Unpopular Opinions- Cars in General

  • Thread starter Turbo
  • 1,713 comments
  • 157,162 views
Joey D
If dual clutches do go away, I just hope they aren't replaced with CVT's. I know they're good transmissions, I just can't stand they way the make a car feel.
Click to expand...
I still don't mind CVTs. They can be pretty nasty if you're driving quickly but most of the modern ones I've tried work well enough when you're driving normally.

Helps if the rest of the drivetrain works okay too though. Having an engine that delivers its best without needing to be at maximum revs is a good start. Priuses work well because you've got plenty of torque low-down from the electric motor.

The Subaru stuff works well too as flat-fours are inherently balanced and most of their stuff is turbocharged, so noise and vibration are relatively low. The Juke Nismo, which is good fun with a manual, was pretty grim as a CVT.
 
If you were to present both designs (Torque converter planetary gearset automatic and dual clutch automated manual) to an intelligent person without knowledge of either one, I'm fairly certain the traditional auto would come across as much more advanced and sophisticated despite the fact that its 64-years older. I've always thought the engineering of the torque converter auto is particularly innovative and elegant. Now that they are actually kind of fun (latest gearboxes from ZF, for instance) really seals it for me. Really the biggest thing for me is the towering superiority of a fluid coupling over a friction coupling....I've actually try to work out in my head how you could pair a torque converter with an H-pattern gearbox, maybe with some sort of variable vane on the impellers....
 
Losco
I'm in love with manual gears but i wish my Alfa had paddles. Alfa's manual is so bad.
Click to expand...

A friend of mine had an Alfa with a Selespeed gearbox and on several occasions the car just wouldn't move off, she had to leave it in car parks for days on end! Good old Alfa reliability 👍
 
Eunos_Cosmo
If you were to present both designs (Torque converter planetary gearset automatic and dual clutch automated manual) to an intelligent person without knowledge of either one, I'm fairly certain the traditional auto would come across as much more advanced and sophisticated despite the fact that its 64-years older. I've always thought the engineering of the torque converter auto is particularly innovative and elegant. Now that they are actually kind of fun (latest gearboxes from ZF, for instance) really seals it for me. Really the biggest thing for me is the towering superiority of a fluid coupling over a friction coupling....I've actually try to work out in my head how you could pair a torque converter with an H-pattern gearbox, maybe with some sort of variable vane on the impellers....
Click to expand...
Always surprises me just how crummy DCTs still feel at low speeds, and that I think is primarily down to that friction vs fluid coupling difference. Ultimately to pull away or to manoeuvre slowly in a DCT there's a lot of clutch-slipping going on. It always feels too abrupt where a torque converter is perfectly smooth.

Much less in it at higher speeds, and for seriously quick gearchanges I think DCT still gets the nod, but I'll not be too sad if DCTs eventually disappear.
Losco
I'm in love with manual gears but i wish my Alfa had paddles. Alfa's manual is so bad.
Click to expand...
What Alfa do you have?
 
V0RT3X
I don't like the MK4 Toyota Supra. Fight me.
Click to expand...

Me neither. It is not really any better of a car than the 300zx or 3000GT and probably not as good as an FD3S RX-7. Certainly it is far behind the Honda NSX. And yet, in some cases, they are worth the most. They don't even look particularly good -- all four other cars I mentioned I think are more attractive.
 
I don't know if this would be an unpopular opinion among people here, but I find that tinting or "smoking" taillights and headlights to not only be ugly, but also dangerous. Mainly due to the fact that tinting lights make the reflectors harder to see. I don't understand the appeal of it....
20090113230418_6396.jpg

7494d1291574489-tinted-tail-lights-granturismo-l1000053.jpg


Seems to be popular enough that I've seen manufacturers do it to their cars. Though, their reflectors actually work...
 
Eunos_Cosmo
Really the biggest thing for me is the towering superiority of a fluid coupling over a friction coupling....I've actually try to work out in my head how you could pair a torque converter with an H-pattern gearbox, maybe with some sort of variable vane on the impellers....
Click to expand...
A torque converter is ideal for very low speed stuff, but I find the slurred throttle response annoying and bothersome for maintaining a speed.
 
Wolfe
A torque converter is ideal for very low speed stuff, but I find the slurred throttle response annoying and bothersome for maintaining a speed.
Click to expand...

I find that aspect almost eliminated on some of the newer high ratio-count boxes like the rather excellent 7 speed auto in the 370z. I haven't sampled ZF's 10 speeder, but I'm guessing it's quite good.
 
I'm not a fan of the current Lamborghini line-up. They don't really excite me that much compared to other supercars for some reason. This might also be an unpopular opinion - I like the original Murcielago and the Gallardo more than the Aventador and Huracan. The designs are much cleaner.
 
I genuinely believe that in terms of sheer driving pleasure, a standard transmission will always beat even the best DCT/ paddle shift transmissions.
 
Wolfe
A torque converter is ideal for very low speed stuff, but I find the slurred throttle response annoying and bothersome for maintaining a speed.
Click to expand...
Even DCTs aren't quite as good as a manual for that, though in my experience it's as much down to the throttle response itself as the type of transmission. Some autos are surprisingly responsive to small inputs, just as some manual cars can have annoying input delay.
 
MedigoFlame
I don't know if this would be an unpopular opinion among people here, but I find that tinting or "smoking" taillights and headlights to not only be ugly, but also dangerous. Mainly due to the fact that tinting lights make the reflectors harder to see. I don't understand the appeal of it....
20090113230418_6396.jpg

7494d1291574489-tinted-tail-lights-granturismo-l1000053.jpg


Seems to be popular enough that I've seen manufacturers do it to their cars. Though, their reflectors actually work...
Click to expand...
I am a big fan of this.
 
MedigoFlame
I don't know if this would be an unpopular opinion among people here, but I find that tinting or "smoking" taillights and headlights to not only be ugly, but also dangerous.
Click to expand...

Can look good if done right (and legally). My own pet hate is the tights-tiny (pantyhose-tint in the US?)

tightstint.jpg
 
No car looks good with wider-than-original (and by that I mean the original vehicle design, for instances where the widening was executed by the factory) fenders.
 
I'd be inclined to agree, but only if they're the tacky "bolt-on" arches, but that's only because they've been ruined by the standard, copy and paste Liberty Walk or Rocket Bunny wide-arch design:

LW M3 arches.jpg
RB 350z arches.jpg


The novelty wore off very quickly with the whole exposed screw look. Just looks tacky and all the same now, now that most people have copied it by now.

Though it can look much better when done properly and discreetly, with the Driftworks DW86 being the first example that springs to mind:
DW86.jpg


Otherwise I love a good wide-arch look, when it's done properly, as it looks really classy in my opinion. Especially when it's been smoothed into the lines of the cars body, giving a seamless look.

The HKS-Zero R's wide-body deisgn is a perfect example of this for me. It extends the lines of the R32 without over-doing it or looking too cheesy and tacky:
HKS Zero-R.jpg


Just generally though it looks miles better without the whole exposed bolt and screw look that plagues the whole Liberty Walk/Rocket Bunny scene. At the end of the day it comes down to taste, some love the wide-body look, some really don't, it isn't for everyone.
 
Last edited:
I'm of the belief that the majority of automotive stylists actually know what they're doing, even if not everyone agrees with decisions that have been made, and bodywork is designed to be cohesive--all that work runs afoul when someone decides the vehicle needs a wider footprint for stability or wider rubber for grip greater than was allowed by the original sheetmetal. Does it serve a purpose? Absolutely.

Arguably one of the best-executed examples of this widening--factory or otherwise--was done so on the Porsche 914 GTs, and I still don't find it the least bit attractive.

Michelin Man
View attachment 701963
Click to expand...
There's something else at play here that doesn't mesh for me. While I don't find tacky over-arches attractive, they do serve a purpose (when utilized) and do so with no-frills simplicity; should anything happen during use, original sheetmetal can be replaced with relative ease and another arch extension can be slapped on. When existing sheetmetal is modified extensively, as has been done here, repairing or replacing becomes significantly more difficult and, in effort to preserve the modification, the example isn't likely utilized in the manner that simpler ones are. Sure, it doesn't look as tacky, but what was the point messing with all that original design work if it isn't going to be utilized? It may not be as bad as the "stance" fanboys wanting to break the internet with their Rocket Bunny and Liberty Walk, but I reckon it's not far off.

Edit: Minor fix--either autocorrect got me or I somehow managed to write afield instead of afoul (no autocorrect just now).
 
Last edited:
Each to their own I guess, that HKS Zero-R was widened on purpose to accommodate the wider track and wheels which HKS designed for it given it's massively increased performance over the stock R32 on which it's based; shame it never made it to full scale production really (though that's a story in itself). Obviously re-fabricating the body-work in such a manner is not as easy as simply bolting on a sheet of metal to widen the car instead, though that was never HKS' intention I'd more than likely imagine, since they were never about that.

Otherwise I often see cars as a "blank canvas" if you will, for the owner to do with what they wish, whether or not that's what the designer intended or not. And I'm more than sure car designers know what they're doing, as they're the one working for big car companies designing thousands of cars not me :lol:. Though at the end of the day I completely respect their, and at the end of day not all cars look better widened, whether it's purposeful or not, neither the designer or the owner of the car who performs the modification is right or wrong. I just the feel that some designs work, some do not; e.g. Rocket Bunny, Liberty Walk etc.

That's just how I see it, hence why I love tuning cars and generally seeing them being messed around with as it's that air of creativity that leads to some fantastic creations to me, like the brilliantly bonkers Driftworks DW86.

It's all open to different interpretation really 👍.
 
I’m honestly tired of the whole bolt-on overfender trend. I have no problem when RWB or TRA do it-mainly since that’s just what they do and they have a specific style surrounding it-but all of the people who buy their products and build medicore show cars for shows and social media are just dreadful.
 
Last edited:

Latest Posts

Back