FWD Sports Car?

[Famine]

I think I may be the exception then. I think can they can be loads of fun, there's plenty of fwd cars I would love to own, but I still don't feel they are sports cars, and working at a dealership, I drive a LOT of different cars.

Well then, since you've put your head above the parapet

Explain why in your mind the Mazda MX-5 - a small, small-engined, 2 seat, drophead coupe designed for no other purpose than having a laugh - is a sportscar, but the Lotus Elan S2 - a small, small-engined, 2 seat, drophead coupe designed for no other purpose than having a laugh - is not.

 

[Perfect Balance]

Well then, since you've put your head above the parapet

Explain why in your mind the Mazda MX-5 - a small, small-engined, 2 seat, drophead coupe designed for no other purpose than having a laugh - is a sportscar, but the Lotus Elan S2 - a small, small-engined, 2 seat, drophead coupe designed for no other purpose than having a laugh - is not.

If you take those as the only criteria that a sports car needs to have, then yes, they're the same. In my case though, it ends up being a small, small-engined, 2 seat, drophead coupe designed for no other purpose than having a laugh, and is front wheel drive, whereas the other is rear-wheel drive. I don't really have anything I can present that proves that one is a sports car and one isn't, I just feel that the nature of a sports car is to be rear wheel drive, regardless of the fun factor, actual performance, or "handling."

This is also why I haven't really taken part in the discussion, because I don't have anything but my opinion to offer. I just feel that way, and I don't think that there's anything anyone could say that would change my mind.

 

[Famine]

I just feel that the nature of a sports car is to be rear wheel drive, regardless of the fun factor, actual performance, or "handling."

The question is "why". If the driven wheels make no difference to the design brief or the experience, why is there a need to demarcate?

Should we then exclude the FIAT Barchetta, because it's front-wheel drive? What about the MGF/MGTF and Mk3 MR2 - they have the engine in the middle!

What happens when we get into the realm of Seven clones? The Westfield and Caterham are well-known and examples of the type - but then you get the Tiger Z100 which is exactly the same car but with four wheel drive...


If the purpose is solely "fun" and the driven wheels do not affect that... whither prejudice?

 

[Bones Brigade]

It's not prejudice. Is a Ford Fusion a minivan because it serves the same purposes as a Town and Country? Why can't someone have their own guidelines for classification? I thought this whole thing died long ago.

Parent; Performance Car
Child; Hot Hatch, Sports Car, Super Car, Sport Sedan, GT Car, etc.

Does it need to go beyond that?

 

[ranhammerR34]

FWD Sports Car? They do exist --- Randy

 

[Eric.]

It's not prejudice. Is a Ford Fusion a minivan because it serves the same purposes as a Town and Country? Why can't someone have their own guidelines for classification? I thought this whole thing died long ago.

Parent; Performance Car
Child; Hot Hatch, Sports Car, Super Car, Sport Sedan, GT Car, etc.

Does it need to go beyond that?

Skip back a couple pages. Sports cars are not performance cars. Though they can fit that definition, not all do.

 

[Bones Brigade]

Oh lord.

 

[Famine]

Oh lord.

Please feel free to elaborate - with examples - as to why you think a sportscar must always be a performance car.

On such things discussions are founded.

 

[Rennsport]

I think the JC Works Mini Cooper certainly qualifies. I want to include the GTI in here, but i'd group that under the 'hot hatch' category.

 

[Famine]

That's also a hot hatch.

 

[Joey D]

It's a sporty car and used to drive in a sporting manner. Cars can be classified as more than one thing.

 

[Famine]

It's a sporty car and used to drive in a sporting manner. Cars can be classified as more than one thing.

You can drive anything in a "sporting manner".

It's not a ground-up sportscar - it's a modification package on a hatchback. Performance car? Maybe on the fringes, yes. Sportscar? Nope.

 

[Joey D]

Eh I don't know about driving anything in a sporting manner. The Cooper's are built to be sporty cars even if they don't have a ton of horse power. I'd say a Cooper S and the JCW are both sports cars.

 

[Famine]

Eh I don't know about driving anything in a sporting manner. The Cooper's are built to be sporty cars even if they don't have a ton of horse power. I'd say a Cooper S and the JCW are both sports cars.

Power isn't relevant - no amount of power can make a hatchback a sportscar, and lack of power can't deny sportscar status.

The base car is a hatchback. It's designed to be easy to park, see out of, drive and be practical and comfortable. You can nail on as much as you like by way of upgrades and it's still a hatchback, albeit now a "hot hatch". It can never be a sportscar, any more than it can be a wagon/estate or saloon/sedan.


That's not to say it's not a good car - there's loads of great non-sportscars (our Honda Accord Type-R - brilliant, quick, has power, not a sportscar) - or isn't fast, or can't blow away some sportscars on a track/windy country road. It just isn't a sportscar. Sportscars are drophead/fixedhead coupes, 2 seat or 2+2, small-engined with relatively low power, built from the ground up and with no pretence towards anything else than simply having a damn good time. Yes, you could have a damn good time in a JCW Cooper S or an Accord Type-R, but both are practical cars based on normal family cars.

Of course it doesn't have to be any good to be a sportscar either - take the MGF... Whew.

 

[Joey D]

The definition of sports car is extremely loose and can really consistent anything somewhat sporty. Honestly I think everyone's criteria is different. To me a Cooper S is a sports car and my insurance company seemed to have agreed with me...which is why I don't own one.

 

[Famine]

My insurance company thought mine was a 1.6.

 

[JCE]

Actually using the term hot hatch aside the MINI is a sports car (BMW MINI), and possibly the only FWD hatch that is a sports car from birth. Even the MINI One I would qualify as one because it was designed to be small, light and handle like it was on rails.

And while we are on the touchy subject on the MX5 I hope we are talking hardtop non-convertibles because a 2 seat 2 door car with a removable/retractable roof is a roaster--not a sports car.

Lastly, I don't care if a car like the GTi, ST170/SVT Focus or Civic Si are just normal cars with performance bits put on them--that would actually prove the point that they are sports cars designed to PERFORM in such a manner. If the original definition of a sports car was a car modified to race then the SVT, GTi and Si are more sports cars than the MX5 hardtop. Who says a "sports car" has to be built from the factory 1 way and only 1 way. What do I care of a company like Roush takes a Focus and sticks some performance bits on it to make it a well handling quick car. How is a car with Jack Roush's name on it not a sports car? Oh, and it is a FWD hatchback too. I'm just saying...

That is all.

 

[Famine]

And while we are on the touchy subject on the MX5 I hope we are talking hardtop non-convertibles because a 2 seat 2 door car with a removable/retractable roof is a roaster--not a sports car.

"Roadster" is a subclass of drophead coupe - and in any case the term "roadster" only applies to cars with a wholly removable roof.

Actually using the term hot hatch aside the MINI is a sports car (BMW MINI), and possibly the only FWD hatch that is a sports car from birth. Even the MINI One I would qualify as one because it was designed to be small, light and handle like it was on rails.

Yep, it was designed for that. AND to be easy to park, drive in the city, see out of, fit a baby carriage in the boot and 4 adults in comfort.

Add practicality = not a sportscar. No hatchback (save the hatchback coupe, which is often contentious itself) can be a sportscar.

Lastly, I don't care if a car like the GTi, ST170/SVT Focus or Civic Si are just normal cars with performance bits put on them--that would actually prove the point that they are sports cars designed to PERFORM in such a mannor. Who says a "sports car" has to be built from the factory one way and only 1 way. What do I care of a company like Roush takes a Focus and sticks some performance bits on it to make it a well handling quick car. How is a car with Jack Roush's name on it not a sports car? Oh, and it is a FWD hatchback too. I'm just saying...

That is all.

"PERFORM" is a key word here. Because it's completely irrelevant to sportscars!

Look at just how damn slow the MX-5 Mk1 is and tell me, honestly, that performance has anything to do with it. Sportscars can be fast. Sportscars can be slow. Performance cars can't be slow. Sportscars are thus not necessarily performance cars and performance cars are not necessarily sportscars.

It doesn't matter a jot how fast or how good a car is. In any body that isn't a coupe (drophead or fixedhead), it's not a sportscar.

 

[JCE]

Add practicality = not a sportscar. No hatchback (save the hatchback coupe, which is often contentious itself) can be a sportscar.

Well but the problem is, why does it matter if the car just happens to be practical? The Mustang is practical. It fits 4 people, has a large boot but is also listed as a sports car. The Subaru WRX STi is practical yet is also a sports car. So I would throw the MINI in that category. I don't care if my sports car just happens to be able to carry stuff in the boot and be able to have me haul a few friends with me.

"PERFORM" is a key word here. Because it's completely irrelevant to sportscars!

Look at just how damn slow the MX-5 Mk1 is and tell me, honestly, that performance has anything to do with it. Sportscars can be fast. Sportscars can be slow. Performance cars can't be slow. Sportscars are thus not necessarily performance cars and performance cars are not necessarily sportscars.

It doesn't matter a jot how fast or how good a car is. In any body that isn't a coupe (drophead or fixedhead), it's not a sportscar.

I'm not saying the MX5 hardtop isn't a sports car as I know it is, I used some examples of regular cars that have been transformed into a sports car by either outside factory tuning companies or by the auto company itself--and it doesn't matter that they are hatchbacks. I wasn't using those three examples as ones to discredit the MX5, I was using those as examples to prove that normal cars can be sports cars by modifications from either the factory or factory authorized companies hatchback or not. Which means my Focus SVT is a sports car. Modified engine, 6spd performance transmission, better suspension, better brakes and exterior definitely would make it a sports car.

 

[Famine]

Well but the problem is, why does it matter if the car just happens to be practical?

Cars never accidentally have features that are not part of the design brief. If practicality is in the brief, it ain't a sportscar.

The Mustang is practical. It fits 4 people, has a large boot but is also listed as a sports car.

The Corvette is a sportscar, the Mustang is not.

The Subaru WRX STi is practical yet is also a sports car.

The Impreza is very much not a sportscar.

So I would throw the MINI in that category. I don't care if my sports car just happens to be able to carry stuff in the boot and be able to have me haul a few friends with me.

You ought - because it means it's not a sportscar.

I'm not saying the MX5 hardtop isn't a sports car as I know it is, I used some examples of regular cars that have been transformed into a sports car by either outside factory tuning companies or by the auto company itself--and it doesn't matter that they are hatchbacks. I wasn't using those three examples as ones to discredit the MX5, I was using those as examples to prove that normal cars can be sports cars by modifications from either the factory or factory authorized companies hatchback or not. Which means my Focus SVT is a sports car. Modified engine, 6spd performance transmission, better suspension, better brakes and exterior definitely would make it a sports car.

Hatchback body means it isn't. It's a Ford Focus that goes faster, stops better and handles nicer than a regular one.

Since performance isn't relevant to the nature of sportscars, how can adding performance create a sportscar? Obviously it cannot.

 

[JCE]

I'm going to agree to disagree and avoid an argument.

 

[homeforsummer]

Here's one: Show two pictures to someone who knows virtually nothing about cars. One is of a Lotus Elan M100. The other is of a MINI. Ask them which one is the sports car.

Show two pics to another person who knows virtually nothing about cars. One is of a Daihatsu Copen. The other is of an Impreza STi. Again, ask which one is a sports car.

Do the same for any fixed/drophead coupe and any hatchback, wagon, sedan or anything else. I guarantee that person will pick the one which doesn't look like a hotted-up regular car.

 

[Eric.]

Famine, I don't agree to the small engine bit you've added to the definition. How about something like a Corvette Convertible? Or is that disqualified because there is a coupe? You'd probably class the coupe as a GT, but I'd consider that to still be a sportscar (which also happens to be a performance car, for those keeping count).

Here's one: Show two pictures to someone who knows virtually nothing about cars. One is of a Lotus Elan M100. The other is of a MINI. Ask them which one is the sports car.

Show two pics to another person who knows virtually nothing about cars. One is of a Daihatsu Copen. The other is of an Impreza STi. Again, ask which one is a sports car.

Do the same for any fixed/drophead coupe and any hatchback, wagon, sedan or anything else. I guarantee that person will pick the one which doesn't look like a hotted-up regular car.

I don't know about the STI v. Copen argument.

 

[eight6er]

Famine, I don't agree to the small engine bit you've added to the definition. How about something like a Corvette Convertible? Or is that disqualified because there is a coupe? You'd probably class the coupe as a GT, but I'd consider that to still be a sportscar (which also happens to be a performance car, for those keeping count).




I don't know about the STI v. Copen argument.

I just copied this from a dictionary online.
sports car 
–noun
a small, high-powered automobile with long, low lines, usually seating two persons.

 

[niky]

Famine, I don't agree to the small engine bit you've added to the definition. How about something like a Corvette Convertible? Or is that disqualified because there is a coupe? You'd probably class the coupe as a GT, but I'd consider that to still be a sportscar (which also happens to be a performance car, for those keeping count).

He did state:

The Corvette is a sportscar, the Mustang is not.

The Corvette is unusual amongst modern sportscars in that it actually weighs very little. About as much as a Ford Focus. So it actually meets all the requirements of the classic definition.

I don't know about the STI v. Copen argument.

The whole point is: If you didn't know anything about their relative performance... in fact, if you didn't know anything else about them that you couldn't see in a simple picture... you would easily identify one as a sportscar, and the other as a hatchback or a sedan... maybe a sporting hatchback, but still a hatchback.

---

The whole argument boils down to this: most of the classic uses of the term "sports car" refers to a specific body style. A car may have twenty times the performance credentials of a comparable sports car, but if it's a hatchback, a sedan, a wagon or etcetera... it's technically not a sports car.

 

[Famine]

I just copied this from a dictionary online.
sports car 
–noun
a small, high-powered automobile with long, low lines, usually seating two persons.

MX-5 1.6 has 89hp. That's only "high-powered" if you're used to the Benz Patent Motor Wagen. And it's only just under 13 feet long - the entire car would fit inside the wheelbase of a Mercedes 600 (W100).

So the MX-5 isn't high-powered or long. I guess that dictionary says the MX-5 isn't a sportscar then?

Famine, I don't agree to the small engine bit you've added to the definition. How about something like a Corvette Convertible? Or is that disqualified because there is a coupe? You'd probably class the coupe as a GT, but I'd consider that to still be a sportscar (which also happens to be a performance car, for those keeping count).

No, both the coupe and convertible are sportscars (fixedhead coupe and drophead coupe).

The Corvette is an oddity - it's about the biggest, most powerful engine of any sportscar and by some considerable margin. It doesn't really fit the small-engine part of the criteria and should be excluded but the Corvette has always been a sportscar. In essence, the C6 gets grandfathered in because of the C1 and C2 (and to an extent the C3, which could run as little as 165hp from the factory with the 5.7).

It's also quite a surprisingly small car - it's only just a foot and a half longer than the MX-5 and itself will fit inside just the wheelbase of an F-350 Super Duty. So it fits small, DHC/FHC, 2 seat of 2+2 and designed for naught but fun - and the small-engined part just gets grandfathered in.

And you're bang on the mark - the C6 is a sportscar which also happens to be a performance car.

 

[Rykon Zero]

So is the Viper not a sports car? I'd count it too, even though that thing is nowhere near the small, weak engine requirement.

 

[Horde_R35]

so funny! Thanks guys!

 

[Danoff]

Having not read all the way through this thread, but catching the tail end, I have to agree with Famine. The classification of a car should be based on design, not outcome.

You can have a minivan that outperforms a sports car in every category (grip, power, hell - I'll even pretend handling is better for the sake of argument) - that minivan still isn't a sports car. If the car was primarily designed for sports driving - it's a sports car - regardless of how well it was designed and how well it does other things.

That being said, I think there are FWD cars that fit that criteria.

 

[Famine]

So is the Viper not a sports car? I'd count it too, even though that thing is nowhere near the small, weak engine requirement.

The Viper's a riddle wrapped in a conundrum inside an enema.

It's absolutely sodding psychotic. But, despite the nnnnnnhuge engine, it's still a small (same size as the Vette to within a couple of fractions of an inch), 2-seat DHC/FHC without any kind of purpose aside from fun.

Can it still be a sportscar even though it doesn't have the typically small engine? Well... the inspiration for the Viper was the AC Cobra - and the AC Cobra itself was based on a 2 litre, 4-pot British sportscar called the AC Ace. This is the same kind of situation as the "Is a modified hatchback now a sportscar" question, but in reverse - is a sportscar with a bastard-huge engine still a sportscar? Yes it is.