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 5

post #61 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post
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.
well, I'm not factoring weight into my reasoning just because I have no idea how much any of these cars weigh. but here's another argument: the Mercedes CL600 and the Ferrari Scaglietti. both are powered by monstrous V12 engines and both are hardtop coupes. but when I look at the Mercedes CL600 (and I look at one almost every day, lol, because my dad's employee has a CL550) I think "coupe" and when I look at a Ferrari Scaglietti, I think "sports car" now chances are most of you won't agree with me but hey, that's why I say the term is open to interpretation :] but they're both extremely fast, extremely sexy, hardtop, 2-door, 4-seaters. so with the solid reasoning a lot of you are using, they're either both coupes or they're both sports cars.
post #62 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.

The 911's rear seats aren't seats, they are leather-lined attaché carriers. Regarding BMW's handling: um, M3?

Quote:
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.

So, practicality and being a sports car is mutually inclusive?

Quote:
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

So, you are going to compare one of the greatest drivers that ever lived, who has thousands of hours worth of track time, and with years of experience driving for the best sports car company that ever existed with the common, average sports car owner? That's fair.

Jon.
post #63 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chasey View Post
well, I'm not factoring weight into my reasoning just because I have no idea how much any of these cars weigh. but here's another argument:

the Mercedes CL600 and the Ferrari Scaglietti. both are powered by monstrous V12 engines and both are hardtop coupes. but when I look at the Mercedes CL600 (and I look at one almost every day, lol, because my dad's employee has a CL550) I think "coupe"

now chances are most of you won't agree with me but hey, that's why I say the term is open to interpretation :] but they're both extremely fast, extremely sexy, hardtop, 2-door, 4-seaters. so with the solid reasoning a lot of you are using, they're either both coupes or they're both sports cars.

Have you ever sat in the 612's rear seats? They are a bit bigger than a 911's attaché carriers. The rear "˜seats' are deigned to carry luggage or a golf bag.

Also, matter of point, the 612's v12 is far more monstrous than the CL's.

Jon.
post #64 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chasey View Post
well, I'm not factoring weight into my reasoning just because I have no idea how much any of these cars weigh. but here's another argument: the Mercedes CL600 and the Ferrari Scaglietti. both are powered by monstrous V12 engines and both are hardtop coupes. but when I look at the Mercedes CL600 (and I look at one almost every day, lol, because my dad's employee has a CL550) I think "coupe" and when I look at a Ferrari Scaglietti, I think "sports car" now chances are most of you won't agree with me but hey, that's why I say the term is open to interpretation :] but they're both extremely fast, extremely sexy, hardtop, 2-door, 4-seaters. so with the solid reasoning a lot of you are using, they're either both coupes or they're both sports cars.
My apologies, I thought you were talking about the CLS, as for the CL, it would fall in the GT category, as well as the Scaglietti, BMW 650 and Aston Martins DB9. I love GT's just as much as sportscars, then again, I'm partial to two-doors.
post #65 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Have you ever sat in the 612's rear seats? They are a bit bigger than a 911's attaché carriers. The rear "˜seats' are deigned to carry luggage or a golf bag.

Also, matter of point, the 612's v12 is far more monstrous than the CL's.

Jon.


True, and the Ferrari, I image would have a touter better performing suspension system.
post #66 of 118
2008 Dodge Viper

610 horsepower
570 lb-feet torque
over 1G on the skid pad
200+ mph

Relatively inexpensive to maintain
Fits tall people
Looks good

Not anything I can think of that's faster around a road course or a drag strip for $100,000 (or even $200,000.)

Factory installed mountings for 6 point belts
Factory installed mountings for a diff/transmission cooler


post #67 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
Regarding BMW's handling: um, M3?
Having driven both, the Z4 handles better than the E46 M3.
Quote:
So, practicality and being a sports car is mutually inclusive?
No, but a sports car must be capable of being a daily driver. I don't see that happening with an Atom.
Quote:
So, you are going to compare one of the greatest drivers that ever lived, who has thousands of hours worth of track time, and with years of experience driving for the best sports car company that ever existed with the common, average sports car owner? That’s fair.
And here you completely missed the point. If you can't extract 10/10ths out of 90 horsepower, what are you going to do with 300 more? --Andre
post #68 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
And here you completely missed the point. If you can't extract 10/10ths out of 90 horsepower, what are you going to do with 300 more?
A maximum of 9.99/10ths of 390 horsepower ?
post #69 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
Having driven both, the Z4 handles better than the E46 M3.

What did you like more about the Z4, the open rear diff in corners or the feel of the electronic steering? I assume you are talking about street driving and not tracking.
post #70 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
And here you completely missed the point. If you can't extract 10/10ths out of 90 horsepower, what are you going to do with 300 more?
--Andre

He could drive a 100hp Yugo around a track faster than any of us, but I am not going to buy one. TS summed it up nicely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim View Post
A maximum of 9.99/10ths of 390 horsepower ?

+1
post #71 of 118
Yeah but I was just being a smartass.
post #72 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
Having driven both, the Z4 handles better than the E46 M3.

I meant the new M3...which will be out this year (at least in Europe, so...)

Quote:
No, but a sports car must be capable of being a daily driver. I don't see that happening with an Atom.

I can use it as a daily driver as long as it doesn't rain. I never carry anything to work but myself, my cell phone, wallet, car keys, ID badge and libido.

Quote:
And here you completely missed the point. If you can't extract 10/10ths out of 90 horsepower, what are you going to do with 300 more?

--Andre

Yes I can. At least I straight line; I live in Florida; we don't have nice curvy roads like in Italy. At the same time, I don't like massive HP cars, my car has only 200 HP (but 207 lb-ft of torque), the trick to going fast is lighter weight, not just massive HP.

Jon.
post #73 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS View Post
At the same time, I don't like massive HP cars, my car has only 200 HP (but 207 lb-ft of torque), the trick to going fast is lighter weight, not just massive HP.

Jon.

Agree. Gearing is also pretty important as is tq and the engines power curve.
post #74 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 :]

OT: To say the least, I think it's a little shortsighted to think this way about Honda. They are one of the truly independent pioneers in 20th C transportation. I believe that because Honda does so many things well, like build the worlds most advanced Robot, killer family sedan or fuel efficient econo-boxes, that we forget just how talented and experimental and fun loving the company is.

These guys revolutionized motorcycles AND cars in the 60s and 70s. They are a racing company at heart and they've got the trophies and dirty overalls to prove it. They've won at the highest, most demanding levels of both bikes and cars

And the S2000 is actually not Honda's first "sports car" if you must know. They built two in the 60s, the S600 and S800, with 600cc and 800cc engines, respectively. And they raced them too! If those had Porsche or BMW badges...
post #75 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpatrick View Post
OT: To say the least, I think it's a little shortsighted to think this way about Honda. They are one of the truly independent pioneers in 20th C transportation. I believe that because Honda does so many things well, like build the worlds most advanced Robot, killer family sedan or fuel efficient econo-boxes, that we forget just how talented and experimental and fun loving the company is.

These guys revolutionized motorcycles AND cars in the 60s and 70s. They are a racing company at heart and they've got the trophies and dirty overalls to prove it. They've won at the highest, most demanding levels of both bikes and cars

And the S2000 is actually not Honda's first "sports car" if you must know. They built two in the 60s, the S600 and S800, with 600cc and 800cc engines, respectively. And they raced them too! If those had Porsche or BMW badges...

So, we know you're a fan of Honda. But the S2000 is not in the same ballpark as the other cars mentioned here, regardless of how much you try to proclaim that Honda is your favoritest and bestest car company in the world.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best value sports car under 100k?