I think the fundamental difference is what that "appliance" is supposed to do. When the purpose of a vehicle is to provide transportation as easy as possible then it fills a function and nothing more. Plenty of cars fill this role.

The other camp are cars that are designed to invoke emotional reactions whether it be the driving experience, the appearance or even the sound of the car. That emotional reaction, in my opinion, is what makes a car more than just an appliance.

As I mentioned, I don't know anyone that has any positive emotional experiences with their toaster, oven or refrigerator.

Is anyone honestly surprised the cars that are flying off the shelf are the most boring cars? We have a large segment of the public that hate driving. So, they want a car that reminds them they are driving as little as possible. No noise, no vibration, no road feeling...nothing. The idea is to create a sensation like you're sitting in your favorite chair watching the road pass you on TV.

Whereas I am the exact opposite. I love the feeling of the road even if it means a harsher suspension. I like hearing the exhaust tone to know where the car is in the RPM range and I don't mind some road noise if it translates into performance.

The think about supercars or hypercars is they are vehicles without compromise. These are cars made out of exotic materials like carbon fiber or titanium. They have motors putting out stupid amounts of horsepower with loads of cutting edge computers and electronics. Complete the package with lush interiors with real materials. These cars demonstrate the peak of modern automotive technology.

Until we have a large customer base that enjoy driving we will always be struggling to find cars that make driving fun and do it within an obtainable price range.

 

There's only a few companies working seriously on Hydrogen, OF COURSE it's hasn't got 300hp yet.

 

the thing is, companies can make their econoboxes "fun" cars by adding a few bits and making the price a tad higher. They sorta already do that but they could do it more.

I look at something like a Honda Fit. With a MT, those little cars are a hoot to drive. I bet if you threw on some better suspension and lowered it a tad, it could be ever more fun to zip around in.

Not saying the Fit is an awesome car by any means, it doesn't compare to any sports car, but it is the kinda thing that could bridge that gap between boring and fun if companies felt inclined to do so. At the point it just comes down to actually getting people to realize that you could have your fun in it but keep the boring side as well.

I mean, fun to drive doesn't have to be 300+ HPs and Torques. Fun could be 100HP if done right. I know I have fun in a 100HP car.

 

I have lots of positive emotions with my toaster, oven and refrigerator.

Cuz everytime I walk close to them, I know I am going to eat. and these appliances make it possible, Which makes me happy. Ultra happy

/jk

I agreed with your point 100%

I had a FIT for over a year, it's a pretty reliable car, is it fun to drive like my 8? hell no. but for city commute, it's reliable, good mpg. holds lots of stuff especially when the rear seats are down, it fit 2 doors, 2 fenders, and whole exhaust in it. Yep. but it is what it is. Great Commute car, not so great for performance, even if you add suspension and stuff to it. my friend has a fit, full header suspension everything. still not good enough.

Sadly, most people's "fun to drive" means having as much horse and torque as possible, even if the car would just understeer and flies out of corners everytime.

 

Actually, I think companies can make thier cars fun if they stripped everything out to make the car lighter and decreased the size. AE86 or NA miata style.

 

Pity they got it so wrong...the RX-8 HAS NOT Stopped being made...

It has stopped being Exported to North America and Europe.

Still being made in Japan for it's domestic market and for Australia and for other regions..

The RX-8 will still be made right up to and including April 2013, ending then as originally planned after 10 years of production.

 

Nycgps,

About the last line, getting people to like driving, it all comes back to the local urban city planning. Take where I live for example in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The 401 is the world's most heavily travelled road. There are gridlocks everywhere in the city at all times of the day.

Traffic is so bad in Toronto that it is now ranked worst in the country, and tied with Los Angeles. Moreover, city planning develops roads that are as straight as possible adding to the boring/numbness of the drive no matter where you go.

With conditions like these, it's no wonder why the love of driving does not exist or is dwindling... Sad

 

you might be right, all these garbage city planning ... like NYC, traffic is already as bad as LA BUT our great Mayor Bloomberg said "oh we should try to drive less and lets get everybody on their bikes!(bicycle)"

then they start taking out a lane and make it a "bike lane" ... almost everywhere and made the traffic worst. only small group of ppl support it, mostly are people who can't afford a car and stays in a Shitty place all the time, reason for staying in NYC because it's "cool" to do so. and it created so many problems ... this A-hole has the ***** to come out and say Bike lane helped the environment blah blah blah YEAH RIGHT, all these traffic ? ok. whatever.

*sigh*

 

Bike lanes help control overpopulation. That's good for the environment.

Ken

 

From what I read, most of the people who are complaining about Manhattan's bike lanes are the people that do not live in Manhattan - such as commercial traffic, shopkeepers, and New Jersey folks.

I love the bike lanes. I can avoid the stinking subway as a result.

I'm also a believer that with good urban planning, a clearer line will begin to emerge between cars for transportation and cars for pleasure.

IMHO, the sooner cars go the way of the horse, the better. I'm all for migration to automated driving/traffic control.

This way, driving will be reserved for those that really care about driving. The ones who truly care will justify its existence in their life - just like people do with horses nowadays.

- ducks for cover -

 

I live in Queens But I also have a place in the city.

the problem with bike lanes is that ... no one wants to use them ! It's a waste of money and it created even more traffic problems, especially down/mid town.

People are bitching about it every day, you can go ahead and ask people who lives in lower manhattan, just to see anybody would tell ya that "oh yeah, Bike lane is great!" Well delivery guys might like it, other than that ...

did u see that news about the residents are suing the city for that stupid bike lane? I don't know how that goes but I truly hope that they can win. a lot of other suits will follow.

 

run them over like deers ?

 

Yeah, the bike lanes are controversial. There are some really disruptive ones. I think they could have eased them in by doing studies of actual bike traffic (Perhaps they did that. I don't know). For one thing, 6th Ave needs one pretty bad. The existing one is crap and dangerous. On the other hand, the one on Broadway near the wholesale district is quite disruptive without a lot of bike traffic.

However, any systemic change like this always causes some pain because people are so used to the way they do things. Give it some time, and perhaps it may work out to be for the better.