You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion 

Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion - READ ONLY

522 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2007 at 6:07 PM

You are in the Coupes & Convertibles Forum. Your Host is claires

What is this discussion about? Porsche 911, Chevrolet Corvette, Ferrari F430, Lotus Exige, Lotus Elise, Coupe

#3 of 522 Love Corvette, is Porsche over priced? by starrow68 Mar 20, 2005 (8:07 pm)
Interesting views and yes we have it real good right now. I read a lot of car and sports car mags and am just getting to the C6 review in Grassrootsmotorsports but I read from front to back and have to get past the helmet and harness articles first. As to what is a sports car I also think it is partly an age and economic thing. When I was 20 something I did a dozen years in an MGB (72 - before the rubber bumpers) and was a very happy camper, it was what I could afford and was much more fun than the 280SL that I couldn't afford at the time. Also I fit and didn't have any issues getting in and out or driving long trips.   As I got to 50 something and was looking for some fun I wanted the XK8, until I found out at 6' 3" I didn't come close to fitting in the door or riding in the car. That led to lots of test drives, Boxster, S2000, M3, Z3, Z350, ZX300 (used), Miata and even a Prelude. Didn't think much of the TT or the SC430, sorry, a looks thing. Nothing really impressed me until I was encouraged to try a Corvette, most dealers don't test drive new ones. Test drove a couple used ones and it fit the bill, fun, comfortable and I admit more a GT than a true sports car which I was looking for at the time.    Then the neighbor with the M3 wanted to do a driving school so we went to Russell Racing at Sears Point and I've been on the track for a couple years now. The Vette is a sports car even in plain vanilla coupe form. It's really fun with an instructor getting a particular turn down and then they say, 'stay wide and when the M5 stays on line you should be in good position to pass, now nail it'.      So, why do the sports car mags rave about the Boxster? I was underwhelmed by the power and it was too tight for comfort, I'm only 195# so not a bulk issue. At the track I pass most 911's and the Boxsters don't even come close even in the twisty sections like the esses at Sears Point. Running up on one in the esses and then blowing by in turn 9 only gets hairy when you have to decide how fast you want to take turn 10, takes some working up to. To get a Porsche that performs as well as a $40k to $45k Vette(02) you need to get well past $100k, say $125k. And for a $50k Z06, which I don't have, it can usually run with GT3's. Passing a GT3 by the way is really fun , and lapping one in a 25 minutes session at Laguna Seca is just gravey, ok he was a rookie but I'm not far past that myself .      In two weeks, off to Reno-Fernley, newly expanded road course for my sixth track in the past two years. All Corvette weekend, no Porsches to pass . If you have a sports car and you are not getting out on road courses for High Performance Driving Events (HPDE) you are really missing most of the fun! IMHO
#4 of 522 definition, please! by tsaupe1 Mar 21, 2005 (8:54 am)
I'm not really sure what constitutes a sportscar anymore. When I was younger I thought of my Lotus Elan as a sports car and the Elan plus 2S as a GT. I guess I always thought of "sportscars" as open roadsters with two seats that were light and "tossable."   Now that I'm driving a 328 Ferrari, I think of it as a sportscar. I'm wondering if the change in attitude happened with a lot of people with the introduction of the 240Z.   Going by the old definition, I'd have to vote for the Elise. At least, I sure wouldn't mind having one!
#5 of 522 linking to N&V by Mr_Shiftright HOST Mar 21, 2005 (9:35 am)
We might link this discussion if it remains civilized. The "what is a sports car" forums in the past have gotten rowdy, so we'll see.   I'm going to take the position that if you can't track the car from the showroom floor without making a fool of it and you, then it's not a sports car. If you can, that doesn't mean it IS a sports car, as some 4-door sedans might track very well.   Let's just say that multiple hot laps, performed respectably without brakes on fire and suspension begging for mercy and pig-squealing tires and an exhausted driver, takes you at least to the semi-finals of "what is a sports car".   "Sport" implies a serious weapon for the job, not some marketing device IMO.
#6 of 522 tracking by tsaupe1 Mar 21, 2005 (10:00 am)
"I'm going to take the position that if you can't track the car from the showroom floor without making a fool of it and you, then it's not a sports car."   I don't know, Mr Shiftright, I've had some awfully good cars make a fool out of me on the track. But yes, I think being trackable should be in the equation.
#7 of 522 Not so sure ... by starrow68 Mar 21, 2005 (11:45 am)
After two years on track I've seen everything from Suburbans to a Pontiac Sunbird and Volvo wagons to one Elise and everything inbetween. BTW, the Suburban was being driven by an old instructor and passing many in the entry level group. Some of the M and AGM sedans seem to track pretty well but none have passed my Vette yet, not that any high end unit with a good driver couldn't. There is just too much capability in most cars today to let it off that easy, and face it I see vintage NASCARs at the track all the time, not sports cars for sure.      So, from the dozen years in the MGB, which I did enjoy greatly, is it as simple as having the top down and taking the long way home through a canyon? I would like to think the track would some how make a distinction but what's the next factor? I'm not into the sun so top down is no longer a draw, track performance on the other hand keeps me very happy in the Vette. Randy Replies to this message: Mr_Shiftright (Mar 21, 2005 12:05 pm)
#8 of 522 Re: Not so sure ... [starrow68] by Mr_Shiftright HOST Mar 21, 2005 (12:05 pm)
Replying to: starrow68 (Mar 21, 2005 11:45 am) Well I did specify "off the showroom floor" so that eliminates the highly modified NASCAR automobile that is not even streetable...   As for a Suburban on the track, that's fine for a couple laps driven by an expert but soon enough its brakes would fail completely if it were driven hard, ditto Volvo wagons, Sunbirds or whatever. They simply cannot endure 100+ mph speeds on the track with the brakes and suspension they have. Shoot, anybody with some skill can beat a couple raw rookies on a track for one or two laps without even breathing hard.   So I think the track test is very valid for openers if you really try to drive the "sports car" seriously and seriously fast around the course. You really think a Sebring convertible is going to do ten ferocious laps at Sears? Don't think so myself unless you got a lotta heart and a lotta guts.
#9 of 522 Yea, well ... by starrow68 Mar 21, 2005 (11:00 pm)
That does bring down the limits, but I wonder how bad the brakes are on stuff off the showroom floor. Since the last two new cars we bought were Corvettes my most recent prior experience is the Excursion and it's hopeless, even compared to the Sub. So, I get your point. What I do see at the track currently is Evo's and WRX's, lots of 'em, S2000's interestingly most with race rubber and not street cars, Miata's in all forms but mostly modified, Porsche mostly 911 or older stuff like 944's, hardly ever see Boxsters, several BMW, mostly 3 series, Mustang's and F Body's and surprising to me not a lot of Corvettes. But I guess less than 35k per year with 16 million car sales isn't going to be much of a percentage. I've seen very few Z3's, a few G35's and a few mini Cooper's, they look like fun. Now older stuff like NSX's, RX7's and turbo Supra's show up every so often. Pick what you like, it's really not a long list.
#10 of 522 on the track by Mr_Shiftright HOST Mar 22, 2005 (12:20 pm)
You think Mustangs and F bodies are running stock brakes and tires? I doubt it. Evos are pretty awesome right out of the box as long as you don't hit anything. 944s are great handling cars, very under-rated.
#11 of 522 Thanks again, by starrow68 Mar 23, 2005 (9:12 am)
I guess since I'm running stock brakes I think it can be done more widely. True that most of the Stangs and F-body's are modified to some extent and the brakes seem to be one of the simplist things to be done.   On the 944 there seems to be a good series for them in NASA, I think, just like American Iron for pony cars. Too bad I don't have the interest in keeping up my own or the money to have one kept up for me, doing some racing might be interesting. OTOH, for just a few dates a year seems like lots of work, which I get the impression is why many like it, a hobby. Running on track for the fun of it takes less time and allows more dates, any one with a performance sports car is really missing out. There is a group running at Sears Point Sunday the 3rd that I may try to catch a session with after returning from Reno-Fernley that day. Addicted, no way! Randy
#12 of 522 Seems like this should be part of the discussion by starrow68 Mar 24, 2005 (10:22 am)
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=1949   Of course I like the result, except for the Boxster and just wish the Elise would fit for a few laps. Oh well! Replies to this message: Mr_Shiftright (Mar 24, 2005 3:16 pm)

You are here: Forums Coupes & Convertibles Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion