What am I getting wrong about sports cars?
Discussion
740EVTORQUES said:
I’d add the original NSX (especially the type R) to that.
Even the doors feel light, and it’s way stiffer than a car that old deserves to be.
I'd agree, and John probably agrees too. The original manual 3.0 NSX won PCOTY in 1991 and 1994. They placed the NSX-R as one of the ten cars of the decade 1994-2004, and it was ECOTY winner in 2002. The NSX got 4 votes in their 'Car of the Century' feature (1999)Even the doors feel light, and it’s way stiffer than a car that old deserves to be.
But it is a little wider and heavier than a 306...
740EVTORQUES said:
I’d add the original NSX (especially the type R) to that.
Even the doors feel light, and it’s way stiffer than a car that old deserves to be.
I can't help but agree.Even the doors feel light, and it’s way stiffer than a car that old deserves to be.
It doesn't hit every box (steering isn't perfect - ePAS lacks the fine patter you're after, but the weight is very natural, manual rack is more feelsome but heavy around town), but those it does hit it nails hard - engine, gearchange, seat*, visibility, ride quality, brake feel.
And to those i'd add unflappability - if you want an expressive drift machine, this isn't it (well, I'm sure Messrs Harris and Barker could), but it is a very forgiving machine on the road (at all bar insanely illegal speeds) and genuinely is as easy to drive as a Honda Civic if you're not in the mood.
Not one for the OP though - it starts coming properly alive around the point where you start keeping an eye out for camera vans.
* The stock powered-leather 'armchair' grips you well enough and the driving position is great for all bar the tallest and shortest...but is perhaps a little too soft / too well padded - those seeking more connection to the car replace them with various slender carbon buckets to great effect.
sassthathoopie said:
What do you think? Are they right?
Might be interesting to see how often their ECOTY was consistent with it. Suspect “not very”.https://www.evo.co.uk/features/202457/evo-car-of-t...
sassthathoopie said:
Back in Feb 2020 I read an article in EVO (270) written by hugely experienced journalist and production road tester John Barker that really struck a chord. So much so that my mk1 MX5 build and my Alpine A310 purchase were a response to it.
The EVO Blueprint
'New performance cars are too big, too heavy and too powerful. What we actually need for a great drive is much less.'
What do you think? Are they right?
Yes and I've been saying the same for many years before thatThe EVO Blueprint
'New performance cars are too big, too heavy and too powerful. What we actually need for a great drive is much less.'
What do you think? Are they right?
I had Sierra Cosworth's, 944 turbo, Griffith 500, 6.0 V8 RX7 etc they all came and went but my Mk 1 MX5 remained
On an open road, it isn't underpowered. It's easy to get well over the speed limit and keep it there on an NSL
However, because frequently there's some idiot dawdling on the corners but accelerating enough on the straights to make overtaking awkward , I supercharged mine.
It's simply the best car to enjoy at semi-sensible speeds and I've driven thousands of modified / performance cars
My daily for local short trips is a Suzuki Swift Sport. Very similar power to weight to a Mk2 Golf GTI with real character
I still buy stupidly quick cars every now and again but sell them, before I lose my license
I have absolutely no interest in modern cars. Too heavy. Too much grip. Too much power. Too many driver aids
otolith said:
Might be interesting to see how often their ECOTY was consistent with it. Suspect “not very”.
Caterham Sevens - 5th 1998, (no other entries)Elise (inc Club Racer) - PCOTY winner 1996, ECOTY 2nd 1998, 6th 2001, 5th 2002 + 2004 + 2006 + 2011
Exige - 2nd 2004, winner 2012
Elan (original) - 6th (Evo 100 greatest cars, 2009)
Clio Williams - 3rd PCOTY 1994
Impreza RB5/P1 - 3rd 1999 + 2000
Evo VI Makinen, Evo VII - no ECOTY appearance, 10th (Evo 100 greatest cars, 2009; behind the mk1 MX5 in 9th)
106 Rallye, 306 Rallye, - 5th 1999
Megane R26R, - 4th 2008 (5th Evo 100 greatest cars, 2009)
Clio 182 Cup, Trophy, 200 - 3rd 2004 + 2005, 5th 2009
Integra Type R - PCOTY 1997 (2nd?)
E30 M3 - 5th PCOTY 1990 (behind Audi Quattro, Alfa SZ, TVR S3, Integrale 16v
Puma (not Racing) - No appearance
Early 911 2.7RS - (28th Evo 100 greatest cars, 2009)
930 (3.2?) Club Sport - no appearance
Porsche 968 CS - winner PCOTY 1993, (50th Evo 100 greatest cars, 2009)
Cayman R - 4th 2011
Alpine A110 - 2nd 2018, 2nd 2023 (R)
otolith said:
Aye, but was what won the car most consistent with those principles?
(or was it a 1400kg+ coupe?)
You know as well as I do that 9/10 times they are enraptured with the latest Porsche GT product or a track special Ferrari or McLaren. These cars stand out and are amazing to drive on the Route Napoleon, or on a quiet dry Scottish Borders A road at 7am in November. (or was it a 1400kg+ coupe?)
BUT how much fun are they really on a bumpy Suffolk/Essex back lane?
The kind of road that is actually accessible to enjoy at times other than 06:00 on a Sunday morning!
Aren't you really having more fun in an original Elan?
sjc said:
This has been perfection for me for the last 17 years. Very lightweight ,over 400 BHP/ton, wonderfully balanced, fun at 30 mph or silly speeds. You drive it,and in those moments the world is just you and the car.Even passengers comment how nice it is to “feel” a car.
Most importantly of all though,it’s absolutely the right size for our B roads compared with anything modern.I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen owners of bigger “sports cars” trying to enjoy themselves and being utterly hampered by the sheer bulk of what they are driving, and that frustration would drive me potty.
These have been on my bucket list forever, something I just love about the formula Most importantly of all though,it’s absolutely the right size for our B roads compared with anything modern.I’ve lost count of the times I’ve seen owners of bigger “sports cars” trying to enjoy themselves and being utterly hampered by the sheer bulk of what they are driving, and that frustration would drive me potty.
Edited by sjc on Wednesday 3rd July 05:26
The more I think about it, the more I don't agree with the notion that the MX5 (in standard form) is all you need or the epitome of a sports car. It's great fun for the budget (although probably a few other ways you could go) but I feel like a sports car should have a certain sense of occasion that things like the Noble have. Have had some fun in a friend's 86 and whilst it was a laugh, I'd feel like I'm missing something day to day. Like the OP mentioned, modern cars at all levels have become so good that there's a certain ride quality that critics and consumers expect them to have. Have to remember that for every person purchasing a sports car for the way it drives and feels, there's another 10 who were trying to decide between it and a corolla and simply wanted something that looked more the part or was 'zippier' (and therefore still expect it to have some of the comforts of said corolla).
The 981 boxster was brilliant and almost perfect in that regard - could have done with a slightly louder exhaust but as it stood, relatively light, mid engined, extremely responsive etc. But around town it was a little too sedate. I wasn't enjoying it all that much going around town. A few cars have stood out recently though.
I felt more excited going for my 996. OK it's an x51 and modified but dialled in it just feels perfect to me for any day. The Gemballa exhaust sounds phenomenal without being excessive at all speeds, the suspension is raw and the whole thing feels like a go-kart. They were still lightweight and with minimal electronics, 6 speed manual, x51 giving a higher redline and I'm not sure I've driven many things that deliver in quite the same way. A late model GT3 is a brilliant thing, as are Carrera S' and beyond, but they don't have the sort of bottom shelf thrills that make a car feel instantly connected imo..
The McLaren ticks those boxes but I find modern cars have become so polished that it diminishes a little - I have it in one of the stiffer suspension settings to add a bit of feel back in at more sedate speeds, and find myself knocking it out of manual mode and holding the lower gears for longer. It feels light and nimble but with an extremely high band in which to enjoy it with more pace - but the thing makes me feel extremely lucky just jumping into it to go to the shops and tickles all the things I've ever loved about cars since I was a toddler. Honestly the first car I've ever owned where I feel like it's hit the perfect spot, and while it's not the most expensive, fastest, most collectable, exclusive or whatever else drives people to buy exotic cars, I feel like I'm not really going to gain anything by looking elsewhere.
I think modern cars are definitely becoming universally 'all rounders' which isn't great for enthusiasts. The critics seem to be negative towards a car that doesn't have a nice ride around town - I personally couldn't care less, the bumpier the better. But there is a sweet spot still out there.
Edited by thejaywills on Thursday 4th July 01:27
sassthathoopie said:
Back in Feb 2020 I read an article in EVO (270) written by hugely experienced journalist and production road tester John Barker that really struck a chord. So much so that my mk1 MX5 build and my Alpine A310 purchase were a response to it.
The EVO Blueprint
'New performance cars are too big, too heavy and too powerful. What we actually need for a great drive is much less.'
It's so good that I'm going to post it here and hope that nobody minds. Surely if you've got to page 3 of this thread you are genuinely 'one of us'
I encourage you all to read it. The Bullseye page doesn't photograph well so I've copied it to make it clearer, adding only the A110 which was mentioned in the text. I've also zoomed in on some of the text to make it more readable.
What do you think? Are they right?
For reference John Barker wrote for Performance Car prior to EVO, and I know he was on the first PCOTY test in 1990. But he won't have written this article without consulting a few others
I remember reading that article, and it made me realise at the time that I'd actually never owned a well regarded performance car(in EVO's eyes anyway). However I did get a Caterham seven last September though, so I did get there eventually at least. The EVO Blueprint
'New performance cars are too big, too heavy and too powerful. What we actually need for a great drive is much less.'
It's so good that I'm going to post it here and hope that nobody minds. Surely if you've got to page 3 of this thread you are genuinely 'one of us'
I encourage you all to read it. The Bullseye page doesn't photograph well so I've copied it to make it clearer, adding only the A110 which was mentioned in the text. I've also zoomed in on some of the text to make it more readable.
What do you think? Are they right?
For reference John Barker wrote for Performance Car prior to EVO, and I know he was on the first PCOTY test in 1990. But he won't have written this article without consulting a few others
Edited by sassthathoopie on Wednesday 3rd July 20:01
otolith said:
Indeed - less a criticism of the “EVO Blueprint” than a suggestion that they don’t actually walk the walk.
They can't, because the majority of most manufacturers don't make cars to the EVO blueprint anymore.It's been said by others previously - you need to look for the faint praise, the light criticisms in their writing - that's the most a modern journo can do without pissing off the OEMs who they depend on.
havoc said:
They can't, because the majority of most manufacturers don't make cars to the EVO blueprint anymore.
It's been said by others previously - you need to look for the faint praise, the light criticisms in their writing - that's the most a modern journo can do without pissing off the OEMs who they depend on.
Yep. No magazine that writes about new cars will publish an article like that John Barker Evo one again, because it basically says today's cars are no fun (with a very small number of exceptions obvs).It's been said by others previously - you need to look for the faint praise, the light criticisms in their writing - that's the most a modern journo can do without pissing off the OEMs who they depend on.
sassthathoopie said:
Interesting reference although it depends on what you're looking for in a car. Is it the driving capability? Or is it the experience/event? I guess if you're looking for a track car, most of the bullseye list is within reach of mere mortals so that's good news for the driving enthusiast.Hoofy said:
sassthathoopie said:
Interesting reference although it depends on what you're looking for in a car. Is it the driving capability? Or is it the experience/event? I guess if you're looking for a track car, most of the bullseye list is within reach of mere mortals so that's good news for the driving enthusiast.
Even though I do actually agree with EVO on that though. However that wouldn't stop me buying either now to be fair. I'd buy them for their relative purity and their basic ingredients(FE/RWD/Manual etc).
braddo said:
havoc said:
They can't, because the majority of most manufacturers don't make cars to the EVO blueprint anymore.
It's been said by others previously - you need to look for the faint praise, the light criticisms in their writing - that's the most a modern journo can do without pissing off the OEMs who they depend on.
Yep. No magazine that writes about new cars will publish an article like that John Barker Evo one again, because it basically says today's cars are no fun (with a very small number of exceptions obvs).It's been said by others previously - you need to look for the faint praise, the light criticisms in their writing - that's the most a modern journo can do without pissing off the OEMs who they depend on.
Even though I generally prefer a manual gearbox in a sporty car, I would love a go in an Alpine A110 with the DCT. You never hear a bad word said about the A110 generally. Plus I'm actually a big fan of the F82 M4 with the DCT...because for me personally it suits the engine/car.
I always read about how well the A110 rides/soaks up the bumps too, and you don't get many modern performance cars that are capable of that now in fairness. I reckon that a skateboard would be more comfortable than the M4 is!
I always read about how well the A110 rides/soaks up the bumps too, and you don't get many modern performance cars that are capable of that now in fairness. I reckon that a skateboard would be more comfortable than the M4 is!
As a base 981 cayman owner I can relate to that article a lot. The entry level cayman/boxster offers such a fantastic package that's about as close to perfect as you will get.
I've had mine for nearly 18 months and after road trips, trackdays and daily driving i still relish the chance to jump behind the wheel.
It isn't perfect though, a 987 does have better steering, the gearing is hilariously long and a diesel rep mobile will house it in a straight line. But once you're on an empty road and get it up on its toes its fantastic, and the noise is just heavenly.
Still doesnt stop me wanting a 7 or an Elise though, but thats the thing with sportscars they are all so different, you just have to fund your groove.
I've had mine for nearly 18 months and after road trips, trackdays and daily driving i still relish the chance to jump behind the wheel.
It isn't perfect though, a 987 does have better steering, the gearing is hilariously long and a diesel rep mobile will house it in a straight line. But once you're on an empty road and get it up on its toes its fantastic, and the noise is just heavenly.
Still doesnt stop me wanting a 7 or an Elise though, but thats the thing with sportscars they are all so different, you just have to fund your groove.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff