FWD Sports Car?

[Paulie]

So they (Manufacters) dont go there to test the cars between them selfs? Hmmm i wounder about that:idea:!

EDIT: If a car with less 130HP and more wheight does the same laps times has the Vette, in a 21km track, that doesnt mean anything to any of you? Thats just hilarious !

No, it doesn't mean 🤬. For example, a variation of humidity, track temps, driver errors/abilities, traffic (as you get at the Ring) could account for more than 10sec on a lap that long, 10sec!! The only reason manufacturers test cars there is because it offers almost every known corner, bumpy road-like conditions, and long straights. They tune their cars there, then manufacturers in recent times use Ring times as bragging rights yes, but Ring times mean absolutely nothing. You'd have to take them all to the same track on the same day with the same driver and give him a number of laps to find a hot lap to have any indication what so ever of which is faster. And it would have to be a track of reasonable and normal length.

 

[niky]

So they (Manufacters) dont go there to test the cars between them selfs? Hmmm i wounder about that:idea:!

EDIT: If a car with less 130HP and more wheight does the same laps times has the Vette, in a 21km track, that doesnt mean anything to any of you? Thats just hilarious !

130 hp less, better tires, much more torque, less drivetrain losses, a better gearbox, and nearly a million kilometers of testing on the same track? You don't say.

-

A track time is less about power and more about handling and corner-speeds. The GT-R has great handling and, being AWD, can attain higher corner exit speeds than RWD cars. Yes, the GT-R is faster than the Vette and most high-end sportscars on other tracks, too... but the Nurb is essentially useless for comparison, like Paulie says.

 

[YSSMAN]

I know all about the fastest FF cars of the USA!... But when i talk about performance car, im talking about the track perfomance: chassis/suspension/tires/engine... not about who goes faster in the 1/4 mile!

All are pretty recent, all were sport-oriented American FWD vehicles that performed near or at the top of their class. The Cobalt SS in particular has still set a very high bar for FWD sport coupes, I might add. As I recall, it was only the mad-as-hell Renaultsport Megane R.26R that beat it at the Nurburgring, that being a track-only racing hatch with a roll cage a five-point harnesses. Hardly a fair match against a car with SatNav, leather seats and a six-disc changer.

As far as I'm concerned, the Americans don't exactly come up short when it comes to sports cars, generally speaking, at any level. Sure, we do things differently (which doesn't necessarily make it better), but nevertheless, our performance levels are consistently on-par (often times better with the GMPD vehicles) with the rest of the competition.

 

[Paulie]

130 hp less, better tires, much more torque, less drivetrain losses, a better gearbox, and nearly a million kilometers of testing on the same track? You don't say.

-

A track time is less about power and more about handling and corner-speeds. The GT-R has great handling and, being AWD, can attain higher corner exit speeds than RWD cars. Yes, the GT-R is faster than the Vette and most high-end sportscars on other tracks, too... but the Nurb is essentially useless for comparison, like Paulie says.

The ZR1 would fair extremely well against most said high-end supercars I would think. The Z06 is now some 4-5yrs old, and in major need of an update. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, it took several years for many other manufacturers to finally topple the Corvette, especially in performance for dollar. Now the GT-R has finally done it, but the C6 is old and tired, yet still amazingly good. If only not for the GED, we might have a C7 coming a lot sooner.

But let's forget the supercars for a second. Japan and Europe make the best handlers? How is it then that a HSV GTS can essentially match the track pace of a BMW M3 which is a couple hundred kilograms lighter, has a better power-to-weight ratio and is considerably smaller? On top of that, the 325kw GTS can beat a 380kw Merc E-Class in track performance/lap times, when the Merc is roughly the same size and weight, and also beat the Jaguar XFR with its 375kw, again, similar size and weight? Yeah, the GTS is neither Japanese or European, it's an all Aussie design with an American engine.
(I considered mentioning the Cobalt, but I don't know enough about it, thankfully YSSMAN has mentioned it).

Edit: Isn't that Focus European YSSMAN?

 

[Bones Brigade]

When I think of a sports car, I think of a small (100 inch wheel base or so), rear drive, 2 door coupe, meant for some sort of fun. It doesn't have to be fast or powerful.

I don't think of things like Mazdaspeed3s or Integras as sports cars. But I mean that in no insulting way. I guess I kind of look at the term "sports car" as a sub category rather than a broad category encompassing many types of sports cars. The broad term would have to be..."performance or fun oriented cars." Or something of that nature.

Were I to put a car like the R32 side by side with an RX7, I would say, "they are equals. But they are not 'the same.'" A sports car to me is something practical, if fun is all you need to accomplish. Added utility just seems...un-sports car-ish.

I don't think of hot hatches as a lesser to "sports cars." They're just not the same.

 

[Tornado]

Edit: Isn't that Focus European YSSMAN?

International effort, like the SVT Contour was.

 

[JCE]

Lets please not turn this into a GTR vs ZO6 or this country vs this other country thread. Seriously. The topic is, can FWD cars be sports cars.

Oh, and how did we forget to mention the giant killer, the SRT4. One of the fastest out-of-the-box FWD cars ever made. Stock it gave Mustang GT's and Camaro Z28's a run for their money.

 

[Rykon Zero]

Well, until the engine exploded.

 

[Keef]

The Cobalt SS in particular has still set a very high bar for FWD sport coupes, I might add. As I recall, it was only the mad-as-hell Renaultsport Megane R.26R that beat it at the Nurburgring, that being a track-only racing hatch with a roll cage a five-point harnesses. Hardly a fair match against a car with SatNav, leather seats and a six-disc changer.

Pssh. The only reason that pitiful Renault won is because it wears R-compound tires compared to the Cobalt's relatively pedestrian Continental summer tires. Had the tires been equal I'm confident the Cobalt would outhandle it easily. While listening to its six-disc changer. The SS beats Evo 10s, for cryin' out loud.

But it's still not a sports car.

 

[McLaren]

Pssh. The only reason that pitiful Renault lost is because it wears R-compound tires compared to the Cobalt's relatively pedestrian Continental summer tires. Had the tires been equal I'm confident the Cobalt would outhandle it easily. While listening to its six-disc changer. The SS beats Evo 10s, for cryin' out loud.

But it's still not a sports car, in my opinion.

Fixed.

 

[Paulie]

Pssh. The only reason that pitiful Renault lost is because it wears R-compound tires compared to the Cobalt's relatively pedestrian Continental summer tires. Had the tires been equal I'm confident the Cobalt would outhandle it easily. While listening to its six-disc changer. The SS beats Evo 10s, for cryin' out loud.

But it's still not a sports car.

Don't you mean the only reason it won?

 

[Keef]

Your BMW is more of a sports car than your Civic, and even it has too many doors to be a real sports car.

I think we should clarify some terms, as I just looked at the cover of my new Car and Driver magazine. It's their Lightening Lap issue, where they say "22 performance cars unleashed on the track!" Performance cars. Cars built for performance. Cars like these, which have been through this performance car test before:

All of them performance cars, undoubtedly. They're all made to perform well. But only a couple of those cars are worthy of the title "sports car".

They have two doors, two seats, and they're not front wheel drive. Whether they're slow or fast, cheap or expensive, air conditioned or hot and sweaty, they're sports cars, and the others just aren't.

This is a sports car:

This is not:

Both of those are pieces of crap, but one is a sports car while the other one is just acting like it. If you call that second one a sports car then you have to call a Del Sol a sports car, and that would make you a fool. I know this.



EDIT:

Don't you mean the only reason it won?

Yes.

 

[McLaren]

Again, all in your opinion. If you honestly think my 5 is more of a sports car than my Si, you're smoking some good 🤬, Keef.

There is nothing that says a FWD can't be a sports car. Ferrari could produce the world's fastest car around any track, in any situation known to man, & you'd say it wasn't a real sports car if it ended up being FWD.

 

[Keef]

There is nothing that says a FWD can't be a sports car. Ferrari could produce the world's fastest car around any track, in any situation known to man, & you'd say it wasn't a real sports car if it ended up being FWD.

Correct. It's a principle, man. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being front wheel drive--you do remember that Civic I owned, right? It'd handily beat this RX7 no matter the task at hand, and I wrung it out for all it had a time or two. But it wasn't a sports car. It was a good performance car, but it wasn't a sports car.

And yes, your 5 series is more of a sports car than your Si. The Si is more nimble, it's more responsive, its a bit louder and more obnoxious, and it's more fun than the BMW. But it's got two strikes against it, while the Bimmer only has one. It's front wheel drive, and it has four doors.

For the record, Azuremen's M3 is not a sports car either, although he'd probably argue that too. My justification is that the rear seats are just too dang comfy. This, however, is a sports car:

In no order of importance, as all requirements must be met:

1. Not front-wheel drive
2. Two doors
3. Two or less normal-people-sized seats
4. Designed with performance as its goal

 

[McLaren]

Correct. It's a principle, man. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being front wheel drive--you do remember that Civic I owned, right? It'd handily beat this RX7 no matter the task at hand, and I wrung it out for all it had a time or two. But it wasn't a sports car. It was a good performance car, but it wasn't a sports car.

What exactly do you think a sports car does, man? Last I checked, it was a car that offered good performance.

And yes, your 5 series is more of a sports car than your Si. The Si is more nimble, it's more responsive, its a bit louder and more obnoxious, and it's more fun than the BMW. But it's got two strikes against it, while the Bimmer only has one. It's front wheel drive, and it has four doors.

I'm sorry Keef, but that's just absolute, absurd thinking. What's next? A Hummer is more of a sports car than my Si?

TBQH, all I'm getting from you is an attitude similar to that of the typical drifters; FWDs are bad & can't be anything RWDs can be. Who cares which wheels are getting the power? If the car is still performing like a real sports car, then imo, it's a sports car.

And yes, I consider Azure's M3 a sports car as well. If you don't because of the "rear seats being comfy", then this must not be a sports car either.

And you'll be damned to find anyone who doesn't consider this a sports car.

 

[killanite]

Drivetrain doesn't categorize what a car is. It's like categorizing all AWD/4WD cars as off roaders.. that's just not true is it.
If a car was designed and made to be a sportscar, even if it's FWD then it is a sportscar.

 

[Keef]

What exactly do you think a sports car does, man? Last I checked, it was a car that offered good performance.

Performance cars are cars built for performance. Sports cars are performance cars which meet the criteria required to be a Lotus Elan. The first one.

I'm sorry Keef, but that's just absolute, absurd thinking. What's next? A Hummer is more of a sports car than my Si?

Interesting thought, one I hadn't had before. Technically, yes, because like the BMW it only has one strike against it. It has four doors. I'd add a truck provision to my list, but then again if a person can't distinguish a truck as not being a sports car, then they need to have a little talking to.

TBQH, all I'm getting from you is an attitude similar to that of the typical drifters; FWDs are bad & can't be anything RWDs can be. Who cares which wheels are getting the power? If the car is still performing like a real sports car, then imo, it's a sports car.

Again, I refer you to my love for my Civic, and this video:



That there video shows you a gussied up economy car beating one other gussied up economy car, and three sports cars. I'll be glad to tell you how badass an Integra Type R is, how that 10 year old car car beat a brand new VW R32 around a track, how it can beat your Si around a track, etc, and as a matter of fact I just showed you that it performs better than a selection of real sports cars, a Z3, a Miata, and a naturally aspirated MR2, even after a screw up. But it's not a real sports car, bub. It just isn't.

If you'd asked me if my Civic was a real sports car while I was beating E30 M3s--the only other things there I can remember that perform like sports cars--at the track I'd have told you "no". I never thought it was a sports car because I knew it wasn't, but I did think it could beat real sports cars because it had the potential. Even if I'd have gotten there, I would still be beating sports cars in a Civic.

That's clearly an M3, which has rear seats I could sit in. Grand Tourer, possibly? Whatever it is it's not a sports car.

This is a sports car:

This is not:

I could actually sit back there!

NOT A SPORTS CAR.

 

[Horde_R35]

You dont know nothing about cars man!!! Hahaha LMAO! And how many times most of you post here the more i laugh with frazes like: " Seat at the back and confi - no sports car"! Thanks alot 👍! Me and my friends are having a blast! I even saw in this thread that a jeep is a sports car!

 

[niky]

Performance cars are cars built for performance. Sports cars are performance cars which meet the criteria required to be a Lotus Elan. The first one.

By the classical definition of a sportscar, this is a sports car:

This is a sports car:

This is a sports car:

-

This is not:

It's not small, it's not lightweight... and... oh... it's all-wheel drive.

If you're willing to consider an all-wheel drive car, why not a front-wheel drive car? There's not really much difference between them, when it comes down to the wire. You oversteer them by provoking them, you cure oversteer by planting the throttle to the floor. That's it.

Let's take it a bit further. Your opinion of front-wheel drive cars as not capable of becoming sports cars is because the rear tires do no work. Something which I refute, because rear tires on a good front wheel drive car passively steer, increasing maneuverability. But what about steering? Do cars that don't have four-wheel steering automatically become unable to classify as sportscars? Simply because the rear tires don't actively steer?

In no order of importance, as all requirements must be met:

1. Not front-wheel drive
2. Two doors
3. Two or less normal-people-sized seats
4. Designed with performance as its goal

You missed the part: "in my opinion." Do I have to post the official Merriam Webster definition again?

a small car, often with only two seats, offering above-average speed, acceleration, and handling

This is the best article on the net considering the classification of sportscars:
http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/2-11-2006-88657.asp

Whether you like it or not, the old, purist definition of sportscar nowhere mentions front-wheel, rear-wheel or all-wheel drive. Nor front-wheel or all-wheel steering. It does mention small, which disqualifies just about everything bigger than a Miata (which is small compared to most cars for sale today).

 

[Horde_R35]

Reminder:

Yes 51 83.61%
No 10 16.39%

I know it doesnt prove anything but in 61 persons 51 voted yes, well...

 

[Keef]

This is not:

It's not small, it's not lightweight... and... oh... it's all-wheel drive.

If you're willing to consider an all-wheel drive car, why not a front-wheel drive car? There's not really much difference between them, when it comes down to the wire. You oversteer them by provoking them, you cure oversteer by planting the throttle to the floor. That's it.

Good, I'm glad you agree with me. Now I can stop having second thoughts. Replace "not front-wheel drive" with "rear wheel drive" and that's my final answer. Besides, that Lambo is more of a supercar anyway. Those things are in a league of themselves where pretty much anything goes as long as it's ridiculous.

But I'm stickin' with the front-drivers not being sports cars. Mirriam and Webster must have gotten on each other's nerves that day and forgotten a word or two, because this...

...is not a sports car. I owned one. I know this. That Elan is just as much of a sports car as this crappy Del Sol, which is none at all.

Horde, just because everyone voted for it doesn't necessarily mean it's right. So enjoy that healthcare system, bub. I'll join you.

 

[nobuffalo]

20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:26.4 Chevrolet Corvette C6 ZR1 (2009) Jim Mero 27 June 2008 General Motors conducted test,[10] base specification car with stock tires and non-stock safety equipment, video confirmed. Driver: Jim Mero (GM Engineer), June 2008. Also, Sport Auto[11] published results of Horst von Saurma obtaining 7:38 on Michelin tires.

20,832 m (68,350 ft) 7:26.70 Nissan GT-R (2009) Toshio Suzuki 23 April 2009 Nissan Motors conducted test. Completed on standard Dunlop run flat tires, video confirmed. Best Motoring (08/2009).[12]


These are Nurburgring lap times! So you think its a better car? Its a 21km track! Imagine what happens in a smaller track! How many cars do you want more?

And this is your favorite quote? "Doesnt matter if you win by an inch or a mile... winning is winning"

 

[Horde_R35]

And this is your favorite quote? "Doesnt matter if you win by an inch or a mile... winning is winning"

One of the favourites yes! Your point beeing?? And why would you post here asking that??

 

[niky]

Good, I'm glad you agree with me.

I don't. I'm just curious about where you draw the line. I do consider the Murcielago a sports car, because I don't believe in the purist definition, since it doesn't make any sense at all in this day and age.

Now I can stop having second thoughts. Replace "not front-wheel drive" with "rear wheel drive" and that's my final answer.

As long as you specify that it's your final answer, and not an official definition, I'm fine with it.

Besides, that Lambo is more of a supercar anyway. Those things are in a league of themselves where pretty much anything goes as long as it's ridiculous.

That's a whole other can of worms...

...is not a sports car. I owned one. I know this. That Elan is just as much of a sports car as this crappy Del Sol, which is none at all.

They're about as similar as a Mazda Miata and Ford Thunderbird. One of which isn't very sporty at all. Drive layout doesn't matter one whit compared to suspension tuning, personally.

Horde, just because everyone voted for it doesn't necessarily mean it's right.

This, I agree with, even though the majority actually agrees with me. But then, like I said, there's really no right or wrong in this situation.

 

[Omnis]

No such thing as a FWD sports car. That's like calling a grill a bbq.

 

[NLxAROSA]

Having owned a Nissan 350Z and now owning an Opel Corsa OPC; while the Corsa OPC is a fast little bugger that corners like crazy and is extremely fast on the intermediate sprints, IMO it is not in the same league as the Z. The Z was built for performance to start with, while the Corsa OPC is a regular Corsa with (as Stotty called them ) 'go faster bits' added. Which doesn't mean the Corsa is less fun than the Z, but IMO you can hardly compare the two.

Note I avoid the term 'sports car' here, IMO it's a far too generic term, especially because the borders on which the definition is based are very blurred today (as niky already pointed out). To me, this whole discussion is semantics only, rather than principle.

 

[Keef]

They're about as similar as a Mazda Miata and Ford Thunderbird. One of which isn't very sporty at all. Drive layout doesn't matter one whit compared to suspension tuning, personally.

That one, yes. A VTEC model (or whatever they called it elsewhere) like mine is just about directly comparable to that Elan, and I've no doubt it would be very competitive in performance. Remember what I always say about these crazy Civics and they're spectacular suspenders...

But neither of them are sports cars.

 

[Eric.]

So they (Manufacters) dont go there to test the cars between them selfs? Hmmm i wounder about that:idea:!

EDIT: If a car with less 130HP and more wheight does the same laps times has the Vette, in a 21km track, that doesnt mean anything to any of you? Thats just hilarious !

We are talking about the GT-R and Z06, right? Z06 = 505hp. 505 - 130= 375hp. The GT-R has 485hp. And probably the most sophisticated AWD system short of a WRC car. It is bound to be more stable than a 500hp RWD car on a very rough track like Nurb, and it has the power to keep up on the straights (the Z06 probably pulls away some because of weight). And then there's the whole basis of how Nurb is not a definitive track for hot laps due to all of the variables you get on a 20km toll road full of tourists.

And don't think I hate the GT-R either. I'd take one way before I'd take a Z06. Maybe even the ZR1.

 

[Keef]

We are talking about the GT-R and Z06, right? Z06 = 505hp. 505 - 130= 375hp. The GT-R has 485hp. And probably the most sophisticated AWD system short of a WRC car. It is bound to be more stable than a 500hp RWD car on a very rough track like Nurb, and it has the power to keep up on the straights (the Z06 probably pulls away some because of weight). And then there's the whole basis of how Nurb is not a definitive track for hot laps due to all of the variables you get on a 20km toll road full of tourists.

And don't think I hate the GT-R either. I'd take one way before I'd take a Z06. Maybe even the ZR1.

Don't touch it, it's sleeping. It was, anyway.

 

[Eric.]

Okay then, how about I touch this?

–noun
a small, high-powered automobile with long, low lines, usually seating two persons.


Also, sport car.

Origin:
1920–25
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.


sports car
n. An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Noun

Singular
sports car


Plural
sports cars

sports car (plural sports cars)

1. An automobile designed for high speed and power, tight handling, and flashy looks.