I came across a new form of aggressive driving yesterday on the M42. I was cruising in the inside lane and coming up on a truck. A Mitsubishi Evo was gaining on me extremely fast, so I waited for him, figuring I had space to let him past before pulling out and without coming off cruise.
To my surprise, he braked very hard as he came along side me, keeping level until I had to hit the brakes to not get too close to the truck. He then zoomed off, giving me the finger out of his window. I have no idea why, other than perhaps his manhood is smaller than he might like. I saw him do similar to another car about half a mile up the road. Very odd.
|
|
The guy's a creep. He'll soon have a crash. Sooner the better.
|
|
I think the answer lies in what he was driving. You have to be some kind of loser to choose to own something quite so silly, which goes on to explain the driving. Simples.
|
|
It's due to the weather, the Inglisch aren't used to it you see, back to normal t'morrow :)
|
>> some kind of loser to choose to own something quite so silly,
What's silly about a car that can outperform a Subaru turbo on a circuit? A lot less silly than the driver I think.
I've always been uncomfortable with the bullying American expression 'loser'. Seems to imply that there's a moral component in being, or not being, a 'winner'. If only, huh?
|
Perhaps he was trying to provoke someone into 'racing' him.
With luck he'll choose an unmarked BIB.
|
>>What's silly about a car that can outperform a Subaru turbo on a circuit? A lot less silly than the driver I think. <<
Jordan may have some amazing skills in the bedroom, but she still counts as one of the most ridiculous women on earth with a reputation to back it up.
An Evo has zero class unless it is on a track or doing a rally stage where it belongs - not something any normal person requires to get to Tesco for some milk.
|
|
Nothing wrong with driving an evo on the road, nothing wrong with driving one fast and with presence on the road. It takes class to own and run one and drive it properly. The guy was a dork, nothing to do with the car.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 24 May 10 at 17:56
|
>> Nothing wrong with driving an evo on the road, nothing wrong with driving one fast
>> and with presence on the road. It takes class to own and run one and
>> drive it properly. The guy was a dork, nothing to do with the car.
>>
Agreed.
Its just that most car's of that type are driven by dorks.
|
|
so few on the road completely impossible to state that. It could have benn any BMW or Audi driver.
|
|
Who is for compulsory advanced driver training before the purchace of any car over 150bhp, or a graded licence as hgv drivers have. Or would that make them even more over confident.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 24 May 10 at 19:04
|
|
No because at least a BMW or Audi driver has the decency to buy something remotely modest. They might attract aggressive drivers, but atleast they are aggressive drivers who have a small amount of class. The Evo is athe motoring equiv of an ASBO.
|
I think Stu had it about right - you can't separate the medium from the message.
Anyone who chooses to drive a racing car on the road must be deficient in the gentleman's area (or in ladies, the equivalent). Any Evo is practically undriveable in normal road conditions & legal speeds - the engine output characteristics, suspension & steering are designed for smooth racetracks where the high-rpm power characteristics can be exploited.
The same (though to a lesser extent) can be said of Subaru WRX type cars.
|
Modern performance cars can be surprisingly docile kensitas, and I imagine an off-the-peg Evo would be. All it takes to pootle around is a gentle (but firm) foot.
My son-in-law has a fairly heavily tweaked Skyline GTR with an absolutely huge exhaust, not for ornament but all the way to the downpipe. Keeps the turbos spinning you see. It is quite a rapid car. But it can be pootled at an idle through a village. You can hear it, but it isn't offensive without quite a lot of loud pedal. So, driveable on the road by a sensible person. And a standard Evo would be easier to drive.
|
|
I wouldn't tar all with the same brush AC, but the Evo is fairly extreme - even when compared with WRXs (..and from what you say, GTRs too). I remember a TG test with Clarkson in an Evo (probably 7) - he was, unusally, testing its 'off-cam' driving characteristics, i.e. 30-40 mph in top or highish gear - result: sluggish & uncomfortable . It only made 'sense' on the track for him.
|
Of course by docile I meant controllable at ordinary road speeds without drama by a competent driver. I didn't mean a mature, sensible person might choose one as a daily driver.
But Zero has been at pains to point out, and I agree absolutely, that driving a very high performance car on the road and being a dork or creep are two completely different things that make a bad combination, not two connected parts of the same evil pathology, capisce?
|
As is usual from JC and TG they were making a story out of nothing.
I think it was one of the uber-turbo'd Evos (360bhp from a 2.0 or there abouts) - the turbo lag was so huge it wouldn't pull from 30mpg in 5th gear.
Of course if he tried 2nd or 3rd there would have been no problem, but then Top Gear isn't about journalism, is it?
These cars can all be driven sensibly on normal roads if driven properly.
The fact that they can travel at twice the legal limit is true of many run-of-the-mill family cars these days.
|
I think the demented chappie in the OP was demonstrating his bigger ego, they should have named the whole range Ego instead.
I've seen the odd S type Audi being similarly driven possibly worse, one in particular travelling at a high rate of knots with another car following, small bottle neck comes up eg 2 trucks side by side leaving only 3rd lane free...Audi driver brakes hard to 55mph and runs beside the trucks for a while whilst glaring at the driver behind in the mirror...obviously after 20 seconds the 3rd lane is well clear ahead, Audi roars off showing his bigger exhaust pipes.
No i can't understand them either, probably lack of a proper woman and displaying all the hallmarks of a numbskull unlikely to get one.
|
gottem rarnd ere. Big saust, small willy, missplet tattos, staffie bull terrier, sunny delight (sic) garage pasty etc etc etc.
Yours faithfully,
Lee Enfield.
|
>> - not something any normal person requires to get to Tesco
>> for some milk.
stu, this is exactly what many of us think about massive SUVs/4x4s. However, when the view you express here is used against ownership of a this type of vehicle, a type of which you approve, you think it's mindlessness and jealousy.
Do you see my point now? You don't have to agree with it, I'd just rather like you to say that my point about 4x4s (which we discussed with quite some passion in another place a while back) is not mindless - a comment you failed to retract if I remember correctly.
|
At the risk of making you both hate me, I'd say that both points of view are equally mindless, rather than saying that neither are mindless at all! ;)
To judge people by the car they drive because it is supposedly in some way 'inappropriate', is ridiculous - unless you yourself always use the smallest, most economical and efficient vehicle which can successfully complete the point of your journey.
As said above - the fact that this idiot was driving like an idiot, makes him an idiot. What car he was in while doing so is irrelevant.
|
>> As said above - the fact that this idiot was driving like an idiot, makes him an idiot. What car he was in while doing so is irrelevant.
Spot on Bazza, spot on.
|
Well, HDA and Bb, I dunno. Yes and no.
There are some cars and trucks (to use the American description for SUVs and 4x4 Pick Ups) which seem idiotic things to buy given their usage and habitat. Seems stu and I agree on that, even if we see idiocy in differing types of vehicle.
|
An individual may be driving a particular vehicle for one of any number of reasons.
Yet there are some people who will look at the vehicle, decide the driver is an idiot without knowing anything about them, and take the trouble to say so in front of everyone.
Listen chaps: you may not want a four-door pick-up and you may think you couldn't manage it easily in town. But the person driving the thing did want it for a reason which may be perfectly good, and did think they could manage to drive it.
Person A drives a four-door pick-up.
Person B thinks person A is an idiot because he, person B, doesn't like four-door pick-ups and doesn't want one himself.
Who, really, is the idiot? You don't have to be a genius to know.
|
>> An individual may be driving a particular vehicle for one of any number of reasons.
Yep, and if that reason is image/status symbolry above driving experience, on road manners, suitability for purpose, running costs, social costs etc, then I say idiot. Live up a mountain? Fine, fill yer boots. Live up the Kings Road. Berk. Like my best friend who once bought a Shogun, whilst living on Twickenham High Street above a shop. Told him he was an idiot. He got an MG F a few years after that, but it still took him 10 years to admit I was right about the Shogun.
>> Who, really, is the idiot? You don't have to be a genius to know.
Your opinion. I differ. I'll try not to take it personally, :-)
|
Bt you're only allowing for two possible types of reason. Who says the reasons you can think of are the reasons someone else can?
I drive a 'performance car' of sorts. I don't give two figs for the performance. I wanted the car because it looks and sounds fabulous. Not to other people - I don't give two figs for them either. To me. Who elses foibles should I care about when choosing my car?
That blows Stus prejudice out of the water. If I drove my car at the limits of its abilities I would indeed struggle to keep with in the law. So I don't. The same would be true of a 1.2 Corsa. Or an early 80's Aston Martin Vantage - which happens to be my dream car, and has been since I was a child. Given the opportunity to have one, should I not because Stu thinks its abilities are redundant (in common with 90% of the cars out there - doubtlessly including his own). Stu - your mistake is in assuming that the only reason for owning a performance car is its performance.
While I don't particularly like 4x4's myself, and therefore don't have as easily accessible a reason for wanting one, I can happily imagine that someone wanting that much space in their car, or preferring the higher seating position for instance might buy on that basis. I'm sure there are a myriad others too.
You and Stu are both prejudging people's reasons for buying the car they want based on YOUR range of experiences and desires, not theirs.
That you're both then accusing the other of being unfair while being completely unable to accept the same failing in yourselves is a bit weird - you're doing exactly the same thing as each other.
|
>> That you're both then accusing the other of being unfair while being completely unable to
>> accept the same failing in yourselves is a bit weird - you're doing exactly the
>> same thing as each other.
I'm not accusing stu of being unfair, merely pointing out that the position he holds regarding performance cars is based on the exact same argument which I use as part of the position I hold on 4x4s, a position which he believes to be mindless. I'm wondering if he sees and accepts this.
Whatever reasons people have for justifying the use of massive 4x4s in the urban environment when they have absoultely zero use for them in the extra-urban environment, I believe to be invalid. Every one of them can be satisifed by the use of a far more suitable vehicle for city and town streets, and motorways come to that.
>> Who elses foibles should I care about when choosing my car?
Consideration of others is something I was brought up to believe to be an essential part of living in and maintinaing a civilised society. People who inconvenience everyone else by their insistence to operate agricultural and even military derived vehicles on the streets of my mostly Victorian era town don't, I believe, share the same standards. I consider it to be, in fact, and in deference to the origin of this thread, a type of aggressive and indeed anti-social behaviour.
|
I dont really care what people drive Bazz, I was just making a point about capabilities vs needs.
Ive owned and driven all sorts an one thing I have never given much thought to is the wider implications for society. I buy the car I want or need at any given time.
As for Evo drivers, the kind of person who likes to make that kind of statement by driving something quite so in your face and just a tad Playstation generation, well ive always found show-offs to be rather irritating.
Id always defend peoples right to drive what they like, legally, but that wont stop one forming an opinion on the sort who makes those choices. I know a guy with an Evo an quite frankly it woul be doing our species a favour by having him neutered. I know one with an Impreza too with the whole 400 bhp etc. He was a berk an all.
|
I'm glad the two of you have both replied to that post - you're like mirror images of each other!
Alan - who gets to choose what the size limit is for a vehicle that makes driving it anti-social? Can you give me some dimensions so I make sure I don't go over it when we replace me wifes car? And, bearing in mind that the large 4x4 in many cases has no larger a footpring than a large estate, are people allowed to drive one of those? If your argument truly is 'lack of consideration for others' do I have to change my car? It's not the most economical, am I showing this lack of consideration by using more petrol than strictly necessary?
I agree entirely with you that Stus position is just as bad as yours - but every time you say that yourself, you then try to claim that yours is perfectly reasonable. Does that not suggest that Stus is too?
And Stu, you're continuing to assume your own potential reasons for owning a particular car. The hypothetical owner might hjave completely different reasons. Perhaps the fact that it is 'in your face' is a downside for him, but he puts up with it because Tommi Makinen was his childhood hero, and he's wanted to own one since then?
Perhaps the Lamborghini driver has Italian blood and has always dreamed of owning one. Lucky enough to have that opportunity, should he spurn it and buy a Lotus instead because you find it distasteful?
I'm arguing this point very light-heartedly. Everyone has their prejudices about particular cars. I certainly used to share Alans about 4x4s. And the Evo (not the Scooby for some reason) I used to actually like the idea of owning, before them became a lot more common and (irony alert!) the chav-wagon of choice. (See? I'm the guy who loved it's rally heritage, and the image was a down-side - just the down-side has become too large for me.)
It's just very amusing seeing you both point out the sheer wrongness of each others prejudice, while painting your own as reasonableness personified.
|
>> It's just very amusing seeing you both point out the sheer wrongness of each others
>> prejudice, while painting your own as reasonableness personified.
>>
Bazza, as I keep pointing out, I've no problem with stu's position. However, he has one with mine. I find that somewhat baffling. He's perfectly entitled to his thoughts on the matter, as I am mine. I take exception to his accusation to me of mindlessness whilst taking the same position with a different target. Please stop saying I'm trying to say his position is wrong. Like I said earlier, I don't really have an opinion either way on his objections.
I'm not going to describe my position on 4x4s in any greater detail here as I've done so before at great length, and it isn't the subject of this thread. I'm sorry I brought it up in fact, but couldn't resist it when I saw stu's original thoughts about performance cars.
|
>> should he spurn it and buy a Lotus instead because you find it distasteful?<<
No, I think its silly car and it doesnt make sense when there are more effective alternatives, but I have no problem with anyone owning one in the same way I have no problem with anyone owning a 4x4.
I have a middle aged female customer who had a string of TVRs to her name, which is at odds with the image Im sure even TVR wanted to portray.
I dont object to the cars, thats where you misunderstand my position chap. Im mearly pointing out that they are built for a purpose that they cannot be reasonably used for which has a reflection on the image of the car. I think the same thing about a Range Rover with big wheels that cannot reasonably transverse someones front lawn.
It seems all a bit vulgar to me BUT many people are happy to appear that way ( or infact think they are the coolest thing on the road ) and while ill have a giggle at their expense, I wouldnt wish to stop them as the world would be a duller place.
I do actually see Al's point, I just dont think its down to the owners, rather car makers who dont offer better alternatives - this is as someone who has had many discussions with customers who own such cars and why they bought them.
|
|
That being said a lot of drivers seem to live up the sterotype for the vehicle they drive
|
>>>a lot of drivers seem to live up the sterotype for the vehicle they drive.
Yep I'm trying hard to do so with my diesel Citroen Estate.
Last edited by: Fenlander on Tue 25 May 10 at 14:21
|
|
What, you've been eating more garlic and cheese ? Stuff like that ?
Last edited by: Humph D'bout on Tue 25 May 10 at 14:26
|
|
Well I was thinking more... refined but cheap to run.
|
Most cars are more than any one person needs, be it performance or off-road ability, granted.
I dont think that the particular classification of a car makes a blanket statement about it very clever. Every car is different so I judge by make and model.
I havent any time for a Lambo when you can buy a Lotus that is just as fast on normal roads but far more economical. It makes the Lambo rather reundant to me.
The difference with performance cars is simply that they are of no legal use being as fast as they are. If you drove them at the limit of their abilities you would struggle to keep within the law which makes their abilities rather useless in todays society. The thing about having a car so fast you cant use it in any sensible way is that you are suggesting that you need to over-compensate for something.
A 4x4 does have uses such as towing and off-roading which can be used to the full legally. I think that buying a 4x4 to use in town is quite silly HOWEVER I think the reasoning behind it is that MPVs which are surely the more practical choice for such a task, give any school-run mum the image of a baby-making machine - that is what I was told by someone who just swapped a 5-series estate for and X5. She said that nobody really makes a properly classy and luxurious MPV that doesnt look like a bus. I guess when you buy cars like that you wanna feel good about yourself.
The Merc R-Class is halfway there but when I suggested it I was told it was just too big. It seems that MPVs have an image problem and this is the root of 4x4s being bought it their place.
|
of course, it could be so blindingly simple as 4x4's being bought because people like them.
Other people like fast cars, big cars, sports cars, etc and it's their choice to buy what they want with their own money and they shouldn't be criticised for it.
If they choose something that they can't use the potential of, then so be it.
How many of you who criticise car choice have a house with more bedrooms than you need?
More toilets than you can sit on at once?
A large garden you never use or enjoy?
Live and let live:)
Pat
|
>> of course, it could be so blindingly simple as 4x4's being bought because people like
>> them.
>>
More likely that the Ad men have persuaded them that its the ideal car for them...
You know the thing, the advert with the open road... pretty girl in the front... and the car is ... an Astra!
|
I can sit here, hand on heart, and say that advert did nothing for me at all:)
Now the Yorkie ad from many years ago did have some bearing on my career change............!
Pat
|
>> Now the Yorkie ad from many years ago did have some bearing on my career
>> change............!
>>
>> Pat
>>
Pat, try this for bringing back memories
www2.tv-ark.org.uk/adverts/y.html
|
It was the 1976 one commerdriver and boy did that bring back memories:)
It took me around 20 years to have the opportunity to let a dishy bloke go past, in an open topped car at a set of lights, but it was worth it!!
Thanks for that:)
Pat
|
A new form of aggression - Armel Coussine
