wish cars took a little MORE driver interaction to use.
I’ve got two 1% cars in the garage. That is, these cars will out perform 99% of all vehicles out there. Handily. Yet some of the most fun I’ve had is in the 5 speed Cruiser. with the base motor. it’s more of a challange to be smooth and quick with it.
The Avalanche has been the single most versatile vehicle we’ve owned. Bitch all ya want about SUV’s, I love ours.
I came ->| |<- this close to buying a Mini Cooper. I couldn’t rationalize the expense, but MAN did I want it. Talk about hype! Kill stickers in magazines, ‘grin-o-meter’ gauges to make sure you turn left as many times as you turn right?
Well, they’ve been promising us that for about a decade now, and supposedly the Europeans were going to get it first. No idea if it’s showed up on the far side of the pond yet, but given that it took several decades for some of Tucker’s ideas to show up on mass production vehicles, I ain’t holdin’ my breath.
I’ve heard two things on 42v systems of note.
-
Current research is stalled with no plans for rollout by anybody. Complexities of running multiple voltage systems is cited. (Don’t shoot the messenger, I’m aware the current hybrids run a low voltage and a high voltage loop)
-
The biggest neato feature with a 42v system was not all the electrical doodads. That was secondary to the devlopment of camless engines. That is: The valves would be actuated via solenoid, rather than one or more spinny bumpstick pieces of metal. That takes all of your variable valve timing tech and tosses it out with the bathwater. At zero voltage, the valve is in a half-open position. There’s no drag due to compression. You could shut off cylinders as necessary for economy. Come to a stop and all valves open, gas stops, ignition stops. when you need to move again, the piston that’s at the right point in the cycle has both valves close, a little squirt of gas, and the motor starts up without a starter. This motor could use valve timing for torque at low rpms, and timing for high hp at the top of the rpms, emissions and fuel efficiency in the middle…and NOT have the same problems with valve float…that’s caused when the valve can’t close fast enough agains the valvesprings…well, there’s no valvesprings!
It’s got some killer potential, but i have no idea when (or if) we’ll see it.
No doubt. But there are still objective measurements we can make. Horsepower, fuel burned per HP made, crash ratings, skidpad numbers, lap times, etc. Of course, that pre-supposes that these are the measurements that matter to you. Consider this next paragraph:
And there was. I actually had to make this decision, and chose the Mustang. IMO, the last-gen Camaro was a perfect example of what happens when you let your gearhead engineers make all the design choices. Sure, the Camaro was a superior race car. It’d crush the older Mustang on the track. But almost no one drives their cars on the track. And as a daily driver, the Mustang was far superior, IMO. Here’s what was wrong with the Camaro:
[ul]
[li]The steeply raked window threw too many reflections, and the top of the windshield was was too low. From my seating position, the top of the windshield cut right through my field of vision. It was really annoying.[/li][li]The semi-reclined driving position is nice for the track, but tedious for a ‘practical’ car.[/li][li]The catalytic converter hump on the passenger side was a major pain for passengers.[/li][li]The rear seat in the Mustang was MUCH more usable. In the Camaro, it’s really an afterthought. No one was actually going to sit back there. And try to get a kid into a carseat in the back of a Camaro. The Mustang, on the other hand, had a usable back seat.[/li][li]The long doors on the Camaro were a pain when parking in tight spot. I had an 83 Camaro, and I hated, hated those doors.[/li][li]The Mustang is easier to get in and out of, and the upright seating position is more comfortable in traffic. Forward visibility was better, too.[/li][li]The Mustang was a tighter car. The Camaro had too much body flex.[/li][/ul]
There were other little usability details. The Mustang had a much better stereo, etc. The Camaro just had way too many compromises in search of top performance and ‘sports car’ looks.
But if I had to choose one of those cars for SCCA racing, it would have been the Camaro, hands down. Or if I were 18 and just loved the thrill of driving a racy car and didn’t care about the practical details, the Camaro would have been my choice easily.
I absolutely agree. You know what drives me nuts? We own a Saab 9-2x. It’s essentially a Subaru WRX with some Saab tweaks. It’s even made on the same assembly line. But if you go over to the Subaru Forums, you’ll find all kinds of people trashing it because it’s not a WRX. And over on the Saab forums, you’ll find people trashing it because it’s not a ‘real’ Saab. And the Subie guys trash the Mitsubishi Evo guys, and the Evo guys trash the Subie guys, and they all trash the Mustang/Camaro/SRT-4 guys, ad nauseum. It’s crazy.
Here’s something I’d really love to see actually in production, the Quasiturbine. Pretty damned sweet, and the possible applications are incredible. The rotary engine had a lot of potential, but the fuel economy was miserable and the inefficiency of its operation guaranteed its spot as a footnote in automotive history. The Quasiturbine is the Wankel done right. I recall my dad racing against one of the first rotary coupes at Fuji speedway in the '60s–the thing was fast as hell and kinda scary since it ran with the mufflers on. Apparently the sound of the Wankel unmuffled was even too loud for a racetrack! Dad used to freak out when the knobby little thing would just suddenly show up out of nowhere in his mirrors and he hadn’t heard it coming, heh.
Man, if Detroit and the other world automakers would just get off their asses and grow some balls about implementing some of these cool innovations we could be driving some badass cars without having to feel guilty about gas guzzling and polluting. Chickenshit bastards!
They promised me HOVERCARS!