"If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent" (essextee) 06/04/2020 at 11:40 • Filed to: None

19

73

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:47

7

V6 accords are Japanese muscle cars.
Change my mind

facw > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:48

2

Hey man, sleek looks with 278 horsepower:

Sure they don’t make the coupe anymore, but it could be new to the coworker as opposed to objectively new...

Milky > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:51

6

People that dont know shit talking like they do, on any subject, is cringe.  

facw > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 11:53

0

Could be. Would explain why all Accords are 4 cylinder these days.

CalzoneGolem > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:53

0

So ... uh ... what makes it not a sports car?

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > facw 06/04/2020 at 11:54

0

That always saddens me....

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 11:54

0

If any current Japanese car could be called a muscle car it's the Infiniti Q60

Maxima Speed > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:55

0

LOL

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > CalzoneGolem 06/04/2020 at 11:57

2

Fwd. Without better balance it’s just “sporty” and not “sports” .

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 11:58

0

Hmm but its too fancy, a muscle car is supposed to be a commuter car (ish) with a big motor

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 11:59

0

Meh, they make em in Ohio. Not really that Japanese.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:00

1

All modern cars are sports cars.

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 12:01

0

It weighs 1800kg. Too heavy to be a true sports car.

dogisbadob > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:03

2

The Accord has VTEC which adds like 1000 hp!!!

And if it’s loaded with stickers, it’s a fucking rocket

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 12:04

5

Pretty much, yeah. Nobody can afford sports cars so they have to convince us that their milquetoast offerings with boring engines and numb steering are what we want.

Wacko > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:04

1

What about the maxima with the 4dsc thing?

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > dogisbadob 06/04/2020 at 12:05

2

You forgot the “yo”

If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent > Wacko 06/04/2020 at 12:06

2

When was the last time you saw a new Maxima?

Wacko > Wacko 06/04/2020 at 12:08

0

They still Make those?? Hihi

I saw one recently in the parking of the grocery store. It even had a  4DSC badge or sticker, and I remember laughing 

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:18

0

Never said sports car, muscle car is what they are.

sn4cktimes > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:18

0

This just made my wife and I laugh. Well done

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 12:19

0

True, I meant from a Japanese brand.

3point8isgreat > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:20

3

Where does this leave hot hatches? By vehicle intents and function they’re sports cars.

Heck even with my cars the RWD requirement makes little sense . I’ve got my Mustang that most people would call a sports car. And then I’ve got the Veloster. Every aspect of the Veloster is more sport oriented than the Mustang. And I don’t even just mean in raw #’s either. The only sporty part of the Mustang’s stock suspension was that they gave it a rear sway bar. No LSD. A de-stroked truck engine. And a chassis made to be cheap.  The body style is the only sporty part of the Mustang.  

Future next gen S2000 owner > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:21

1

Damn right! I want my steering pinky finger light with no hint of feedback. Who cares what those front tires are doing as long as the wheel is cranked the right direction!

I just love me a mediocre 4 cylinder with middling mileage and a confused automatic. No, I don’t need “low”. PDR those are what I crave. I don’t need nothing fancy!

All season tires are great at being middle of the road! THAT’s EXACTLY HOW I ROLL!

I DRIVE A DODGE STRATUS!

Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available > facw 06/04/2020 at 12:46

2

That is a genuine sports car that I very  much like. Most are just middling sport sedans that have about as much sport as a sport utility vehicle.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:46

1

I mean, have you driven an old analog sports car? An MGB or an Elan ? They’re fun, but they kinda... suck. They’re slow and don’t actually handle THAT well. Sure, they’re rewarding, but hucking shitboxe s through corners is rewarding too. The cheap stuff’s always been pretty bad.

NYankee1927 > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 12:51

4

Also my wife:

“You need to be nice”

Michael > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 12:56

2

I mean, my MR2 is pretty good. Depends on your definition of Analog, I have EFI, power windows, locks and brakes, and a single noble air bag doing god’s work (if it still works) . No traction control, ABS, stability control, no nannies, just 3 pedals.

feather-throttle-not-hair > Wacko 06/04/2020 at 13:02

1

4DSCVT

ihm96 > Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available 06/04/2020 at 13:06

1

This is not a sports car lol

ihm96 > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 13:07

0

They handle pretty damn well for a 50 year old design lol. I’d rather have a sub 2000 pound rwd torquey MG or Lotus than a fwd 3000 pound 4 cyl that’s supposedly supposed to be engaging and “light”

ihm96 > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 13:08

4

Hot hatches are hot hatches; that’s where it leaves them. It’s a sporty version of a hatchback, not a sports car.

A mustang is a pony car. Just because non car peopel will call it a sports car doesn’t make it so

feather-throttle-not-hair > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 13:11

0

Hmm. I think of sports cars as being small, generally having 2 seats, a relatively bespoke chassis and a design philosophy that puts fun above all other concerns, including all out speed.

Miata, boxster, MGB, Elise etc.

I feel like we’re moving more and more towards fast SUVs, ho t hatches and s port co upes that are fast, but which share most of their underpinnings with more pedestrian cars. (Mind you, I drive a “sport coupe” and I love it, nothing wrong with it, just not an actual sports car in my mind.)

I mean, at the end of the day we all have our own definitions, because really cars are too nebulous to ever make truly defined categories that fit each and every one of them. But personally i like the term “performance car” to describe something fast and fun without having all the baggage I described earlier that comes with the term “sports car”

sony1492 > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 13:12

0

Any thing is a sportscar if you dare to drive it right.

feather-throttle-not-hair > Future next gen S2000 owner 06/04/2020 at 13:16

0

Heh, the power steering on my lemons car is like that. A teammate didn’t secure the steering wheel properly and it popped off when he was heading into a chicane. What did he do? He grabbed the splines on the steering column and twisted. No problem, car got around the curves and he stuck the wheel back on during the following straight. Overboosted steering ftw 

Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 13:16

0

I don’t think fwd is a disqualifier . A 280 hp coupe with sharp handling is a sports car.

feather-throttle-not-hair > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 13:19

1

Personally, I wouldn’t call either a sports car. Both are performance cars, ones a hot hatch and the other is a pony/muscle car. I’d also accept “sport coupe” for the mustang.

But also, that’s just my definition.

CobraJoe > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 13:20

3

All modern cars are sports cars.

Wrong.

All modern cars are fast and handle well, but that is not the true definition of a sports car.

Look at the historical examples, many of the most notable sports cars in the past 100 years were quite slow. The Miata, Air cooled 911s, the British roadsters.... Most of those could be beat on a dragstrip by more popular sedans that cost less. (Granted, it’s not a universal truth, but that’s the point).  

Sports cars were effectively defined by being more engaging for the driver by sacrificing in other areas (passenger space, cargo space, even horsepower for certain models).

feather-throttle-not-hair > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 13:22

1

Muscle cars have always been more about displacement than actual power ratings. The biggest engine in the accord  is what 2.0L?

Snuze: Needs another Swede > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 13:23

2

Years ago Grassroots Motorsports did a comparison, “Porsche vs. Minivan”where they compared a Honda Odyssey with a Porsche 356 (and also a Jaguar XKE) .

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/articles/soccer-moms-revenge/

I’ll go ahead spoil it for you - they ran an AutoX course, the Jag turned a 51.54 lap, the Porsche 356 turned in a healthy 48.89. The Odyssey turned in a 49.09. That’s 0.2 seconds slower. Then for fun they put on a set of sportier tires on the minivan, from a 16" T-rated tire to a 17" H-rated tire. It turned in a 45.9 1, almost 3 full seconds faster than the Porsche.  

CobraJoe > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 13:27

4

Pretty much, yeah. Nobody can afford sports cars so they have to convince us that their milquetoast offerings with boring engines and numb steering are what we want.

I have a theory that y ears and years of “Handles like a sports car!” advertisements have left the majority of consumers blind to what a sports car actually feels like .  “The 4 door CUV is much more useful, and it handles like a sports car, so why would I bother with the sports car?”

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 13:31

0

They used to have a 3.5 V6.

3.5L is quite big in a commuter car among the Japanese brands.

3point8isgreat > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 13:32

0

So whats your criteria for a sports car? Is it rwd, 2 doors , 2 seats?

For the record I don't normally call my Veloster a sports car. I think I've described it as "effectively a sports car". Since it accomplishes a lot of the same intentions (go fast, handle well, be fun to drive, etc.)

3point8isgreat > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 13:35

0

What would you call a toyobaru twin? Or a porsche 911? Or an Evora? Those have 2 doors and back seats just like a mustang or camaro. 

ihm96 > Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available 06/04/2020 at 13:39

2

It’s not necessarily a disqualifier but there are plenty of cars with “sharp” handling and plenty of HP, doesn’t make them a sports car.

“ A sports car is designed to emphasise handling , performance, or thrill of driving” I don’t believe for a second that a Honda Accord coupe was designed to emphasize any of those things. It’s meant to emphasize being a great affordable commuter car. It may have sharp handling but it was not outwardly designed for sportiness and people aren’t buying it for it it’s sportiness. Just because it can also be “sporty” and handle sharp doesn’t change that.

Nobody buys a Honda Accord to take out for Sunday cruises and to go on backroad drives, they buy it to be a daily. By your logic pretty much 90% of cars sold today are sports cars, because most cars have over 200 HP and can handle most turns at above the speed limit very easily aka sharp handling.

A C300 Coupe has plenty of HP and sharp handling too, doesn’t mean it’s a sports car.

A Miata has very little HP, it is a sports car.

Who is the Leader - 404 / Blog No Longer Available > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 13:43

0

Granted. The Accord is spor ty but necessarily a sport car.

feather-throttle-not-hair > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 13:49

1

Nah, there can be fwd sports cars, they’re just rare (lotus elan would be an example along with that one mercury in the early 90s.)

Sports cars concentrate on fun over practicality. They also should generally have a chassis built for the purpose, EG a BMW Z4 is a sports car while an M3 is not despite the M3 possibly being stiffer, faster and more performance oriented. But when BMW designed the Z4, the first questions on their mind were things like “where do we want the driver to sit in the chassis?” and “how low can we get the center of gravity?” instead of “how can we use this space efficiently for drivers passengers and their cargo?”

Now that said, there’s always gonna be overlap so it’s never going to be an exact art . I’m not trying to say you’re wrong if you’ve got your own definitions!

ihm96 > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 13:52

1

It has nothing to do with doors or seats

“A sports car is designed to emphasise handling, performance, or thrill of driving.”

Most hot hatches are cars designed for economy that get tuned to be more fun. A brz or 911 is developed from the ground up with the purpose of being a car that is engaging and fun to drive. A veloster is a practical hatchback that has a sporty version.

Basically a sports car has fun, sportiness and engagement (Or some combo)  as the main goal, whereas a hot hatch it’s the secondary goal. The main goal of your hot hatch is to be reliable practical transportation 

feather-throttle-not-hair > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 13:54

0

Hmm, I’d maybe accept it as a muscle car in Japan, but I don’t think they ever sold it there. Here, 3.5L is not enough to be eyebrow raising in a sedan. Muscle cars were big engines shoved into medium sized cars (or what passed for mid-sized in the 60s/70s.)

The accord is mid-sized, but in a country that has 8.0L sports cars, 3.5L is mid-sized as well.

3point8isgreat > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 13:55

1

Im just always curious how people split their definitions for this stuff. It feels exactly like the “is it a sandwich?” Thing.

And hey now, the Veloster’s ridiculous doors and drastically sloped roof that reduces headroom and cargo space beg your pardon on the point of designed for practicality. Hahah

I guess if I had to lay out a definition I'd have to say  basically all performance oriented cars are “sports cars”. And then smaller classifications like roadster, pony car, or hot hatch would fit inside that. But I also admit I don't actually normally think of hot hatches or sport sedans as sports cars.

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 13:58

0

They were sold in both the US and Japan.

Its not a muscle car in the true sense of the word. Thats why I said its a Japanese muscle car

3point8isgreat > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 13:59

0

Then how would a mustang or camaro not be a sports car? They’re designed for fun and performance. And don’t ride on economy car platforms. (Okay I guess the camaro shares the Alpha platform with some Ca dillacs).

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > Snuze: Needs another Swede 06/04/2020 at 13:59

0

That’s amazing.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 14:07

0

I think the telling thing, though, is tires. The Porsche was riding on factory sized 165R15s, a tiny, tiny narrow little tire with a lot of sidewall, and an S speed rating. The S rating is good for 112 MPH, only 6 MPH down from the Odyssey’s stock T-rated tires which are good for 118 MPH. The H rated tires they added to the minivan are good for 130 MPH. While not the tell-all, speed ratings generally translate well to grip.

There’s a few ways to skin this cat, but I’d be interested to see a comparison of the Odyssey and 356 on tires of equal speed rating.  Me thinks the Porsche would edge ahead, based on the stock-for-stock comparison.  Additionally, when they added the H-rated tires to the minivan, they had to go up to a 17" wheel.  They kept the same 225 section width, which means the aspect ratio had to decrease to keep the same overall diameter.  That means less sidewall flex, which improves handling.  The 356 tires are 25.4" diameter on 15" wheels, meaning “huge” 5+” tall sidewalls, meaning a lot of flex.  It would, again, be interesting to normalize these things for a more meaningful comparison.  Another thing that could be considered is contact patch (a function mainly of section width) vs. weight.  The 356 is a lot lighter, but also has a tiny contact patch.  

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > Snuze: Needs another Swede 06/04/2020 at 14:10

1

A lot of it is probably weight distribution, too. Having a lot of weight over the front tires means better grip through the corner when trail braking.

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > CobraJoe 06/04/2020 at 14:16

0

Sports cars were effectively defined by being more engaging for the driver by sacrificing in other areas (passenger space, cargo space, even horsepower for certain models).

Perhaps, but generally stuff from before the 80s was designed with parts bin stuff. The sacrifices were generally made to keep weight down to make it handle better, not for the subjective goal of making it more fun.

The main things that made those cars fun and engaging to drive were mostly parts bin stuff- hydraulic power steering, mass produced motors. I think the goal was moreso to make a car that handles well and doesn’t weigh much with what they had. When we take the same approach today, the main difference is that we have electronic power steering, which doesn’t have enough feedback to make it engaging.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 14:20

1

That’s a good point.  It’s really not an apples to apples comparison.  And without controlling for a lot of factors, it was probably never meant to be.  But it is a good indicator of just how far “regular” cars have come.  

I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 14:22

0

Eh, I’d disagree that a car needs a bespoke chassis to be fun. Case in point, Mk1 VW GTIs. Any car with rally pedigree. In these cars, chassis differences are nominal, and they’re fun to drive.

ihm96 > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 14:28

0

A base mustang has always just been another regular commuter car, not with any sporting pretensions. An ecoboost can be equipped with performance packages and all that, but they don’t come standard as a particularly sporty car.

A V8 Mustang or PP Ecoboost is pretty much a sports car, I’ll give you that. Obviously all of these car categorizations don’t ultimately matter for much, but it just doesn’t make sense to me that people feel the need to call their daily driver a sports car. A sports car is one that is designed for sport, it doesn’t worry about practicality. Everyone wants to make like their practical car is also a sports car , and thats fine if it makes them feel cool or better , but it doesnt make them a sports car .

feather-throttle-not-hair > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 14:33

3

Oh I’m NOT saying a bespoke chassis is necessary for a car to be fun. I’m saying it’s one of the things that make a sports car a sports car.

That’s why I pointed out that my own car is not a “sports car” despite being something I bought mainly for driving enjoyment.

There are plenty of wonderful hot hatches, sports coupes, grand tourers, muscle cars etc that are built to go fast and handle well. Many of them do so incredibly effectively, but they’re not sports cars (in my mind) when it comes down to it. Which again, takes nothing from the vehicle.

But you’re  going to have trouble replicating stuff like low center of gravity, a low seating position towards the middle of the car and uncompromised weight distribution front to rear if you’re designing the chassis from the ground up to be a practical hatchback.

WasGTIthenGTOthenNOVAnowbacktoGTI > Wacko 06/04/2020 at 14:33

0

I had a 92!! It was not a sports car......

3point8isgreat > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 14:49

1

Hmm, I don’t think I’ve ever thought of a Mustang as a regular commuter car. It’s not designed for efficiency or practicality. And they always release the base models and the GTs of new generations at the same time on the same chassis. And then continue to use that chassis for the even higher performance models. So I’d say they very much DO design the platform with performance potential in mind. And the base models are definitely sportier than their contemporary economy cars.

The more I think about it, the base mustangs are like the inverse of a hot hatch. They take a fast high performing platform and slow it down with cost cutting. I vote for a new class of car called the “Cold Coupes”.

And yes I know at the beginning I said the chassis on my mustang was made to be cheap. But it’s still a good bit more sporty in character than a ‘97 Taurus.

feather-throttle-not-hair > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 15:04

1

wow, i’m surprised they sold the Accord with a 3.5L in Japan, taxes would be wild on a car with an engine that big there. Which actually kind of adds to your argument calling it a muscle car.

So yeah, I’d consider it a muscle car in Japan.

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 15:09

1

It was called an Inspire in Japan

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_Inspire#:~:text=The%20Honda%20Inspire%20is%20a,derived%20from%20Honda%20Accord%20chassis.&text=In%20June%202003%2C%20the%20fourth,their%20Variable%20Cylinder%20Management%20technology.

CobraJoe > I like cars: Jim Spanfeller is one ugly motherfucker 06/04/2020 at 15:09

1

The sacrifices were generally made to keep weight down to make it handle better, not for the subjective goal of making it more fun.

Better handling was not the exclusive goal, as there were several sports cars that sacrificed handling for a big engine. (Big block Vettes and the Sunbeam Tiger for a couple examples).

There is a very wide variety of sports cars out there, but the one thing they have in common is that they all sacrifice interior and cargo space to make it more interesting for the driver.

The main things that made those cars fun and engaging to drive were mostly parts bin stuff- hydraulic power steering, mass produced motors. I think the goal was moreso to make a car that handles well and doesn’t weigh much with what they had.  

So, why weren’t the family sedans of the 70s considered sports cars? They had parts bin hydraulic power steering and mass produced motors.

I think you’re partially right with the goal to make a car that handles well and doesn’t weigh much... Just look at the reason why they did those things: to make a car that was more engaging for the driver. They sacrificed interior space and cargo capacity to make the car lighter and the center of gravity lower so it is better to drive. 

When we take the same approach today, the main difference is that we have electronic power steering, which doesn’t have enough feedback to make it engaging.

Few things here: There are hydraulic power steering systems with zero road feel (see the 70s) , and there are many sports cars without any power steering. Besides, from what I hear, Porsche is learning how to do electronic powersteering with lots of feed back.

ihm96 > 3point8isgreat 06/04/2020 at 15:32

1

“So I’d say they very much DO design the platform with performance potential in mind”

Thats definitely true that they design it with the potential upgrades in mind, but the base models are not very sporty at all. Being more sporty than a 97 Taurus is a very low bar haha. And I’m not trying to say there is anything wrong with any of the cars I’ve used as an example, I just disagree with the characterization. A V6 Accord Coupe is an awesome fun car, but to label it a sports car is a disingenuous reach for no reason other than cool points.

Most people think of the Mustang as very sporty because their mind jumps to all the high end V8 models, but even dating back to the 1st gen the base models are just a practical affordable 2 door Ford made for everyday people.

Cold coupes sound pretty fun tbh. I am of the mind that Id rather drive a C300 on the road than a C63 because its much more tossable and wringable and usable, but I would never call it a sports car even if I regularly tracked it.  

As far as the chassis being cheap, I don’t think that factors into it much. A miata and MG were both cheap, as is the BRZ. I ultimately think its really the intent of the designer and the whole package of the car. I may be wrong in calling the modern Mustang as not a sports car, it probably could be considered one. Hot hatches though I think are ultimately just hot hatches and thats awesome. I love driving hot hatches

ihm96 > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 15:43

1

This 100%. My E34 540 is very sporty but it is not a sports car, and thats okay. Not sure why people want to reach so hard and make everything fit the category other than they want cool points?

feather-throttle-not-hair > ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability 06/04/2020 at 15:45

1

You’ve....i nspired me to learn something new!

feather-throttle-not-hair > ihm96 06/04/2020 at 15:51

0

Yup, i’d go so far as to say that most of my favorite “fun” cars are not sports cars. I love a good sport sedan or sport coupe and my first automotive passion revolved around rally homologation vehicles, and the last time one of those was an actual sports car was probably the Stratos (though i guess the C elica is a little bit of a grey area. )

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 15:56

1

Thats what Oppo is here for!

Learning and shi tposting

ihm96 > feather-throttle-not-hair 06/04/2020 at 16:02

1

Agreed. Once you drive a low slung sports car you realize how different it feels to even the best handling sedans and coupes.

Like an SL550 is very very sporty, but when you compare the feeling of driving in it to an AMG GT where you sit basically below the door sill and all the way back over the rear axle its incredible. The difference cannot be understated in feeling , and I think a lot of people miss that. 

Neil drives a beetle and a fancy beetle > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 16:47

0

This is the best thing I’ve  seen All week

i86hotdogs > If only EssExTee could be so grossly incandescent 06/04/2020 at 22:09

0

OOOOH this brings back a few furious moments I’ve encountered like this:

1. Shopping for a used car, found a Magnum R/T with 33,000 miles listed for $3,000. HAD to take a look. The used car lot (in Detroit) was half used car dealer, half kickboxing gym. The salesman was mid workout when I arrived to look at it; covered in sweat wearing gym clothes. He insisted the transmission was a manual since it had a manual option. I foolishly corrected him and he took it personal. “You think you know more than me?!” Car had the ABS and check engine lights flashing as well. I didn’t buy it.

2. I STILL am in an argument with a friend of mine who calls his 2019 Jeep Cherokee Limited a “truck”. “I can bring my truck to the beach”, “My truck can fit all of us.” His argument is because it’s not a car or a van, therefore it’s a truck.