Newer cars have lost that direct connection feel. Sure they are more powerful, faster, and safer. They all just have a layer of computers between you and the road. Even when you turn driver aids off there are systems running in the background managing diffs, etc. I guess it depends on what you find enjoyable. The one thing for sure is that I do a lot more work on my older car. When new cars now are old cars they are probably going to be a nightmare to keep running.
I vastly enjoy older cars, but I suppose it depends on what you mean by 'older'. To me, it's stuff made before the 1990s. But if I could keep only ONE car, it would be my 2006 Mustang. Not too modern, not too old, and engaging to drive.
Slipping into my various 60's era E36 M3boxes definitely bring a smile and an uncomfortable pants tightness everytime.
As long as things are kept in perspective. I recall a sidebar conversation I had with an engineer at Vorshlag Racing while discussing maximum wheel widths and fitments for my S550 Mustang. As the conversation went on, this gentleman posited that he had explored modifying his Fox Body Mustang for the track and figured that he'd have to spend upwards of $40,000 and a lot of time investment to get it to where an S550 with some minor modes, i.e., camber plates, stiffer/lower springs, larger sway bars, wider wheels, maybe some rear differential cradle bushings, and some other peripheral hardware, at a cost of less than $10,000.
This basically said to me that the newer platforms have evolved so much, that it would be difficult for anything from the nostalgic era to come close for the money. What has been learned; and the design aids that make these new platforms so good, just simply wasn't available back then.
In reply to RaceRed :
Since this canoe thread paddles along at regular intervals I'll jump in on this thought.
And for 20K I can buy a 30 year old Formula Continental or Formula Mazda that will spank new cars, especially if one mildly modifies the motor in either the FC or FM.
Old cars aren't about ultimate speed or even bang for the buck.
I bought my Foxbody Mustang because of it's flaws not in spite of them. Same goes for my Datsun.
The driving style required to be fast in old cars is very different from modern wide tired cars.........it's what I like about them.
Tom1200 said:In reply to RaceRed :
Since this canoe thread paddles along at regular intervals I'll jump in on this thought.
And for 20K I can buy a 30 year old Formula Continental or Formula Mazda that will spank new cars, especially if one mildly modifies the motor in either the FC or FM.
Old cars aren't about ultimate speed or even bang for the buck.
I bought my Foxbody Mustang because of it's flaws not in spite of them. Same goes for my Datsun.
The driving style required to be fast in old cars is very different from modern wide tired cars.........it's what I like about them.
Comparing a race car that needs a trailer, tow truck and somewhere to store all 3 is beyond a silly comparison to a newer street car.
That's like when so many here say for 1/5 of the price of that car, you could buy something 15 years old without modern amenities, warranty, etc, and act like it's apples to apples.
In reply to z31maniac :
With all due respect you missed the point.
It's not anymore silly than comparing the cost of making and old car as fast as a modern one.
If you are trying to make an old car fast as a modern one you're not likey going to be driving that car to the track and so you're going to need a trailer and a place to store it.
Most people in this hobby have a garage and a separate daily driver already.
We're talking about a 1000lb car that you can tow on an 800lb trailer; my Outback would easily do that and has.
The real problem with a single car is it limits the events you can attend.Even if you bought an older SCCA P2 / D Sports Racer there are still some groups that won't let you run them.
First, my points of reference. The fleet contains a 2019 Ford Ranger, 2018 Mazda CX5 and a 2008 Corvette.
Since getting the Vette I realized one major attraction to it over the others. When you hit the throttle in the Mazda you can count to 4 as the computers realize you want to go, arrange for fuel, decide if it's in the right gear and, finally, creates motion. The Ranger goes through the same process but is a little more efficient at about 2 seconds. The Corvette is immediate, right now. No vibrating the steering wheel when you hit a corner apex, no beeping if you get too close to something and no undetectable slowing of the cruise control if a slower car is ahead (Mazda).
Yes, I know these are apples and oranges and the Vette may not be considered old by some.
One other point is that, in general, the automotive industry is BORING. SUVs, CUVs, trucks and very few cars... even fewer cars with any kind of "soul". Walk around a dealer lot now and it's row after row of the same. Back in the day the "back row" often contained some slightly weird, different, unusual, odd gems... the occasional Citroen SM, a TR3 or 6, any number of MGs, even a Honda S600. I know a local dealer that took in a Formula Ford! Would never happen today... like I said, BORING!
My cutoff is 2010. After that, I have no interest in vehicles. I sat on my Boomer stool and opined about it this week.
Original video I reference:
I have no problem with anyone who (inexplicably) is excited about modern cars - you do you. But I'm out. I'll cheerfully live in the past where I'm comfortable and not at the mercy of manufacturers/dealers.
Threads like these make me smile because it reminds me of my dad...who was born while WW1 was still raging in Europe.
It may be a matter of perspective. He, and many of his generation, often lamented about how generically boring cars of the 1960's had become. A Buick was just a Chevy with more chrome, etc. The cars of the '70's, '80's, 90's, etc., were even more "cookie cutter."
To him and his friends, cars made after WW2 were as many in this thread describe the cars of the 21st Century: boring, needlessly complicated, generic, mass produced disposable people movers, and little more.
Sure, there were some models he and they liked, but over all, they'd just shake their heads and lament the loss of those "special" cars of the 1920's and 1930's.
Now like all old men lamenting about the past, they forgot to mention that the bulk of what they could afford to purchase were assembly line produced Model T's and Model A's (the A truck he had on the farm was a MUCH better vehicle than the T, in Dad's opinion, for what it's worth 
) and it was the same for the "everyman" Chevys, Fords, Dodges, and whatever else.
It was only decades later when he'd talk about how good those throwaway cars were, say like a Ford Businessman Coupe.
Dad always seemed to have a soft spot for the Chrysler Airflow, but he never owned one...very likely it was simply too expensive for him. And he absolutely loved the Cords and Auburns that were around in the era, but he never had one. He certainly respected the Duesenbergs that could break the 100mph mark, but again, you literally had to be Clark Gable to afford one.
What's the point of this miscellaneous rambling? There is none, really. A simple observation seems to be that the torch has been successfully passed from The Great Generation to its descendants of children and grandchildren.
Now get off my lawn; I have some clouds to yell at! 
I love my 1919 Model T.
They're so unlike anything else and so much fun.
triumph7 said:Since getting the Vette I realized one major attraction to it over the others. When you hit the throttle in the Mazda you can count to 4 as the computers realize you want to go, arrange for fuel, decide if it's in the right gear and, finally, creates motion. The Ranger goes through the same process but is a little more efficient at about 2 seconds. The Corvette is immediate, right now. No vibrating the steering wheel when you hit a corner apex, no beeping if you get too close to something and no undetectable slowing of the cruise control if a slower car is ahead (Mazda).
That's got much more to do with the fact that the Corvette is a sports car, while the CX5 and Ranger are trucks/SUVs than their relative ages.
As for the cruise control -- a system that is smart enough not to rear-end the car in front of you is usually considered a feature, not a bug. :) If you really want to, most adaptive cruise systems can be put back into "dumb" mode through a configuration option.
I own a 93, 99, 2021, and 2024 (plus a 2004 non-street-registered race car). The 2021 and 2024 get driven a whole lot more than the 93 or 99 do. Why? They're quieter, faster, more comfortable, safer, have better audio, and are just generally better at the job of doing "daily driver" things than the older cars are. The RX7 and Miata are for special driving, not sitting in traffic on the way to the grocery store or whatever.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
Try any Mopar with a Hemi anything, even the Challengers. The throttle response is like the throttle is communicating to the engine via four people who need to translate to each other like that one scene from I Love Lucy.
Apply throttle... nothing happens. Apply more... still nothing. OOPS WE HAVE WHEELSPIN LET OFF... engine keeps making power for a second or so but that second is eternal.
I can understand why there are so many videos of these hitting other things while leaving a car meet. The throttle response lags heavily in both directions!
And yet it looks like a gaggle of Weber IDAs would bolt right on to those horizontal intake flanges with little more than a pair of adaptor plates, for those of us who like throttle response so sharp you could shave with it.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:I can understand why there are so many videos of these hitting other things while leaving a car meet. The throttle response lags heavily in both directions!
One reason not to own a Chrysler, I guess?
I haven't driven one, but I would be very surprised if a 2025 Corvette is like that. Or a 2025 Miata, Porsche, or any other sports car. My 2024 Audi (sport wagon, not sports car) does not lag like that.
Yes, my 2021 F-250 can be a bit laggardly on throttle response, but sort of the nature of turbo diesel 3/4 ton trucks.
My first car was an '87 Taurus wagon, and throttle response was definitely not its strong point.
In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :
I've driven trucks like yours, they are responsive in comparison.
Note that the Challenger is Mopar's performance model, not a gravel haulin' truck.
triumph7 said:First, my points of reference. The fleet contains a 2019 Ford Ranger, 2018 Mazda CX5 and a 2008 Corvette.
Since getting the Vette I realized one major attraction to it over the others. When you hit the throttle in the Mazda you can count to 4 as the computers realize you want to go, arrange for fuel, decide if it's in the right gear and, finally, creates motion. The Ranger goes through the same process but is a little more efficient at about 2 seconds. The Corvette is immediate, right now. No vibrating the steering wheel when you hit a corner apex, no beeping if you get too close to something and no undetectable slowing of the cruise control if a slower car is ahead (Mazda).
Yes, I know these are apples and oranges and the Vette may not be considered old by some.
One other point is that, in general, the automotive industry is BORING. SUVs, CUVs, trucks and very few cars... even fewer cars with any kind of "soul". Walk around a dealer lot now and it's row after row of the same. Back in the day the "back row" often contained some slightly weird, different, unusual, odd gems... the occasional Citroen SM, a TR3 or 6, any number of MGs, even a Honda S600. I know a local dealer that took in a Formula Ford! Would never happen today... like I said, BORING!
I want to see a video of you cruising with a stop watch, mash the accelerator and see if it LITERALLY takes 4 seconds for anything to happen.
Me thinks you are being extremely hyperbolic. We have a 2023 CX-5, which I think is the same drivetrain, and I suspect if I actually timed it from cruising at say 45 and mashed the throttle it would be around 1 second for the downshift and acceleration to begin.
I'd go test, but I had a few adult beverages at lunch and the better half drove home.
In reply to Coniglio Rampante :
I'm pretty much have the same mindset of your Dad; I really like 70s & 80s cars.
Except if I'm going on a road trip; that engagement I like in older cars also makes them more tiring to drive than a new one.
We also don't want to discuss how horrendous old cars are in a crash compared to new ones.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:As for the cruise control -- a system that is smart enough not to rear-end the car in front of you is usually considered a feature, not a bug. :) If you really want to, most adaptive cruise systems can be put back into "dumb" mode through a configuration option.
It's not that it slows down, it's the way it does it... imperceptibly. No notice, no warning. I'm waiting to get to the point where I change lanes to pass and then I realize that I'm no longer closing. If I were sleeping or staring at my phone, yeah, but I still DRIVE the car. Fortunately, this is wife's car. The Ranger doesn't have that "feature" but I did have to disable some crash warning alarm thing after it scared the crap out of me while driving through a deserted intersection on a rainy night... for the second time. Never did figure out what it thought I was going to hit.
Funny what some people like about cars and others don't. I almost never use cruise control. I need to be on an empty freeway before I even think of turning it on. I bought my truck six years ago and have yet to use it. Each to his own though.
In reply to triumph7 :
"but I still DRIVE the car" Amen Brotha.
DeadSkunk (Warren) said:Funny what some people like about cars and others don't. I almost never use cruise control. I need to be on an empty freeway before I even think of turning it on. I bought my truck six years ago and have yet to use it. Each to his own though.
I hate the feeling when the car starts accelerating without any input from me. It's a lack of control.
When I did used to use it, I'd set it for about 10mph slower than I wanted to drive. Then I got a car with a system that disabled cruise control if you had a throttle input for longer than ten seconds, so that doesn't work.
I use adaptive cruise when on long trips, it's especially useful on long tows to/from the track. I don't use for around town stuff.
All of the adaptive cruise systems I've used have some kind of indication on the dash about what it's doing. Usually some kind of icon showing a car that it's detected and is matching speed to.
Adaptive cruise: let's hang a $1000 or more radar device from the most frontal point of the car, the place where it is most likely to be damaged in even the most minor of collisions. Then, when you do need to replace it, it requires $500 worth of specialist calibrations you can't do at home to make it work again.
And everyone wonders why car insurance is getting to be so expensive.
triumph7 said:It's not that it slows down, it's the way it does it... imperceptibly. No notice, no warning. I'm waiting to get to the point where I change lanes to pass and then I realize that I'm no longer closing.
I don't understand. You want it to slow down aggressively? Or sound the alarm? I think most people desire smooth.
I had a Hyundai Tuscon rental recently and the adaptive cruise programming in that suuuucked. It would accelerate hard enough to go down a gear or two, even when you are only 5mph below target speed. Then it would rapidly close the distance to the next car and suddenly slam on the brakes. Its probably one of the first adaptive cruise systems I had to turn off or actively plan "its going to go wild if I do x" in my head.
I had a lot of other rentals with it recently, and it worked great on the rest of them. Get in the left lane, set it for your desired speed, and just sit there. If somehow traffic actually opens up and you can achieve that speed, then its time to move over.
I actually think there is a scenario where the number of adaptive cruise/radar sensing vehicles on the road reaches a threshold that a significant number of highway rear-end accidents stop happening.
This was a loooong thread. Read it all, too.
I think GRM has unlocked the secret click-bait code to it's readers!
You'll need to log in to post.
