[Hydrac7]

Quote:

Originally posted by ProFingerSk8er CRX when they first came out.. price at about 3/4 of muscle car at the time, but could handel as well as ferreris and prosches...

at speeds under 30mph, right?

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

sorry about the details, i actually found that artical from my road and track collection, it was in July 2003 issue. artical "15 years ago"
Quote:

The 1988 cover story was all about an exciting and SURPRISINGLY INEXPANSIVE race car- at $14,567 (1988!) fully set up and tweaked- the specially tuned HONDA CRX Si. Joe Rusz drove and wrote about it, finding the car's handeling surprisingly comparable to RACING HEAVYWEIGHTS like Ferrari, Lotus and Porsche, and its racing performance at least sufficient to get their attention. And this at just about a fourth of their cost. The SPECIAL FEATURES of the CRX included some extensive engine and chassis modifications, installed and tuned by Oscar Jackson Racing of Huntington Beach, California. Rusz summed up his conclusions: "[The CRX Si delivers] performance, handling, exclusivity, FEEL AND FUN...at an affordable price. Nipping at the heels of Ferrari or Porsche is a bonus."

yupp..i typped up the entire thing exactly for you guys

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

Quote:

the car you mention is not a true 2 seated sportcar. Its a sport version of a family car. Its another thing.

well IMO i dont think true sports car has to be 2 door. Evo and WRX are not family cars, they're 4 door because they were design to be in WRC.
Quote:

And nothing compares to the sound of a V8. Not even the squeaky turbo sound.

true, sometimes i just love the rumble from true classic muscles. but for everyday driving i rather have something with higher displacement/horspower ratio to save on weight. (ie. better handling, faster breaking, higher mpg ect ect..)
Z06's engine's barely making 71 horsepower per liter (stock vette making 61.4hp/liter), Evo is making 135.5hp/liter and WRX STi making 120hp/liter

 

[marios_mar]

V8 doesnt necessarily equal a muscle car. American V8s maybe but its not a rule.

Now about the mag article. I read a German auto motor und sport from 1992 that said the Corrado was comparable to the porsche 944 S and has similar performance so its better because the porsche is more expensive. These simplifications leave out a lot of factors incl diminishing returns. Sure you pay for the brand too when you buy a Porsche but lets be real a porsche 944-951-968 etc are no match to most cars of their time each as far as handling goes.

So i bet the Honda is as good as golf and a corrado but thats it. It doubt it can play in the high league. And btw the magazines usually are the worst judges being almost always biased. (for financial reasons Id say)

 

[marios_mar]

Quote:

surprisingly comparable to RACING HEAVYWEIGHTS

surprisingly comparable should mean more like
: "good handling that you wouldnt excpect from a car at that price range.

Quote:

well IMO i dont think true sports car has to be 2 door

Its not a matter of opinion. Sports cars are 2 seated low cars of high performance.

Racing car is another thing. Otherwise the cars you mention normally are family cars and you are talking about their racing/sport versions. Thats what WRC cars are. Its not that I dont like them but they are based on the simple Lancer or Focus or whatever chassis.

Not that the cars you mentioned are of no good value but its not the sporstcar thing.


Btw to answer for the original post a Corrado VR6 6 cylinder 0-6 in 6,7 secs etc can be had for somewhat under the amount you are willing to spend. Parts should be easy to get since its a VW and its an eye catcher. The car is very durable. It should go for hundreds of thousands of Kms.

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally posted by ProFingerSk8er dont hate me for saying this, but i would really like to see any muscle car make a turn at 70 mph. IMO, i think muscle cars put wayyyy too much effort into thinking how to make more hoursepower and how to make it go fast, just tell me how well does a 1980 mustang turn?? speed isnt everything. eventhough im not old enough to drive yet, but i do like japanese cars for some good reasons. in one of my countless Road and Track, in the artical "30 years ago", they talked about how shocked they were when they tested honda's "new" CRX when they first came out.. price at about 3/4 of muscle car at the time, but could handel as well as ferreris and prosches... since you said Z06's price to performance ratio, how about Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution? 4.8 seconds 0-60, 13.4@103mph, 108ft 60-0 at $30k fully loaded and gets 21.7mpg compare to Z06's 4.5 0-60, 12.8@113.5mph, 114ft 60-0 for $21k more then Evo and gets 20mpg?

The Z06 can't handle?

You do realize we're in the 21st century, right? Please, the Z06 spanks any car at that price level. Yes, handling-wise as well.
To the original poster, as much as you may want to get a HIPERFORMANCEOMGTYPERDRIFTU car, a cheap beater car will probably serve you just as well. Driving is a skill that takes years to master.

 

[bdb55]

I got my first car a couple of months ago - 1995 BMW 525i for about $9500. I've been very happy with it. I'm sure that you can get one in your price range; my only worry about the car is that I'll get stuck with expensive repairs.

Unfortunately I already had an accident when I hit some black ice last week. Now it's in the body shop for 2-3 weeks

 

[CMacDaddy]

4 DOOR SPORTS WHAT?????

!!!

race a Z06 against a lancer and you'll see which is a true sports car. I'm not buying into the whole rice rocket craze. If you want a new sports car it better be an NSX, Supra, 350z, Rx8/7, maybe an S2000 or Miata ,or not from asia. None of these compare to a Z06, Saleen S1, or Viper much less the original sports cars of Europe (aka porshe, ferrarri, aston martin, AC, Jag, etc).

Asian car manufactrers have alot to prove before I'd even consider a "sports" car (not a "sporty" car) from that continent.

 

[soundboy]

Get yourself one of these.....a babe magnet if there was ever one

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

Quote:

Originally posted by CMacDaddy 4 DOOR SPORTS WHAT????? !!! race a Z06 against a lancer and you'll see which is a true sports car. I'm not buying into the whole rice rocket craze. If you want a new sports car it better be an NSX, Supra, 350z, Rx8/7, maybe an S2000 or Miata ,or not from asia. None of these compare to a Z06, Saleen S1, or Viper much less the original sports cars of Europe (aka porshe, ferrarri, aston martin, AC, Jag, etc). Asian car manufactrers have alot to prove before I'd even consider a "sports" car (not a "sporty" car) from that continent.

um... comparing porformance of a $51 car again a $30k and say you expect more the 0.6 second difference at 0-60 before you "consider a sports car"?

Z06 is at $51k, Saleen S1 is near $56k, viper if over $97k, ferrarri and aston martins are over $300k...
NSX at $90k, Supra at $27k, 350z at $32k, RX8 at $30k,

just from the price difference it's not hard to tell they'r in totally different class, but porformance datasheet shows little difference between Lancer and Z06... how can you even compare them like they'r in the same price range and same class?

[edit] one of my dad's friend has a 1991 NSX, after almost 13 years is still running strong, never been in any big repair, only changing oil, replacing tire and things like that.

and guess how much it cost to change oil from Acura? 17 bucks..

yupp..lets see that kind of price tag on ferrari and Jags

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

Asian car manufactrers have alot to prove before I'd even consider a "sports" car (not a "sporty" car) from that continent.

Hmmmm....I thought they have already proven that affordable and reliable sports cars can be build with the Miata, MR2, and the S2000, not to mention the Z car and NSX.

Toyotas still build the Supra?

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally posted by ProFingerSk8er just from the price difference it's not hard to tell they'r in totally different class, but porformance datasheet shows little difference between Lancer and Z06... how can you even compare them like they'r in the same price range and same class? [edit] one of my dad's friend has a 1991 NSX, after almost 13 years is still running strong, never been in any big repair, only changing oil, replacing tire and things like that. and guess how much it cost to change oil from Acura? 17 bucks.. yupp..lets see that kind of price tag on ferrari and Jags

Where does he defend the cost of sports cars? All he's saying is that the Lancer Evo is NOT one. And it isn't. Sure the lancer may have awesome performance, but a sports car it ain't.
Should I even begin with the show room rust stories?

 

[pbirkett]

I dont know why some people on here are so quick to knock hot hatchbacks, like the Civic. There is a Civic available in the UK (and maybe in the US too) called the Type R. It is a lightweight, 200 bhp hatchback, that is literally only about 5 seconds behind Porsche 911 Turbo's and the like around a track, OK, so its not quite in the same league, but a Porsche 911 Turbo is something like 420 BHP whereas the Civic is half of that, and the Porsche costs like £80k whereas the Civic is about £15k. I dont think thats too bad personally

 

[andrzejpw]

I'm not bashing the Civic Type-R. In fact, I'd take a (real) one in a heartbeat, even though its FWD. Still, it's NOT a good car for a first time driver.

 

[soundboy]

Quote:

I dont know why some people on here are so quick to knock hot hatchbacks.

Me neither. They are not my cup of tea but I think they are a great way to have high performance, practicality, and a reasonable price tag. Some people's egos just need to be stroked by a certain name brand and high price tags. I agree that cars like the Mitsubishi EVO or the Subaru WRX are NOT really sports cars, but I think these are just as good, if not better, as high performance alternatives.