Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Sports Cars - The Definitive Discussion

1235711

Comments

  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I'm not sure you're picking up what I'm putting down, Shiftmeister.

    If that's the kick you were on from the beginning, then you should've said so. First of all, I doubt Hondas will ever possess the soul of Ferrari at all. I've never questioned the almighty Ferrari mystique. Not in the slightest. I was merely stating that Honda possesses the resources to produce a Ferrari fighter, cachet aside (I hope I don't have to say it again).

    However, when the downplaying one of the greatest sports cars in the world occurs, it reeks of a blatant refusal to acknowledge the car for what it is. It seems as if this perspective is looking down from the top, sipping wine (hehe), laughing at the S2000 perspective.

    To put the effort of Honda and the S2000 on the same level of the Miata is a slanted view of the automotive landscape. True, the ethos behind the two is the same, but that only reinforces how correct the Japanese have on what true sports cars are.

    Don't take it the wrong way, as to say that the other sports car makers in the world have the definition wrong. They don't. It's just that the MX-5 and S2000 have a unity about them that really screams "sports car" more so than it speaks of their individual identities. When I drove the S2000 with the top down and the engine humming and screaming (depending on my preference) along the Florida coast, the thought came to mind that, "this is a great sports car." During the rental of a 360 in Miami--engine screaming or humming depending on how I felt--I thought, This is an awesome Ferrari."

    It's just what separates the two. The Honda staying true to all of the elements of a sports car while offering a user-friendly interface, the Ferrari further evolving the elements of it's own great sports cars with each generation, getting more user-friendly with each generation.

    I'm going to repeat, this isn't to say that anyone else has it wrong. I'm just speaking from the perspective of a person in the market for both cars, but holds value over cachet as priority (which is why I'm also in the market for a Ferrari). Shifty is merely the opposite and that's fine.

    It'd be nice if the host of "The Definitive Discussion" had a more holistic view of the automotive landscape. But the fact that this is a forum, and the host doesn't have that view, makes for awesome debate. Thanks, Shifty.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I'm not the host here actually, just visiting.

    I'm not sure where we're going with this at all, so maybe others have something they'd like to say?
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Just a difference in 2 opinions. Nothing more. As long as I'm me, and you're you, this debate is perpetual. No need to stretch it out anymore.
  • designmandesignman Member Posts: 2,129
    Well they say the best way to speed is via RPM. However part of the RPM mystique is the noise that comes with it. Noise is macho. Lack of comfort is macho. You get a enough of both with the S2000. Cue… pound chest, yodel like Tarzan… think… my car is a Ferrari.

    In defense of the bargain darling… I think the S2000’s RPM takes you into the testosterone zone. When you are sticking it into the torque peak it is screamin-mimi fun, even if you have to parry with it as the Edmunds reviewer put it. And you nearly have to redline it because peak torque and redline are not too far apart. So the Ferrari… I mean the S2000… definitely has the machismo factor.

    I also disagree with any notion that S2000 styling is Japanese-derivative. In my opinion it’s one of the best-looking sports cars around and the newer 2.2 interior is drop-dead gorgeous. As far as cachet I could care less. The smallness of any sports car plus the inherent qualities are enough for me. Just don’t make it ugly like a Z4 and you have a friend here. Spinning an S2000’s engine with wind in hair goes a long way with any true sports car lover. Impressing the valets and snobs? They can kiss my cantaloupes. Now, go easy with this cachet business or I’ll spoof you again with Eustace Tilly. Sports cars are mostly about the elements and the roller coaster ride.

    What I want to know is, what is everyone going to do when electric motors come to the performance world? They have maximum torque at 1 RPM, maintain it throughout the rev range and can spin up to 12K. The problem? No noise. Not very macho.

    ;-)
  • speeds2muchspeeds2much Member Posts: 164
    Aha, designman pinpoints the Ferrari-S2000 connection via wailing RPMs. I wholeheartedly agree. (Of course for an extra 200 grand one gets a better sound).

    ...but what an interesting question regarding electric motors. I suppose it depends on how silent the motor and overall car is, and what sounds replace the sounds of the motor. Imagine the paradigm shift for the space age: instead of barnstorming, it's space flight. There's no sound in space, and no air resistance, making for incredible smooth power delivery and supersonic speeds. So what would an electric sports car deliver? Ungodly torque and acceleration along with maybe a little sound of the elements, wind and road, and the sound of the clock ticking inside like the old Bentley ads.....sign me up! :shades:
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    ELECTRIC sports cars? Well, I guess, as long as it is somehow MECHANICAL or machine-like. I mean, even the F-16 pilot must like the noise and the stress on his body and the danger. At least those things can't be missing. But you don't need a piston engine particularly, although personally I'd miss it. Who wants a sports car that sounds like an elevator going up and down. 1925 cars are still fun, I hope 2025 cars are too.

    I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss cachet as irrelevant in the human psyche. The mere fact that owners of less expensive or less exclusive cars are so self-conscious about it speaks volumes about its enormous pressure in the marketplace. I sure lust for cars I can't have. Ditto fashion, electronics, you name it. It's like the man who spends all day telling us he doesn't care about money. He doth protest too much.

    Cachet is almost cave-man stuff. He with the biggest sword, the most glittering crown, the mightiest steed. Sure, it's a perfect object for ridicule, but there's tremendous power in it and some carmakers thrive on it and strive to own it for their products. Why after all, did Toyota become Lexus? Lexus has cache, Toyota doesn't, and you can't say Lexus is just a fluffy little nothing of people's vanity. There's a stark reality to cache. Also, rich car enthusiasts are not collectively stupid. A Ferrari is worth every penny you pay for it. What you DO with it is another story--that's not the car's fault. You can hitch a thoroughbred horse to a pony cart but don't call it a nag.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I adore the idea of a zero emissions sports car. I'd have fewer complaints from my significant other (she's an environmentalist to the nth power), while still being able to get my thrills.

    I've loved the T Zero since it debuted some years back. Not sure about the noise thing, though. It sounds like a golf cart (not that I haven't drag raced a couple of those, hehe). On track days my eyes are glued to the tach as if my life depended on it.

    I could see a powerful electric motor further defining a GT or a luxury car's mission, but it's harder to realize in a true sports car.

    In addition, the range would be the thing keeping such a wonderful car out of my driveway. 100 miles at 60mph? That figure regulates it to being a weekender.

    It'd be something very different to acclimate to.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I bet you'll see a larger electric/gas hybrid GT car pretty soon...I can't imagine current hybrid technology fitting into a Miata, but I could see it in a large fast GT coupe of some type.

    Personally in a full electric sports car, I'd need at least 150 mile range. The problem is that the idea of "sportscar" , as in full-on acceleratioin (why else would you drive one, to putter?), isn't so compatible with electric cars and how they work---yeah you get the torque from the get-go, but you drain the system pretty fast, too.
  • speeds2muchspeeds2much Member Posts: 164
    Shifty, what would the weight distribution be in a hybrid GT? As far as sports cars and GTs go, I wonder if the hybrid platform is compatible. A low center of gravity and 50/50 weight distribution along with good steering feel would go a long way toward making a hybrid GT work, but if it's rear or front-heavy, that wouldn't be so hot.
  • designmandesignman Member Posts: 2,129
    Actually I was alluding to hybrids. Lexus claims F1 teams are interested in the technology but it is not sanctioned by the F1 governing body.

    http://en.lexus-hybrid.com/benefits/performance.html

    “ELECTRIC sports cars? Well, I guess, as long as it is somehow MECHANICAL or machine-like. I mean, even the F-16 pilot must like the noise and the stress on his body and the danger.”

    Needless to say hybrids are as mechanical as it gets what with dual power sources, planetary gear sets and engineering/optimizing power and transmission for performance. Ditto pure electric. Hybrid success will mostly depend on advances in battery technology. Fascinating challenges here. I have no doubt they will be pushing the limits though. They have to, the world’s gas tank will be running on empty; estimates say 30-100 years.

    I’d like to see where CVTs go. On paper it has to be the fastest form of transmission. I understand there are problems making them strong enough for massive amounts of torque.

    I think today’s fighter jets are pretty quiet in the cockpit, and the faster they go the quieter they get due to the sound/speed relationship. Yeah, g forces on the body are something else. Take a ride in a P-51… there’s your noise. Might as well strap your head to a Marshall amp while a hard rock band is playing. WWII pilots came home with hearing problems. That said, there’s nothing like the sound of those 1600hp 12 cyl Rolls Royce Merlin engines roaring across the sky.

    I love speculating where tech is going but I guess I’m glad Scottie can’t beam us up yet. No fun getting there.

    Speeds2much… I think they’re working hybrid into the ideal front/rear/vertical balance. As always total weight is the challenge. Internal combustion engine, electric motor, batteries… sounds like an engineering nightmare for performance cars. Who cares how fast they can go? Gotta toss it! There ya go, you just gave me an idea. Maybe I’ll change my screen name to Corners2much.

    ;-)
  • speeds2muchspeeds2much Member Posts: 164
    I love speculating where tech is going but I guess I’m glad Scottie can’t beam us up yet. No fun getting there.

    lol...I agree. That kind of technology looks cool on Star Trek, but please, let the next guy be the one who actually tests out the darned thing. I read once that it would take an unrealistic amount of energy to accomplish this feat, anyway, but I'm not sure whether that's just geek talk.

    Back to the definitive sports car discussion, though. Imagine a future where sports "cars" could leave the garage, then the atmosphere and then race around in space. Now THAT would be a sport. Speed limits? I doubt it. :P
  • beall1beall1 Member Posts: 1
    I tested one and had the same problem. Somebody told me that you can have the seats made specially for you, but I do not know how much.

    What, they only mak the car for short people?
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I think the Porsche approach would be the most logical way to properly execute an electric vehicle. All of the elements that have made almost every iteration of the 911 such a dynamically complete vehicle would further communicate the overall design ethic of the vehicle.

    Centering the weight either over or behind the rear axle yields huge dynamic advantages over having the horse in front of the carriage. I'm sure most members are aware of the inate handling benefits of of the mid-rear and rear engine. The lower polar moment of inertia allowing quicker transitions and such. Not to mention the subterranian center of gravity levels some of these cars have achieved in recent years.

    As far as acceleration is concerned, if the static weight distribution of any given vehicle is rear heavy by more than 55% (read 45/55 front/ rear,or more), then the dynamic weight distribution under acceleration places about a third or more of the total weight over the rear wheels. This means that fewer horses are needed to accelerate the car at the same rate as an identically geared front engined vehicle with the same weight/power ratio.

    In the braking department, the reverse distribution allows maximum stopping power by evenly loading the front and rear brakes. Gotta love it.
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    check out this video of an LS7 being built

    LS7 video
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Hey xk. How nice would it be to have a lightweight, mid-engined coupe weighing in at about 2400-2500lbs. powered by a Powertec V8?

    I'm not sure if everyone's apprised as to the specs of this wonderful little powerplant. What I've learned so far is that using a bespoke block and fuel injection, this 203lb flat crank V8 employs heads from the Suzuki GSX1300RR, also known as the Hayabusa. The results are impressive.

    360bhp@10 500rpm from 2.6 liters
    11.0:1 compression ratio
    180 degree crankshaft
    Dry sump lubrication

    Check out the site and post your comments.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Sounds like great fun on a track but a real pain in a street car in the real world. You'd get the same complaints that were levelled against the original S2000, only much worse, and where in the world will you find the high octane fuel? I'm a little wary of HP numbers posted at 10,500 rpm. Makes me wonder what I'm going to be doing at 2,500 rpm on a city street. It'd be like driving a Ninja in traffic don't you think?
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    The guy who owns Radical West, the distributor for Radicals out here was driving one at Thunderhill yesterday. It was just about the fastest thing on the track but not quite. They did an exhibition race after lunch and had a split grid for the, I think, 8 Radicals in front and then ten or more more common vehicles that started about 200 yards back. The Porsche caught and passed each of the Radicals in turn and picked off John Morris in the V8 Hayabusa twin on the last of a ten lap race, 30 miles. Impressive driving, but I don't know the specs on the 911 except it had a huge double wing on the rear. Fun to watch. They were both very fast cars. BTW, the Radical is the right hand picture on the Powertec header of the four vehicles shown.

    Funny thing about the little V8, in the pits it has a supurb sound, deep and rumbles, but going by on the straight it just screams. Also FWIW, an IMSA Mustang with about 700hp passed most of the Radicals as well, and it sounds great anywhere.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    it screams probably because it's a cammer and also probably doesn't have massive piston weight, so revs up fast. That's one reason I hate to see modified V8s running on the track with cars of other classes...you can't hear anything except those monsters. It's like NASCAR or something---I want to hear the other engines, too. It took me about 6 different mufflers before I could get a sound out of my car I could live with. The Ansa I have does a nice job..it sounds like a German Mustang.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Hopefully, the car would be light enough for torque not to be a huge issue. I'd factor in a lightweight flywheel and underdrive pulleys to allow engine speed to pick up where a weak low end left off.

    What was the model designation of the Porsche you saw, Starrow? I recently saw a couple of Porsches lapping that I'm glad I didn't have to go up against. One was a 934, the other a slope-nosed 935. Truly amazing sports/race cars. Always striving for more knowledge, I picked the 935 owner/driver's brains a little bit. The car weighed in at 880kg, which equates to 1 936lbs wet with no driver. coupled with a nearly closed wastegate on that Type 930/72 2.8 liter engine, he estimated around 900bhp@7000rpm. I've seen fast cars. However, this car was fast.

    Always a good thing to see Porsches on a racetrack.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    http://www.ncracing.org/members-200.html

    Check out member 277, but that is not the car he was driving, I think, may
    just have new paint but didn't look like that to me.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Porsches get good HP per liter in racing form. Even in 1968, the 908 was producing about 115 HP per liter.

    Now before those wheels start turning, it isn't fair to presume that an 8 liter American V8 should be producing 8 X 115HP to be comparable. In fact, as you increase displacement it is much harder to achieve the equivalent HP/liter ratio----due to very heavy pumping losses as I understand it.

    Still, 199 mph out of 3 liters is pretty good.

    GT2s are ferocious. Here, hold your breath while I tell you the cost of front rotors---$8,500! So next time you see the driver slamming on those brakes, feel his pain why don't you?
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    I pulled up behind a newer Ferrari at the track on Friday and he seemed to be working on figuring out the line so he waved me by early on and I didn't see him again. Didn't know what it was and never got around it in the pits to ask, but someone passed along that it was, 'The Ferrari was a 456M', so can some one tell me something about it?

    Also, I continue to be amazed at what it costs to track some cars, and I think the vette is expensive. I'm planning to cut my approximately $450 for all 4 rotors down to about $150 for after market units next time I change. Not for the faint of wallet, in any case.

    Next thing to look into is an Ultralite.

    Randy
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    The predecessor to the new 612 Scaglietti coupe, it was the four seat V12 GT coupe in the lineup from '92 to a few months ago. Nice, smooth 5.7L engine up front, and a top end of around 186mph. Engine specs are as follows:

    Aluminum block and heads
    65 degree DOHC V12
    10.6:1 Compression
    Displacement is 456.2 cu. in. (5 473.9cc)
    436bhp@6250rpm
    398lb-ft@4500rpm
    Redline is 7 250rpm

    It's chassis is tube frame with an aluminum body welded to it. Of course, it has double wishbones at all four corners with huge ventilated discs sitting at the end of them.

    I've had the pleasure of being both driver an passenger of this car and the drive is superb. It started out weighing in at around 3 700lbs. in 1992 and ended up closing in on 3 900lbs. toward the end of the production run probably due to safety standards. You can feel the weight in the turns but fortunately the motor is so torquey, you can pull yourself out of the understeer should you go into a corner too hot.

    I've never seen one on the track, though. Just took one for a test drive. It's very much a GT in the way it rides. That much I do know. The steering and engine seemed sharp enough for anything you wanted to throw at it, but the suspension (even with adjustable shocks) didn't seem up to the task of prolonged use.

    Starrow, did it seem race preped, or was it stock? I'm very curious to know what those things can do on the track when set up right.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Seems an odd car to put on the track. It really is a GT car. But at least the guy is out there.

    TRACK COSTS: I've heard from friends in vintage racing that all in all you can plan on at least $600 a weekend if you average it out over a few years of tires, mishaps, fuel, etc.---this would be a minimum for a stock class or vintage class of gentlemanly racing I mean. And you probably won't win anything spending that little. Any serious racing is real expensive of course.

    I think karting would be way fun and a cheaper way to go. That's where many of the great drivers started out as young 'uns.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    The Ferrari looked stock all around, even to all season tires and was stunning, as noted before. The guy or could have been gal ;), seemed to be hunting for the line so it was hard to judge what it might have been capable of. It was running with the 2nd of 4 groups so the driver should have had more than just basic experience, the 1st group was instruction/novice and the second group was limited/solo, meaning drivers that should know tracking and the local track, but aren't yet into open passing. Our group passes only on straights, which for a Vette works to perfection. :)

    Then again, there was this CTS-V that I caught several times in the corners and once out of turn 15 onto longest straight he pointed me by because I had closed very fast in the corners through 14/15. Only problem was I come out of 15 in 3rd and after point me by he and I both floored it and he pulled me for about 50yds until he noticed and hit the brakes to get me by. He was on my tail until we hit turn 1 and then my close to 90mph turn left him way back, by the entry to turn two I was ahead by a lot. Just have to figure out if I'm somehow down on power and haven't noticed since I'm carrying more speed through corners with experience and the times aren't off much.

    Have to admit, this discussion has convinced me that the Vette is mostly a touring car and it's sports car pretensions are dependent on setting it up beyond street stock. The Z06 on the other hand is a pretty handy performer in the control of the right driver.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Just did some testing with some friends at the runway of a private airport. My buddy just obtained an SLK350. He opted for the 6-speed stick in hopes of better performance.

    The best we were able to do was 5.5 seconds to 60 with the quarter coming in 13.9 at a tick over 100mph. The dynamics were much improved, but I'm still not sure I want to try and put the sports car label on this one yet. The braking was fine (if a bit vague compared to my BMW), but I'm not sure if I'd trust the suspension to any type of track use, regardless of shock/spring ratings. Overall a good ride, though. Gonna try the SLK55 AMG in another couple of weeks.

    Has anyone else driven one yet?
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    Hey xk. How nice would it be to have a lightweight, mid-engined coupe weighing in at about 2400-2500lbs. powered by a Powertec V8?

    Only if it were tested at the Nurburing, backed by the factory in racing (perhaps the American Le Mans Series), were crash-tested, and looked nothing like the new BMWs.
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    I saw the Panoz Esperante on the Travel Channel tonight.

    check here

    Hand-built aluminum American sports car

    Panoz takes a lot of pride in their cars. It was great to see how they build them.
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    check the link

    No Cayman race car

    It is too bad that Porsche won't race a superior design (mid-engine vs rear-engine).
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    http://automobilemag.com/news/0507_porsche_cayman_s/

    I can't get too interested when they talk about faster than a 911 which my
    $40 - $45k Vette passes with pretty much ease on the track. How much
    is the name worth, seems a lot.
    Randy
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I guess they're getting their money's worth spending decades taming that crazy rear end and sledgehammer weight distribution.

    Figures they'd have to put a roof on the Boxster to justify such a deserving engine.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,370
    what they can't have and Porsche is aware of that. I have no doubt that when the time comes they'll take the Cayman out to race. No doubt they'd like to do additional testing and development work to insure that the Cayman is truly competitive when they do.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I'd like to see more of an effort from Porsche on the mid-engine front. With the advent of the Carrera GT, hailed by some as the best sports car ever, it seems Porsche is rediscovering what's possible with those magical twenty inches or so they decide to place the engine mass.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    http://www.nbc4.tv/news/4562562/detail.html

    I will note that some found the extra images of the car to be excess.
    Like the demo's they do at HS's I found them sobering and a vivid
    reminder of what can happen when something goes very wrong.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Very sad to see images of crashes. True about the sobering and vividness of that accident, starrow.

    Just got done tuning my first Elise for a customer. Overall, not a bad effort from the shop. I cant wait for the Exige to hit the shores. All of the Elises responses jacked up to 12. It'll be great for those people either small or limber enough to drive it. I doubt there will be a dynamically better sports car for the money (or not).

    Hang on, maybe the Noble M400. Yeah that car is quite possibly the greatest vehicle ever produced, ever. Okay maybe that's taking it a bit far, but having driven a lot of sports cars I can say that Noble tattooed the words "sports car" into it's soul. And it's big enough to fit me!
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    Although it has all the development and credentials of a true sports car, I find that the BMW is more of a GT than anything else. I'm not sure where it fits into the automotive landscape as far as competition is concerned.

    BMW PR claims that they're going after wayward Porsche Turbo customers. However, Porsche owners are as loyal as they come.

    It's disheartening that as an avid BMW owner/racer/enthusiast, I'm not sure what to think about this vehicle.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 235,200
    It looks like a lot of fun..

    But.. I can't imagine someone considering it as a replacement for the 911 Turbo..

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I believe that BMW makes some of the best performance sedans and coupes on the market - M5, M3, even the standard 5 and 3 series.

    But if they consider the M6 a sports car, let alone a competitor to the 911, someone in their marketing department has to have his head examined. Unfortunately, BMW has not made a competitive sports car since the M1. The Z3 and Z4 plop the same engine found in the 530i and X5 into an overweight roadster and call it a sports car?? Back in 2001, I bought an S2000 over a Boxster S on price, but I wouldn't take an M Roadster for $5,000 less than the S2000.

    The 6 series and M6 might capture some of Mercedes CL and even Astin Martin buyers, but they are nearly 4,000 lb behemouths that are no more competitive with the 911 than the old 850i was. As a sports car, I'd take the base Boxster over the M6, so the PR guy that is shooting at the Porsche Turbo really needs to come down to earth.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    After spending the last few weeks driving some very fast and expensive cars, I'm pertty sure I've figured out what falls into the category of "sports car" and what doesn't.

    I group the M6 in the same category as I do the R34 Nissan Skyline GT-R. After driving a highly modified version of this vehicle, I can truly say it falls into the category of a highly powerful sports coupe that's capable of outstanding numbers.

    The Skyline had awesome power and was capable of accelerating faster than nearly every car I've ever driven, modified or not. The car was equally adept at negotiating hairpins like they were nothing due to the fact that I wasn't only dealing with a superb all-wheel drive system, but I had 4-wheel steering throwing me through these curves. The Skyline also comes as a sedan, however, and is also quite heavy. Regardless of whether or not it puts up Enzo-beating numbers is a moot point. Even with thought-driven steering/transmission/brakes, this is still a heavy car that is a really a powerful GT at traffic violation speeds, and a racer when the pace gets truly illegal.

    The M6 might be able to do all of these things, but it will stand as a bit of an anomaly in the automobile world. Big enough to be a GT, but it might lack the comfy/taught ride. It'll have power, but not the nice lazy power people expect of a vehicle of that type. For my 6 figures, I'll take a used Lamborghini Gallardo with e-Gear. I still get a 500ish horse V10 and semi-automatic tranny. Not to mention a chassis that hasn't had it's weight chopped and moved to lower the center of gravity a couple of inches.
  • habitat1habitat1 Member Posts: 4,282
    I agree with everthing except your last statement about gettign a Gallardo with e-Gear. Why? that seems to be the worst of both worlds. A car that is not a comfortable GT. And an automatic transmissioned muscle bound car that does not have the nimble feel and finesse of, say a Ferrari 360 or 911 S. Once again, at subsonic speeds, I'd even take my former S2000 over the nearly 3,600 lb Gallardo.

    According to Edmunds review: The Gallado "Lacks nimble precision of its competitors".

    I have pretty well convinced myself with research that the best $100,000 I could spend right now on a sports car is a 997 model 911 S Cabriolet. If money is no object, then the 430 Spider seems to be the ultra enthusiasts choice (albeit a car that can't be driven a quarter as much as the 911). Best bang for the buck is still the $32,000 Honda S2000 in my book. Between $40,000 and $75,000, it's a tougher decision, with the Boxster S and new Caymen being contenders, but not yet convincing me of their incremental value over an S2000. In my case, if I go Porsche, it will likely be the 911 S or not at all.
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    I also agree with the fact that the S2K is the best sports car you can buy for less than $40K.

    In addition, I concur that the Gallardo isn't the enthusiasts choice when it comes to out and out sports cars. I would just get one were I to be choosing a competitor to the M6 based on spec and feel.

    It's my feeling that because the M6 is trying very hard to be a sports car, and the Gallardo is a sports car and doesn't know it, these two would be perfect opposites to a common coin.
  • xkssxkss Member Posts: 722
    And the rear bumper is ghastly.

    A sports car it is not.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    I'm also not fond of what AWD does to a "sports car". I think it deadens it a bit. Certainly felt that way with the Porsche C4s. AWD does give you tremendous grip but also nails the car down a lot and increases driver effort. I like sports cars that feel very nimble and "electric"...if you slide around a little bit, all the better test of your skills. I'd rather rely on tires and suspension to keep me planted.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    if the driver provides balance. That's why I understand it's so hard to drive a Porsche at the limit. It's harder to balance a 34/66 pendulum compared to a 51/49 bar. Although once you work it out, having all that weight over the back wheels seems to help a lot. And getting the proper slip angle as opposed to sliding will improve turn in providing a shorter route to the apex and better angle of exit to the track out. I just don't get why it's so interesting to master a flawed concept rather than doing quicker laps in a better design. Here's to watching Panoz (David) to see if it can come through more than once this season in ALMS. Always nice when the only junk yard dog in the ring shows up all the pedigrees! And it has a much nice sound to boot.
    Randy
  • designmandesignman Member Posts: 2,129
    "I just don't get why it's so interesting to master a flawed concept rather than doing quicker laps in a better design."

    Same reason why men ride bulls in rodeos.

    “I like sports cars that feel very nimble and "electric"...if you slide around a little bit, all the better test of your skills.”

    Bingo, Shifty will get up on that bull.

    ;-)
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    You got it. Mastering the perfect, un-eventful, clinically perfect lap (to me anyway) is like driving to a car show and then talking about the gas mileage you got on the way over.

    This is also why watching modern racing is like looking at paint drying unless someone crashes or blows up, and why flying a small plane in Alaska is more fun than piloting a 747---so the pilots tell me. (I've flown in lotsa small planes but not piloted a 747, nor do I ever care to).

    I'd rather not even have power steering in a sports car, but the wider rubber we run now makes that a necessary evil that I'm willing to live with.

    It seems every day manufacturers conspire to take more and more feedback away from us.

    As I have so tediously mentioned before, it is no co-incidence that many gazillionaires who also love cars spend a great deal of time and money racing the most primitive types old machinery around the race courses all over the world.

    Well sure you don't have to go THAT FAR BACK to have a good time, but having every problem ironed out for you by technology is in my mind a most regrettable choice, as what you gain isn't as much as what you lose.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    You all see it as a loss while I see the opportunity to learn something new, to me, in taking a current, fairly high powered sports car, around different tracks and learning the line to improve lap times up to something almost respectable as a challenge and an opportunity to develop. There are some things that need to be built on as opposed to jumped into with both feet, first time out. I doubt a lot of Bull riders got their start at that point of their career. Your approach smacks of absolutes without accomodating the fun steps in the process for others beginning at different levels and with different goals.
    Sure it would be nice to have an historic, saw a 850hp McClaren at Sears Point a couple weeks ago that would terrify me I'm sure, but at this point there are lots of basics that even at my age I still need to learn. Maybe that historic is off in the future, not too far off, but when I get there I expect I'll have driven a lot, taken several more classes, and learned a few things even from some of the technology available today. Keeping an open mind,
    Randy

    PS Aren't pilots just bus drivers with wings?
  • ultimatedriverultimatedriver Member Posts: 74
    All this talk about the tactile feel of sports cars is reminding me why I'm kicking the girlfriend out to make room for a new MX-5 (we can't co-exist, fights over the keys and what not).

    Now here's a car that is driven by an entire philosophy rather than just improving on spec and kit. I can't wait to first see if I can properly fit into it. Following that little test, I'm taking it for a weekend up the east coast. There's no doubt in my mind this sports car will rank as one of my top ten drives of any car (for it's own reasons, of course).

    I'm glad there are still cars like the MX-5 on the market for the simple fact that it seems as if a lot of manufacturers have forgotten the simplicity that used to exist in a genuine sports car. If only Lotus could hear my cries, and build something that can fit taller drivers.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    "PS Aren't pilots just bus drivers with wings? "

    At the United Airlines Terminal, perhaps. In Alaska, the bus drivers with wings are all dead. (as are the reckless cowboys I might add....ah, balance, all is balance....)

    I don't see how a person can truly learn something if the computer is doing half the driving for him. All he'll learn is how how and when the computer reacts...he is getting purely second hand information, since the computer has stopped the car from doing something. WHAT the car wanted to do, he will never personally experience. The computer is training him....he isn't training himself....

    True, this will save him both embarrassment and damage, so that's good, but he'll always be less of a driver than if he went in bare-[non-permissible content removed] nekkid IMO. If he can't ever crash, he can't back off that eensy teensy bit that makes a winner a winner. Think of a radar controlled baseball that is not allowed to touch a batter or something like that.

    Giving over control of the car to a computer might be GREAT for the driving-impaired on today's public roads, but not for the sports car lover IMO.
  • starrow68starrow68 Member Posts: 1,142
    I might be willing to test out your theory. As a matter of fact I do, when I take a day or three in the open wheel Formula Mazda's at Infineon with instruction. And I have crashed, limited liability and all that. But for the fun of learning new tracks in what is my daily driver, btw it is fun on the street too, I will take a little coaching and learn when the system engages and what I can do to get around that particular corner a little faster without that happening the next time. It does get you to smooth out the driving, believe it or not.

    OTOH, while most I've met seem to believe as I do, I did run across a kid, mid 20's at Sears Point in a Z06 that flat out said he pushes to get the system to engage. I think he will live to regret it, personally, but hey I can deal with other approaches since I'm not saying my approach is the best for everyone. It just works for me.

    Was it Michener who wrote 'There are old pilots and bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots'? Or was he just quoting? That still leaves lots of room for bus drivers, it would seem!

    Randy
This discussion has been closed.