A selection of cars for autocross...my word, the choices!

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Not that I wouldn't like to see it, but why would you consider a Malibu and cross the Miata immediately off the list?

 

[JCE]

...and then proceeded to list a bunch of cars that were 600 lbs too heavy for a decent FWD car, or 400 lbs too heavy for a decent RWD car.


They are not people, they are cars. And you are kissing off two of the most fun-to-drive automotive bargains of the last 20 years.

If you've got that attitude, I can't do anything to help you, and I'm not even going to try any further.

That's basically the same conclusion I reached.



EDIT: Had a bunch of stuff here, decided to take it out.

You know what, nevermind. Feel free to lock/delete/remove my topic then Duke. Excuse me for excluding what I do not like. And another thing, just because a car is heavier than an MX5 does not make it un-fun. Miata's and the Civic aren't the end all to be all fun you know. And, I said at the outset that I wasn't going to do this for the competition but for fun. And my idea of fun is driving something that I like around corners. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

You know what, nevermind. Feel free to lock/delete/remove my topic then Duke. Excuse me for excluding what I do not like. And another thing, just because a car is heavier than an MX5 does not make it un-fun. Miata's and the Civic aren't the end all to be all fun you know. And, I said at the outset that I wasn't going to do this for the competition but for fun. And my idea of fun is driving something that I like around corners. Is that so hard to understand?

Good for you man, everyone always says "buy a Miata" on these forums and I personally tire of it. A car should be something you can be passionate about (not physically though ). Get something you like, you can have fun in almost anything, so yeah.
So what are you leaning towards now?

 

[Joey D]

Autocrossing really isn't about driving what you like, yes you can drive anything but whether it will be any good is another story. Do you honestly think a lot of people get passionate about Neons? Probably not, but they know they work well and they use them because of that. The goal in autocross isn't to be different, it's to be fast through the course and there are just cars that have been proven to do it well. And if you are losing all the time and constantly having poor runs you probably won't be having fun out on the course...I tried to autocross the Blazer once, it failed and I had an awful time.

I would listen to Duke, he knows what he is talking about on this subject.

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Autocrossing really isn't about driving what you like, yes you can drive anything but whether it will be any good is another story. Do you honestly think a lot of people get passionate about Neons? Probably not, but they know they work well and they use them because of that. The goal in autocross isn't to be different, it's to be fast through the course and there are just cars that have been proven to do it well. And if you are losing all the time and constantly having poor runs you probably won't be having fun out on the course...I tried to autocross the Blazer once, it failed and I had an awful time.

I would listen to Duke, he knows what he is talking about on this subject.

I beg to differ. The goal of motorsport full stop is to have fun at a privately owned vehicle level. (i.e. no sponsors to impress). The best way to have fun is buy a car you like and have a little passion for and go drive the hell out of it. If you are losing and never intended to win then what's the problem? You're getting some adrenaline filled goodness irrespective of how you finish, and if you do do well that's just a plus.

 

[Duke]

I, frankly, don't care very much at all about the competitiveness of it. I agree wholeheartedly that it should be done for fun first.

But I think it is ludicrous to ignore a car that is cheap, incredibly fun to drive, and competitive just because you've decided in advance that you don't like it, without ever driving one! To me that's utterly ridiculous.

Why would I lock or delete this topic? It's not against the rules in any way. I just think you're going about this entirely the wrong way. No reason to stop you; I'm just not going to bother to try to help if you're going to dismiss it out of hand.

 

[Famine]

I own an MX-3 V6 (which, by the way, is about a second quicker to 60mph than you have it pegged) and co-own an MX-5 Mk1.

The MX-3 is your girl if you're doing longer tracks - above 50mph she eats the MX-5 up. But for autocross and, dare I say it, fun to drive-ness, she's in second place.


However... a few words about the MX-3. Lovely sounding V6 with VRIS to give a nice, flat torque curve, passive rear-wheel steering to help you in the slow stuff and you can probably shave a good 150kg out of the interior. She'll tear the MX-6 and Probe V6 apart as standard - and will happily accept (there's some fudging with the driveshafts) the Japanese MX-6 engine (KL-ZE, 195hp & 170lbft). That's about 200hp/tonne.

 

[JCE]

Autocrossing really isn't about driving what you like, yes you can drive anything but whether it will be any good is another story.

Rubbish. If I have fun in a car regardless of what car it is that to me is good.

Do you honestly think a lot of people get passionate about Neons?

Been to a Dodge forum recently?

Probably not, but they know they work well and they use them because of that. The goal in autocross isn't to be different, it's to be fast through the course and there are just cars that have been proven to do it well. And if you are losing all the time and constantly having poor runs you probably won't be having fun out on the course...I tried to autocross the Blazer once, it failed and I had an awful time.

That's your fault for not having fun in your Blazer--you probably went in to COMPETE and not have fun. You CAN have fun in most cars if you go into it with that in mind. The goal of autocross can either be from the person or from the institution. I choose that the goal FOR ME is to have fun in whatever I get my hands on. THAT is the point I'm TRYING to get across.

I beg to differ. The goal of motorsport full stop is to have fun at a privately owned vehicle level. (i.e. no sponsors to impress). The best way to have fun is buy a car you like and have a little passion for and go drive the hell out of it. If you are losing and never intended to win then what's the problem? You're getting some adrenaline filled goodness irrespective of how you finish, and if you do do well that's just a plus.

Thanks for sticking up for me but its not needed. At least someone here shares my opinion.

I, frankly, don't care very much at all about the competitiveness of it. I agree wholeheartedly that it should be done for fun first.

But I think it is ludicrous to ignore a car that is cheap, incredibly fun to drive, and competitive just because you've decided in advance that you don't like it, without ever driving one! To me that's utterly ridiculous.

But I have infact driven these cars before, granted not on a road course but enough of a test drive to not change my opinion. I just don't understand why you guys can't accept the fact that I don't like something? And yes that maybe close minded in the end--but it is also closed minded for you guys not to accept the fact that there are more fun cars that could perform well enough to enjoy in the universe. If everyone chose the same car it would be frankly boring. This is one reason why I don't watch NASCAR, Formula One, and any sort of open wheel racing. At least touring cars and GT cars are different from each other.

Why would I lock or delete this topic? It's not against the rules in any way. I just think you're going about this entirely the wrong way. No reason to stop you; I'm just not going to bother to try to help if you're going to dismiss it out of hand.

Its not about being against the rules, its about realizing that this isn't the forum for this type of topic where the topic starter has his opinions and gets bombs thrown at him for not liking what the other people prefer. I feel like I walked into a Dodge forum yelling "CHEVY IS BETTAR!" and promptly getting the bombs thrown at me. You guys can prefer the MX5, Civic, and etc--that's perfectly fine with me. I do not, now can't we move on from that fact and continue to discuss the subject and talk about the billions of other cars on planet earth? Famine's post below is exactly what I was looking for, lock-stock-and-barrel. I even love the fact that he uses the MX5 as a basis when discussing the MX3 and such.

*edit*
Toronado's post(s) also were what I was expecting as well.

I own an MX-3 V6 (which, by the way, is about a second quicker to 60mph than you have it pegged) and co-own an MX-5 Mk1.

The MX-3 is your girl if you're doing longer tracks - above 50mph she eats the MX-5 up. But for autocross and, dare I say it, fun to drive-ness, she's in second place.


However... a few words about the MX-3. Lovely sounding V6 with VRIS to give a nice, flat torque curve, passive rear-wheel steering to help you in the slow stuff and you can probably shave a good 150kg out of the interior. She'll tear the MX-6 and Probe V6 apart as standard - and will happily accept (there's some fudging with the driveshafts) the Japanese MX-6 engine (KL-ZE, 195hp & 170lbft). That's about 200hp/tonne.

That's some awsome info! And as a bonus the MX3 is quite a pretty car I think. I've never driven one, but would love to chuck it about to see how playful it is. And the 0-60 number was from that website, I'll be happy to change the time if you can verify it. 👍

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

I, frankly, don't care very much at all about the competitiveness of it. I agree wholeheartedly that it should be done for fun first.

But I think it is ludicrous to ignore a car that is cheap, incredibly fun to drive, and competitive just because you've decided in advance that you don't like it, without ever driving one! To me that's utterly ridiculous.

Why would I lock or delete this topic? It's not against the rules in any way. I just think you're going about this entirely the wrong way. No reason to stop you; I'm just not going to bother to try to help if you're going to dismiss it out of hand.

OK, I have no problems with your stance then. LOL, I thought Joey D was saying that winning was everything or something. My mistake. But seeing JCE said he ha driven an MX-5 and didn't like it much then I guess we're OK. Let's discuss some more of these cars.

I own an MX-3 V6 (which, by the way, is about a second quicker to 60mph than you have it pegged) and co-own an MX-5 Mk1.

The MX-3 is your girl if you're doing longer tracks - above 50mph she eats the MX-5 up. But for autocross and, dare I say it, fun to drive-ness, she's in second place.


However... a few words about the MX-3. Lovely sounding V6 with VRIS to give a nice, flat torque curve, passive rear-wheel steering to help you in the slow stuff and you can probably shave a good 150kg out of the interior. She'll tear the MX-6 and Probe V6 apart as standard - and will happily accept (there's some fudging with the driveshafts) the Japanese MX-6 engine (KL-ZE, 195hp & 170lbft). That's about 200hp/tonne.

My respect for your car has grown a little when I seen some in person, pretty in some ways. Which was better between MX-3 and FTO? They seem so similar. Tiny cars, tiny V6s, FWD. Hey, what about an FTO? Or are they really crap?

 

[homeforsummer]

FTOs are supposed to be pretty good, those in the know claim they handle up to the level of Integras. The engine is supposed to be a git to work on though, funny little things like the rear three spark plugs costing 4 times as much as the front ones because they're hard to access and designed to be changed less often.

With that kind of eccentric servicing they may not be the cheapest things to run... I love the look of them though. And the MIVEC V6 sounds good too.

 

[Keef]

Did somebody say something about HUGE sway bars? That car looks flat as a pancake. I'd love to have a later model ACR (the ones with the tree spoke wheels and dual exhaust). I think they look great and are still quite light, if a bit fatter than ones like in the picture. I think it'd be a fun car to drive.

 

[Famine]

My respect for your car has grown a little when I seen some in person, pretty in some ways. Which was better between MX-3 and FTO? They seem so similar. Tiny cars, tiny V6s, FWD. Hey, what about an FTO? Or are they really crap?

Best person to ask about FTOs is someone who owns one. I suggest Venari.

Top spec FTO has a 2.0 MIVEC V6 which, with 200hp, will trounce an MX-3 for pace. The lower spec one is about on-par. Handling? Not a clue.

That's some awsome info! And as a bonus the MX3 is quite a pretty car I think. I've never driven one, but would love to chuck it about to see how playful it is. And the 0-60 number was from that website, I'll be happy to change the time if you can verify it. 👍

Actually... I've never thought to check it It's somewhere in the high-7, low-8 bracket, probably a couple of car lengths shy of the Mk1 MX-5 1.8 (and about level again by 100mph). It'll do 7-141mph in 5th gear though.

For a scrabble-wagon, she's certainly chuckable and playful - less so than the aforementioned MX-5. You can have her wagging her tail easily enough, even on grippier rubber. The braking is piggin' excellent as standard, and I've recently upgraded to Mintex 1144 pads and Black Diamond discs up front (I have to do the rears soon to balance it all out, because she fair stands on her nose now).

 

[YSSMAN]

Just an FYI:

We never received the FTO here in the US...

 

[Prosthetic]

We didn't get FTO's in the US...

EDIT: TREE'D

 

[JCE]

Anybody ever drive a Mitsu Mirage? If so, what are they like?

 

[Keef]

I have, actually. They're really light, sprightly, and have an abysmal structure. The suspension is mighty econo-ish, but that can be fixed. You should certainly add whatever structure reinforcement whatever autocross class you want to run in allows so the crappy suspension can work as well as it possibly can. Overall it's a decent car because it's so light.

 

[JCE]

I'll take a look at the numbers and post them up to see if they're any good...

1990-1992 -- Mitsubishi Mirage GS -- 1.6L I4 123bhp 101tq FWD -- 2231lbs (saloon) -- No 0-60 data found
1993-1996 -- Mitsubishi Mirage ES -- 1.6L I4 113bhp 116tq FWD -- 2195lbs (saloon) -- ~8.7s

 

[nd 4 holden spd]

Just an FYI:

We never received the FTO here in the US...

I'll take a look at the numbers and post them up to see if they're any good...

1990-1992 -- Mitsubishi Mirage GS -- 1.6L I4 123bhp 101tq FWD -- 2231lbs (saloon) -- No 0-60 data found
1993-1996 -- Mitsubishi Mirage ES -- 1.6L I4 113bhp 116tq FWD -- 2195lbs (saloon) -- ~8.7s

I've driven them in GT4. In GT4 at least they felt very nimble and light even in comparation to other hatches.

 

[niky]

Sorry to bring it up again, but I'm also of the opinion that an EF or EG Civic or an MX-5 is the way to go. An EG Civic weighs next to nothing, has decent steering and a great power-to-weight ratio. With just simple modifications, it can be very very quick.

The MX-5... absolutely no power... even when modified, zilch. I drove one that had a port & polish, full exhaust and a piggyback fuel and ignition controller. Still sluggish. But most autocrosses are, as said, pretty slow 2nd gear courses. The MX-5 just destroys everything there, and it actually feels great doing it. Don't knock it till you've tried it.

----

With that out of the way, I'd nix the B14 SE-R and go for the B13 SE-R. No way are you adjusting the camber in the rear of the B14 without a beam-bender, and I know of only one or two guys who actually do that... in the whole of the U.S. of A. The B13 has a soft suspension and an old chassis, but it's nimble, extra-light, has great balance, has a great engine (SR20 FTW) and there are tons of mods available for it still. Best of all, you can get a beater to strip out for very little money. Say, 500-1500 for a terrible car, strip everything out and put a decent suspension on it and some exhaust. Would be a terribly, terribly quick car.

If you like Proteges, the Protege5 is the best buy of the bunch. The big wagon-back gives it a better weight balance than the sedans, and there are mods available. Cons include a really really sucky engine that needs a lot of mods to make halfway decent power, and a few more to stay in one piece on the autocross, and it's not that light of a car. But the balance is great and the steering is marvelous. Still, probably not as cost-effective as getting that MX-3, but power parts are probably easier to get. And there's always turbocharging... or, even better... getting the MSP (if you can afford it on your budget).

 

[homeforsummer]

Don't knock it till you've tried it.

Nobody was knocking the MX5, the OP just doesn't like them

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm tempted to just recommend a Celica GT (or GT-S), but they're hard to come by in decent shape, and other than the good handling on the older models, you aren't going to get much in the way of power outside of the turbo versions... Which are too expensive and break too easily.

I'm very interested in attempting a run in my car at least once, as I know the chassis is more than capable, and with the shorter gearing, it would be decently good (?) at the shorter runs.

...But that's when you run the risk of breaking something...

 

[Rumple Foreskin]

Ever think of a firt gen Focus hatch? It is a cheap, great handlin little car.

 

[Tornado]

I think JCE already owns a first generation Focus (or use to at least).

What about an early 4th/late 3rd generation Prelude?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I'm tempted to just recommend a Celica GT (or GT-S), but they're hard to come by in decent shape, and other than the good handling on the older models, you aren't going to get much in the way of power outside of the turbo versions... Which are too expensive and break too easily.

I'm very interested in attempting a run in my car at least once, as I know the chassis is more than capable, and with the shorter gearing, it would be decently good (?) at the shorter runs.

...But that's when you run the risk of breaking something...

My brother autocrossed his and it's probably way past 200,000 miles by now.

 

[Venari]

Shame about the FTO, when they are lowered and set up properly they are better than the Integra Type-R of the same vintage. When mine was very, very low, with a filter and exhaust (and no cat) it topped 160mph on the clock on an, uh, private highway, and was still slowly pulling. Sixty is just before the rev limiter in second so you can pull surprising quick 0-60s in them if you're being timed. And the noise is luuuurrrvly.

I autocrossed a Vauxhall Nova SR (Geo Sprint) in my youth, which obviously isn't a wise choice... but...

... why isn't an old E30 BMW 3-series on that list? In M3 or 325i Sport guises, it's a capable machine, and there are plenty of spares and tuning stuff out there for one.

How about a Corrado? They're a bit heavy, but they are a cut above a Golf in handling. If you're spending money on the engine, the G60 is a fabulous motor, but the 2.0L 16V is more practical. I had a Golf Rallye G60 SE and it was an amazing bit of kit. I really miss that car.

 

[JCE]

Sorry to bring it up again, but I'm also of the opinion that an EF or EG Civic or an MX-5 is the way to go*snip*

Then please don't. 👍

If you like Proteges, the Protege5 is the best buy of the bunch. The big wagon-back gives it a better weight balance than the sedans, and there are mods available. Cons include a really really sucky engine that needs a lot of mods to make halfway decent power, and a few more to stay in one piece on the autocross, and it's not that light of a car. But the balance is great and the steering is marvelous. Still, probably not as cost-effective as getting that MX-3, but power parts are probably easier to get. And there's always turbocharging... or, even better... getting the MSP (if you can afford it on your budget).

Protege's are getting expensive around here due to them getting good mpg and being very reliable. If I could find one cheap I'd get one--but that in itself is probably an impossible task.

I'm tempted to just recommend a Celica GT (or GT-S), but they're hard to come by in decent shape, and other than the good handling on the older models, you aren't going to get much in the way of power outside of the turbo versions... Which are too expensive and break too easily.

Celica's are definately high on my list. 👍

I'm very interested in attempting a run in my car at least once, as I know the chassis is more than capable, and with the shorter gearing, it would be decently good (?) at the shorter runs.

...But that's when you run the risk of breaking something...

Which you should think about. Never run your daily driver--just as a precaution.

Yea yea yea, I'm sure people do it all day long but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Ever think of a first gen Focus hatch? It is a cheap, great handlin little car.

2 problems with them, first the cheap ones have the horrid SPI engine, and second is even with ZETEC its slow. Hell, even with the D20 mine were slow. But, if I could find one very cheap I would greatly consider it. 👍

I think JCE already owns a first generation Focus (or use to at least).

What about an early 4th/late 3rd generation Prelude?

I had an '05 ZX5 and an '07 ZX3. Have neither any longer. And the Prelude would be expensive to obtain unless I get one in HORRIBLE shape. Which is ok because I'll be looking for cars IN horrible shape. Bad interior, dented fenders, engine/trans not working well (or at all?), and other things that make a car so cheap are things I'll be looking for. I'm probably not looking to spend more than $1,000~1,200 on the car itself...running or not.

... why isn't an old E30 BMW 3-series on that list? In M3 or 325i Sport guises, it's a capable machine, and there are plenty of spares and tuning stuff out there for one.

Any M badged BMW will be so expensive even in wrecked shape that it will be impossible to obtain. I do however fancy a regular 3-series--which could be a good move since real old ones are cheap. I do like the idea of getting something old and German.

How about a Corrado? They're a bit heavy, but they are a cut above a Golf in handling. If you're spending money on the engine, the G60 is a fabulous motor, but the 2.0L 16V is more practical. I had a Golf Rallye G60 SE and it was an amazing bit of kit. I really miss that car.

Corrado's are collector's items, I'll never find one for sale much less in the price range I'm after. Its like the Subaru SVX--I'd love to have one (not for autox but in general) but the price is insane.

===============================

So, guys and gals tell me about Volvo 240's, 740's, and the estate versions of them? Power, weight, handling, and how good the previous things would be if stripped and the power increased+good suspension? I wonder how much weight one can strip out of these tanks?

 

[Tornado]

240s don't weigh much to begin with. People use them for autocrossing all the time.

 

[JCE]

240s don't weigh much to begin with. People use them for autocrossing all the time.

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1990-to-1993-volvo-240-4.htm

~3000lbs? Is that right? The estate only weighs 130lbs or so more than the saloon? I'll take the estate thanks. What's awsome is I'd imagine that you can quite easily lose alot of that weight by stripping it. And the most important thing of all? ITS BLOODY CHEAP!

*edit*
I find this to be interesting...

year make model 0-60 ¼mi
1990 Volvo 740 Turbo Wagon 7.8 16.1

That's not bad at all actually.

The 850 that replaced it weighed in at more than 300lbs heavier--but has more power. I guess its a toss up? I'd imagine all those 300lbs (and more ) were spent in safety and comfort items?

===================================

Thought? 1995 VW Cabrio? You could remove the roof and when you add the roll cage you could add a few strengthening beams to prevent the usual convertable "wobblly" feeling. The Cabrio weighs 2701lbs and shares the Golf/Jetta's 2.0L with 115bhp and 122tq. I've thought about convertables in this mannor before...strengthen up the chassis and remove the heavy convertable top to reduce a bit of weight.

 

[Tornado]

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1990-to-1993-volvo-240-4.htm

~3000lbs? Is that right?

Pretty accurate.

The 850 that replaced it weighed in at more than 300lbs heavier--but has more power. I guess its a toss up?

Not even. 850 is a torque steering, FWD box of parts waiting to break. The only reason it has more power is because they took the exact same engines from the 240/740/940 series and added more boost.

Thought? 1995 VW Cabrio?

No insult intended, but are you secretly a woman?

 

[exigeracer]

My brother just picked up a 1992 Corrado SLC with 80,000 miles for under 5 grand. It would be more than perfect for autocrossing and good to live with in general. They're hard to find at the right price, but well worth the effort when the right one comes along. GTPer Powripper owns one too. I'd say avoid the G60 though.