I'm glad I'm not the first guy to say E30M3. I didn't care for an m50 swapped E30 either.
The new Camaro (when they first brought it back).
Early C4.
E90 M3 was kinda disappointing too. I know the torque number is not small, but you can't really feel it till you're revving it all the way out.
That's too bad.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the Cobalt SS turbo.
I haven't driven a 500 Abarth, but I don't mind the same 1.4L engine in the 124 Spider.
The 2.3L in the Mustang is terrible. It's obviously very effective at providing thrust, but it is not fun, sounds terrible and the power falls of precipitously after 5.5k. The Mustang isn't terrible to drive, but it's not very good. There are a lot of better options out there.
For me it was way back in 1990 when I found a General Lee replica in AutoTrader for $2200 and not too far away. So I went to out to test drive it. 383 big block, automatic. Otherwise stock except for the iconic paint and graphics (although it didn't have the push bar). Bearing in mind, my point of reference at the time was my 1982 Subaru GL 4WD 4 spd wagon. While the Charger definitely had tons of power, I was so underwhelmed by the terrible handling it rather soured my opinion of the car. Looking back, I wish I'd bought it anyway (not knowing how stupid Charger values would get). Then again, it's also possible the combination of too much power in a poor chassis and an inexperienced driver would have resulted it the car wrapped around a tree.
That test drive did sow the seeds for my love of the idea of restomods long before that became a thing to do to old muscle cars.
More recently - my 1988 325is. Everyone says how awesome E30's are. I didn't like that car from the moment I test drove it, but bought it anyway thinking it just needed a few things fixed. The shifter is horrific. The steering is crap. And it has all the (nonexistent) build ergonomics of a classic car, but with all of the complexities of a modern car (all you guys with stripped out race cars: STFU). And to top it all off, it made my Triumphs look reliable. Every time I drove the car, it seemed like it broke. I was never so glad to see a car go away as I was that POS.
1) Scott's G/Street Abarth 500: I wanted to like this car, I really did. And it had just gotten PAX, so I expected great things. Only change on the car from stock was Dunlop ZII Star Specs. First thing, weird seating position, I've sat in trucks with a lower seating position. Clutch does not feel like the pedal is attached to anything. Shifter is very balky and vague (to be fair, Scott thinks there is something wrong with it, but the Fiat dealer says no) and I almost leave in 3rd. Botch my first run's launch and leave at 2500rpm and it's a doooooog. Doesn't hit boost until almost into the second chicane. Lots of understeer and I have no clue what the car is doing or what it wants me to do. Steering weights up very weird. At the big end sweeper it's understeer city, going way wide trying to find traction. I run several seconds slower than my best in my car. Take a second lap and get the launch right, that's fun, but overall felt very ugly. Fast FWD is no fun, I've determined, the cars never feel very happy. As for the Fiat, it just comes off as floppy and incommunicative. Disappointing too because I wanted to like it.
I went and dug up the time I drove a Fiat Abarth 500 at an autocross. I was also not a fan.
I think the other one I really have to bag on is the Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky twins. When they first came out, I thought they were the coolest things ever. RWD, 2 seats, convertible top, 260hp turbo Ecotec. Then fast forward to when I start working at GM and got to drive one for the first time. Despite being a good bit larger than an NA Miata, there is no interior room, to the point where I can barely drive the stick ones, because my left knee is jammed up against the dashboard. And the car feels like someone at GM thought that "buzzy" was synonomous with "sporty". The whole car is just coarse and buzzy, and the engine and chassis really didn't engage me either, it just felt like a low-slung tractor more than a sports car.
Ian F said:More recently - my 1988 325is. Everyone says how awesome E30's are. I didn't like that car from the moment I test drove it, but bought it anyway thinking it just needed a few things fixed. The shifter is horrific. The steering is crap. And it has all the (nonexistent) build ergonomics of a classic car, but with all of the complexities of a modern car (all you guys with stripped out race cars: STFU). And to top it all off, it made my Triumphs look reliable. Every time I drove the car, it seemed like it broke. I was never so glad to see a car go away as I was that POS.
Not to nitpick, but you're complaining about a 30 year old car being worn out. My e30's didn't suffer from those issues... when I had them 15 years ago.
In reply to nderwater :
I sold that car years ago. It was a little over 20 yeas old when I bought it. And my hatred really started AFTER I replaced all of the worn out parts.
2006 pontiac solstice, and 2005 Ford Mustang GT. I wanted desperately to love both cars, but I couldn't do it.
1965 GTO is on the list, too. I test drove one and almost let the owner take it back to the house after 2 miles.
The Jaguar F-Type R. 550HP sounds like a lot, and it is, but I dunno, it just did not feel fast. The sound it made was just obscene, but it wasn't nearly as fast as it sounded. I was let down.
NickD said:
I think the other one I really have to bag on is the Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky twins. When they first came out, I thought they were the coolest things ever. RWD, 2 seats, convertible top, 260hp turbo Ecotec. Then fast forward to when I start working at GM and got to drive one for the first time. Despite being a good bit larger than an NA Miata, there is no interior room, to the point where I can barely drive the stick ones, because my left knee is jammed up against the dashboard. And the car feels like someone at GM thought that "buzzy" was synonomous with "sporty". The whole car is just coarse and buzzy, and the engine and chassis really didn't engage me either, it just felt like a low-slung tractor more than a sports car.
Like some of the other cars mentioned in this thread, the Solstice GXP and Sky Redline come alive as you approach 10/10s but aren't that rewarding to drive if you're not wringing them out.
In reply to Ian F :
Got it -- I was thrown off when you said "More recently"
In reply to nderwater :
Considering I was 19 or 20 when I test drove the Charger and in my 40's when I had the BMW, that is more "recently". 
I'm going to say S2000 as well. I really want to like them, but just don't. The biggest issue is that it doesn't feel special. It's a good car and fast when you ring it out, but it feels like a Honda.
Another I was disappointed in was the E36 M3. I thought it was big and clumsy in that everything I had was light and mid engine at the time. Some years later I drove another one and liked it better, but I don't go crazy over them like many do. (disclaimer, I had a E36 3 Series as a daily back in the day, so I don't dislike them either). But to me it wasn't as impressive as it's press proclaimed.
One more. In college in the '80's I had a decent chunk of money to spend on a car. I bought a TR4A, but one of the cars I drove was a '64 Corvette. It looked great but the drive was terrible. Steering, if you wanted to call it that, was unreal vague, worse them '70 Boss 302 I owned at the time, and it creaked and rattled pretty bad as well. It was a fantastic looking car in nice, unrestored condition with less than 50k on it, but it cured me from wanting a Corvette for years. The car I really wanted was the TR8 I test drove, but it was too expensive. Yes, the Corvette was far cheaper than the TR8 at the time.
My Fiat 500 comments are similar to those in this thread, although I was never really excited to drive it to begin with. A buddy picked up a Turbo and tossed me the keys once. Hateful seating position, slow, and just not really what I was expecting. I though the na mini it was replacing was a much better driving car.
An air cooled vw beetle with a 1300 single port. I was 16 and had spent the last 4 years riding or driving in my dad's 1835cc powered sandrail. Now that I'm older I understand there's a big difference between a built engine in a sandrail and a stock engine in a heavier beetle.
loosecannon said:I had a chance to drive Audi R8 with the V8 and it was a disappointment. The steering feel was poor and that gated shifter was miserable, but the engine sounded good :)
To each there own. I loved mine.
The only thing I have learned is don;t drive your hero's. The first time I drove a stock Merci I was completely blown away at how bad the transmission was with the F1 with stock tuning.
Around a 2005 TT. Felt neither particularly smooth, nor sporty, was slow, and the interior just wasn't what I thought it would be.
2008 Mudstaing GT. Felt too cramped, felt down on power (for what is was I was expecting more out of the loud pedal). Don't care for the looks. But then a buddy got a soft top version and that made much more sense.
sergio said:Test drive a Mazdaspeed 3.
I test drove an FR-S then a few hours later test drove an MS3. I bought the Mazdaspeed3.
The extension of this was the FR-S. As much as I got on it during the test drive I couldn't help come away apathetic despite how excited i was to finally get behind the wheel of one.
Oddball: A B7 uparmored Land Cruiser which had full cell (armor extends behind the rear seats isolating the trunk from the rear seats.) Visibility is fairly terrible and the distortions from the thick laminated glass make you think things are jumping out at you from the corner of your vision.
I had an underwhelming experience driving a 1.6 Miata. I guess I should drive another one to see if it was just that particular car, or if I just don't like them in general.
wearymicrobe said:
The only thing I have learned is don;t drive your hero's. The first time I drove a stock Merci I was completely blown away at how bad the transmission was with the F1 with stock tuning.
The clunky single-clutch automatic transmission really hurts the driving experience in the Galardo and the Aston Vantage as well. I remember being really excited to finally drive a Lamborghini and an Aston Martin, but the driving experience in both cars was less rewarding than the 911 and M3 I also drove that day.
Snrub said:That's too bad.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the Cobalt SS turbo.
I do have some Cobalt experience, but it would be nice if I was pleasantly surprised.
It never occurred to me until I drove the 500, but I think a Chevy Sonic would make a far better project car. My wife's (also 1.4T) feels as fast, is more willing to rev and handles significantly better than the 500. I also think it has much more potential as a simple, inexpensive build. Too bad it's 4dr.
Cayman S for me. I thought it was going to amazing, but it just wasn't. The shifter felt blah, the steering felt slow, I just thought it would be better than it turned out to be. Maybe my expectations were too high.
I agree with most of the comments about the E30 M3, it feels meh on the road. Never had one on the track.
E34 M5 was another big disappointment. Felt sluggish and vague.
500 for me, too. I knew before we got to the freeway that the rental premium was a total waste. And it got crappy mileage, to boot.
Worse was a 500 eco I got in Italy. Twice, it would not climb a hill. Even in first. Good thing it was so cheap...
S2K
Fairly shocked that I did not like it. I am a ragtop guy and love Hondas, so it should have been perfect. Not possible for me to find a comfortable seating position, hated the dash, felt heavy and slow, unless you were North of 7K on the tach. Could not believe it.
Miata fits me like a bespoke suit, so it worked out okay.
dropstep said:An air cooled vw beetle with a 1300 single port. I was 16 and had spent the last 4 years riding or driving in my dad's 1835cc powered sandrail. Now that I'm older I understand there's a big difference between a built engine in a sandrail and a stock engine in a heavier beetle.
Man isn’t that the truth. My 62 Beetle, with the original engine, is so slow it feels downright dangerous. However, my 60 Baja has a modified 1600 dual port and feels relatively peppy.
I have one: FRS/BRZ/86
I've heard such good things about it, but I didn't think it lived up to the hype. The steering feel is great, as are the seats and the shifter is pretty good. Granted I was on public roads, so I didn't get to 10/10ths, but I didn't think the handling feel was super awesome. The engine I detested, not so much the general thrust, but the character of the engine. It doesn't make power low down because it's low displacement (fine), then it somehow loses power in the mid range for a while, it pulls reasonably well in the mid-high section and then falls on it's face above 7k. It doesn't sound good doing it. In that kind of car I want to have an incentive to accelerate out of corners, move the balance of the car around, etc. When an engine loses power, it makes me not want to rev it there. Basically that's almost everywhere. I don't think ther was anything wrong with the car...
You'll need to log in to post.
