Is The Crossover The New Sports Car? FT86 Vs. BMW X7 M50i Vs. Supra & 8

[rennlistuser3]

Love comparisons like this one

I agree with their end results completely


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8Xm99PVAWE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8Xm99PVAWE[/ame]

I'm sure there will be those who'll jump and say well they're faster, apples to oranges blah blah blah whatever.... I don't care, cars are cars and they are all comparable and speed and brands are not everything. Enjoy the comparison for what it is.

[Broseph]

Fun video - thanks.

[NWFRS]

Probably. More people can justify a car with carrying capacity. And even among true sports cars there are choices to be made. Does one value exclusiveness, looks, acceleration, handling, or cost?

[DarkSunrise]

So around the track, the $30k sports car is much more fun than the $113k CUV. $50k sports car is much faster.

Seems like that just proves the CUV platform is horribly compromised for either fun or speed, which I'm sure no one is surprised to hear.

[soundman98]

i'm mostly annoyed at the drastic pricing differences that they chose to compare. almost $60k more with the supra buys a lot of engine power and suspension tuning in any vehicle. if they compared a nissan gt-r to a kia nero, all the suv buyers would be crying foul.

for me, it'd be more fair if they compared a nero to an 86, or a gt-r vs that x7.

[why?]

Originally Posted by soundman98

i'm mostly annoyed at the drastic pricing differences that they chose to compare. almost $60k more with the supra buys a lot of engine power and suspension tuning in any vehicle. if they compared a nissan gt-r to a kia nero, all the suv buyers would be crying foul.

for me, it'd be more fair if they compared a nero to an 86, or a gt-r vs that x7.

or a z corvette or a Porsche.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

So around the track, the $30k sports car is much more fun than the $113k CUV. $50k sports car is much faster.

Seems like that just proves the CUV platform is horribly compromised for either fun or speed, which I'm sure no one is surprised to hear.

Yeah they just can't beat the limits imposed by physics, at least not with current technology, who knows what the future will hold.

I think for me the take home message is that speed is not everything and if it is to you than an extremely heavy CUV is a better answer.

[rennlistuser3]

Originally Posted by soundman98

i'm mostly annoyed at the drastic pricing differences that they chose to compare. almost $60k more with the supra buys a lot of engine power and suspension tuning in any vehicle. if they compared a nissan gt-r to a kia nero, all the suv buyers would be crying foul.

for me, it'd be more fair if they compared a nero to an 86, or a gt-r vs that x7.

I actually like what they did. By choosing much much cheaper sports cars they drove in the point that you're better off buying 1 say SUV for utility and 1 sports car of your choice and you would still be saving big bugs over buying a big heavy car that is forced to be fast rather than inherently destined to be fast.

[bfrank1972]

I guess people have small driveways, or maybe live in the city, but why does everyone try to make one vehicle do everything? Never made sense to me. Two vehicles, one for utility and one for all out fun.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I guess people have small driveways, or maybe live in the city, but why does everyone try to make one vehicle do everything? Never made sense to me. Two vehicles, one for utility and one for all out fun.

When I tell most people that between my wife and I, we have 3 cars, they look at me like I have 2 heads. Most people either can't afford multiple vehicles or prefer to spend money on other things (these are multi-thousand dollar purchases after all). Think about appliances you have, and what makes them good or bad. That's how most people think about vehicles.

Conversely: Do you have two blenders, or phones, or dishwashers? Maybe you have 2 refrigerators or freezers, but is that a matter of capacity (like 2 people needing 2 cars), or does one do something better than the other?

[why?]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I guess people have small driveways, or maybe live in the city, but why does everyone try to make one vehicle do everything? Never made sense to me. Two vehicles, one for utility and one for all out fun.

Because 2 cars is twice as expensive or more. It was one thing when cars were a few grand each, but now they are just too expensive, and so is everything that goes along with them. Although if you can afford a six figure bmw you can afford 2 cars.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by Spuds

When I tell most people that between my wife and I, we have 3 cars, they look at me like I have 2 heads. Most people either can't afford multiple vehicles or prefer to spend money on other things (these are multi-thousand dollar purchases after all). Think about appliances you have, and what makes them good or bad. That's how most people think about vehicles.

Conversely: Do you have two blenders, or phones, or dishwashers? Maybe you have 2 refrigerators or freezers, but is that a matter of capacity (like 2 people needing 2 cars), or does one do something better than the other?

Hard for us to remember that not everybody loves cars. To about 99% of the driving population they are a necessary evil not a hobby or pleasure in any way at all. Many would like to have no cars! We are the weirdos that frequently have more cars than we need not the other way around.

Originally Posted by why?

Although if you can afford a six figure bmw you can afford 2 cars.

Bet you there are many many out there with BMWs that can't really afford them much less another car.

[why?]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

Bet you there are many many out there with BMWs that can't really afford them much less another car.

Very true, but if you can afford to get someone to give you a lease on a six figure car you probably could afford to buy a Toyota Camry and an 86.

[MaverickMonk]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I guess people have small driveways, or maybe live in the city, but why does everyone try to make one vehicle do everything? Never made sense to me. Two vehicles, one for utility and one for all out fun.

Because “people who live in cities” is actually a whoooooole lot of people. The majority of people in the US live in expensive metro areas along the coasts. Most families are dual income, meaning both parents share childcare duties. That means both family members need to share childcare duties, carry kid seats etc. very few people living in these areas can store 3 cars. So each needs a kid carrier. In bigger cities even 2 cars is a tough sell.

It’s why small crossovers are more popular than compacts, and why on the sportscar front even a crappy hothatch is more popular than the best of sports cars. It’s why the best selling sportscar, the corvette, sells primarily among empty nesters