Ponies and Cars

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

No, that does not include the Ford Mustang, you guys. Just letting you know.
 
I'm no theorist, but today, we're gonna come up with two interesting comparisons between ponies and vehicles. Sorry, no planes, helicopters or boats there, in case you're wondering. Same goes for bikes, no offense (I'm not a big bike fan myself). 
 
Here is a pony:
 

 
And here is a car:
 

 
Now then, let's get started with comparisons, shall we?
 
We look at both ponies and cars, both having similar, but different, traits. For example: Ponies have hooves, cars have wheels; ponies have eyes, cars have headlights (and taillights as well, including reverse lights); ponies have mouths, cars have bumper faces (which comes close to mouths). There are, however, different comparisons when it comes to those two types between ponies and cars:
 
Ponies have free will and have their own emotions. Cars, on the other hand, do not possess any emotions, nor do they have free will as they are mostly controlled by human beings. While there are, of course, driverless cars, this is not always the case as they're not only under current development, it also takes years to perfect them. While the majority of cars cannot fly like many pegasi ponies would, there are some such as the famous DeLorean DMC-12 from Back to the Future, where it was well known as a hover car from the 1980s.
 
While cars contain headlights for eyes that benefits increased visibility though the darkness, there are ponies who can see in the dark like Princess Luna and the batponies due to their nocturnal nature, including Twilight Sparkle's pet, Owloysius. However, ponies can easily grab objects with their forehooves, or magic for unicorn ponies, while cars cannot; their wheels would wind up flattening objects instead of grabbing it due to their lack of flexibility, apart from their suspensions, but they can store objects inside... of course, as long as you don't keep it inside, as it would gradually lose its quality the more unwanted objects remain stationary inside a vehicle.
 
For underwater seaponies from G2 (I think?) MLP, you'd have the Rinspeed sQuba, an amphibious vehicle that can traverse both on land and underwater. Many ponies can talk, but not vehicles; most late-model cars have voice commands for GPS usage, but overall, cars themselves do not express any emotions whatsoever (I'm not talking about the movie Cars, mind you ) let alone express feelings.
 
Just like how ponies can eat any types of meals, not just hay, cars themselves have their own "meal", mainly gasoline, ranging from simply regular, premium and dieselio-diesel fuels to algae fuel for economic purposes; and for electric and hybrid powered vehicles, a solar-powered electric charger. Also, depending on noise levels, ponies themselves have very little noise, although they highly depend on the events, such as the changeling invasion of Canterlot from the two-part episode, A Canterlot Wedding, plunderseeds overwhelming Ponyville and a flashback which consists of the school being abandoned and dilapidated and apples rotting away overtime from the lack of harvest, which would have eventually spiraled into chaos from the episode Hearts and Hooves Day. Cars, on the other hand, vary greatly; hybrid/electric cars generate very little noise, but can be rather dangerous, especially for people with poor hearing and lowered senses, whereas non-hybrid/electric cars have a lot of noise, depending on traffic, which can also create noise pollution if there were too many vehicles at once (as China PR is famous for having WAY too many vehicles and making safe breathing rather dangerous due to the overall poor air quality from the constant noise pollution).
 
For ponies, they contain coats and manes, whereas vehicles are purely metal with billions of paint coated around its bodywork, and its interior has a wide variety of features, such as the tachometer, speedometer, a steering wheel, a transmission stick (be it manual, automatic, or semi-automatic for vehicles with paddle shifters), emergency brake lever, car seats (includes driver seat, passenger seat and the backseat, including additional seats for minivans or crossover SUVs), etc., each with different styles and colors.
 
Now, how will both cars and ponies survive even the most grueling injuries, or in vehicles' cases, crashes, such as scratches and bruises that leaves wounds, you ask? For cars, however, their "injuries" cannot be healed after receiving paint scrapes, bodywork damage, and broken windshield, unless it is taken to a repair shop to be fully restored to its former glory. If the car would sustain too much damage, however, it would become rendered useless, making repairs inevitable, which would count as "totaled", equivalent to "death". Even high-performance racing cars, including high-performance supercars, (similar to athletic ponies), they can still suffer damage due to mechanical problems that would prevent it from continuing to race, or drive, until it is taken for repairs. The same applies for Formula 1 cars, as its exposed wheels makes it highly suspectible to damage from even the slightest contact at well over 150-200 MPH. There are many safety features, even though it will still injure its driver, to ensure the survival for its occupant, whereas the car itself will not survive from a severe accident.
 
In case you are wondering how cars can sing, well... they don't. Radios and MP3s are featured to enable music, so unless they can sing like SAM would, they pretty much don't in my humble opinion. I'd be surprised if any auto manufacturer would design a vehicle that can allow it to sing, but who knows when, though. 
 
Like us humans, ponies usually bathe for hygiene, while cars receive the same, but similar treatment, such as a car wash, to keep its appearances pristine as possible. Speaking of, ponies can handle any kinds of rugged terrain, save for hot and scorching terrains, which certain vehicles such as compact cars and sports cars can only handle asphalt terrains, as its off-roading capabilities are poor at its best, unless they have 4WD capabilities, such as the Subaru Impreza WRX STi, as it was famous for WRC races. SUVs and Pick-up trucks, on the other hand, can handle rugged terrains reasonably well, as long as they are handled carefully. Most off-road vehicles that have been modified for off-road racing can handle perfectly well, but the latter still applies for racing cars in terms of mechanical problems.
 
Ponies' hooves can become sore over time from galloping for countless of hours, or if stepping onto a pointy object that can painfully harm them (or in pegasi's cases, their wings would tire out after prolonged flight and for unicorn ponies, their magic would wear off the more they use it, especially with advanced spells), while vehicles' tires can wear out over time due to friction along the asphalt roads, depending on how long it is driven, or if it is punctured by a piercing object that would render it undrivable without spare tires to fit in. For ponies, however, their sore hooves can easily recover for several minutes, or a handful of hours, depending on how long they can fully recover before going back to their daily basis.
 
How can ponies handle? They handle well as long as they are tame, but for cars, they handle differently. Take the Bugatti Veyron, a hypercar that has over 1000 HP and is highly unpredictable when first driving it, even with 4WD capability. It can result in a spin-out if mishandling the vehicle, especially at a high rate of speed, just like how a pony would stumble and fall off from losing their balance.
 
Again, I'm not a. expert theorist myself, nor am I perfect of making comparisons, but that's all I have put every bit of detail between pony and machine with wheels, but if you're wondering about NOS for modified vehicles, while they can break the sound barrier, they also increase fuel consumption and increases the risk of rupturing the tanks if overusing it, just like when Rainbow Dash tries to perform two Sonic Rainbooms in one segment. 
 
With that done, I hope you guys liked it! Tell me what you think about the comparisons I have made up. 

Edited February 26, 2014 by Jon the Bronynerd

[Wind Chaser 4,767]

Interesting comparison. The most basic similarity between ponies and cars is that they are both forms of transportation, but as you showed, it goes much beyond that and might just show why the fandom has a fascination with showing ponies and cars together (aside from it just looking cool). I thought of this once and thought that if you took any of the stories from MLP and changed a few words in them, you can basically turn a world full of ponies and magic into one of machines and sufficiently advanced technology. Being a gearhead like that, I tend to think that way of MLP a lot and amuse myself in the process.

 

However, I think it's a bit hard to compare cars in real life to ponies in MLP, I would much prefer to think of the possibilities of such a machine in a fictional context for the sake of this comparison.

Edited February 26, 2014 by pegasusexpress2010

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

Thanks! I added another details I missed out regarding on how ponies and cars handle.

[jackleapp81 456]

This was an awesome read. Kind of a stretch, but the way you made the comparison between certain cars and ponies was remarkably creative and original. Thanks for sharing!

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

This was an awesome read. Kind of a stretch, but the way you made the comparison between certain cars and ponies was remarkably creative and original. Thanks for sharing!

 

You're welcome! It's why I got into Gran Turismo back in the day.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Jon the Bronynerd

[Scootalove 10,684]

What a good read, I've always wanted to compare ponies to cars in terms of transportation.

[TheChosenPony 279]

Jesus christ thats alot of words mate.....

 

Remember, dont read more than you can comprehend now, TheChosenPony

[Sholem Itzhak 84]

As of when I posted this, I didn't read all the comparisons; but here's some examples of what happens when you put Ponies and Cars together:

 

-http://pancake-ss.deviantart.com/art/Apple-Family-as-Cars-347370391

 

-http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/437/657/a50.png

 

-http://misssensitiveness48.deviantart.com/art/Ponified-Luigi-340412932

[Chevette 1,052]

I don't know, but it seems to me as a decent portion of this is a redundancy or a "given". As for some of the comparisons, it seems like you kinda flip-flopped around from what you were going for in the whole explanation of your theory there. What do I mean? Well, I'll try my best to explain.

 

You mentioned vehicles such as the DeLorean from the film Back to the Future, the Rinspeed sQuba, & the Bugatti Veyron. All fine and well if ya wouldn't have tossed the DeLorean in there. What I'm sayin' is you are comparing ponies to cars right? Well, without the movie, the Delorean couldn't have flown under it's own power. Sure that is really the only "true" oddball, but I feel the others don't exactly fit in either. If you were to go out on the limb and mention the Delorean, there wouldn't be any reason why other fiction vehicles could have been mentioned as well let alone modified vehicles. Many modified vehicles have been made out to out-preform the vehicles listed etc, etc.

 

As for the Bugatti, sure it's a fancy-dancy all wheel drive quad-turbo'd supercar, but in the comparison I'd say there are many other vehicles that are highly unpredictable when driving. 

I guess what I'm getting at is ya toss in a fiction vehicle from a movie to prove the theory in one paragraph and then scoot on back to vehicles that actually exist and preform in the real world. It seems like a bit of a inconsistency in what you are trying to get across. Just like the part where ya say "vehicles have no emotions" I mean yeah compared to people, I guess they don't. But if you get to use the DeLorean as a example why not other fiction vehicles from films that did have emotions. Hell, we did have Herbie...

 

I'm not trying to get on your case or call this whole thing goofy or anything, I'm just tossing down what I think just like you did.

 

Vehicles can be compared to many things, they are pretty amazing especially when it comes to the technology that goes in to them. But it'd be around the same if you compared ponies to humans or something. Everything has points of performance, vulnerability, style etc, ect.

I mean it's really one six half dozen of another on how one goes about the comparison. I'd see much more validity in comparing the ponies to vehicles that are available for purchase such as the STI you mentioned. 

 

But yeah, for the most part I saw what you were going for in the original post and the examples that were given did do the job of the "comparison" per say I just personally think the choices for the comparisons could have been chosen differently.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Chevette

[Jon the VGNerd 842]

I don't know, but it seems to me as a decent portion of this is a redundancy or a "given". As for some of the comparisons, it seems like you kinda flip-flopped around from what you were going for in the whole explanation of your theory there. What do I mean? Well, I'll try my best to explain.

 

You mentioned vehicles such as the DeLorean from the film Back to the Future, the Rinspeed sQuba, & the Bugatti Veyron. All fine and well if ya wouldn't have tossed the DeLorean in there. What I'm sayin' is you are comparing ponies to cars right? Well, without the movie, the Delorean couldn't have flown under it's own power. Sure that is really the only "true" oddball, but I feel the others don't exactly fit in either. If you were to go out on the limb and mention the Delorean, there wouldn't be any reason why other fiction vehicles could have been mentioned as well let alone modified vehicles. Many modified vehicles have been made out to out-preform the vehicles listed etc, etc.

 

As for the Bugatti, sure it's a fancy-dancy all wheel drive quad-turbo'd supercar, but in the comparison I'd say there are many other vehicles that are highly unpredictable when driving. 

I guess what I'm getting at is ya toss in a fiction vehicle from a movie to prove the theory in one paragraph and then scoot on back to vehicles that actually exist and preform in the real world. It seems like a bit of a inconsistency in what you are trying to get across. Just like the part where ya say "vehicles have no emotions" I mean yeah compared to people, I guess they don't. But if you get to use the DeLorean as a example why not other fiction vehicles from films that did have emotions. Hell, we did have Herbie...

 

I'm not trying to get on your case or call this whole thing goofy or anything, I'm just tossing down what I think just like you did.

 

Vehicles can be compared to many things, they are pretty amazing especially when it comes to the technology that goes in to them. But it'd be around the same if you compared ponies to humans or something. Everything has points of performance, vulnerability, style etc, ect.

I mean it's really one six half dozen of another on how one goes about the comparison. I'd see much more validity in comparing the ponies to vehicles that are available for purchase such as the STI you mentioned. 

 

But yeah, for the most part I saw what you were going for in the original post and the examples that were given did do the job of the "comparison" per say I just personally think the choices for the comparisons could have been chosen differently.

 

Good eye.

 

I wasn't really an expert when it comes to comparisons, but I did my very best, no less.