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 6

post #76 of 118
I think it is funny reading threads like this. I get the feeling most of the people on this forum get more utility out of washing their cars than driving them. If I didn't track my car, I wouldn't get a "sports car" because there is hardly a reason. The sacrifice in comfort and practicality isn't worth the cost to only be able to drive it on the street. I have a nice, soft, comfy, heavy, non-sports car for my mundane driving tasks (Audi S4 Wagon), and an otherwise useless not-a-sports-car-by-your-definition vehicle to take to the track (heavily modified Subaru STi).
post #77 of 118
Most sports cars aren't marketed towards people who track their cars though, they are targeted towards middle aged men who have too much money in their bank accounts and feel like they need to spend it before they are too old to press the pedal any more or who need an escape from their 2.5 children and their college savings and the wife who screams about practicality all day long. Maybe .1% of them will take the car to the track and the rest are happy enough with an escape from reality on their weekend drive knowing that there are only two seats and that means the children stay home. Your WRX was actually pretty practical until you heavily modified it.
post #78 of 118
Then again, if you are going to take the car to the track, you might as well get a cheap race car. Does a much, much better job on the track.
post #79 of 118
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by visionology View Post
Most sports cars aren't marketed towards people who track their cars though, they are targeted towards middle aged men who have too much money in their bank accounts and feel like they need to spend it before they are too old to press the pedal any more or who need an escape from their 2.5 children and their college savings and the wife who screams about practicality all day long. Maybe .1% of them will take the car to the track and the rest are happy enough with an escape from reality on their weekend drive knowing that there are only two seats and that means the children stay home.

Your WRX was actually pretty practical until you heavily modified it.

And the .1% that do track are really just hoping for a timely end. Zip?
post #80 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon View Post
Then again, if you are going to take the car to the track, you might as well get a cheap race car. Does a much, much better job on the track.

The same things that make a sports car fast at the track will also make the car very fun to drive on twisty canyon and mountain roads. A cheap race car typically doesn't have a license plate, so you can't play on the public roads with a cheap race car.

Plus, there is a certain satisfaction in being able to drive to the track, run your car, then drive home again. It brings to mind the days when the line between sports cars and racing cars was not so distinct.

If you own a sports car, and never take it to the track, you're missing out on one of the really fun aspects of owning a high performance car.
post #81 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dragon View Post
Then again, if you are going to take the car to the track, you might as well get a cheap race car. Does a much, much better job on the track.

I think the point is being able to drive your car in the environment where it excels the most, thus extracting the most from the ownership experience. Not everyone who drives on the track are aiming to achieve the faster than the other guy. Having a race car also means the need for a truck, trailor, parking space, amongst other smaller things.

Though many people who started going to the track with their street cars will shift their attitude from having a good weekend to kicking butt on the race track, and thus eventually will step into the money pit that is race car ownership. I've stopped going to the track having moved to HK, but most of the friends who I started out with have ditched their street/track cars and track events for race cars and club racing.
post #82 of 118
I'm just making one small point DarkNWorns. No need to condescend, but I'll bite (again).

Performance wise, we're talking about value for money, and not all-out performance, I'm not sure which cars other than Ferraris and 911s, whose company you believe the S2000 doesn't belong in. The Z4's? Boxster's? Lotus?

I'm a fan of any exciting car or marque period, not just Honda. I haven't actually owned a Honda in a number of years now.
post #83 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSeca View Post
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.

Its handling was predictable, it talked more to me, and did what I wanted it to do more than the M3. Whether that's due to its open diff, the electric steering or something else, I don't know, but I drive the car not its feature list. I haven't driven one on the track, but CCA instructors have said the same thing.

In general, I'm not impressed with the E46 M3's handling. It has a bone-jarring suspension, but offers no better handling than my lightly modified and far more comfortable E46 328Ci (Bilstein sport shocks, H&R sport springs, UUC sways, GC RSMs, stock sport package alignment).

Quote:
Originally Posted by LSeca View Post
He could drive a 100hp Yugo around a track faster than any of us, but I am not going to buy one.

A Yugo has more deficiencies than just its engine. Let's compare apples to apples.

--Andre
post #84 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew View Post
A Yugo has more deficiencies than just its engine. Let's compare apples to apples.

--Andre

Understand, I was just using a similiar example. People want to buy cars that perform beyond their driving skills, there is nothing wrong with that.

Btw, an open diff does nothing good for a car's handling on a track. Imo, it is one of the strenghts of buying an M model (among other things) over the garden variety Z4. The electronic steering is something I don't think I could have. The "M" models of the Z4 are really good cars, I would like to have one.
post #85 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by LSeca View Post
Understand, I was just using a similiar example. People want to buy cars that perform beyond their driving skills, there is nothing wrong with that.

Btw, an open diff does nothing good for a car's handling on a track. Imo, it is one of the strenghts of buying an M model (among other things) over the garden variety Z4. The electronic steering is something I don't think I could have. The "M" models of the Z4 are really good cars, I would like to have one.

That may not be case in every situation. For example, Lotus engineers all prefer the Exige with traction control and no LSD for track driving, as opposed to with LSD and no traction control. I do think that in general, a LSD equipped car has certain advantages in certain situations, but how much it can help or hurt a car's performance depends greatly on how the rest of the car is set-up.
post #86 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by maomao1980 View Post
That may not be case in every situation. For example, Lotus engineers all prefer the Exige with traction control and no LSD for track driving, as opposed to with LSD and no traction control. I do think that in general, a LSD equipped car has certain advantages in certain situations, but how much it can help or hurt a car's performance depends greatly on how the rest of the car is set-up.


True, but you are using an example of a mid engine car with a rear bias weight balance. The Exige has less difficulty putting power to the ground because of this, as do some Porsche without an LSD. The Z4 is a 50-50 weight bias, a limited slip helps it a lot in tracking situations.

edit: I just looked up the Exige weight specs. 32/68% rear weight bias. Z4 is 50/50 I think.
post #87 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern-Nupe View Post

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.\\


What about the 300SL?
post #88 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpatrick View Post
I'm just making one small point DarkNWorns. No need to condescend, but I'll bite (again).

Performance wise, we're talking about value for money, and not all-out performance, I'm not sure which cars other than Ferraris and 911s, whose company you believe the S2000 doesn't belong in. The Z4's? Boxster's? Lotus?

I'm a fan of any exciting car or marque period, not just Honda. I haven't actually owned a Honda in a number of years now.

I actually don't dislike Honda. I just think there's better way to spend that money. The S2000 is a decent car, but you have to rev it to hell to get to the good stuff. It's suppose to compete with the 350Z, the RX-8, Z4, TT, Boxster, Elise, etc. But nobody actually takes it as a serious competitor to the German cars because the overall package does not compare well. As for value for the money, I'd rather take the 350Z over the S2000, for the reason stated.
post #89 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by LabelKing View Post
What about the 300SL?
I apologize, I mean modern day Mercedes, the 300's of the past were simply classics, but look at what the SL has evolved to a 4,000+ lb behemoth.
post #90 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai View Post
The same things that make a sports car fast at the track will also make the car very fun to drive on twisty canyon and mountain roads. A cheap race car typically doesn't have a license plate, so you can't play on the public roads with a cheap race car.

I don`t think sports cars are THAT fun to drive on the track. They are not really made for the track anyway.

I agree that a sports car would be fun to drive on a twisty mountain road, but you can enjoy just as much with a sports GT, or something relatively fast. The mountain road is not enough to enjoy the sports car to the fullest, and the track is too much for the sports car for the non-race car driver.

Quote:
Plus, there is a certain satisfaction in being able to drive to the track, run your car, then drive home again. It brings to mind the days when the line between sports cars and racing cars was not so distinct.

The line these days is very distant.

Quote:
If you own a sports car, and never take it to the track, you're missing out on one of the really fun aspects of owning a high performance car.

I agree that you should try to take your car to the track at least once.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › best value sports car under 100k?