And I'll start it out.The Lotus M100 Elan was an FWD sportscar.
If you agree, vote yes. If you disagree, let's agree on a definition of a sportscar before you vote no.
#1
Got the thread idea from EliseTalk.Is there an FWD sportscar?
#2
And I'll start it out.The Lotus M100 Elan was an FWD sportscar.
If you agree, vote yes. If you disagree, let's agree on a definition of a sportscar before you vote no.
#3
Quote, originally posted by bhtooefr »
Is there an FWD sportscar?Of course, the list is looooooooong
#4
Quote, originally posted by bhtooefr »
If you agree, vote yes. If you disagree, let's agree on a definition of a sportscar before you vote no.
That's an inconclusive 30-page thread right there...
http://www.speedsportlife.com
Press vehicle this week: 2011 Ford Fiesta SE HatchbackOriginally Posted by 1SICKLEX
#5
5 pages with tons of personal attacks right now, but if we get into that mess, let's be civil about it.
#6
First thing I though of when I read the topic of this thread was the Lotus Elan...
4 coilpacks, 2 gearboxes and counting...
#7
One need only look to racecars before 1920 for a bunch of FWD ones.
█ ♣ █ + ███ | Sunlight on chrome, the blur of the landscape... every nerve aware
#8
Quote, originally posted by WhitePoloCT » First thing I though of when I read the topic of this thread was the Lotus Elan... quoted for truth
#9
I thought the agreed upon definition of a sports car was a 2-seat, RWD, manual transmission, convertible.So if the Elan is a sports car, then is the Mercury Capri?
#10
That's like saying "the M3 is a sport sedan, therefore the Lincoln Town Car is too."
Or saying "The VW GTI is a hot hatch, therefore the Taurus Wagon is too."
Don't allow a bad example of an FWD sportscar to rule out a good example.
Modified by bhtooefr at 8:08 AM 12-14-2006
#11
Quote, originally posted by axe » One need only look to racecars before 1920 for a bunch of FWD ones. /thread
#12
Hey, I just trying to elicit out what other people's definition of a sports car was.
#13
OK...Basically, my opinion is a car whose main goal is performance. Mainly in the twisties, but it's gotta have SOMETHING in the straights, too. Not for showing off, not for hauling people around (meaning that the traditional sports car is a two-seater, yes, but I also think a 2+2 can be allowed), not for hauling cargo around. (However, having those traits doesn't NECESSARILY exclude it from being a sportscar, just makes it harder to meet the definition.)
The M100 Elan meets that definition.
Partially because Lotus even chose the FWD drivetrain... for performance reasons!
#14
Quote, originally posted by bhtooefr » That's like saying "the M3 is a sport sedan, therefore the Lincoln Town Car is too."
Or saying "The VW GTI is a hot hatch, therefore the Taurus Wagon is too."
Don't allow a bad example of an FWD sportscar to rule out a good example.
Modified by bhtooefr at 8:08 AM 12-14-2006So then, your answer to him would be 'yes' on both counts, the Lotus and the Mercury?
#15
The Acura ITR would easily qualify to be a FWD sports car, IMO.Ultimately, it is what the intent of the production vehicle is and how well it meets that goal. Most FWD cars are not built for performance first, however there are always exceptions to the rule. Conversely, RWD/2 seats/optional drop top does not equal sports car (Chevy SSR, Factory Dodge Dakota Conv., etc.)
#16
Well, what was Mercury's intent for the Capri?Sports car? Or chick car?
If they were intending it as a chick car, then... But if it was intended to be a sports car, I guess we can let it in...
Oh, and another thing about that definition - 2 seat, RWD, manual tranny, convertible - while an automatic kills the car, is the Miata Automatic not a sports car? (totally unrelated to this thread's topic...)
Modified by bhtooefr at 8:44 AM 12-14-2006
#17
It is not just intent, but execution as well. The Civic Del Sol would kinda' fall into that same genre, meant to be something of a FWD "Sports Car" but outclassed by other Honda offerings when it came to true performance.
#18
Quote, originally posted by vwgilly » The Acura ITR would easily qualify to be a FWD sports car, IMO. Yes. ITR was the first thing I thought of.
#19
All these other cars people are coming up with are fine cars I suppose it depends on how you define "sports car" -You mentioned 2+2 Coupes. Those aren't sports cars, they are 2+2's, they already have a designation. I don't see why people see it as a big insult for something not to be a sports car.
Same thing with those truck things. Sports Car = RWD + Manual + Soft Top, but RWD/Manual/drop top may not necessarialy mean it's a sports car. It doesn't necessairly have to be reciprocal.
The Integra Type R is a really neat car as well, but does that open the door to all other performance oriented cars, homologation specials or not? What then about the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, WRX STi, Taurus SHO even?
To some people, a Red Pontiac Grand Am 2-door is a sports car, and you can probably find convincing literature from Pontiac on the subject as well.
Also for as far as having pick-up on the straights, what about an MG-TD? or did it fall short on excecution?
#21
Quote, originally posted by MXTHOR3 » X2 That was the first car I was thinking of.
I always have leftover VW parts available For Sale or Trade. Mk1 & Mk2, 8v Engine and Misc. trim parts, (and some E30 BMW).
Have a look at my photobucket album, and PM me with any questions.
Link: http://s2.photobucket.com/albums/y6/...%20or%20Trade/
#22
Quote, originally posted by MGQ » You mentioned 2+2 Coupes. Those aren't sports cars, they are 2+2's, they already have a designation. I don't see why people see it as a big insult for something not to be a sports car. Conversely, I don't see why people get worked up when times and definitions change. I would bet you anything you want that if you polled people as to whether Porsche's are sports cars (which is certainly not true if you go by the strict archaic definition you are referring to) they would almost universally say yes.
I see it all the time in magazine articles and advertising, certain cars being referred to as "sports cars" which according to some in the CL aren't.
I'm curious as to why you think the older traditional understanding of a sports car can't be adopted to modern times. Back in the day (at least in the US) you had boring sedans, pony cars/muscle cars, and convertible "sports cars". And the occasional economy car like the beetle or early datsuns. But now you have a MUCh more varied classification of cars. The term sports car is simply a generic term, to which a variety of different types fall under. Thus, there are different types of sports cars. If you look at any modern book written exclusively about "sports cars", you will find lots of cars people in here would consider GT cars for example.
A sports car is no longer a narrowly defined type of vehicle that has one specific design template. People have expanded the types of cars that exist currently. At the same time, it would be ridiculous to classify a roadster as a sports car, yet the same, fixed top version, as a GT for example. That's just silly.
Though I suppose there will always be those who absolutely refuse with all their might to move into modern day and feel comfort in holding on to their archaic definitions.
#24
There are plenty, as already mentioned.Integra Type R, GTI, Corrado, Civic Si (Type R), Lotus Elan, and so on.
Very varying price ranges, I know. Now, these are arguably not sports cars by the true definition of the word, but they are sporty (ie. can be driven quickly), and posess greater capabilities than most average vehicles. So, sports coupes, compacts, hot-hatches... whatever you want to call them. Fact is, they are all FWD, and can be, or are designed to be driven quickly.
#25
Yes there "Can" be but clearly the vast majority of sports cars are RWD or in some cases AWD.
Till there is a FWD Ferrari or Porsche, make mine RWD
"One thing I’ve noticed over the years is that if you drive into London at 6am, half of the cars on the roads are Porsches and Astons. Whereas if you go in at ten to nine, they’re all Renaults. Simple solution, then. You want a nice car? Get up earlier and do more work."
-- Jeremy Clarkson
#26
I guess it depends on your definition of sports car vs sporty car. IMO - Ferrrari's, Lambo's, Porsche, Vette, Viper and the like are sports cars. The integra, miata, and the like are not a sports car.
#27
I think you partially define sports car by the intent of the manufacturer. The Integra Type-R was no doubt, a purest sports car. Yes, it drove the wrong wheels, but everything about the design decisions that went into it were focused on performance and driving experience. That is started off on an already "sporty" platform (double-wishbones at each corner, high rev'ing/specific output engine, etc.) only affirms this.I'd say the same holds true, maybe to a lesser extent, for the SRT-4. The only reason why I discount that car slightly versus the Type-R is that the Neon platform it was based upon probably had a lot further to go to be a performer than the Integra did.
#28
Quote, originally posted by MXTHOR3 » Finished #2 for best driver's car of all time according to evo.
PSN: PhilipGTI
Sweetberry - Team My Little Pony
#29
Quote, originally posted by rudyr » I think you partially define sports car by the intent of the manufacturer. The Integra Type-R was no doubt, a purest sports car.
No, the ITR was designed to be a fast, fun sport coupe. The S2000 was their intention to make a sports car. FWD cars are never, ever sports cars. No exception. Not the original MINI, not the new MINI, not the FWD Lotus Elan, nada.
#30
this topic always gets kinda murky... but I don't consider a FWD car to be a sports car. there are fast FWD cars that I would call sport coupes.Neither do I consider the 911 or Veyron to be sports cars though...
A sports car is a Miata, S2000, MG, Triumph, Porsche Boxster, etc. imo.
#31
Quote, originally posted by coldweatherblue » A sports car is a Miata, S2000, MG, Triumph, Porsche Boxster, etc. imo. What about the M100 Elan, though? It fits squarely in that clase, with only one difference - FF instead of FR or MR.
#32
Quote, originally posted by AZGolf »
No, the ITR was designed to be a fast, fun sport coupe.Agree to disagree, the changes to the ITR go beyond fast/fun sports coupe. Lower final drive + limited slip, removal of sound deadening/sunroof, structural braces, shocks/springs, 5 bolt hubs vs. 4 bolt, small diameter lightweight wheels, 195HP 1.8L engine (108 HP/L, rev limited @ 9000rpm - those are Ferrari like numbers), and I think A/C was even optional.
Most companies doing a fast/fun version of their cars do things like upsize the rims, add a body kit and maybe some slightly lower springs. How many have you seen go so far as to change bolt pattern on the wheel hub, or handbuild a motor with 2000 additional RPMs to play with?
#33
Quote, originally posted by coldweatherblue » this topic always gets kinda murky... but I don't consider a FWD car to be a sports car. there are fast FWD cars that I would call sport coupes. Neither do I consider the 911 or Veyron to be sports cars though...
A sports car is a Miata, S2000, MG, Triumph, Porsche Boxster, etc. imo.
If you feel that way, then I feel that a real sports car is an open wheeled, no roof car. How bout that?
The Elan is the first FWD sports car I thought of too.
#34
Quote, originally posted by BostonB6 » I guess it depends on your definition of sports car vs sporty car. IMO - Ferrrari's, Lambo's, Porsche, Vette, Viper and the like are sports cars. The integra, miata, and the like are not a sports car. I'm sorry, are you implying that the Miata is fwd?
The Miata certainly is a sports car. My definition includes 'purpose built'. Purpose built would include the Elan, but not derivatives of economy cars, such as the Corrado or Integra. Are they fast and fun? Sure, but they're not built to be sports cars from the ground-up. If that's overly rigid for some, then take my definition with a grain of salt.
Fwiw, Karmann Ghias are not sports cars by my definition, since they're derived from Beetles, but the Porsche 356 is, even though they are mechanically similar. The Porsche uses a monocoque frame and a more performance-designed engine. (Yes, the early cars used alot of Bug parts, but the Chassis was completely different.)
Does that lessen the beautiful and hand-made Karmann Ghia? I think not! Nor does it lessen the Integra or Corrado.
Edit: The Elan was the first thing that came to my mind as well! How anyone could not consider it a sports car is beyond me! It was one of hte first to use carbon fiber in it's body, was it not? All of it was designed from the get-go as a sports car, ergo, it is.
Modified by Air and water do mix at 1:05 PM 12-14-2006
#35
Quote, originally posted by rudyr » Agree to disagree, the changes to the ITR go beyond fast/fun sports coupe. Lower final drive + limited slip, removal of sound deadening/sunroof, structural braces, shocks/springs, 5 bolt hubs vs. 4 bolt, small diameter lightweight wheels, 195HP 1.8L engine (108 HP/L, rev limited @ 9000rpm - those are Ferrari like numbers), and I think A/C was even optional. Most companies doing a fast/fun version of their cars do things like upsize the rims, add a body kit and maybe some slightly lower springs. How many have you seen go so far as to change bolt pattern on the wheel hub, or handbuild a motor with 2000 additional RPMs to play with?
Maybe do some fact checking. Aside from the fact that modifying a FWD car to be closer to a racecar does not make it closer to being a sports car, it revved only 300 rpm higher, not 2000rpm higher since the GS-R it's engine was based on had an 8100rpm redline compared to the ITR's 8400rpm redline. Tons of cars, especially from the 80's and 90's, have different bolt patterns for different models.Front wheel drive cars can easily be made in to race cars. They can be made very fast and go 'round a roadcourse with lap times comparable to a RWD car of similar power to weight ratio. That still doesn't make a FWD car a sports car, it's just a fast FWD car, typically called a sport compact, or sports coupe.
Posting Permissions
