Okay, thanks. I am hoping that prices have about bottomed.

Sorry all for taking the thread off topic.

 

The "soul" thing is very important to me in a car (I also prefer a manual 'box to any paddle system by a HUGE margin in a road car, from a driving enjoyment perspective). Cars that just do great numbers but lack "feel" or soul do not appeal to me (I respect them, but I have little desire to own them). I'd read the magazine comments from those who accused the McLaren of lacking soul.

Then I drove one. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it was absolutely fantastic, the performance and handling just extraordinary. But here's the thing... I didn't think it lacked soul. IMO, the car communicated with the driver very well, and -- I think this is a VERY important characteristic in a road car -- the steering had very good feel.

I still think the car is almost too fast for the road, because it begs to be pushed hard, and the speeds that results in are crazy fast. But I didn't think it lacked soul at all. Fantastic car.

 

The word 'soul' doesn't mean a damned thing in any two individual perspectives. It is different for EVERY PERSON and therefore irrelevant. Soul is a term that people refer to when analyzing their own personal physiological responses to a given input (whether looking at while parked, giving it throttle while sitting still, taking a high speed corner, perhaps the communicative steering inputs providing effortless movement, or predictability, etc...). Because everyone is physiologically unique, the term should never be used to describe a car - to someone else. Because you and I may have different internal meanings of the word, one person will say it does, and others will say it doesn't. This usually sparks a conversation that is pointless to carry out, because both sides are right, and neither sees the other's perspective, because the word being used has 7 billion meanings.

I'm not trying to discount your opinion, and I think we all (as a car enthusiast community) understand what you're trying to say. Thanks for your post!

 

The term "soul" is used because the feeling people get is hard to put into words. Generally speaking, they are referring to an emotional connection to the car as if it's more than just a hunk of metal. While I agree that it can mean different things to different people, it's hardly "irrelevant." In fact, it may be one of the most important aspects of the car-driver relationship because it has to do with how the driver connects with the car on a visceral level.

 

I disagree. Again, because everybody perceives things in their own way, one cannot quantify definitively what soul is or isn't. Unless, you believe that everybody connects to a car the same way, drives the same way, sits in the seat the same way, sees everything the same, hears everything the same, applies the same amount of pressure at the same force and velocity, and experiences everything everybody else does, then sure. But then we'd all like the same car. A car can have features that group certain people together, and they might have a SIMILAR (but not exact) definition of what soul is

Soul is - I like when the car does 'x'. Or I like when I apply throttle, the sound is 'y'. I like when I move a stick and I feel clunk in my butt, and am able tap the throttle just right, or whatever.

It's a way of saying - I like this car because it does things I like, but I can't explain them.

 

No need to knock it just because you can't feel it.

 

Exactly!

 

Arguing about terms like soul in a car is like the high end stereo guys arguing about sound field, attack and decay and yin and yang in their stereos. People like different things and there is no point in arguing about semantics. I have tried both the Mclaren and the 458 and I bought the 458. I like it better. Each car has its positives and negatives as there is no perfect car for all occasions. This is all just bench racing as far as one being faster than the other. It doesn't matter as each side will always up the ante with the next car. I will trade my 458 for the spider and since Mclaren doesn't have a spider yet its a mute point for me as to which is best. The spider beats them both for overall use and enjoyment.

 

Sorry... Years of growing up with an English major for a mother.

 

Haha, that bothered me too.

 

So what factors made you choose the 458 over the 12C? Thx.

 

You are correct. I thought it was funny but, no matter.

I like the styling of the 458 better.
I like the interior much better.
Power, brakes and suspension about the same. Ferrari wins the exhaust sound hands down.
Simplistic answer but, I get asked the question a lot and have boiled it down to the above to save time. I would also like to point out that I could care less if the Mclaren or the Ferrari is faster by a tenth or two. If that is how I based my buying decisions I wouldn't have my Astons as they certainly don't register in the performance for the buck category.
Its the overall package that counts.

 

Ferrari wins in the exhaust note department but the McLaren wins with cooler doors

 

I mentioned earlier that a prominent F1 driver recently chose a manual transmission for his road car. Just was reminded that the driver is Lewis Hamilton and the car is the latest iteration of the Zonda (with a few one-off mods).

 

Ok, that's 1 traitor then lol j/k; I would hazard a guess that he's in the minority.

Paganis don't even have dual-clutch, not even the Huayra, maybe that was a factor in going for the MT, who knows. I'd rather go for spd vs the retro-way of shifting. To each their own.