Lotus Evija

[gymratter]

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Spuds

"Sports cars" over 3500lb are aberrations.

BMW M3, M4, M5, M8, M2
Ferrari 812, F8 Spider, SF90, Roma, Portofino

But yeah, Ferrari and BMW don't really make "sports cars". Why, the only real sports car BMW really makes is the Z4, and it also is over 3500 lbs.

In face, a Tesla Model 3 Performance weights about 3900, and a BMW M3 weights about 3840. I'm sure you can make it heaver with a sunroof though.

And the M3P is faster in a straight line and on many tracks.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

BMW M3, M4, M5, M8, M2
Ferrari 812, F8 Spider, SF90, Roma, Portofino

But yeah, Ferrari and BMW don't really make "sports cars". Why, the only real sports car BMW really makes is the Z4, and it also is over 3500 lbs.

In face, a Tesla Model 3 Performance weights about 3900, and a BMW M3 weights about 3840. I'm sure you can make it heaver with a sunroof though.

And the M3P is faster in a straight line and on many tracks.

What do you consider the i8?

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

BMW M3, M4, M5, M8, M2
Ferrari 812, F8 Spider, SF90, Roma, Portofino

But yeah, Ferrari and BMW don't really make "sports cars". Why, the only real sports car BMW really makes is the Z4, and it also is over 3500 lbs.

In face, a Tesla Model 3 Performance weights about 3900, and a BMW M3 weights about 3840. I'm sure you can make it heaver with a sunroof though.

And the M3P is faster in a straight line and on many tracks.

I've been distinguishing sporty cars with sports cars (soft tops like the Miata) and sports coupes (hardtops like the Elise). The vehicles you mentioned are sport sedans and grand tourers. Many supercars and hypercars are not really representations of the classic sports car or sports coupe. The Gordon Murray T50 is as close to a modern/hypercar sports coupe as anyone could get.

Back in the day, sports cars and sport coupes were distinct from pony cars or muscle cars or supercars, but now anything is a sports car. Part of that reason is because sports cars and sports coupes were doing most of the sport racing at one point, but then other car configurations became popular to race, so the sport of car racing became synonymous with any car, and that is probably where we began to lose meaning or evolve the language. Now, anything that can perform or looks to be inspired by performance is a sports car.

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

What do you consider the i8?

Hot sex on wheels.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I've been distinguishing sporty cars with sports cars (soft tops like the Miata) and sports coupes (hardtops like the Elise). The vehicles you mentioned are sport sedans and grand tourers. Many supercars and hypercars are not really representations of the classic sports car or sports coupe. The Gordon Murray T50 is as close to a modern/hypercar sports coupe as anyone could get.

Back in the day, sports cars and sport coupes were distinct from pony cars or muscle cars or supercars, but now anything is a sports car. Part of that reason is because sports cars and sports coupes were doing most of the sport racing at one point, but then other car configurations became popular to race, so the sport of car racing became synonymous with any car, and that is probably where we began to lose meaning or evolve the language. Now, anything that can perform or looks to be inspired by performance is a sports car.

Sports car, sports coupe, super car, super coupe, super sedan, sports sedan, sport wagon or GT? These definitions only matter to the OCD crowd. Some people would consider the Miata a GT since the bloated pig weights over 1600lbs. It's no Sprite! It's like one of those whale-like 3000s.

If it looks and drives fast, most consider it a sports car of some kind.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

Hot sex on wheels.



Sports car, sports coupe, super car, super coupe, super sedan, sports sedan, sport wagon or GT? These definitions only matter to the OCD crowd. Some people would consider the Miata a GT since the bloated pig weights over 1600lbs. It's no Sprite! It's like one of those whale-like 3000s.

If it looks and drives fast, most consider it a sports car of some kind.

I think this makes sense to some degree.

For the most part I have three categories: sporty car, GT, everything else. None of this bullshit of "tHiS iS a TrUe SpOrTsCaR cUs 2dOoRs".

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

Sports car, sports coupe, super car, super coupe, super sedan, sports sedan, sport wagon or GT? These definitions only matter to the OCD crowd. Some people would consider the Miata a GT since the bloated pig weights over 1600lbs. It's no Sprite! It's like one of those whale-like 3000s.

If it looks and drives fast, most consider it a sports car of some kind.

Which is why we have this (see below). There is an Audi SQ5 and an Audi RS Q3. Apparently crossovers can be sports cars. Basically anything that handles better than its base counterpart, and anything that has a more powerful engine than its counterpart is a sports vehicle. In fact, almost all cars today are superior to their older predecessors. For instance, a base 2020 Civic is probably faster to 60 than an original Mustang GT, and it would probably destroy the Mustang on a road course. I guess all vehicles are sports cars, which basically means that 'sports car' has no meaning.

I suppose Spuds could amend his comments to something that expands on the topic, but I get what he meant, which is that anything north of 3500lbs is too heavy for him. I don't think he means this objectively, but there may subjectively be a place where the weight of the vehicle becomes so noticeable that it can take away from the joy of driving, regardless of performance or what technology could be used to compensate. Perhaps that technology makes the car more numb and less engaging. Maybe that technology adds so much dimension to the car that it becomes too bulk. Maybe for some people their number is 3000lbs or 2500lbs or 2000lbs. It is subjective to a point.

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Which is why we have this (see below). There is an Audi SQ5 and an Audi RS Q3. Apparently crossovers can be sports cars. Basically anything that handles better than its base counterpart, and anything that has a more powerful engine than its counterpart is a sports vehicle. In fact, almost all cars today are superior to their older predecessors. For instance, a base 2020 Civic is probably faster to 60 than an original Mustang GT, and it would probably destroy the Mustang on a road course. I guess all vehicles are sports cars, which basically means that 'sports car' has no meaning.

I suppose Spuds could amend his comments to something that expands on the topic, but I get what he meant, which is that anything north of 3500lbs is too heavy for him. I don't think he means this objectively, but there may subjectively be a place where the weight of the vehicle becomes so noticeable that it can take away from the joy of driving, regardless of performance or what technology could be used to compensate. Perhaps that technology makes the car more numb and less engaging. Maybe that technology adds so much dimension to the car that it becomes too bulk. Maybe for some people their number is 3000lbs or 2500lbs or 2000lbs. It is subjective to a point.

People certainly use cars in a way that covers crossovers, SUVs, and even pickup trucks. Generally people separate cars and SUVs, but crossovers like the Q series are somewhere in between.

Perhaps you are struggling with the truth that meaning, instead of being about absolute truth, is about usage that, and that usage changes by person and over time? Many people are convinced, deep down, that words have absolute definitions, and those definitions in a real sense will define reality. None of that is true. You can see it in how people lose their minds over gender, defining it as absolutely male and female. Reality of course sees that such rigid definitions are nonsense. Gender involves genitalia (which can be both physically evident and hidden), clothing, body language, social roles, genes, surgical changes, identity, and many other factors.

People glom onto definitions and argue over them, even physically fight over them. It's pretty funny, really.

From the start, I've been pointing out that people's beliefs about EVs have far less to do with reality than they think. Their feelings are likely more about identity politics or whatever people want to call it. The same goes with what makes a sports car. I can tell you that, without a doubt, our I-Pace can traverse a windy mountain road far faster than the FRS can. It has more grip and far, far more acceleration.

So yeah, as you said, one man's sports car is another man's GT.

That said, with EVs generally carrying their weight down low, the impact on handling is surprisingly positive. The Evagina even moves the weight to the rear, which I wholeheartedly approve of. Personally, I'd like to see a tiny, rear-weight-biased, RWD EV with performance suspension. Basically, I want a Honda e with a bit more power and a bit less battery.

As it is, I'm getting a Model Y for the time being. I'll also be getting one of these: https://ingenext.ca/collections/boos...-tesla-model-y

That will allow an ABS on but traction control off mode, which should be a hell of a lot of fun.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

People certainly use cars in a way that covers crossovers, SUVs, and even pickup trucks. Generally people separate cars and SUVs, but crossovers like the Q series are somewhere in between.

Perhaps you are struggling with the truth that meaning, instead of being about absolute truth, is about usage that, and that usage changes by person and over time? Many people are convinced, deep down, that words have absolute definitions, and those definitions in a real sense will define reality. None of that is true. You can see it in how people lose their minds over gender, defining it as absolutely male and female. Reality of course sees that such rigid definitions are nonsense. Gender involves genitalia (which can be both physically evident and hidden), clothing, body language, social roles, genes, surgical changes, identity, and many other factors.

People glom onto definitions and argue over them, even physically fight over them. It's pretty funny, really.

From the start, I've been pointing out that people's beliefs about EVs have far less to do with reality than they think. Their feelings are likely more about identity politics or whatever people want to call it. The same goes with what makes a sports car. I can tell you that, without a doubt, our I-Pace can traverse a windy mountain road far faster than the FRS can. It has more grip and far, far more acceleration.

So yeah, as you said, one man's sports car is another man's GT.

That said, with EVs generally carrying their weight down low, the impact on handling is surprisingly positive. The Evagina even moves the weight to the rear, which I wholeheartedly approve of. Personally, I'd like to see a tiny, rear-weight-biased, RWD EV with performance suspension. Basically, I want a Honda e with a bit more power and a bit less battery.

As it is, I'm getting a Model Y for the time being. I'll also be getting one of these: https://ingenext.ca/collections/boos...-tesla-model-y

That will allow an ABS on but traction control off mode, which should be a hell of a lot of fun.

Gender does NOT involve genitalia nor genes; gender is a social construct.

Just thought I'd put that out there.

RIP Lotus Evija thread.

[EAGLE5]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

Gender does NOT involve genitalia nor genes; gender is a social construct.

Just thought I'd put that out there.

RIP Lotus Evija thread.

And by some perspectives, you're right.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

People certainly use cars in a way that covers crossovers, SUVs, and even pickup trucks. Generally people separate cars and SUVs, but crossovers like the Q series are somewhere in between.

Perhaps you are struggling with the truth that meaning, instead of being about absolute truth, is about usage that, and that usage changes by person and over time? Many people are convinced, deep down, that words have absolute definitions, and those definitions in a real sense will define reality. None of that is true. You can see it in how people lose their minds over gender, defining it as absolutely male and female. Reality of course sees that such rigid definitions are nonsense. Gender involves genitalia (which can be both physically evident and hidden), clothing, body language, social roles, genes, surgical changes, identity, and many other factors.

People glom onto definitions and argue over them, even physically fight over them. It's pretty funny, really.

From the start, I've been pointing out that people's beliefs about EVs have far less to do with reality than they think. Their feelings are likely more about identity politics or whatever people want to call it. The same goes with what makes a sports car. I can tell you that, without a doubt, our I-Pace can traverse a windy mountain road far faster than the FRS can. It has more grip and far, far more acceleration.

So yeah, as you said, one man's sports car is another man's GT.

That said, with EVs generally carrying their weight down low, the impact on handling is surprisingly positive. The Evagina even moves the weight to the rear, which I wholeheartedly approve of. Personally, I'd like to see a tiny, rear-weight-biased, RWD EV with performance suspension. Basically, I want a Honda e with a bit more power and a bit less battery.

As it is, I'm getting a Model Y for the time being. I'll also be getting one of these: https://ingenext.ca/collections/boos...-tesla-model-y

That will allow an ABS on but traction control off mode, which should be a hell of a lot of fun.

I understand that usage dictates the definitions and that language evolves over time, which was my point, that it has evolved to mean nothing. If someone says they own a sports car then I have learned nothing about what type of vehicle they own. In general, I know it is likely not a truck or SUV/CUV, but who knows because the definition has been muddled down. At best, I can assume they are referring to some type of vehicle that is relatively fast compared to other vehicles in its class and that it may also handle better than other cars in its class, but even that is not necessarily the case. Maybe someone put a wing and an electric turbo on their Prius, and now it is a sports car.

If BMW made another 2800lb i3 made out of carbon fiber that wasn't a pud then I'm sure a well handling electric car could be enjoyable. If it only had a manual then I would be 100% in. Noise isn't huge for me, but weight, handling, acceleration and shifting is important. I've been in Teslas. I know how they handle well for a heavy sedan, but I think you confusing less body roll with better handling when comparing the I-Pace to the 86.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by EAGLE5

And by some perspectives, you're right.

I think people use sex, gender and sexuality sometimes interchangeably, as if they were synonyms, and perhaps then someone could argue that because people use words incorrectly, those definitions have been culturally adopted to be synonyms, yet these words are very different. As you have stated, people get hung up on words, and this topic was your example, but your example also illustrates how definitions matter in the context of the law and society, so we can argue that definitions don't matter because their usage can be vague or broad, yet they can also be critical too.

Obviously, the use of sports car is not critical. It is mostly annoying to some.

[Jordanwolf]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I think people use sex, gender and sexuality sometimes interchangeably, as if they were synonyms, and perhaps then someone could argue that because people use words incorrectly, those definitions have been culturally adopted to be synonyms, yet these words are very different. As you have stated, people get hung up on words, and this topic was your example, but your example also illustrates how definitions matter in the context of the law and society, so we can argue that definitions don't matter because their usage can be vague or broad, yet they can also be critical too.

Obviously, the use of sports car is not critical. It is mostly annoying to some.

The CTR is the most practical sportscar tbh.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Jordanwolf

The CTR is the most practical sportscar tbh.

Actually it is the Bentley Flying Spur or maybe the Koenigsegg Gemera or maybe the Camry TRD. I don’t know.