Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

Good car Vs nice car???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 23 August 2008, 09:21 PM
  #1  
Playsatan
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
Playsatan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 1,465
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default Good car Vs nice car???

I was out in my old mans car today, a 330 clubsport.



It's a very nice car, but is it a good one? I mean it's well made, very comfy and has enough performance to keep him happy but is that enough?

Then there's my car. I may be biased but I consider it to be a good car but not necessarily a nice one. It's way too loud, uncomfy, poorly built (partially by me) and is a general pain in the **** if your not in the right frame of mind.



So, whats better? Nice car or good car?
Old 23 August 2008, 09:44 PM
  #2  
magepaster
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
 
magepaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Hmmmmm? Good car. A good car will usually put a smile on your face and have you look back at it when you leave it. A nice car is just that -nice- but will never make you smile. At least it's that way for me.
Old 23 August 2008, 10:51 PM
  #3  
Suresh
Scooby Regular
 
Suresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 4,622
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Default

I've had a nice car which isn't a good car for the last year. 200bhp, fwd and wet roads are not a joyous combo. That's exactly why I'm thinking our family needs a 3rd car - a proper 'good car' in fact


P.S. Did you know you can get child seats in the back of a 911?
Old 24 August 2008, 11:37 AM
  #4  
PaulC72
Scooby Regular
 
PaulC72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Obviously alot depends on the individual, for me you can have both a nice car and a good car all in one depending on what you want and the criteria you set out.

If a good car is one that is fast and makes you smile like a scooby
And a nice car is the BMW, which is comfy, has enough power for most people and is reliable then the definative criteria is speed against comfort

However if you are not too fussed about speed and want a comfortable ride with something else you can have both wrapped up in one? I have an Astra TT which provides me with a nice car and a good car as it is both reliable, comfortable and provides me with a smile when i take the roof and and drive it, thus meeting both the criterias set out, it is no means a pace maker but it was never built for that.

Sorry for the over analysis.
Old 24 August 2008, 01:17 PM
  #5  
Shark Man
Scooby Regular
 
Shark Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ascended to the next level
Posts: 7,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Is there such thing as a "good" car though?

Its either too soft or too stiff. Not practical enough or too heavy when it is, too thristy on fuel or too poor on perfromance. Too easy to drive or too tiring to drive. IMO Its always a mix up those and more factors. And for whoever that person is, the balance is always different. The compromise is always there.

I've been knocking round in a Golf MK5 R32 for the past week: Great car, but a good car? Hmmm, well. Its focused, fast, comfy, good handling and easy to drive. But, its thristy, heavy, over-assisted everything (brakes, steering etc), huge external dimension for a supposedly medium 3 door hatchback. And doesn't feel fast, nor comunicate to the driver via steering feedback.

I think part of the size/weight issue is all crash safety and consumer group orientated. Its a bloody tall car (compared to a Mk1 Golf) And the bonnet/waistline is so high that visibilty is awful, its easier to manouver my dad's old XJ-S or my old Monaro. I feel that these characteristics that have ruined the small/light hatchback sector, and I blame the consumer groups demanded things without realising the consequences: Such as better crash safety, more interior headroom, a "big feeling, small car", "Safe" handling, Tall driving position etc. It all adds compromise, shame

Same with the driving sensation, people demand easier cars to drive with "good" brakes, but that just results in extremely light steering with little or no feedback, ditto with brakes; A hard solid pedal needing effort to press turns into a soft, oversensitive on/off switch, that results in a emergency stop should you sneeze whilst braking.

And thats the thing...what I want in a car, is clearly not what others or the supposed majority want in their car.

Back in the day, I think it was more simple: Comsumer demands used to only really affect "normal" everyday cars...For example: the Ford Cortina/Sierra (commuting a to b rep mobile) Volvo 240 (safe and practical), Vauxhall Nova (small, shopping car), Whilst the high performance cars where very focused edgy widow-makers, like any pre-1988 911 (superb steering feedback, nice solid brake pedal, no PAS, light, superb handling, with a tendancy to spin you off into a feild, a uncooperative gearbox that you can't just ram into gear - which you shouldn't do with any car anyway plus a habit of stalling when your clutch leg gets tired). 1970's Lotus Elan (super light, super handling, tiny, cramped, unreliable, unpractical with no crash safety whatsoever), Jaguar XJs/6/12 (smooth, comfy, waft-able, although a thristy tank that handled well, but made passengers sea-sick) and Land Rover 88"/109" (4x4 for off-road use...not on-road comfort).

Today there is still the same car genres, but they are musch more closer together...the need to make niche market cars more appealing to the masses, such as performance cars means to tone them down and make them more like "normal" cars; Make them easier to live with day to day, safer handling, and better to crash in. And whilst on paper that seems like a great idea to create the ultimate good car. Sadly it doesn't. As each change to add one characteristic compromises another - which might be something a the not so average consumer wants.

~fin.

Last edited by Shark Man; 24 August 2008 at 01:26 PM.
Old 24 August 2008, 05:34 PM
  #6  
PaulC72
Scooby Regular
 
PaulC72's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: RIP Tam.
Posts: 5,108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Shark Man, I though mine was a long post
Old 24 August 2008, 07:58 PM
  #7  
Shark Man
Scooby Regular
 
Shark Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ascended to the next level
Posts: 7,498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I type too quickly for my own good

It doesn't look that much when looking at it on a 22" widescreen monitor
Old 24 August 2008, 08:19 PM
  #8  
KPScooby
Scooby Newbie
 
KPScooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Huddersfield
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question

I'm glad this question has been asked about good car over nice car as I am struggling to decide what to buy now. I sold my Scoob to by a house with the (ex) Girlfriend, Which has since all gone **** up and I'm now back at my parents with a bit more cash in my pocket I miss the Scoob so much but people have been saying & I've been wondering if I should get something a bit more Classy like a TT or Porsche Boxter etc, although tempting I still find myself drawn back to looking at Scoobies. If I buy one of the above will I be satisfied with the drive or will I be hankering back for the Lairyness of the Scoob? Any help would be appreciated
Old 24 August 2008, 09:07 PM
  #9  
fpan
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (11)
 
fpan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,423
Received 174 Likes on 128 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Shark Man
Is there such thing as a "good" car though?

Its either too soft or too stiff. Not practical enough or too heavy when it is, too thristy on fuel or too poor on perfromance. Too easy to drive or too tiring to drive. IMO Its always a mix up those and more factors. And for whoever that person is, the balance is always different. The compromise is always there.

I've been knocking round in a Golf MK5 R32 for the past week: Great car, but a good car? Hmmm, well. Its focused, fast, comfy, good handling and easy to drive. But, its thristy, heavy, over-assisted everything (brakes, steering etc), huge external dimension for a supposedly medium 3 door hatchback. And doesn't feel fast, nor comunicate to the driver via steering feedback.

I think part of the size/weight issue is all crash safety and consumer group orientated. Its a bloody tall car (compared to a Mk1 Golf) And the bonnet/waistline is so high that visibilty is awful, its easier to manouver my dad's old XJ-S or my old Monaro. I feel that these characteristics that have ruined the small/light hatchback sector, and I blame the consumer groups demanded things without realising the consequences: Such as better crash safety, more interior headroom, a "big feeling, small car", "Safe" handling, Tall driving position etc. It all adds compromise, shame

Same with the driving sensation, people demand easier cars to drive with "good" brakes, but that just results in extremely light steering with little or no feedback, ditto with brakes; A hard solid pedal needing effort to press turns into a soft, oversensitive on/off switch, that results in a emergency stop should you sneeze whilst braking.

And thats the thing...what I want in a car, is clearly not what others or the supposed majority want in their car.

Back in the day, I think it was more simple: Comsumer demands used to only really affect "normal" everyday cars...For example: the Ford Cortina/Sierra (commuting a to b rep mobile) Volvo 240 (safe and practical), Vauxhall Nova (small, shopping car), Whilst the high performance cars where very focused edgy widow-makers, like any pre-1988 911 (superb steering feedback, nice solid brake pedal, no PAS, light, superb handling, with a tendancy to spin you off into a feild, a uncooperative gearbox that you can't just ram into gear - which you shouldn't do with any car anyway plus a habit of stalling when your clutch leg gets tired). 1970's Lotus Elan (super light, super handling, tiny, cramped, unreliable, unpractical with no crash safety whatsoever), Jaguar XJs/6/12 (smooth, comfy, waft-able, although a thristy tank that handled well, but made passengers sea-sick) and Land Rover 88"/109" (4x4 for off-road use...not on-road comfort).

Today there is still the same car genres, but they are musch more closer together...the need to make niche market cars more appealing to the masses, such as performance cars means to tone them down and make them more like "normal" cars; Make them easier to live with day to day, safer handling, and better to crash in. And whilst on paper that seems like a great idea to create the ultimate good car. Sadly it doesn't. As each change to add one characteristic compromises another - which might be something a the not so average consumer wants.

~fin.
+1
Couldn't have been said better
Old 24 August 2008, 09:43 PM
  #10  
Maz
Scooby Senior
iTrader: (34)
 
Maz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Yorkshire.
Posts: 15,884
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

In an ideal world we'd have a car that would suit our mood. Sometimes you want something smooth, comfortable and quiet. Other times you want something that will do a zillion miles to the gallon. Then on some occasions you'll want a loud, raw and exhilirating car. There will never be an ideal car, all cars have their plusses and minuses. In it's own way the Beemer is good and nice, as is the Scooby.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Iqy7861
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
22
12 October 2015 09:21 AM
ossett2k2
Engine Management and ECU Remapping
15
23 September 2015 09:11 AM
ossett2k2
General Technical
9
13 September 2015 09:35 AM
blackandz
General Technical
0
12 September 2015 07:01 PM
riiidaa
ScoobyNet General
1
12 September 2015 11:52 AM



Quick Reply: Good car Vs nice car???



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:35 PM.