When did "peak car" occur?

[Plugger2]

In my opinion, "peak car" was circa 1990 -- up to that point, most technological advances were still focused on the driver experience, rather than the subsequent shift to efficiency and safety.

Electronic fuel injection -- cool. ABS --- cool. ABS was just starting to become common in the late '80s.

The related question is, of course, "when did peak Porsche occur?"

For my money, the peak 911 was the 964, and the peak 944 was the 944 S2 and late Turbo.

993s and 968s I'm slightly less fond of, a bit of "over-egging of the pudding" in both cases, so while we are still near the peak, in my view it had already passed by 1993. Later on, we get the Boxster 986 and the 911 996. And 'nuf said about that.

Also consider: In 1992 the BMW e30 gave way to the e36. And look at the prices now of the e30 325i compared to the e36 325i.

Now, I'm not saying that *no* worthy cars have been built since 1990. But I also note that three of four cars I own were all built within a few months of each other in 1989. Which is what got me thinking -- why is that?

So: When was "peak car" for you? Or do you think it is still to come (perhaps even in the form of "driverless cars".)

 

[quasio]

What about GT3s?

[MB911]

The 993 Turbo was a nice piece of kit.

[Carrera28]

Porsche 996 GT3 series 1

[JWM]

Like everything I think this goes in cycles. Peak, trough, peak trough... I reckon we might be in a peak at the moment.

[hugh]

Porsche 996 GT3 series 1

^^^ Can't disagree with that!

996.1 GT3 is definitely the yardstick in terms of water cooled, they are what the 73RS is to air cooled 911's - all early cars are always compared to it in some way. 

Like everything I think this goes in cycles. Peak, trough, peak trough... I reckon we might be in a peak at the moment.

I'd argue that the current 991 isn't a peak model, or at least I don't believe it will endure as one. 

[Coastr]

Mid 90s where the platform was evolved from something started earlier.  Latest tech for engine and brakes, but without the bloat New cars have.

For Porsche that is the 993 and 928 gts.  Pity there was no turbo 968.

90s BMWs were better than prior - higher output engines but still low on gizmos.

No question that jap cars peaked in early - mid 90s.

[Carrera28]

Roadsters: 1989 with the release of the first MX5

SUV: 1990 with the release of the J80 Landcruiser

Japanese sports cars: 1995 with the release of the DC2 Integra Type R  

Utility vehicles: 1988 with the fifth generation HiLux

Hot hatches: 1994 when the Peugeot 205 GTI was discontinued

Porsche: 1999 with the GT3.1

Ferrari: 2004 with manual 430

Lamborghini: 1993 with the Diablo VT

[cyberpunky]

In my opinion, "peak car" was circa 1990 -- up to that point, most technological advances were still focused on the driver experience, rather than the subsequent shift to efficiency and safety.

Electronic fuel injection -- cool. ABS --- cool. ABS was just starting to become common in the late '80s.

The related question is, of course, "when did peak Porsche occur?"

For my money, the peak 911 was the 964, and the peak 944 was the 944 S2 and late Turbo

 

This is where you lost me. Peak for driver experience for the 944 was the 86  turbo. No ABS. No airbags. Manual only.

87 we see twin airbags and ABS. The beginning of the end. Nanny state. Safety over driver experience. ABS is cool for ppl who can't brake and therefore can't drive. Airbags are cool for those planing to crash. Personally I don't want high explosive devices that can kill me sitting in front of my face, and I definitely don't want 30 year old explosive devices there even more. There is strong evidence airbags do more harm than there claimed good, when the statistics are examined. Why airbags are not the messiah

I agree with 964 but would also suggest the 930 is really the peak. When a car earns the nickname the widow maker well that makes me want to experience it just a little more

 

[Plugger2]

87 we see twin airbags and ABS.

Que? My S2 has ABS, but definitely no airbags.

ABS wasn't offered before 1989 as an option. 1990 it became standard equipment for both S2 and Turbo.

 ABS is cool for ppl who can't brake and therefore can't drive.

Oh please. The only ppl I've ever heard claim that they can brake as well an ABS equipped car on a wet surface are wankers who seriously have no idea what they are talking about.

[ANF]

Mid 90s where the platform was evolved from something started earlier.  Latest tech for engine and brakes, but without the bloat New cars have.

For Porsche that is the 993 and 928 gts.  Pity there was no turbo 968.

90s BMWs were better than prior - higher output engines but still low on gizmos.

No question that jap cars peaked in early - mid 90s.

But there was a 968 turbo. Admittedly they did not make many, only 16 (227kW and 500Nm)..... they also made 4 Turbo RS models for racing...

Plus Peter Fitzgerald was given permission to create 4 x Turbo RS Race/ road versions in Australia which apparently cost $225k each to build (between 92 and 96)!!

Agree with the 928 GTS - actually any 928 would fill that bill for me. As for the peak Porsche it would be the 959 (I know this may be a very much technological car, but a high point for me for Porsche) or Carrera GT  - for non Porsche it would be the 90s for me.

[tazzieman]

If we are talking lack of gizmos and pure unadulterated driving jollies in a road legal car , did it get much better than the 904 ?

[ANF]

If we are talking lack of gizmos and pure unadulterated driving jollies in a road legal car , did it get much better than the 904 ?

or 906, 908, 910, etc.....

Your w108 is up there  only power assisted brakes.

 

[tazzieman]

or 906, 908, 910, etc.....

Well yes , not a lot of those made in street legal trim! The 580kg 906 would be just perfect. Not so much in the mainland heat though.

 

[cyberpunky]

Que? My S2 has ABS, but definitely no airbags.

ABS wasn't offered before 1989 as an option. 1990 it became standard equipment for both S2 and Turbo.

Oh please. The only ppl I've ever heard claim that they can brake as well an ABS equipped car on a wet surface are wankers who seriously have no idea what they are talking about.

"The 87 was the first car in the world with dual airbags standard(North American market)" source wiki.

We never got the 87 here. The 88 also got ABS in most markets, hence why the offset change on wheels. 23mm on 86 to 52mm on 88 onwards. So 86 was last pre Nanny state car.

Why are you driving fast on a wet surface ??? My point wasn't that I could brake better than ABS, it was that knowing when to brake and how, for the conditions at hand and in any car, means you have no need for ABS, so ease up on the wanker talk. Your the one who was talking up pre safety and efficiency over driver experience, and in the very next sentence you state ABS is cool. Which is it ? If you need ABS for driver experience, then you either don't know your car, don't know how to drive to the conditions or can't drive/brake.

ABS actually increases braking distances on gravel, sand and other surfaces. Not cool IMO

 

[K911]

Surely 1992 was the peak with the Mclaren F1.

[SimonN]

"The 87 was the first car in the world with dual airbags standard(North American market)" source wiki.

We never got the 87 here. The 88 also got ABS in most markets, hence why the offset change on wheels. 23mm on 86 to 52mm on 88 onwards. So 86 was last pre Nanny state car.

Why are you driving fast on a wet surface ??? My point wasn't that I could brake better than ABS, it was that knowing when to brake and how, for the conditions at hand and in any car, means you have no need for ABS, so ease up on the wanker talk. Your the one who was talking up pre safety and efficiency over driver experience, and in the very next sentence you state ABS is cool. Which is it ? If you need ABS for driver experience, then you either don't know your car, don't know how to drive to the conditions or can't drive/brake.

ABS actually increases braking distances on gravel, sand and other surfaces. Not cool IMO

 

Your views on ABS are rather idealistic. It doesn't matter how good a driver you are, on tarmac surfaces you are better off with ABS than without it. Nobody is so good that they can spot changes in road surface conditions which would lead to needing ABS, such as surface contaminates. You also fail to take into account the action of other road users. I hope you are never driving down the road at a very safe and responsible speed without ABS when somebody (a kid?) steps out in front of you and you hit them because you cannot brake as well as with ABS. It might not have been your fault and you might have been driving perfectly for the conditions but that kid would still be dead when with ABS they might not be. I suggest that arguing against ABS because you don't need it shows a certain lack of foresight as to what others might do on the road

As for your comments on gravel, sand and other surfaces, how often do you drive you Porsche on those surfaces? And when you do, are you driving at speed? IMO, the only condition when I wish i could turn off ABS is when there is snow, because locking the wheels is the fastest way of stopping, that is when surface condition are hardest to anticipate and you can slide at very low speeds. It's very hard to argue against ABS and while I make a conscious decision to own a car with no "nanny" style aids, i acknowledge that it is less safe than a car with ABS.

[tazzieman]

while I make a conscious decision to own a car with no "nanny" style aids, i acknowledge that it is less safe than a car with ABS.

You possibly wouldn't like my '73 Land Rover or my mates '25 2 tonne Silver Ghost with rear drum brakes only? He won't even change gears going downhill in case it doesn't engage as the brakes are , well , rudimentary. Ah the good ol days , when people drove slowly and didn't risk others lives by texting and overtaking 

[sandy468]

Your views on ABS are rather idealistic. It doesn't matter how good a driver you are, on tarmac surfaces you are better off with ABS than without it. Nobody is so good that they can spot changes in road surface conditions which would lead to needing ABS, such as surface contaminates. You also fail to take into account the action of other road users. I hope you are never driving down the road at a very safe and responsible speed without ABS when somebody (a kid?) steps out in front of you and you hit them because you cannot brake as well as with ABS. It might not have been your fault and you might have been driving perfectly for the conditions but that kid would still be dead when with ABS they might not be. I suggest that arguing against ABS because you don't need it shows a certain lack of foresight as to what others might do on the road

As for your comments on gravel, sand and other surfaces, how often do you drive you Porsche on those surfaces? And when you do, are you driving at speed? IMO, the only condition when I wish i could turn off ABS is when there is snow, because locking the wheels is the fastest way of stopping, that is when surface condition are hardest to anticipate and you can slide at very low speeds. It's very hard to argue against ABS and while I make a conscious decision to own a car with no "nanny" style aids, i acknowledge that it is less safe than a car with ABS.

Simon you've managed to reply to all your own statements and questions over your two paragraphs with your last sentence .... a sentence which is pretty much in line with Cyberpunk's statements and choice! And how often do you drive the hotrod on snow? It aint the motherland here..

[tazzieman]

And how often do you drive the hotrod on snow?

Cmon we're all heroes here!

 

[Redracn]

 

ABS actually increases braking distances on gravel, sand and other surfaces. Not cool IMO

 

Early examples and some from the lesser car companies yes but these days the above statement is incorrect for state of the art ABS system. It should also be remembered that non competition ABS is programmed to maintain steering over absolute shortest braking.

How does braking on rough surfaces compare?

I would also disagree that if you drive to the conditions you will never be caught out. I have instances of the car loosing grip at only 0.4G due to a small non visible slippery spot then reaching 1G while sliding which was the grip generally available in the conditions.

We all know of course that to stop in the shortest distance in an emergency the time taken to reach full braking capability is critical. This is easy with ABS just jump on it as hard as you can as quick as you can. With manual brakes you need to creep up on the limit as it varys by the minute so you waste a lot of distance trying to find max braking. On a track of course you can practice to find the limit but on the track you will not be jumping on the brakes as fast as possible. 

On a lot of modern cars if you get off the throttle and touch the brake as fast as possible the car will emergency brake for you even though you are not pushing hard on the pedal.

[cyberpunky]

Your views on ABS are rather idealistic. It doesn't matter how good a driver you are, on tarmac surfaces you are better off with ABS than without it. Nobody is so good that they can spot changes in road surface conditions which would lead to needing ABS, such as surface contaminates. You also fail to take into account the action of other road users. I hope you are never driving down the road at a very safe and responsible speed without ABS when somebody (a kid?) steps out in front of you and you hit them because you cannot brake as well as with ABS. It might not have been your fault and you might have been driving perfectly for the conditions but that kid would still be dead when with ABS they might not be. I suggest that arguing against ABS because you don't need it shows a certain lack of foresight as to what others might do on the road

As for your comments on gravel, sand and other surfaces, how often do you drive you Porsche on those surfaces? And when you do, are you driving at speed? IMO, the only condition when I wish i could turn off ABS is when there is snow, because locking the wheels is the fastest way of stopping, that is when surface condition are hardest to anticipate and you can slide at very low speeds. It's very hard to argue against ABS and while I make a conscious decision to own a car with no "nanny" style aids, i acknowledge that it is less safe than a car with ABS.

So you agree ABS is nanny state and a safety item ? As this discussion was started on the premise of peak driver car before safety and efficiency took over, I felt that the OP was in direct contradiction with that premise stating ABS is cool. It is a safety item. By throwing the "what if a kid ran out" and ABS made the difference point isn't really fair as, what if you had ABS but poor tyres or poor shocks which would both also increase stopping distance and end up with a dead child too ? We can all introduce emotive arguments but sticking with the issue, you are basically saying you think you need ABS because safety, but choose not to because driving experience. Need I say more ? Are all of us "non ABS car drivers" just baby killers waiting to happen ? What was the point of this topic if not to discuss pre nanny state cars ? Did I miss something about the original premise ?

Personally I think it is every drivers responsibility to drive to the conditions and be responsible for their actions. As an ex-motorcyclist who has suffered the serious consequences of poor drivers, I know that flesh and metal don't mix, but to be thrown in with the general poor standards of many drivers who can't drive, are texting or facebooking etc while driving, because I am on the same roads and told what I need to be safe, doesn't sit well with me. If you need ABS and air bags, that is fine, but you can pry the keys of my non nanny state car out of my cold dead hands, as I am never giving it up.

Now who wants to discuss auto emergency braking, autonomous driving etc lol ???

 

NB at a track day, my professional racing driver guide complimented my braking when after 3 attempts I still hadn't kicked in ABS while stopping on a dime and insisted I stomp the brake on 4th go, so I could kick in ABS. I didn't stop in a shorter distance with ABS btw

[Redracn]

 

NB at a track day, my professional racing driver guide complimented my braking when after 3 attempts I still hadn't kicked in ABS while stopping on a dime and insisted I stomp the brake on 4th go, so I could kick in ABS. I didn't stop in a shorter distance with ABS btw

Did your professional driver teach you about car dynamics especially weight transfer to the front of the car and the dynamic transition from rolling to full braking? I assume he did so you would be aware that manual brakes only work at their optimum at a certain grip level and at a certain vehicle load. Some race cars have a brake balance adjustment to set this optimum level for the specific conditions but road cars do not. So in all other conditions manual brakes are sub optimal and are never optimal in the transisition period from no braking to full braking. ABS on the otherhand goes very close to maximizing the capabilities of all 4 wheels in the vast majority of conditions we encounter everyday. On manual braked road cars the rear brakes a way underutilized by design to stop the rears locking under any circumstances. Better to hit something head on than slide into it sideways.

Do you actually have data to show that a typical modern car in sub optimal conditions can stop in a shorter distance without ABS with a pro driver? Or is it just something from the early days of 2channel ABS systems that keeps on being regurgitated 30 years on. 

Time has marched on and modern cars will outbrake older cars even on the same tyres. 

 

[sandy468]

Re original post .... Gotta be a 964 Turbo S or a 964 Carrera 3.8 RS, depending the feel that floats ya boat ... 993 turbo S comes in a close 1st 2nd or 3rd

[cyberpunky]

Did your professional driver teach you about car dynamics especially weight transfer to the front of the car and the dynamic transition from rolling to full braking? I assume he did so you would be aware that manual brakes only work at their optimum at a certain grip level and at a certain vehicle load. Some race cars have a brake balance adjustment to set this optimum level for the specific conditions but road cars do not. So in all other conditions manual brakes are sub optimal and are never optimal in the transisition period from no braking to full braking. ABS on the otherhand goes very close to maximizing the capabilities of all 4 wheels in the vast majority of conditions we encounter everyday. On manual braked road cars the rear brakes a way underutilized by design to stop the rears locking under any circumstances. Better to hit something head on than slide into it sideways.

Do you actually have data to show that a typical modern car in sub optimal conditions can stop in a shorter distance without ABS with a pro driver? Or is it just something from the early days of 2channel ABS systems that keeps on being regurgitated 30 years on. 

Time has marched on and modern cars will outbrake older cars even on the same tyres. 

 

Optimum braking performance occurs before ABS kicks in. If your ABS kicks in you have exceeded the adhesion limits of your tyres. This is a fact regardless of ABS era. It's actually basic physics.

The Porsche 88 944 turbo S has a stopping distance of 133ft from 60mph to 0(source Road and Track June 88). The 2011 911 turbo S has a stopping distance of 130 ft(source Motor Magazine Aust). Yes 3 ft better in 23 years. How do you like that data ? Saying time has marched on and modern cars will out brake older cars is a very anecdotal and generalised and 5 minutes on the net proves it is just not true. How many modern ABS equipped cars can stop from 60 MPH to 0 in 133 feet ?

BTW my pro racing driver was actually a female. The first thing she said to me on a hot lap was have you raced go karts. I replied yes how do you know, and she said she could tell. She then asked me if I rode motorbikes. I answered yes. She taught me a lot and I have huge respect for her abilities. As an ex-motorcyclist, I also have huge respect for wet roads, as any sensible bike rider does and find the majority of ppl on the road today are terrible drivers in the wet and don't allow anywhere near enough distance. These ppl need ABS.