Is weight no longer an issue in sports cars?

[nikitopo]

Originally Posted by Dr. BRZ

If you were to gut the brz/frs to an extreme level, it would weigh between 2200 - 2300lbs something. Lighter than the alpine.

It doesn't make any sense to compare the Alpine A110 with the BRZ. The Alpine is a 2-seater. You can compare it with the MX-5 and in fact the Alpine is not much lighter with all its "premium" materials.

[TommyW]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Most of the cars are turbocharged now so there is so much torque from down low compared to an NA car that it doesn't even matter what the weight is.

Weight matters, no matter the power.

[EAGLE5]

If you hate weight, buy a motorcycle. If you hate weight but don't want a motorcycle, buy a Lotus 7. If you hate weight, need rear seats, and want to survive even a minor crash, buy a twin. If you hate weight, need rear seats, and want more power, buy a 911. If you hate weight, need truly usable rear seats, and want more power, buy a... burrito?

[86 South Africa]

Tech, safety, comfort, etc all adds weight, but I can’t help feeling that some manufacturers are maybe missing an opportunity for the “light” cars they could produce...

But that being said, sales numbers show that the lightweight sports car lovers are a tiny minority (just look at volumes of sales of the cars mentioned).
It’s a real pity because losing a few kg has big benefits... but most would rather argue about their extra 5hp.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Yoshoobaroo

Torque and horsepower share a linear relationship with RPM. The whole torque is better than power argument is perpetuated by muscle car idiots who like engines whose ability to make power is crippled after 4000rpm.

Not to get too far from the lighter is better party we got going on but...

Low end torque is more appealing to the mass market because you can make a car feel fast in the rev range people normally drive in. If you don't normally drive stick, you aren't thinking about what gear you are in, so when you hit the accelerator and the car needs to downshift it seems weaker than a car where it will just start pulling.

Also, area under the curve does mathematically translate to acceleration performance so that also looks good on paper. What isn't typically said about it though is that only the part of curve you take the area under is the part you are actually using. Which is why the twins feel lethargic when driving in a city or highway, but are fun when you are driving in a 'spirited' fashion where you keep the revs up. The opposite is true for 'high torque' cars.

[StraightOuttaCanadaEh]

Originally Posted by TommyW

Weight matters, no matter the power.

Yeah which is why an Elise lost in a track battle to a Mercedes and Porsche SUV way back in the day in an evo magazine track battle. Badly. Torque overcomes weight quite a bit more effectively than horsepower

[Dr. BRZ]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Yeah which is why an Elise lost in a track battle to a Mercedes and Porsche SUV way back in the day in an evo magazine track battle. Badly. Torque overcomes weight quite a bit more effectively than horsepower

Hmm......have you seen the video of the miata nd beating the hellcat charger on a track?

[Yoshoobaroo]

Originally Posted by StraightOuttaCanadaEh

Torque overcomes weight quite a bit more effectively than horsepower

That's like saying Amps are better at turning an electric motor than Watts. It makes no sense.

Sure, that Elise was underpowered, but that doesn't mean HP>TQ

[new2subaru]

It doesn't matter which one is faster, what matters is which one is more fun.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Dr. BRZ

Hmm......have you seen the video of the miata nd beating the hellcat charger on a track?

The one where Pobst is in the miata vs a YouTube car journalist in the dodge?


What about this? https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-car...-than-a-miata/

In terms of relationships to lap time, power and weight don't have direct relations to each other. I'm not trying to discredit either argument but rather suggest that's its usually the faster car that's faster. Not the lighter or more powerful. More importantly, I don't think lap time is a good metric for a sports car.

[Seiryuu]

While lightweight has its performance values, I think it is more for the driving feel for "practical" purposes.



Driving an NA1 Miata is quite the pleasure to maneuver and toss around, true feeling of "light on its feet". I wouldn't call the twins porky but its weight is pretty "average" (the current base Mazda 3 and Civic is about 100 pounds heavier). It is unfair to compare it to cars in the mid 90's to mid 00's what's with more tech and all.


You would also think auto makers would give it enough power to compensate for heavier body or at least make it feel adequate but I've driven these modern-day crossovers and I was pretty appalled. The worst offender is the Subaru Crosstrek - truly underpowered and cannot get out of its own way. The other is when the CX-5 still has the 2.0L engine. No wonder why people drive even slower than ever!

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by Dr. BRZ

If you were to gut the brz/frs to an extreme level, it would weigh between 2200 - 2300lbs something. Lighter than the alpine.

Wow thanks for this bit of information!

I might strip down my BRZ at some stage of it's life maybe towards the end of it. Now it's too practical for me as a daily driver.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by JR

What about Smart Cars? Apparently they have good crash ratings and only weigh about 1,800lbs. That would fulfill some peoples light weight and nimble requirements.

NO

I'm talking about sports cars here. While the term "sports car" is disputed to the point of even disqualifying the 911 I'll make blanket definition here which is cars made with intent purpose of driving joy and are renowned among among car enthusiasts as being driver's cars.

With that definition the Smart cars econo boxes that happen to be very light due to their size and nothing else. They were not designed for race track in mind.

Hot hatches count

Smart Cars = disqualified

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by rennlistuser3

The Mazda ND is a great success story in my book. My issue with it is mainly that it's just too small for me. I couldn't even stretch my legs inside it let alone the fact that I do love the small rear seats in my BRZ which I've used so many times for various reasons.

I still absolutely love the ND and if money was no problem I'd get one.

^^^
This is me too. Too small of proportions. Closer to the 86 size, and in a true hardtop then I would have bought it. The proportions and looks are great.


To add more...


For sporty-car buyers, the lightweight cars are not on their registry. They just want power and looks. A subgroup wants performance too, but weight may not be a factor. Another subgroup sees small, low, sports cars as death traps like many non-sports car shoppers who want giant SUV's for safety. These tanks can't stop too fast or handle an evasive maneuver too well. Outside of the Tesla Model X, the rollover resistance is so poor with these SUV's that they can barely be called safe.