Logical Induction... help my narrow mind understand this paradox

[rez333]

I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but maybe someone can help me here.

I practice logical induction. I think many people don't seem to have that ability based on the cars they end up buying.

Here's how my though process goes:

- People like cars with rear spoilers
- people like cars with bigger/wider rear tires
- people love throaty muscly exhaust sound
- people like cars with sporty brakes
- people like cars with sporty wheels

- Conclusion: buy a RWD/AWD sporty car.

However, most people buy FWD cars instead. I don't get it. The way they mod their cars, it's obvious that what they really wanted was a RWD/AWD sporty car like say the FR-S but instead they buy something like a Honda Civic or a Mitsubishi Eclipse.

Price is not an issue IMO because there are plenty of inexpensive RWD/AWD cars on the used market. The only thing I can think of is that FWD cars are cheaper to own for winter roads but if a person is modding a car to have a sporty look, one would think that "practicality" can be compromised for sportiness - just buy winter tires!!

Maybe the person just wants something to look sporty, but is good on gas and has Honda reliability? They're not interested in performance? That to me is like saying "I like to have a spoon, but I want it to function like a fork". If you're going to spend $5000 in visual mods to give your car the appearance of sport, you obviously love sports cars - then just buy one!!



Someone please educate me.



How much do you guys think this guy spent? It still looks like a cartoon Minivan and probably performs like one too. He could have bought a stock sports car for cheaper, it would have looked better, performed better and it would have been real. Second hand Boxsters can be had for $16k. This guy comes off as having a split personality - he so desperately wants a sports car, and yet he bought an econo car. I DON'T GET IT!!!

ps. I am posting this here because I suspect posting this on an econobox forum will get me lynched whereas I expect that I'll get more sympathy here.

[Scalded Dog]

One reason that so many buy front wheel drive cars is because it became very trendy a few years ago, and many drank the Kool-Aid that made them believe that FWD cars are "better." No real logic behind most of the argument there... "Oh, it's better to be pulled than to be pushed..." What? When the center of gravity shifts to the rear under hard acceleration? And is a completely moot point under conditions that do not include broken traction?

Or, "FWD is much better in the snow." Why? What? Any scientific--- or real world--- evidence to support that, other than because our Kool-Aid drinking parents always SAID it was so? (I've been driving in snow for 30 years, and have done it in countless types of vehicles.... give me RWD over FWD any day).

I'm just glad that we still get pushed in our Camaros, rather than pulled...

[drummer5679]

People like cars that are easy on their wallet and are reliable, and most econo boxes as of late tend to be fwd. The percentage of the population that does what you're describing is very small.

[LOWDOWN]

Consumers vote with their wallets. Small, affordable transportation, since about the mid-'80s, has largely been FWD. Buy it, pay for it, mod it. Used cars are purchased, as well, by young males who pay exorbitant insurance rates, leaving pennies to "play with" regarding their vehicles.

Under-25 Males therefore often drive econoboxes as daily drivers, and have some disposible income left to personalize their "wheels". The days of them gravitating to trucks are almost gone due to gas prices, and those who do drive trucks therefore have less disposible income to "customize". Witness the decline of "sport trucks" as a trend within "street machines", and the withering of magazines who cater to that (former) trend...

[Sir Nuke]

rez333.....the people you are talking about have these on their table at every dinner ..... need we say more?? nuff said......

[CamaroSkooter]

I'm going to assume you're only referring to the "racers" who show up to the drag strip, autocross, or road course to actually drive their vehicles in a performance manner, and not the everyday vehicles purchased by yuppies just to get them to work, or the grocery store, and back home again.

Generally speaking, front-wheel drive vehicles are less expensive than rear-wheel drive vehicles.

So, they spend less on the car up front and then hope they can make the car faster with as many bolt-ons as possible.

I imagine a large percentage of these folks don't really have any idea what they should buy in the first place, so they just go by what they see in movies or what they see their friends driving.

Or, they got the vehicle as a gift from their parents and are not financially capable of going out and trading their FWD car in for what they really ought to be driving to get the most out of whatever course they're trying to race on.

I imagine economics and ignorance are the two largest contributors to this phenomenon.

[Berean]

It's a paradox. Paradox.

[Caitlin&Caroline]

I think people buy cars for a wide and strange range of reasons.

I have had a FWD, an AWD, and a RWD vehicle. Never did any of these make my list of reasons:

- People like cars with rear spoilers
- people like cars with bigger/wider rear tires
- people love throaty muscly exhaust sound
- people like cars with sporty brakes
- people like cars with sporty wheels

FWD purchase was based on price and condition, AWD on cargo space and road handling in inclement weather, and RWD on looks and fun-to-driveness. All purchases required reliability.

Many of my co-workers still scratch their heads as to why I own both a blue station wagon and a bright orange V8.

The world may never know why.

[Atlas]

FF layouts offer a driving characteristic that is more forgiving to novice drivers but at the same time more difficult to master. since they are prone to understeer, over inputs into steering do not upset the balance the car as much as an FR platform or AWD. The allure of FF is prominently held with lighter platforms such as Hondas EG6 and Toyotas AE92 and EP Starlets. FR is the standard, and acts as a barometer with regards to other platforms. To say one or two is better than the other is to feign practical knowledge of these layouts. Not too mention midship FR and MR, or even Porsches RR.

In summation, to answer your question, the driver of that Fit, the one putting in seat time, the guy who refuses to let his handicap be his platform layout, the helmet who sees the seconds tick off while we're all here stricking keys and complaining about what other people say and do, the absolute last thing he's thinking about, is why the hell would he give two fingers about what you think he should have bought, when he's turning faster laps in his gaudy wingtastic front engine front drive automobile.

drivers shouldn't limit themselves to ordained platforms. Its then when we become less of an enthusiast and more of a snob.

[CamaroSkooter]

But if he put that money into a "better" car, he would be turning faster laps

[Atlas]

damn it skooter, I was trying to be all serious and Zen like for a second

But yes, your correct. There are advantages to certain platforms. What I was trying to say, albeit very lengthy, was that some drivers prefer the handling characteristics and the challenge of an FF platform. Its all dependent on driving style. Keep in mind, this hardly applies to ricers and bad guy street racers types

[rez333]

Originally Posted by Atlas

In summation, to answer your question, the driver of that Fit, the one putting in seat time, the guy who refuses to let his handicap be his platform layout, the helmet who sees the seconds tick off while we're all here stricking keys and complaining about what other people say and do, the absolute last thing he's thinking about, is why the hell would he give two fingers about what you think he should have bought, when he's turning faster laps in his gaudy wingtastic front engine front drive automobile.

drivers shouldn't limit themselves to ordained platforms. Its then when we become less of an enthusiast and more of a snob.

Have you finished your "missed the point" pontification?

This thread is discussing people who dress their cars up with an obvious preference for rear wheel drive and racing. If you prefer RWD and racing, then buy a RWD sports car. The thread was discussing why people can't make this simple logical conclusion based on their conspicuous preferences.

As for "turning faster laps", he's not. Give me a friggin break. Have you actually done open track? No FWD car comes close to doing a decent lap time against proper sports cars. Even auto-x is dominated by the S2000s and Miatas; the small FWD do okay but they don't win (that I've seen) and they only do well because of the small wheel base.

Your entire feeble self-righteous argument is essentially saying something like "soldiers shouldn't limit themselves to the weapons they have, whether it's a knife or an assault rifle. It's then when they become less of a soldier and more of a snob". Ehh... no. It's then when they become dead. Equip your soldiers with the best equipment. Self-employed mercenaries don't run around ill-equipped with the worst equipment. But I suppose in your view, soldiers are just more snobby than drivers.



The driver of the fit is an idiot. His "handicap" as you put it was self-imposed. That's the point.

It's one thing for a kid to take momma's car and play make-believe racing, it's another thing when a working adult goes and chooses to buy a non-race car and use it for racing or appear like it's a race-car.

[CamaroSkooter]

I just want to say, that's a horrible analogy

[rez333]

It's a brilliant analogy. If you're given a choice, you choose the right weapon for a job. Ever heard "don't bring a knife to a gun fight"? If you're going to participate in racing, or pretend that you will, drive a car that's biased for racing.

You can't get a more directly comparable analogy, especially when there's a proverb about it.