What is a sports car?
T.J. 20
It has been debated by many to what is the true definition of a "sports
car". Is it if the car looks "sporty", or is styled to be very sleek and
aggressive? If so, then where do you draw the line? Can a Toyota Paseo be
called a sports car considering it is a sportier looking version of the
Tercel? Is a Toyota Celica a sports car with its meager 130bhp engine,
which could barely beat any modern day sedans? The Celica certainly looks
aggressive and very sporty, definitely enough to pass that line of
sportiness, but the car is just too damn slow. Is the new Accord Coupe,
considered a sports car? Or would it be categorized as a 2 door sedan, like
it always has? Sure if you asked anybody who didn't know Honda cars, they
would think its a sports car. A cop would pull you over thinking it was a
sports car, but because its an "Accord", it cannot be a sports car. Many
would argue the fact that it doesn't drive much differently than the 4-door
sedan, so it isn't a sports car. How about the Prelude? The acceleration
figures aren't enough to be called sports car, yet it has a sporty demeaner
and sporty reputation to it. Or is it the fact that the back seat is a
crammed up 2+2 seater thus because of the fact the Accord Coupe has too big
of a back seat, it is taken out of the sports car category. So is a sports
car, a 2 seater? Or is a sports car anything which offers minimal room on
the back? But then can you call a Civic Hatchback a sports car? By todays
definition, I wouldn't really call the Accord Coupe a sports car, although
some have and some may, as for the Prelude, it has been considered a sports
coupe for a long time now, due to its sporty handling and general
reputation. Some could argue that the 97-98 Prelude may even look too
conservative to be a sports car, but the low ride height and controversial
styling(particularly the headlights) could separate it from the Accord
Coupe. So I guess this would mean that the new Toyota Solara isn't a sports
car either? Is a Porsche 911 a sports car? I bet 99% of people would say
it is, but it has a back seat (very, very small), so I guess this takes away
the 2 seater reason. Toyota Supra has a back seat as well. What do you
think is a sports car? Anything to do with the amount of horsepower?(200
and over, 300 and over?), Or does it have to do with what the makers
intended to sell it out to the pubic as?(meaning the Accord was not being
intended as a sports car). Or is a sports car, vaguely anything with 2
doors, basically a coupe? Or is it acceleration times (must get at least
from 0-60mph in less than 7 seconds, or what?) Is an Acura Integra a sports
car?, Or only the Type R is? Does it have to do with weight and size,
meaning if its too big, then it isn't a sports car? But then again the
Lamborghini Diablo is a huge car, weighing more than 3000lbs and pretty long
as well, and everybody would call it a sports car. Is a modified(racing
modifications) car a sports car? A Civic souped up to have an increase in
horsepower significantly, is it a sports car? Or because it wasn't born(or
rather made) as a sports car(wasn't originally intended), it isn't a sports
car? Finally BMW 3 series cars are always being reputed to having sporty
handling, but they don't look like a typical sleek sports car, basically if
your car looks like a box, but if it handles and drives like a sports car,
would it considered a sports car? What do you think is a sports car?
Ret2Xanadu
NEVER has 2 doors. The BMW M Roadster is a sports car, so is the M3
convertible, but NOT the M3 coupe, it is a sports/luxury coupe, and the M3
sedan is a luxury/sports sedan. I don't know why this is, but that's what they
classify it as. Except for the top of the line BMWs, the rest are sports
sedans/coupes, not true sports cars. This makes it really confusing. Maybe
it's because the emphasis in the sports sedans/coupes are more on luxury or
comfort rather than totally sports oriented, like the roadster and M3
convertible. A sports car doesn't necessarily have to be sporty looking. For
example, the 240SX is a sports car because it's RWD and a great performer with
performance suspension, but it looks like an ordinary coupe, doesn't it? The
Celica and Eclipse/Talon are probably the sportiest looking sports coupes that
aren't considered sports cars, although insurance companies don't care! Even
though the Miata is RWD, sporty looking, has a good suspension, handles well,
and performs respectfully, and is even a 2 seater, they don't consider this car
a sports car. I think it should be a sports car though. There's no way you
can tell what a sports car is and what's not. It's determined when they make
the car, and it seems to be more on opinion than a checklist, although RWD is
required for any car to be called a sports car. I don't know if anything else
is required, besides having 0-2 doors.
Henri Helanto
(I'm trying to avoid these 'define sports car' -threads, but...)
>A sports car always has RWD. This is the standard for a performance car.
<...>
Always? Does this mean that the DAX RUSH (AWD) isn't one, while
making the likes of F355 look bloated and slow luxo-barges?
How about the AWD Diablo? Or heck, why not FWD Lotus Elan?
My own definition goes along the lines of minimum amount of
weight, nothing unneccessary, superb performance AND fun-to-drive
-factor. There are very few pure sports cars available these
days; Lotus Elise, Tomita Tommy Kaira ZZ, a number of Lotus 7
-clones etc.
-Henri
--
# Henri Helanto ; he...@muncca.fi ; hhel...@cc.hut.fi #
# Nissan Skyline GT-R ; '71 Corvette LS-6 ; GMC Typhoon ; etc...#
CAUTION: Before engaging mouth make sure that the brain is in gear.
David Masten
>What makes a sports car a sports car?
Hey guy, take a breath :-)
Some may say it has to be open cockpit, some no back seat, some RWD,
some under a certain weight, some a certain hp or performance spec, some that
it has to be uncomfortable. My answer is more simple ... it has to be RED!
Okay, a tad more seriously. If there is an actual definition. I don't know
it. And I'm sure you'll get a number of definitive answers ... all different.
So, following are my ramblings on the subject ...
I just read the Sept R&T article on this year's Lemans. The article kept
refering to Sports Cars vs GT's vs "prototypes". There's even a "World Sports
Cars Championship". From what I gleaned, the Sports Cars are open cockpit.
I'm sure there is more to it than that. I think any of us here would consider
the Porsche GT1 to be a "sports car" (maybe a difference between sports -
small "s" and Sports?).
I consider myself an auto enthusiast just like the majority in the autos ng's.
When contemplating my last car purchase, I considered the whole gamut. From
old 944, MR2, CRX Si, through 325, 318ti, all the way to Ford Contour SE. Yes,
I was vascillating between visceral "sports cars" (small s) to sport sedans.
Having recently auto-x'd, I wanted a sharp handling car. OTOH, I wanted
something that wouldn't jar my fillings on my potholed commute. I drove some
mk2 MR2's and came away from each unhappy. The stearing was too quick, the
car too loud, the handling too edgey... some may say the definition of a
sports car. You know what? I'm an enthusiast and I found out I don't *want*
a sports car! At least not for my every day vehicle.
So, that's the definition I use now. If it is too damned firm/harsh, loud,
and uncompromising for me ... it's gotta be a sports car :-)
BTW, I wound up with an Integra LS. Reasonably fast (<8sec 0-60), loud when I
want it to be, firm but not too jarring, slick shifting. But it has a
semi-usable back seat and a lot of room for bikes, ski's etc and gets good
mileage. GSR would have been fine too, but I found an LS in RED first :-)
Oh, a sports car has to have a manual transmission :-)
CARDING
For me to be considered a sports car is to drive hard the car in the twisties
then check your palm afterwards. If it`s sweaty forget it but if its dry and
you are grinning to your ears, then you just drive a sports car.
Ric D.
Honda Prelude 97
Visit the website:http://www.freeyellow.com/members2/islands/index.html (copy&
paste)
See the Islands For Sale.
Jens Jakobsen
Let me give you one of many examples:
The current Prelude performs well for a front wheel drive. If Honda
engineers designed the Prelude with rear wheel drive the performance would
be significantly better.
I see the FWD Prelude as a "pseudo" sports car. A RWD Prelude would make BMW
engineers sweat.
Jens Jakobsen
jako...@idirect.com
T.J. 20
Ret2Xanadu wrote in message
<199809050944...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>A sports car always has RWD. This is the standard for a performance car.
>NEVER has 2 doors.
Wow, last time I remembered, the Lamborghini Diablo VT Roadster would be
considered a sports car, but since its 4WD and not RWD then I guess it isn't
eh? Also I guess a Porsche 911 Carrera 4S isn't a sports car either since
its AWD.
GeCKo
"sports coupes" others "sports cars" who cares anyways? the insurace
companies still rip ya off either way!
Michael Ereon
From: he...@snafu.muncca.fi (Henri Helanto) Re: What is a sports car?
Always? Does this mean that the DAX
RUSH (AWD) isn't one, while making the likes of F355 look
bloated and slow luxo-barges? How about the AWD Diablo? Or
heck, why not FWD Lotus Elan?
**Hey Henri, Diablo is RWD. The front wheels only engage if the rear
wheels spinout. Technically, yes, it is AWD, but not like an Impreza or
a DSM which is full time AWD.
See ya!
Mike
*****
The dude formerly known as BANDIT80 and MontePooh!
****
1986 Pontiac Grand Prix LE LG-4 5.0
Zx NiTTo
person that said that sportscars have to be RWD, but i would argue that some
AWD/4WD cars are also sportscars.
i would never call a FWD car a sports car (sure the lotus elans nice but still
doesn't exhibit the sportscar handling characteristics).
i don't care how well the prelude handles, it still doesn't exhibit the
characteristics you will find in RWD car. i don't know about you guys, but i
have trouble trying to do a power slide with FWD car, whereas with a RWD, it's
a cinch.
someone else said that a 4 door isn't a sportscar- i would disagree with that
(nissan skyline gt-r is available in 4 doors). i can go on and on but i'm sure
everyone is gonna disagree with me so i'll shutup
P.T.
90 300ZX
http://www.angelfire.com/pa/nitto/index.html
Ret2Xanadu
AWD.
Ret2Xanadu
granny, I don't care if you have a Ferrari, you just turned it into a family
sedan. But if you drive your Ford Tempo like *psychotic* granny, then that's a
sports car to me!
outthere@leftfield
wrote:
>What makes a sports car a sports car?
Manual tranny.
Small.
Taut suspension.
Not front-wheel drive.
Matthew Powell
Ret2Xanadu wrote in message
<199809060958...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
imagine your grandmother (or mother, if the age group is right) driving a
stick, much less a sports car?
sama...@my-dejanews.com
it says: a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick
response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving.
This is a broad definition, the same as most dictionaries give. It does not
limit it to RWD or FWD and it only says usually 2 seater so this leaves a
wide margin for what a sports car can be. This however is a fairly decent
definition of a sports car. A sporty car on the other hand has some
characteristics of a sports car, but not having all of the characteristics of
a sports car. A car can be sporty, and not be a sports car but a sports car
is always sporty. A good example of a sports car is the NSX. A good example
of a sporty car is the Accord Coupe V6. Sporty looking, sporty engine, but
definately not a sports car. -- Sam
"T.J. 20" <prim...@shaw.wave.ca> wrote:
> What makes a sports car a sports car?
<snip>
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Henri Helanto
>My friend's 76 year-old grandmother just bought a '97 Mustang Cobra. Can you
>imagine your grandmother (or mother, if the age group is right) driving a
>stick, much less a sports car?
A few years ago, at the age of 60, my mother bought an XJS and
now she's considering an Impreza WRX for a 'winter beater'...
(I'm just wondering if this has anything to do with genes?-)
Tommy Hwang
>
> I looked in an online dictionary that is based upon the webster dictionary and
> it says: a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick
> response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving.
>
> This is a broad definition, the same as most dictionaries give. It does not
> limit it to RWD or FWD and it only says usually 2 seater so this leaves a
> wide margin for what a sports car can be. This however is a fairly decent
> definition of a sports car. A sporty car on the other hand has some
> characteristics of a sports car, but not having all of the characteristics of
> a sports car. A car can be sporty, and not be a sports car but a sports
Ummm... given this definition, even a Grand Ma (Sorry,
Grand Am) can be classified as a "Sports Car" because it outruns
a classic Beetle or Trabant!
Sooo... What are characteristics of a sports car other
than fun to drive and fast (say, under 0-60 in 6.5 seconds or
under:-))?
spamno_...@ibm.net
jacket and 'Hey sport!', i.e. it's the kind of car that a sporty young
guy would drive. The whole motorsports thing came later. Heck, if you're
into fishing and hunting, a Jeep is a sports car.
>
> What makes a sports car a sports car?
nonsense
young again, and dealers can go on major vacations after screwing you.
it doesn't matter where the drive wheels are, it's what you can do with them
that counts. FWD, RWD, AWD all have sports cars (ie CRX, NSX, eclipse GS-X)
and crap heaps (ie Hyundai, Ford, Subaru)
Ret2Xanadu wrote in message
<199809060951...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Zx NiTTo
>than fun to drive and fast (say, under 0-60 in 6.5 seconds or
>under:-))?
the miata is considered a sports car because of its RWD platform, its excellent
handling prowess, and because of the sensation it gives the driver-but, it's
not the fastest car around.
speed isn't always an indication of a sports car, but it almost always is a
case.
outthere@leftfield
>A good example of a sports car is the NSX. A good example
>of a sporty car is the Accord Coupe V6. Sporty looking, sporty engine, but
>definately not a sports car. -- Sam
Disagree. A Prelude is a "sporty" car. An Accord coupe is just a car
with 2 doors.
Matthew Powell
nonsense wrote in message <6t51uh$p2$1...@birch.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>it doesn't matter where the drive wheels are, it's what you can do with
them
>that counts. FWD, RWD, AWD all have sports cars (ie CRX, NSX, eclipse GS-X)
>and crap heaps (ie Hyundai, Ford, Subaru)
sporty coupe, even in its turbo/AWD variation. The CRX (other than being way
too tiny) is both FWD, not that fast, etc. The NSX, is a veery expensive
sports car. Which also begs the point - would you rather own one NSX or both
a BMW M Coupe/Roadster and a C5?
Matthew Powell
Ret2Xanadu wrote in message
<199809100124...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>>The NSX, is a veery expensive
>>sports car. Which also begs the point - would you rather own one NSX or
both
>>a BMW M Coupe/Roadster and a C5?
>
ferrari.
Geez - I wouldn't want all 6 M/C5s - but - I'd take an M Roadster, an M
Coupe, 2 C5s, a Datsun 240Z fully restored (the Nissan-restored ones), 1
Audi TT Coupe, and 1 New Beetle. Should come out at the same price. :) I'd
probably put in a Porsche Boxster over one of the C5s, actually... :) But,
I'm not that impressed with the NSX - looks or performance-wise
Ret2Xanadu
Zx NiTTo
i can't tell which is the front end or back end on the audi...the beetle is
similar. ack!
CARDING
>i can't tell which is the front end or back end on the audi...the beetle is
>similar. ack!
>
>P.T.
>90 300ZX
>http://www.angelfire.com/pa/nitto/index.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Zx NiTTo
heh..never saw it that way.
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
"Matthew Powell" <mpo...@nettaxi.com> wrote:
> would you rather own one NSX or both
> a BMW M Coupe/Roadster and a C5?
Besides, there's a billion of those roadsters out there (I know of one being
driven by a gray-haired grandma - honest!). They're becoming old hats, though
I'm sure a possible trophy wife would be impressed by the B M W on the hood.
And the C5 is still too damn big & heavy to qualify as a sports car in my
book. (muscle car? sure. But that's not a sports car!) And, FWIW, my best
friend (6'5") has to fold himself into one, yet he CAN fit comfortably in my
Del Sol! That's insane for a car that's so much larger in external
dimensions.
Besides, for the non-trophy possibles, the NSX has that insatiable appeal of
money, pure and simple.
--
Mike O'Connell
monkeyboy AT hatman DOT com
Henreo
muscle cars anymore... maybe the Viper.
CARDING
>
>heh..never saw it that way.
try to look at them from the front
Michael Ereon
From: monkey...@my-dejanews.com Re: What is a sports car?
And the C5 is still too damn big & heavy to qualify as a sports car in
my book.
**Come again? The C5 weighs about 3300lbs WITH driver and has a 51/49
weight distribution. In other words, it CAN handle. The "Sports car"
Supra weighs about the same if not more.
(muscle car? sure.
**Yeah, it has muscle.
But that's not a sports car!) And, FWIW, my best friend (6'5") has to
fold himself into one, yet he CAN fit comfortably in my Del Sol! That's
insane for a car that's so much larger in external dimensions.
**When you said comfortably, do you mean with the targa off?
Besides, for the non-trophy possibles, the NSX has that insatiable
appeal of money, pure and simple.
**But performance "appeal", the Supra, 300ZX and the C5 will spank the
higher priced NSX.
--
Mike O'Connell
See ya!
Mike
*****
The dude formerly known as BANDIT80 and MontePooh!
****
1986 Pontiac Grand Prix LE LG-4 5.0
****
For all of your G-Body interests, visit http://www.G-Body.org!
Matthew Powell
Henreo wrote in message <199809110853...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>C5 not a sportscar? What? A C5 is NOT a muscle car. Remember? They don't
MAKE
>muscle cars anymore... maybe the Viper.
Firebird/Camaro that's a muscle car? The Viper's kind of ugly (IMHO) - I'd
rather have the Cobra and $10k for mods. :) I agree with you, the C5 is most
definitely a sportscar. It handles (from what I understand, BTW) almost as
good as any, has good acceleration (0-60 in ~5.2, IIRC), and (not really a
point) looks better than the NSX. I still stand by my original comment -
better to have 6 sportscars than 1 supercar. :)
Matthew Powell
Zx NiTTo wrote in message
<199809101408...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
>>Audi TT Coupe, and 1 New Beetle
>
>similar. ack!
loaner for chicks. ;) I love the interior on the Audi - polished chrome and
rounded. I like the lines of the outside, with the low-roofline and small
windows. Kind of reminds of the ZZ Top-esque Ford hot rods.
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
GrandP...@webtv.net (Michael Ereon) wrote:
> **Come again? The C5 weighs about 3300lbs WITH driver and has a 51/49
> weight distribution. In other words, it CAN handle. The "Sports car"
> Supra weighs about the same if not more.
it's purpose. I don't want to drive a tank, I want to drive a light, agile
sports car.
Listen, if it's over 3000lbs I don't want to deal with it. I've driven enough
3000+ lb Camaros in my time (though the Corvette handles it's weight much
better).
> **Yeah, it has muscle.
If I wanted muscle I'd start digging for a trashed 1969 Mustang Boss 429 and
ressurect it to glory (and beyond). That's my idea of muscle.
> my best friend (6'5") has to
> fold himself into one, yet he CAN fit comfortably in my Del Sol! That's
> insane for a car that's so much larger in external dimensions.
> **When you said comfortably, do you mean with the targa off?
Nope. He has to put the seat all the way back to the last notch, but he can
even drive the Del Sol comfortably. He was going to buy one a while back, but
then I test drove it... D'oh!
FWIW, his brother is 7' even (he drives a Civic Coupe, comfortably!) but looks
about the same as my friend in a C5 when folded into the Del Sol...
> **But performance "appeal", the Supra, 300ZX and the C5 will spank the
> higher priced NSX.
Trophy wives don't care about performance, they care about money (and looks,
to a lesser extent). That was the point of that paragraph, BTW.
For me, however, I don't care much about straight-line performance (the
yardstick of a typical American "sports car"), I want to take a SHARP turn
HARD at speed with perfect control & feedback. The justice system takes a dim
view of speed, but they have a hard time nailing you for doing the speed
limit around a turn while in perfect control.
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
hen...@aol.com (Henreo) wrote:
> C5 not a sportscar? What? A C5 is NOT a muscle car. Remember? They don't MAKE
> muscle cars anymore... maybe the Viper.
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
> is both FWD
Not being FWD may have been a good reason 30 years ago, but FWDs have come a
LONG way in that time.
> not that fast,
Oh, I dunno, stick a supercharged 1.8L engine in it, and it's quite fast. And
in stock form it's faster than many American cars which the average person
would consider a "Sports Car".
Ret2Xanadu
automatic spoiler.
Zx NiTTo
>3000+ lb Camaros in my time
this guy loses any respect that i had for him (did i have any to begin with?).
Acura NSX - 3047 pounds
BMW M3 - 3180 lbs
Dodge Viper GTS - 3375 lbs
Mitsubishit 3000 GT VR4 - 3759 lbs
Nissan 300 ZX Twin Turbo - 3502 lbs
Porsche 911 Twin Turbo - 3307 lbs
Toyota Supra Twin Turbo - 3515 lbs
Hmmm.... looking at that list, it seems like these car are NOT sportscars
because they are over 3000 pounds. The only 'true' sportscar out there would
be the 2800 pound RX-7.
Matthew Powell
>Dodge Viper GTS - 3375 lbs
assumed that (just by looks.engine) it was the ultimate straight-line muscle
car....
Matthew Powell
monkey...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<6tfaln$nm$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>In article <199809122119...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
> zxn...@aol.com (Zx NiTTo) wrote:
>> this guy loses any respect that i had for him (did i have any to begin
with?).
>
newsgroups
>they have no real reason to be in... kinda like those Mac fanatics popping
>into PC newsgroups, or vice versa...
Why would he (or I, for that matter) have no real reason to be in rcmh? I
keep up with several automobile newsgroups (Honda, Nissan, Toyota, BMW,
Audi) because the vehicles interest me, and I'm looking for a "new" used
car.
Henri Helanto
>**Hey Henri, Diablo is RWD. The front wheels only engage if the rear
>wheels spinout. Technically, yes, it is AWD, but not like an Impreza or
>a DSM which is full time AWD.
Close enough; the front wheels _are_ also driven, making it very
much AWD. Same thing in my GT-R - it's 100% RWD until the rears
lose traction (computer-controlled clutch for the front driveshaft,
ie. pull the fuse and it's RWD ;)
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
> be the 2800 pound RX-7.
But that turbo kicks in awfully quickly...
monkey...@my-dejanews.com
That's okay. I don't have much respect for folks who poke through newsgroups
they have no real reason to be in... kinda like those Mac fanatics popping
into PC newsgroups, or vice versa...
GrandP...@webtv.net
monkey...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <9268-35F...@newsd-153.iap.bryant.webtv.net>,
> GrandP...@webtv.net (Michael Ereon) wrote:
> > **Come again? The C5 weighs about 3300lbs WITH driver and has a 51/49
> > weight distribution. In other words, it CAN handle. The "Sports car"
> > Supra weighs about the same if not more.
> And I consider the Supra to be a typical Toyota, in other words very heavy for
> it's purpose.
**Hmm, So if its a Toyota, it must be heavy. If its a Honda, it must be
light? You make NO sense what so ever...
I don't want to drive a tank, I want to drive a light, agile
> sports car.
**Get a Miata then...
>
> Listen, if it's over 3000lbs I don't want to deal with it. I've driven enough
> 3000+ lb Camaros in my time (though the Corvette handles it's weight much
> better).
**Um, there really isn't much to choose from. How many cars weigh less than
3000lbs? Miata? Del Slo?
>
> > **Yeah, it has muscle.
> If I wanted muscle I'd start digging for a trashed 1969 Mustang Boss 429 and
> ressurect it to glory (and beyond). That's my idea of muscle.
**What did it run in the quarter? The C5 runs low 13's.
>
> > my best friend (6'5") has to
> > fold himself into one, yet he CAN fit comfortably in my Del Sol! That's
> > insane for a car that's so much larger in external dimensions.
> > **When you said comfortably, do you mean with the targa off?
>
> Nope. He has to put the seat all the way back to the last notch, but he can
> even drive the Del Sol comfortably. He was going to buy one a while back, but
> then I test drove it... D'oh!
**Too slow?
>
> FWIW, his brother is 7' even (he drives a Civic Coupe, comfortably!) but looks
> about the same as my friend in a C5 when folded into the Del Sol...
**Sure...
>
> > **But performance "appeal", the Supra, 300ZX and the C5 will spank the
> > higher priced NSX.
>
> Trophy wives don't care about performance, they care about money (and looks,
> to a lesser extent). That was the point of that paragraph, BTW.
**Do you know, the value of the NSX drops 50% after 2 years? It still rather
have the C5, Supra or 300ZX. They at least retain their value. You lose.
>
> For me, however, I don't care much about straight-line performance (the
> yardstick of a typical American "sports car"),
**Typical American sports car? THe C5 and the VIper are probably the only
sports cars from the Big 3 I can think of. And youd be pretty ignorant if
you said they are all straight line performers. You lose again.
I want to take a SHARP turn
> HARD at speed with perfect control & feedback.
**And some people want to take a step further and have some fun at stoplight
races. The world doesn't revolve around you.
The justice system takes a dim
> view of speed, but they have a hard time nailing you for doing the speed
> limit around a turn while in perfect control.
>
Michael Ereon
From: mpo...@nettaxi.com (Matthew Powell) Re: What is a sports car?
**Shit yeah, it handles. Its pretty much a "over the counter race car",
along with the 3rd gen RX-7. See Jason...
Gary Wolfe
[....]
>> Listen, if it's over 3000lbs I don't want to deal with it. I've driven enough
>> 3000+ lb Camaros in my time (though the Corvette handles it's weight much
>> better).
>**Um, there really isn't much to choose from. How many cars weigh less than
>3000lbs? Miata? Del Slo?
[...]
Even the new Gen5 prelude is under 3000lbs (without a driver), and
people have been saying it's "heavy" compared to the Gen4.
Hmm, "best handling under $30,000" is close enough for me. :-)
Anyways, I dunno why y'all rag on him for his "under 3000 lbs" figure.
I mean, it's clearly just his opinion, not a redefinition of the
sports car terminology. Personally, I prefer smaller cars that handle
well, but I don't mind larger cars being lumped into the same
category. Perhaps we can just make 2 categories -- "large sports
cars" and "small sports cars" and we can all be happy. :-)
I've often heard "sports car" defined as a RWD 2-seater, but I think
that's far to limiting. I prefer the "duck test"....
--
Gary Wolfe
t...@ix.netcom.com
Ricky Crow
Matthew Powell <mpo...@nettaxi.com> wrote in article
<6t6vl9$221$1...@excalibur.flash.net>...
> The Eclipse and CRX are most certainly not sports cars. The Eclipse is a
> sporty coupe, even in its turbo/AWD variation. The CRX (other than being
way
> too tiny) is both FWD, not that fast, etc. The NSX, is a veery expensive
> sports car. Which also begs the point - would you rather own one NSX or
both
> a BMW M Coupe/Roadster and a C5?
Actually, for the same money, I'd rather have about 12 CRX's, and be able
to drive a fun, sporty, tossable car for the rest of my life.
Ricky
Zx NiTTo
>they have no real reason to be in...
so you're saying that I don't belong here?
Zx NiTTo
oh yeah...my mother drives a 96 Accord V6, so i keep an ear out for anything
that might interest her, or myself.
they're plenty of other folks that don't 'belong' here because they don't own
or drive a honda, it still doesn't mean they 'shouldn't' be here. some of the
guys that give advice to this newsgroup don't own a honda (aka Henri)
Zx NiTTo
>assumed that (just by looks.engine) it was the ultimate straight-line muscle
>car....
i had to opportunity to sit in a GTS, but, wasn't allowed to drive it. from
what i've read, it has tenacious grip but requires a very skilled driver to
drive it at the limits due to the amount of torque available. a novice driver
would easily spin them out and lose control through the corners.
earlier posts about a car's slalom numbers and skidpad numbers statedt that
these numbers can be conceiving. on paper , the viper looks great but to get
the most out of it's handling, skill is necessary.
Henri Helanto
>I've never met anyone who has driven a Viper. Is the handling good? I always
>assumed that (just by looks.engine) it was the ultimate straight-line muscle
>car....
They have a s**tload of grip but the problem is that the limit of
traction is very sharp. They're not very confidence-inspiring and
for a good reason; another thing is that the engine power was
a huge disappointment to me at least - I haven't driven the 'new'
R/T 10:s but the older ones have made me want to bang my head to
the steering wheel and scream 'MORE POWER!'.
Meaning: considering how much grip they have, the engine can't
make enough power for you to force them back in line. Once you're
sliding you just have to keep your foot buried, countersteer and
hope that there's enough room on the outside of the turn for you
to go a bit wide.
I really like Vipers, in spite of their dynamical shortcomings,
just because they're Vipers. Utterly brutal, fantastic looks (IMO)
and many good memories... ahh :)
outthere@leftfield
wrote:
>Even the new Gen5 prelude is under 3000lbs (without a driver), and
>people have been saying it's "heavy" compared to the Gen4.
>
>Hmm, "best handling under $30,000" is close enough for me. :-)
The Prelude is a low-torque, front-drive car. These features save a
lot of weight. I like the Prelude, but must point-out that building a
high-powered rear-drive car is going to cost you in weight.
outthere@leftfield
>And the C5 is still too damn big & heavy to qualify as a sports car in my
>book. (muscle car? sure. But that's not a sports car!) And, FWIW, my best
>friend (6'5") has to fold himself into one, yet he CAN fit comfortably in my
Oh get real. With idiots like you out there excluding cars for
reasons as stupid as that, there wouldn't be ANY sports cars, for one
reason or another.
The Corvette is obviously a sports car.
Gary Wolfe
>On Sun, 13 Sep 1998 15:16:53 GMT, t...@ix.netcom.com (Gary Wolfe)
>wrote:
>>Even the new Gen5 prelude is under 3000lbs (without a driver), and
>>people have been saying it's "heavy" compared to the Gen4.
>>
>>Hmm, "best handling under $30,000" is close enough for me. :-)
>The Prelude is a low-torque, front-drive car. These features save a
>lot of weight.
Which sounds ok to me. All I was pointing out about the weight was
that it fit the arbitrary criteria that someone had posted, and you
had more choices than a Miata or Del Sol in that weight range. My
other point was weight aside, it was enough for me that it handled
well (regardless of the weight).
For reference:
>>>Um, there really isn't much to choose from. How many cars weigh less than
>>>3000lbs? Miata? Del Slo?
>I like the Prelude, but must point-out that building a
>high-powered rear-drive car is going to cost you in weight.
Which is great. Throw in a bigger engine. The Prelude is still a nice
car that I would classify as a sports car as much as heavier cars, and
the lighter weight probably makes the handling seem better (to some of
us -- I realize this is in the realm of opinion, but like some other
posters, I prefer a more "tossable" car).
The various gens of RX-7 didn't seem particularly heavy for a RWD car,
although they were pretty small. Perhaps the Corvette, for example,
doesn't need to be as big as it is after all.
--
Gary Wolfe
t...@ix.netcom.com
azza...@my-dejanews.com
"Matthew Powell" <mpo...@nettaxi.com> wrote:
> I've never met anyone who has driven a Viper. Is the handling good? I always
> assumed that (just by looks.engine) it was the ultimate straight-line muscle
> car....
I've driven one - on the street and on the track (there's one in my garage).
It's a LOT more than a straight-line muscle car, although it does that 1/4
mile thing quite well. I know folks who take stock Vipers with slicks and
run 12.0.
The car is big & heavy, but it sticks VERY well in the corners. A novice
driver will be eaten alive in a Viper because of all the power. Once you
learn how to tame all that power, you can get the Viper to scream through the
corners. The steering is tight, the tires grip like mad, and the body does
NOT roll on you. You'd better use a 5-point harness, or the car will take a
corner and leave you hanging out the window! :)
--
Doug Azzarito
1994 Viper RT/10
Henri Helanto
<...>
>they're plenty of other folks that don't 'belong' here because they don't own
>or drive a honda, it still doesn't mean they 'shouldn't' be here. some of the
>guys that give advice to this newsgroup don't own a honda (aka Henri)
Hey... as a matter of fact I do. '89 Civic 4d, AWD/6-speed/
ZC-engined family hauler. A great winter beater - amazingly rust-
free, the AWD-system is quite good, very reliable and gets about
30mpg despite my extra-heavy right foot.
(I've got a Honda bike scattered all over my garage, waiting for
me to find time to put the engine back together now as the new
cylinder head, exhaust system and carb have finally arrived :)
...not that owning a Honda would be a requirement for posting
here anyway.