In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
That was my take on drifting until I took my son to a local amateur event to see a friend that was driving. Watching in person there is a wide range of skills ranging from beginners that relied on brute force to make things happen to the skilled drivers that were able to operate at the limits of their steering angle and make smooth transitions as the drifted around the course.
The coolest part about it was they were just there to have fun. There were no points, no awards, just a bunch of people that had a common interest in drifting. They were hanging out, helping each other with the cars and techniques. Camping in the parking lot, grilling, and spending time with friends.
WonkoTheSane (Forum Supporter) said:
RevRico said:
Whether it's the initial buy in, the tools or materials needed, the learning curve and time suck of that, and that's before you get into dealing with other people involved in the hobby who seem content to spend a monthly paycheck on a stupid accessory or deviation.
Isn't that kinda the point of a hobby? If you were already perfect at something, we're not really wired to keep doing it. Humans only get a "hit" from learning something new or pushing to another extreme, it's called the Hedonic treadmill, or, more politely, Hedonic Adaptation..
In some cases just the pedantry is someone's justification for staying in a hobby (their version of fun), other times it's a sunk-cost fallacy that they've already invested X 1000s of hours into something, so it "would be a waste" to not keep sinking X more thousands of hours into it, so they're stuck.
My fun is in the doing. Trial and error can be fun.
But spending days/weeks/months learning the minutiae of something is not fun.
Using my casting example again, learning to cast something from scrap and have a physical thing afterwards is great. Spending 3 months and untold hours learning to design the perfect mold/pattern? Not so fun.
93gsxturbo said:
I dont understand people who get nice things and don't take care of them.
I am an avid cyclist and I swear I spend as much time working on bikes as riding them. Every rattle, squeak, etc gets addressed right away. I go ride with some folks and their bikes are a rattly mess, and these are guys who can out-ride me. I just dont understand that sort of mentality.
Same people who pack up tents wet, or walk in their house with their shoes on, or buy a nice car and fill it with garbage.
I don't get people who buy nice things and then spend more time polishing them than using them for their intended purpose. There's all the important stuff that makes it work, and then there is whether it's shiny
Edit: I don't intend any snark here. Some peoples hobby is keeping stuff shiny, and that is just fine with me.
RevRico said:
My fun is in the doing. Trial and error can be fun.
But spending days/weeks/months learning the minutiae of something is not fun.
Using my casting example again, learning to cast something from scrap and have a physical thing afterwards is great. Spending 3 months and untold hours learning to design the perfect mold/pattern? Not so fun.
Eh, I can see it either way... Anything that requires high levels of precision will take high amounts of prep work. To bring in the equivalent in the motorsports world, we'd be a lot further behind if there weren't people who really focussed on suspension tuning, instead of just going and driving the cars.
Choosing the correct damper profile and spring rate for a car is just as finicky as learning the ins-and-outs of casting/pattern/moldmaking, and a lot of people spend all year on it for <5 minutes of driving in Nebraska every year :)
RevRico said:
The costs of the hobbies themselves. Even for the more budget minded hobbies, the costs seem to spiral out of control extremely quickly.
Example: let's turn all this free scrap aluminum into something. Even using lost foam and a risky plaster foundry, still over $100 before the free scrap turns into anything but scrap.
Whether it's the initial buy in, the tools or materials needed, the learning curve and time suck of that, and that's before you get into dealing with other people involved in the hobby who seem content to spend a monthly paycheck on a stupid accessory or deviation.
Whenever I take interest in a new hobby naturally I Google it to learn more about it. I am always inundated with all the "must have" stuff, and how I will be a colossal failure if I dont have the very best of the "must haves". Its dumb. Vendors know people get excited about spending money on hobbies and they want to get it. I wanted to start riding bikes again. Internet makes you feel like it's pointless if you dont dump $4-5k. I bought a higher end mountain bike used for $75. New brake pads, a bottle holder and street tires and tubes were around another $75. That's pretty much it. And if I lose interest I could sell it for at least 2/3 of what I have in it. Stuff can be done cheaply if you dont listen to all the hype.
gearheadmb said:
RevRico said:
The costs of the hobbies themselves. Even for the more budget minded hobbies, the costs seem to spiral out of control extremely quickly.
Example: let's turn all this free scrap aluminum into something. Even using lost foam and a risky plaster foundry, still over $100 before the free scrap turns into anything but scrap.
Whether it's the initial buy in, the tools or materials needed, the learning curve and time suck of that, and that's before you get into dealing with other people involved in the hobby who seem content to spend a monthly paycheck on a stupid accessory or deviation.
Whenever I take interest in a new hobby naturally I Google it to learn more about it. I am always inundated with all the "must have" stuff, and how I will be a colossal failure if I dont have the very best of the "must haves". Its dumb. Vendors know people get excited about spending money on hobbies and they want to get it. I wanted to start riding bikes again. Internet makes you feel like it's pointless if you dont dump $4-5k. I bought a higher end mountain bike used for $75. New brake pads, a bottle holder and street tires and tubes were around another $75. That's pretty much it. And if I lose interest I could sell it for at least 2/3 of what I have in it. Stuff can be done cheaply if you dont listen to all the hype.
True, but a lot of people are competitive. You won't be competitive on a bike for that price just like you wont be competitive in the autox world for $1000.
In reply to ProDarwin :
I feel like the "competition" aspect sucks the fun out of things though.
I almost guarantee I had more fun in my $500 cop car at autocross than the guys with $500/corner tires who spent all day wiping the car down between runs and arguing about 1/2psi of air pressure.
At least it sure looks and feels that way.
RevRico said:
In reply to ProDarwin :
I feel like the "competition" aspect sucks the fun out of things though.
I almost guarantee I had more fun in my $500 cop car at autocross than the guys with $500/corner tires who spent all day wiping the car down between runs and arguing about 1/2psi of air pressure.
At least it sure looks and feels that way.
That's great that you feel that way. I'm sure those other guys feel the exact opposite. Personally, I love the competition part of autocross. Mountain biking, not so much. I like to continually improve, but I don't do it competitively. First person shooters? I'm playing to win.
What I really don't get is people who A) feel like the "competition" aspect sucks the fun out and B) complain about classing issues. If you don't want to compete, don't complain about issues that only matter if you are competing. If you want to win your class, build a car to compete and win. Can't have it both ways. Like it or not, racing is a competition....
ProDarwin said:
gearheadmb said:
RevRico said:
The costs of the hobbies themselves. Even for the more budget minded hobbies, the costs seem to spiral out of control extremely quickly.
Example: let's turn all this free scrap aluminum into something. Even using lost foam and a risky plaster foundry, still over $100 before the free scrap turns into anything but scrap.
Whether it's the initial buy in, the tools or materials needed, the learning curve and time suck of that, and that's before you get into dealing with other people involved in the hobby who seem content to spend a monthly paycheck on a stupid accessory or deviation.
Whenever I take interest in a new hobby naturally I Google it to learn more about it. I am always inundated with all the "must have" stuff, and how I will be a colossal failure if I dont have the very best of the "must haves". Its dumb. Vendors know people get excited about spending money on hobbies and they want to get it. I wanted to start riding bikes again. Internet makes you feel like it's pointless if you dont dump $4-5k. I bought a higher end mountain bike used for $75. New brake pads, a bottle holder and street tires and tubes were around another $75. That's pretty much it. And if I lose interest I could sell it for at least 2/3 of what I have in it. Stuff can be done cheaply if you dont listen to all the hype.
True, but a lot of people are competitive. You won't be competitive on a bike for that price just like you wont be competitive in the autox world for $1000.
I'm not competitive, I'm going for rides on a bike trail with my kids. But for the sake of argument, if I were competitive, how much faster would I be with the expensive water bottle holder? I see the same gear envy in my other hobby, wood working. I dont do that competitively either.
Duke
MegaDork
9/29/20 1:26 p.m.
No Time said:
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
That was my take on drifting until I took my son to a local amateur event to see a friend that was driving. Watching in person there is a wide range of skills ranging from beginners that relied on brute force to make things happen to the skilled drivers that were able to operate at the limits of their steering angle and make smooth transitions as the drifted around the course.
The coolest part about it was they were just there to have fun. There were no points, no awards, just a bunch of people that had a common interest in drifting. They were hanging out, helping each other with the cars and techniques. Camping in the parking lot, grilling, and spending time with friends.
That's what our BMC drift events are. The social part of it appeals to me, and I guess I get the point of drifting - you can't argue with the seat time. But they don't seem happy unless they're tearing E36 M3 up and I hate fixing E36 M3 so tearing it up more or less on purpose doesn't appeal to me.
But I won't say it's stupid; it's just not something I'm interested in.
People who do "because racecar" E36 M3 to rallycross cars.
Now we have to add another five or six lines to the rulebook.
And people why the legal code takes up entire buildings' worth of books. Every law and rule in there was because some dumbass did something monumentally dumb and the main defense is "well you didn't say I couldn't"
gearheadmb said:
ProDarwin said:
gearheadmb said:
RevRico said:
The costs of the hobbies themselves. Even for the more budget minded hobbies, the costs seem to spiral out of control extremely quickly.
Example: let's turn all this free scrap aluminum into something. Even using lost foam and a risky plaster foundry, still over $100 before the free scrap turns into anything but scrap.
Whether it's the initial buy in, the tools or materials needed, the learning curve and time suck of that, and that's before you get into dealing with other people involved in the hobby who seem content to spend a monthly paycheck on a stupid accessory or deviation.
Whenever I take interest in a new hobby naturally I Google it to learn more about it. I am always inundated with all the "must have" stuff, and how I will be a colossal failure if I dont have the very best of the "must haves". Its dumb. Vendors know people get excited about spending money on hobbies and they want to get it. I wanted to start riding bikes again. Internet makes you feel like it's pointless if you dont dump $4-5k. I bought a higher end mountain bike used for $75. New brake pads, a bottle holder and street tires and tubes were around another $75. That's pretty much it. And if I lose interest I could sell it for at least 2/3 of what I have in it. Stuff can be done cheaply if you dont listen to all the hype.
True, but a lot of people are competitive. You won't be competitive on a bike for that price just like you wont be competitive in the autox world for $1000.
I'm not competitive, I'm going for rides on a bike trail with my kids. But for the sake of argument, if I were competitive, how much faster would I be with the expensive water bottle holder? I see the same gear envy in my other hobby, wood working. I dont do that competitively either.
IMO the geometry of mountain bikes has gotten so much better in the last 5 or so years there is no way I'd go back to older school stuff. Plus a lot of cheap stuff just doesn't hold up or kind of sucks like water bottle holders. I am running a Fidlock setup because I was tried of losing bottles.
To be honest for some hobbies, I find the most enjoyment in kind of the mid-range at least with bikes and headphones. I have demoed a number of expensive to berkeley off expensive bikes and headphones/ headphone equipment and to me the ideal level of quality to enjoyment to price level has been a nice steel hardtail and a set of Sennheiser HD600 with Liquid Carbon amp.
Cars and watches though I am on the cheap end.
In reply to 93EXCivic :
The geometry of modern mountain bikes looks like te geometry of mountain bikes from the days when people were bombing down trails in Marin County on old Schwinn bombers.
Everything got tightened up because it makes climbing a lot easier. Now, I guess, you just climb by getting on a chairlift.
93gsxturbo said:.
... or walk in their house with their shoes on...
I guess I'll be declining my RSVP to your dinner party, I'm not taking my shoes off. 
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
The geometry of modern mountain bikes looks like te geometry of mountain bikes from the days when people were bombing down trails in Marin County on old Schwinn bombers.
Everything got tightened up because it makes climbing a lot easier. Now, I guess, you just climb by getting on a chairlift.
Have you ridden a modern mountain bike?
I see literally zero disadvantage to modern mountain bike geometry. IMO it climbs well enough and you don't spend your whole time just trying not to go over the bars. Also never ridden at a bike park.
In reply to 93EXCivic :
No i have not, and probably never will. The riser bars and sitting-up position would be hell on my wrists and back. I like 3 degree flat bars rotated until they are pointed up at my shoulder, which mates up to my hands perfectly, and a 150mm stem. Going over the bars was never an issue, most of the time I'd have the front tire off the ground near an obstacle anyway, and on smooth roads it kept my weight on my arms and not my back.
Pete. (l33t FS) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
No i have not, and probably never will. The riser bars and sitting-up position would be hell on my wrists and back. I like 3 degree flat bars rotated until they are pointed up at my shoulder, which mates up to my hands perfectly, and a 150mm stem. Going over the bars was never an issue, most of the time I'd have the front tire off the ground near an obstacle anyway, and on smooth roads it kept my weight on my arms and not my back.
You'd hate my bike. 64.5 degree head angle, 35mm long stem, 40mm riser bars. Sure the front end wanders a little but whatever, climbing is just something to do to get to the fun parts.
I am sticking with a lot more fun to ride on trails I like to ride (which are steep and rocky) then old school stuff. Having ridden owned and ridden old-school geo beginner XC bikes, a slightly more modern 150mm (2011) full sus and an old 90s mtb on some of those trails, I have absolutely zero interest in doing that again. You have to be razor focused on getting your weight in just the right place and hope that you aren't on a steep section with a corner and rocks or roots in the corner all while going slower.
In this thread: People are less fun than I thought.
What I really don't get is people who A) feel like the "competition" aspect sucks the fun out and B) complain about classing issues. If you don't want to compete, don't complain about issues that only matter if you are competing. If you want to win your class, build a car to compete and win. Can't have it both ways. Like it or not, racing is a competition...
See that's the thing that gets me, particularly about autocross. A lot of people already built their car their way. Now to try to introduce them and get them classed, all of a sudden their only competition is people who purpose built for a class, because they (casual car guy) liked a wing, or a certain exhaust sounded better to them, or the other 99% of the time they're in the car they want it to handle differently.
Showing up and seeing your "baby" is always going to lose to someone who built to the rule book is disheartening to say the least.
In reply to RevRico :
Which is why clubs need to tone down the class structure for fun competions, and promote the "Your car sucks based on class, but it's really fun, so lets get you some skills, and as you get better, you can delete some things, change others, and add some new stuff that will get you cooking. For now, there is a guy in an old cop car that is about your speed. Try to beat him next week."
It was a long time ago, but my toughest competion in my Camaro was a V8 Corvair, and a bunch of Rabbits/Jettas. I was nowhere near the same class. I also tried, when I made the course, to set something up that would make the guys faster than me (Turbo 510, Beetle on slicks with all the motor) have to shift twice, while I ran around in first gear at 6300 rpm...
In reply to 93EXCivic :
Yep - I'm all about new geometry these days and can't see me ever going back. I hated super long stems even back when everyone was running them i25 years ago. I ran a 100mm stem and my friends were like, "why so short???" But I am a DH racer (retired) and bike park rider, so my bikes are generally set up for aggressive riding.
Oddly enough, I'm exactly the opposite on a road bike - I don't like an upright position at all. My bars are about 4" lower than my saddle on my road bike.
I follow a few vintage biking groups o Facebook. While I enjoy being nostalgic about the old gear (and still have some), I have absolutely no desire to ever actually ride those bikes again.
Streetwiseguy said:
In reply to RevRico :
Which is why clubs need to tone down the class structure for fun competions, and promote the "Your car sucks based on class, but it's really fun, so lets get you some skills, and as you get better, you can delete some things, change others, and add some new stuff that will get you cooking. For now, there is a guy in an old cop car that is about your speed. Try to beat him next week."
It was a long time ago, but my toughest competion in my Camaro was a V8 Corvair, and a bunch of Rabbits/Jettas. I was nowhere near the same class. I also tried, when I made the course, to set something up that would make the guys faster than me (Turbo 510, Beetle on slicks with all the motor) have to shift twice, while I ran around in first gear at 6300 rpm...
Many local/small clubs can be pretty laid back with classing and the like, but if you run with anything more serious then you'll need to build to the rules. This is nothing new and many clubs will still let cars run, even if they aren't legal, but you won't be running for time or points.
RevRico said:
What I really don't get is people who A) feel like the "competition" aspect sucks the fun out and B) complain about classing issues. If you don't want to compete, don't complain about issues that only matter if you are competing. If you want to win your class, build a car to compete and win. Can't have it both ways. Like it or not, racing is a competition...
See that's the thing that gets me, particularly about autocross. A lot of people already built their car their way. Now to try to introduce them and get them classed, all of a sudden their only competition is people who purpose built for a class, because they (casual car guy) liked a wing, or a certain exhaust sounded better to them, or the other 99% of the time they're in the car they want it to handle differently.
Showing up and seeing your "baby" is always going to lose to someone who built to the rule book is disheartening to say the least.
Yep, exactly. I don't get this at all. If you are casual car guy who doesn't care much about competition, why do you care if you will lose?
We have one of those classes locally, a run what you bring as long as it's street tires and have fun class. STO, street touring other. It was fun. Know what happened? A dude decided he wanted to win. So he spent ALL the money and built a stupid fast turbo Miata. And he won. And he was super annoying about beating everyone and it made the class less fun because a bunch of us ran that class to get away from those guys.
In reply to mazdeuce - Seth :
Yeah, and that will always happen. Keep score and put some rules around it, and someone will decide they want to win. Thats the nature of racing.
If you don't want to lose, try and win. If you don't care about competition, learn to be ok with losing.
That guy doesn't need to be a dick about it though.
