American Sports Cars?
- Thread starter Ryan2
- 41 comments
- 1,375 views
Well, yeah. One heck of a lot of cars have been advertised as "sports" cars, including the Camry SE. Which, despite sportier looks and great build-quality is not a sports car, no matter what anyone's got to say about it.
Far as the Viper's price, I know there's a bunch of Viper fans here, but take a look at the Corvette on your checklist:
Front engine? Yes
Rear drive? Yes
Two seats? Yes
Convertible? Yes
Reasonably affordable? Yes, if the Viper is.
Fast? Yes
Fun? Yes
Handles well? Depends which 'Vette, but generally yes.
Not high on luxury? Yes
So, then, the Vette's a sports car. The question is: How can you consider an M3 Coupe a sports car, but the sedan, with the same power and handling, is not a sports car?
Far as the Viper's price, I know there's a bunch of Viper fans here, but take a look at the Corvette on your checklist:
Front engine? Yes
Rear drive? Yes
Two seats? Yes
Convertible? Yes
Reasonably affordable? Yes, if the Viper is.
Fast? Yes
Fun? Yes
Handles well? Depends which 'Vette, but generally yes.
Not high on luxury? Yes
So, then, the Vette's a sports car. The question is: How can you consider an M3 Coupe a sports car, but the sedan, with the same power and handling, is not a sports car?
- 687
A sports car doesnt really mean its a fast car.. one of the orginal world sports cars was the MG an this is not a proformace power car ... sports cars are fun cars
- 687
the mark 2 was British but the mark 4 was American
- 10,081
- WFG9
I think that original intent is important. I mean, if you sell an econobox for 5 years as a no thrills car, changing it to a little rocket won't help. Still a grocery getter.
I don't know why I'm continuing this, but....
The real point of contention here is "What is a sports car?" This used to be rather clear cut, but that was at least 30 years ago. Back then, you had your sedans, your trucks, your economy cars (Issigonis' original Mini
), and your sports cars. Then came along two "problems": muscle cars, and the 240Z. There is nothing wrong with these cars. Quite the contrary, in fact, I find them rather good. (BTW, I did not call the M3 a sports car; no 3-series has only 2 seats.)The reason these cars are "problems" is because they started the blurring of the line between "sports car" and "other car". Nowadays, people are calling the Z06 a "supercar for the masses". It's faster than some Ferraris, reached 1.06g on the skidpad, and costs US$50,000...but can you honestly call it a supercar? Is this really on the same level as a Murciélago?
There's so many cars out there, with so many differences and similarities. Every car manufacturer tries to reach into every market. The SUV market is a prime example of this. The X5 is a truly excellent car that just barely makes it out of the apple orchard, yet it's marketed as an SUV (sorry, SAV). Same goes for the RX300, M-class, allroad, and V70 CrossCountry. They are "in-between-ers"; neither one nor the other, but a new segment altogether. Some of these new segments are good (minivan) and some are not (bus-sized SUV). Marketing (in all industries) is famous for filling a void no one ever knew existed.
There's a set, traditional definition of a sports car. Very few meet the standard anymore.
No, you can't call the Z06 a supercar, you're totally right. Whenever I am writing about car CLASSES, I have two supercar classifications: Mild Supercar (NSX, Corvette, 911, Boxster) and Supercar (360 Modena, Murcielago, GT2, M5).
I don't believe you can't call an M3 coupe a sports car. What, then, is it?
If you are old-fashioned enough to believe the true, set definiton of sports car, then, no, there's only about fifteen cars in the entire world that are sports cars. More if you count supercars, though. And I don't. Those are supercars.
I love the comment, 'marketing is famous for filling voids no one ever knew existed.' Also totally true. As much as I love the new Nissan Altima 3.5 SE, I hate Nissan's in-your-face, sporty ads for it. They think it's a sports car.
My own non-traditional definition of sports car includes the Lancer Evolution, M3 and M5, and AMG Mercedes. And the Altezza. Why not?
I don't believe you can't call an M3 coupe a sports car. What, then, is it?
If you are old-fashioned enough to believe the true, set definiton of sports car, then, no, there's only about fifteen cars in the entire world that are sports cars. More if you count supercars, though. And I don't. Those are supercars.
I love the comment, 'marketing is famous for filling voids no one ever knew existed.' Also totally true. As much as I love the new Nissan Altima 3.5 SE, I hate Nissan's in-your-face, sporty ads for it. They think it's a sports car.
My own non-traditional definition of sports car includes the Lancer Evolution, M3 and M5, and AMG Mercedes. And the Altezza. Why not?
A sports sedan. Same underpinnings, same chassis, same 4 seats. Changing the number of doors does little to change the fact that it's still a 3-series.
Well, there you have it. My definition of sports car pretty much includes those, too. But that's my definition; what I consider to be worthy. Someone else may consider the Altima or Maxima to be a sports car (though I'm loathe to even call it a sports sedan). That's our definition, as nice and dandy as it may be. It's just that that isn't the traditional sense.
- 687
Originally posted by rufrgt_sn00pie2001
You're just too chauvinistic...
Although you're only a semi-brit...
actually im an aussie
