You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles
Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion ![]()

522 messages, Last post on Dec 08, 2007 at 6:07 PM
You are in the Coupes & Convertibles Forum. Your Host is claires
|
"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. |
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: starrow68 (Mar 21, 2005 11:45 am) 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. |
|
| 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. | |
|
|
| 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. | |
|
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 |
|
|
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!
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: starrow68 (Mar 24, 2005 10:22 am) You can pooh-pooh Corvette and Boxster for this or that failing, or for the grossly stereotypical buyer who is brought forth into the media spotlight for a cheap shot (Corvette drivers wear gold chains, Boxster drivers are incompetent show-offs, blah blah), but these two cars are purpose built and can walk their talk, so 'nuff said. |
|
| Sports car racing will gain even more popularity this year. So why doesn't Ferrari back the new F430 in racing? | |
|
|
|
Not sure what the theme of this discussion really is. There hasn't been any real attempt to define a sports car, which is probably a good thing. As Shifty points out, that discussion has not gone well in the past. I have to say that from my perspective, the Elise is the quintessential sports car available today. It lost a lot of points in that R&T comparison for things like exterior styling, interior styling, ergonomics, seats and trunk space - none of which have anything to do with being a great sports car in my mind. Well, ergonomics might come into play from the standpoint that at 6'1" and 220 lbs, I probably wouldn't fit in an Elise. Only that and the fact that I don't have $45K lying around for a fun car, prevent me from running down to the Lotus dealer. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles
Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion ![]()
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Porsche 911
2010 Chevrolet Corvette
2009 Ferrari F430
2010 Lotus Exige
2009 Lotus Elise



Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats