or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best value sports car under 100k?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

best value sports car under 100k? - Page 4

post #46 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chasey View Post
well if you wanna go a taaaaad bit above the 100k marker, I would seriously look into the Aston Martin V8 Vantage. I think it's something like 105k or 110k.

otherwise I would get a Carrera Cabrio (S or C4 or whatever else there is) or even a Cayman.

the BMW 650 convertible is really sexy and so is the Mercedes SL550, but my god, everyone and their grandma (literally) has an SL depending on where you live.

also, please, don't get a Z06 or a Miata or a S2000 (no offense to the guy that posted them all, I just really hate them) or even a BMW Z-whatever. they all look like go-carts, and the Miata is a joke, and the S2000 is like... wtf... and the corvette is just a redneckmobile and the Z's are like the BMW's that no one really takes seriously.

Great argument.

BTW, the reason the S2000 isn't good is because its way too revvy.

Jon.
post #47 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post
Maserati Quattroporte

It's not a sports car.

Jon.
post #48 of 118
Anything that looks that beautiful and goes that fast is a sports car as far as I'm concerned.
post #49 of 118
Sports car = light, balanced chassis, RWD, convertible. Most cars listed in this thread are not sports cars.

--Andre
post #50 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
Sports car = light, balanced chassis, RWD, convertible. Most cars listed in this thread are not sports cars.

--Andre

So, by your definition, a Porsche 997 C4S Coupe is not a sports car, but a Z4 roadster is? Wow, that's utterly nonsensical.

Jon.
post #51 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by culverwood View Post
Anything that looks that beautiful and goes that fast is a sports car as far as I'm concerned.

A sports sedan is not a sports car.

Jon.
post #52 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
So, by your definition, a Porsche 997 C4S Coupe is not a sports car, but a Z4 roadster is? Wow, that's utterly nonsensical.

Jon.

Andrew has given the traditional definition of sports cars. a Porsche 997 C4S would be considered a GT. Sports cars, in its original intend is never meant to be the fastest car to go from point A to point B. For that, you need what the purists would call a GT.

Having said that, the more commonly accepted definition of sports car today are high power coupes that are relatively light weight, i.e. 911s, Ferrari V8s, etc.
post #53 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQgeek View Post
Maybe, but it's a Vette. I won't even race a vette in a video game. :P
A Vette that is capable of outperforming far more expensive cars, I just can't can rely on generalizations and videogames, when it comes highperformance automobiles.
post #54 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
A Vette that is capable of outperforming far more expensive cars, I just can't can rely on generalizations and videogames, when it comes highperformance automobiles.

Indeed. I've read rave reviews regarding the Z06, including from the other side of the pond.

Jon.
post #55 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Indeed. I've read rave reviews regarding the Z06, including from the other side of the pond.

Jon.
Very true,

The 2 American cars that have consistently received good reviews outside of the U.S. are the Ford GT and the Z06.

My only fault with the Vette, is the interior seems somewhat lacking. Beyond that, the car is amazing.
post #56 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Great argument.

BTW, the reason the S2000 isn't good is because its way too revvy.

Jon.

haha. I just mean, like, wtf, it's a Honda roadster convertible. it seems doubly oxymoronical. that's all I can think of to describe a Honda roadster convertible: "wtf?" that and "why?"

also, as far as the sports car argument goes, I say let's just agree that it's perceptual. I'm sure there's a concrete definition as to what makes a vehicle a "sports car" but with things like the Mercedes CLS and the Maserati Quattroporte creating a huge gray area in between "sports car" and "sedan" it's just impossible to confine many cars to one simple category.

that's just my take, though :]
post #57 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by briancl View Post
The OP asked for good values. The AM V8 Vantage is not a good value as a sports car, and neither are the other cars you listed. They are all show and no go. The other cars I listed are all spectacular values when you consider the criteria.

Would I own a Miata or Vette? Hell no, but I cannot deny the performance they provide at a relatively low cost.


I agree, most of the cars listed were GT's, and not true sportscars. I like the new 997's, but there is no way I would choose a regular 997 over a twinturbo'd 993.
post #58 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chasey View Post
haha. I just mean, like, wtf, it's a Honda roadster convertible. it seems doubly oxymoronical. that's all I can think of to describe a Honda roadster convertible: "wtf?" that and "why?"

also, as far as the sports car argument goes, I say let's just agree that it's perceptual. I'm sure there's a concrete definition as to what makes a vehicle a "sports car" but with things like the Mercedes CLS and the Maserati Quattroporte creating a huge gray area in between "sports car" and "sedan" it's just impossible to confine many cars to one simple category.

that's just my take, though :]
No...a four door car, cannot be considered a sportscar, not even close, it can't even be considered a GT or sports coupe. They're nothing more than sedans, they may be highperformance sedans, but at the end of the day they're still sedans.

To be honest, when I think of Mercedes, sportscar doens't even register in my mind. Maybe the day they offer a low weight high performance 2 seater without an automatic, I would reconsider, as for now, they are nothing more than a boulevard crusier.\\

I will admit that the CLS is a sexy sedan
post #59 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
So, by your definition, a Porsche 997 C4S Coupe is not a sports car, but a Z4 roadster is? Wow, that's utterly nonsensical.

The 911 is a GT. It also has 4 seats, albeit 2 of which are almost useless, and sports cars also have only 2 seats. Z4 is too heavy to be a sports car, though it has the best handling of BMW's current line.

Of the cars named so far, only the Miata, MR2, and Elise could be called sports cars. Atom comes close, but is too impractical. People these days are so hung up on bench racing cars' performance numbers, they forget that they don't have the skill to exploit any significant fraction of any modern car's potential, much less any of the super-high performance cars named here.

Put another way, give Michael Schumacher and yourself identical Miatas: do you think you can lap any track as quickly as he can? If you can't, then you aren't using the car's full capabilities.

--Andre
post #60 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
The 911 is a GT. It also has 4 seats, albeit 2 of which are almost useless, and sports cars also have only 2 seats. Z4 is too heavy to be a sports car, though it has the best handling of BMW's current line.
--Andre

There are many def of sports cars, insurance companies use door count and not seating as a factor for example. While the 911 is a 2+2, most people would consider it a sports car, and they are not wrong. You are not going to be doing any grand touring in a 911 like you would in, lets say a soft sprung SL500 as the Porsche is built for sharp handling. Also, the Z4 is not the best handling car in the current BMW line.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best value sports car under 100k?