my brz vs my evo x

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

And the original Vipers had what were originally re-worked truck engines.

Old Vipers were POS. I remember breaking the door handle of one on the showroom floor.. wtf.

I respect those cars but I would never own an early one.

Agreed on the engine too

[OrbitalEllipses]

What happens when you add two cylinders to a V8 truck engine? You get a supercar!

Not. They tried. The new one is much closer.

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

Regarding the Benz.. no manual trans.. no care.

Having been in a C63... and also an F430 16M Scuderia a few years ago and recently a 458 Spider... there are some cars without manual transmissions that I still care about, even if I can't afford them

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by shyong

Have you been reading what's been posted on here or did you just jump in haphazardly? Just because something's closer in potential to being a super car doesn't mean it's a super car. There's no lesser version of a super car. For example, Ferrari doesn't make a neutered down version of their 458 Italia.

There are certainly plenty of credible people in the industry who would disagree with you.

Corvette ZR-1:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-vide...claren-mp4-12c

Porsche 911 Turbo S:

http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandre...sense_911.html

http://www.evo.co.uk/news/evonews/24..._supercar.html

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

On that note... what's your opinion of the C63 AMG Black Series? That car is pretty bad ass. It's not quite based on an "econobox," but its roots are associated with the run-of-the-mill C-Class that definitely doesn't exactly scream "performance," yet nobody seems to crucify it the way people dismiss Evos, STIs and even the R32/Golf R just because of how far down the totem pole their base model is. Did you guys also brush aside the Integra Type-R too just because the base GS/RS was a two-door econobox?

When I owned my STI, I thought it was a fun car, but I wouldn't deny it was an econobox fitted with a turbo and expensive AWD drivetrain. Nothing wrong with that, but definitely not a supercar. Same with the C63 AMG black and ITR.

[fatoni]

people keep talking about how many cars are just econoboxes with afterthoughts slapped on and that is why these cars arent sports cars. first, i would like to ask what, in a strictly fundamental sense, makes a good eco car but not a sports car? second, what makes you think that companies arent thinking about the sports versions of the cars at all during development? its not like after 9 evos, mitsu made the current lancer without considering that maybe they would make an evo x

[OrbitalEllipses]

First let's define sports car: rear drive two-seater (possibly without roof). That is the STRICT definition of a sports car; everything else is a sporty car. From there we can discuss if it needs to have a V8, a L4, turbo 4 of some kind, etc. etc. The 911 for instance is a sporty GT car. The Supra? Sporty GT bruiser. S2000? Sports car. Miata? Sports car.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

First let's define sports car: rear drive two-seater (possibly without roof). That is the STRICT definition of a sports car; everything else is a sporty car. From there we can discuss if it needs to have a V8, a L4, turbo 4 of some kind, etc. etc. The 911 for instance is a sporty GT car. The Supra? Sporty GT bruiser. S2000? Sports car. Miata? Sports car.

i get the classic definition of a sports car and i hope this doesnt become a thread about arguing that definition. if people are willing to say that the frs isnt a sports car, i can understand not thinking an evo is a sportscar. those arent the people i get confused and frustrated by.

[shyong]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

There are certainly plenty of credible people in the industry who would disagree with you.

Corvette ZR-1:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-vide...claren-mp4-12c

Porsche 911 Turbo S:

http://www.boston.com/cars/newsandre...sense_911.html

http://www.evo.co.uk/news/evonews/24..._supercar.html

Why don't you quote me where I say my opinion? Here...let me help you out since you've got selective reading.

"My 991S has somewhat expensive materials used in it's construction and the $100K+ price tag reflects upon that. But I wouldn't consider it a super car. Nor would I consider the Turbo version of the 911 a super car. But that's based on my definition of what a super car is. They don't qualify. I think of things like high price tag, top of the line performance, exclusivity, rarity, etc as the criteria for meeting the super car definition."

By the way, those links you posted up...what do you think they are? Opinions. Everyone has one...even you.

[shyong]

Originally Posted by OrbitalEllipses

First let's define sports car: rear drive two-seater (possibly without roof). That is the STRICT definition of a sports car; everything else is a sporty car. From there we can discuss if it needs to have a V8, a L4, turbo 4 of some kind, etc. etc. The 911 for instance is a sporty GT car. The Supra? Sporty GT bruiser. S2000? Sports car. Miata? Sports car.

The definition's evolved over the years. It doesn't just apply to strictly 2-seaters anymore. To get technical, here's Merriam-Webster's definition:

a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving

First Known Use of SPORTS CAR

1928

We've come a long way since 1928. Don't know how you interpret the word 'usually' but doesn't mean always. The word sports car doesn't adhere strictly to what you may think a sports car may be.

[EvoXDD]

This is getting out of control. And there are SEVERAL magazines, critics, proffessional driver and so on that have said straight up that the evo is considered a supercar, just at the bottom of food chain

[shyong]

Originally Posted by EvoXDD

This is getting out of control. And there are SEVERAL magazines, critics, proffessional driver and so on that have said straight up that the evo is considered a supercar, just at the bottom of food chain

Not in stock trim. Are you talking about the UK FQ models? Because bone stock it's far from a super car. It has the ability to run super car like performance numbers modded up but let's not kid ourselves. It's not a super car.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by shyong

Why don't you quote me where I say my opinion? Here...let me help you out since you've got selective reading.

"My 991S has somewhat expensive materials used in it's construction and the $100K+ price tag reflects upon that. But I wouldn't consider it a super car. Nor would I consider the Turbo version of the 911 a super car. But that's based on my definition of what a super car is. They don't qualify. I think of things like high price tag, top of the line performance, exclusivity, rarity, etc as the criteria for meeting the super car definition."

By the way, those links you posted up...what do you think they are? Opinions. Everyone has one...even you.

Great, glad you admit that's just your opinion, because that's all that really is. Now see how silly it is trying to argue your opinion is superior to others?

[OrbitalEllipses]

Originally Posted by shyong

Not in stock trim. Are you talking about the UK FQ models? Because bone stock it's far from a super car. It has the ability to run super car like performance numbers modded up but let's not kid ourselves. It's not a super car.

We're seeing eye to eye now.

[shyong]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Great, glad you admit that's just your opinion, because that's all that really is. Now see how silly it is trying to argue your opinion is superior to others?

Huh? You've got issues. At least contribute to the conversation by reading up on the actual debate. It's plenty disrespectful just selectively pulling out and nit-picking what you want to see. You've contributed absolutely nothing to this conversation.

When did I ever insinuate my opinion was the be all and end all? Please, please...quote me on it. And use full context because you've already done a miserable job trying to slander me.

All you did was post up a few articles from different automotive journalists who put up their opinion piece under the guise of an article. Which you tried to use as FACT! ROFL. Come on now. You can do way better than that.

If you respond to me again with nothing constructive to say you'll just go on ignore. Thanks for playing.