Why Yes Old Cars Are Slow and Handle Badly; It's Why I Love Them.

This past weekend while at a track day I had an interesting conversation with two owners of very different cars. 

The first was a McLaren 720 owner of also has a 911 GT3. I made of mention having driven a GT3-RS and how that new cars are better in every measurable way. They do exactly what you tell them to, they are fast, absolutely planted in corners and generally have no faults one has to drive around. I also noted that when you do get it wrong in these cars the velocity at which you leave the track is going to be very high, leaving you a lot less time and space to get things gathered up.

The second was an owner of an R32 Skyline; as great a car as it is we discussed the fact that much like my Datsun it requires you make it turn, especially in the really wet conditions we were running in. I mentioned the lower limits of the cars makes them more fun to hang way out. In older cars 4 wheel drifting them everywhere tends to be the fast way round. You also tend to have to make a lot more steering corrections in old cars.

Most folks are surprised at how busy my old Datsun is to drive especially given I'm turning lap times similar to a B-Spec Honda Fit. When I get out the Datsun I am absolutely spent, it wears you out in a way that no modern car will and there in lies it's appeal. Basically it's like going hunting with a bow and arrow. It is far less efficient but also far more engaging, albeit in a primitive way.

"I wouldn't go so far as to call old cars terrible, they definitely bad, but an ol car's got personality,  and personality goes a long way."

Personality, plus I enjoy the challenge of mastering something that isn't engineered to be so easy to drive. They are also way, way easier to work on.

Consider it done!

I think there's a fine line to this.  I completely understand your point and agree that a car with low levels of mechanical grip can be fun.  However...the question is why do you have to constantly make steering corrections?  If it's because you are at the limits of grip, cool, though I still don't like drifting.  If it's because the chassis is so poorly balanced that you constantly have to "catch", hard pass for me.  Many of the older cars I've driven are because of the latter and not the former.  Even some new super expensive cars are like that.  There's a reason people love the GT3-RS so much. 

I like old cars because they drive like old cars.

Anyone can write a cheque and walk away with a new car, just like buying a toaster or a microwave. 

Being the caretaker of an old car is much more of an experience.

Full choke when it's cold, less choke when it's warm. A bit of throttle to start or no throttle maybe. Where is the starter button (Nash, I'm looking in your direction).

Getting that column shift linkage to work just tight.

Learning to get the revs just right and the shift speed just right to make that sliding gear transmission work smoothly.

Getting mechanical brakes set up just right so they don't pull left or right.

70mph in 2 tons of wood and metal with a 500cid 6 cylinder, with only rear wheel brakes is way more fun than 90mph in "the ultimate driving machine".

It's not about how fast you go. It's all about how you go fast.

Threads like this make me realize of the painful choice I'll have to make in the future when it comes time to getting rid of some of my cars to replace them with equally cool and interesting cars. I wish I had infinite space.

In reply to SKJSS (formerly Klayfish) :

It's mostly being the limits of bias ply tires but it's also the leaf spring rear suspension.

4 wheel drifting through a corner is my happy place.

As for the GT3-RS......they are pheeeeenominal cars.

In reply to Appleseed :

Mmm no, old cars are terrible......yet I love them so.

Old cars are terrible. Old motorcycles too.

My Guzzi will pop out of third if you're in a hurry letting the clutch out before the gear is fully engaged. She's loud, unrefined and borderline agricultural and I love her so much.

My Matchless had a neutral between every gear.

It would be boring owning something that didn't make you work for it a little bit.

It takes people a long time to realize that chasing outright speed is often a losing proposition for a recreational driver.  It can be somewhat boring driving really fast, and it can be exhilarating driving relatively slow.  All cars have inherent flaws, but most of us mere mortals don't have the skills or finances to expose them on new McClarens and 911 GT3's.  I would speculate that most of the people who own those cars don't have those skills or finances either.  The real rewards come from problem-solving your way around the inherent flaws of the vehicle that you're in and driving it as fast as it can be driven. 

I broadly agree, but have two salient-ish points:

• I did some track days on an Aprilia RSV1000R. From my lowly perspective as a basically competent rider but track n00b, it was perfect. Not in that it was the ideal tool, but that at the pace I was comfortable riding, it just did exactly what I asked of it and never gave me any worries. That was nice for learning. I'm looking forward to getting to the track on my 250 Ninja, which is similar era, cheaper parts, much less power. I suspect it won't be as planted, and oddly may *feel* more alarming than the literbike, but I guess I'll find out.
• There's "character" and there are "serious flaws." There's probably overlap, but the former makes things interesting, and the latter should be fixed or re-engineered out. I've got little use for stuff that just works badly. Which is why I'm usually much more interested in resto-mods than restorations (not that I don't see the appeal of the latter).

It's not about how fast you go. It's all about how you go fast.

This.  But it also sucks when you get passed by a newer car with all the nannies but a rookie behind the wheel.

In reply to porschenut :

It's worse when you think you're going balls-out on a newer 850 and an old guy on a 350 is creeping up behind you and you can't seem to shake him.

I think there are too many variables to make a blanket statement one way or the other.  Track, tires, weather, driving skills, etc..  Much of it is personal preference.  I get it about the charm and challenge of an old car.  If the handling is right, then I'm all in.  The Lemons car I run is an '86 Cressida with all of 190-200hp.  It lacks power which is frustrating but the handling is superb.  It's one of the best cars I've ever driven, bar none.  That's due to a lot of hard work to set it up properly.  On the flip side I'm lucky enough to have turned many hot laps in a Lamborghini Huracan.  It suuuucks.  

Those are extreme examples but my point is there are a ton of variables.  Personally I'm all about balance.  Old or new if it's a great dance partner I love it.  If I have to fight it all the way around the track, nope. 

An old car that can go fast, stop fast, and handle well will ALWAYS impress me more than the latest and greatest. 

I will throw this in the mix because it sums things up for me:

A friend once asked why I liked my 76 YZ125 so much, to which I replied.

"It revs like mad but you're going slow, the forks are weedy so it bounced around and the brakes are marginal. So when you do fall off you're not going very fast. You have to work twice ad hated for half as much speed so it feels twice as fast in any given corner"

And sometimes old and slow is still faster than new and cool. A few weeks ago I was riding Skyline Blvd in San Mateo County on the twisty (Southern) end. Came upon a pack of Dual-Sporters in their various KTMs and such with expensive gear. Was great fun picking them off one-by one in my 58-year-old Velocette.  

ShawnG said:

In reply to porschenut :

It's worse when you think you're going balls-out on a newer 850 and an old guy on a 350 is creeping up behind you and you can't seem to shake him.

ITS NOT MY FAULT! HE RIDES AN RD!!!

Old cars ride like crap because people put wide modern rubber on them and then expect them to react like a modern car with sticky rubber. Older cars are designed around the tires of the era. 

My vintage cars ride wonderfully if using OEM style tire, mostly modern bias plys, and used as designed. Asking my 1955 to be an caynon carver with just rubber is a hard pass. 

Appleseed said:

ShawnG said:

In reply to porschenut :

It's worse when you think you're going balls-out on a newer 850 and an old guy on a 350 is creeping up behind you and you can't seem to shake him.

ITS NOT MY FAULT! HE RIDES AN RD!!!

For the record my RD350 ran a 12.60 quarter mile in street trim. It also weighed 275lbs. It was damn fast in the day.

wearymicrobe said:

Old cars ride like crap because people put wide modern rubber on them and then expect them to react like a modern car with sticky rubber. Older cars are designed around the tires of the era. 

My vintage cars ride wonderfully if using OEM style tire, mostly modern bias plys, and used as designed. Asking my 1955 to be an caynon carver with just rubber is a hard pass. 

So much this.

You don't need power steering with the proper tires, at the proper pressure.

Tom1200 said:

For the record my RD350 ran a 12.60 quarter mile in street trim. It also weighed 275lbs. It was damn fast in the day.

My recollection was that the RD had a less than ideal suspension. Not as bad as the Kawasaki triples,  but a little funky at the limit. Around that time I rode a Maico 490 dirt bike which kind of ruined me off street bikes for a while because they all felt so slow and heavy by comparison.

Appleseed said:

"I wouldn't go so far as to call old cars terrible, they definitely bad, but an ol car's got personality,  and personality goes a long way."

 

This is a fantastic PF take on this topic. 

In reply to Kreb (Forum Supporter) 

I was young so the suspension seemed great to me......I used slide that RD around like mad.