Be happy... Be proud of the little things that put a smile on our faces time to time mate
Sorry for the long winded post , but it's all relevant to the OP's reasoning
There are plenty of so called "performance hot hatches" out there these days.. All compete for the coveted title of which one is the "fastest".
Ford, Renault, VW and Vauxhall amongst others are far to preoccupied with what each other is doing and end up as a result adding more and more power to chassis that were simply not designed to handle the stupid amounts that they claim to put out
Which begs the questions:
What defines a performance car these days?
More importantly, what is the quickest "point to point" car nowadays?
Point to point has always been the real world
measurement that the experts in the know define a real performance car and has honestly thrown up quite a few surprising results up over the decades......
Cars like The PUG 205 GTi 1.6. A car that was much quicker all round than it's 1.9GTi counterpart!
Who can forget the almighty egg box
aka the Lancia Delta Intergrale
... Sure Quattro's Subaru's and even Mitsubishi's, all had much better traction, power and 0-60's... But the Intergrale would chew them up for breakfast everytime on a countryside run...
It's all down to "usable power and torque"
what you can lay down, how often and when you have to lay off.
In my opinion, having had the priveleage to drive about 75% of the performance related marques on British roads over the past 20 years, I have many favourites & some I completely hated.
Some may think this as a biased comment... But after having "road tested"
quite a few over the years, why do I drive and own an Alfa?
It's because of all the above reasons...
The best all round car that I have ever driven point to point was a humble 156 2.0 TS
(don't laugh), nothing flash and standard... but it was well sorted.
Where other cars like Subaru Imprezza WRC/ Sti's would be twitchy or scrabble for grip and you would end up being a passenger holding on for grim life while fighting the car.
On identical roads and conditions the 2.0 TS would be planted and give incredible feedback and response exactly as and when you need it.
It gave me confidence in chucking it into a corner and knowing it would be balanced and poised enough so I did not have to correct for the next one.
After all that, you arrive back earlier than expected and wonder how the hell did you make up the extra time???
Combine that with fact it only had 150 Bhp, seated five adults in comfort and a big enough boot for two weeks shopping too and looks to die for as do all alfa's, that's a pretty awsome combination
The answer is simple... A chassis that is sorted and matched to the power output will always, always show a clean pair of heels point to point than a chassis that isn't
I would have another 2.0 TS tommorow... But i'm a sucker for the V6 growl
Your thoughs as this is an interesting subject?