View Poll Results: What do you think?

Voters
43. You may not vote on this poll
  • They are not Sports Cars

    18 41.86%
  • They Are Sports Cars

    16 37.21%
  • WRX is, EVO isn't

    1 2.33%
  • EVO is, WRX isn't

    2 4.65%
  • WRX GO WHAAAAAAAAM PSHH WAAAAAM YOOO

    6 13.95%
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 92

Thread: Impreza WRX and Lancer Evo, Sports Cars or not?

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,465
    Good point there FPV_GTHO...

    Who the hell voted for WRX GO WHAAAAAAAAM PSHH WAAAAAM YOOO? That is reserved for fanboys only

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    aarhus, denmark
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
    NO road-going 'real' sportscar should be open top.
    The lack of a roof structure makes a chassis that has too much flex.
    To fix the flex, MORE weight is added to the body and side structures taking it OUT of being 'real' sportscar. ( and this from a 7-copy fan - but THAT is a long story on the practicalities of Chapmans philposphy )
    Front-engine RWD is as good a sports car as rear-engine RWD.

    I know that a "open top" car is heavier and flexes more, but a "real" sportscar has to be open top, RWD and rear engine! To make some eksamples the Lamborghini Murciélago isnt a "real" sportscar, because it is AWD and tin-top... it may be a roadster now, but it was originally concieved as a coupé.

    Sure a front-engine RWD is as good handling as a rear-engine RWD, but Historically and legaly speaking a front-engine RWD doent fit into the true sportscar categorie!

    If you doubt me.... then ask the guys on Fifth-gear.... they will agree..
    About a year ago they made a program with the theme: Sportscars, and then they told what exactly a "Sportscar" is!
    "Power, Beauty, Soul" - Aston Martin

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Pennsylvania USA
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by jones.dk
    I know that a "open top" car is heavier and flexes more, but a "real" sportscar has to be open top, RWD and rear engine! To make some eksamples the Lamborghini Murciélago isnt a "real" sportscar, because it is AWD and tin-top... it may be a roadster now, but it was originally concieved as a coupé.

    Sure a front-engine RWD is as good handling as a rear-engine RWD, but Historically and legaly speaking a front-engine RWD doent fit into the true sportscar categorie!

    If you doubt me.... then ask the guys on Fifth-gear.... they will agree..
    About a year ago they made a program with the theme: Sportscars, and then they told what exactly a "Sportscar" is!
    So according to your logic there were no sportscars prior to about 1960.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    aarhus, denmark
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by NAZCA C2
    So according to your logic there were no sportscars prior to about 1960.
    If you doubt me then try to find the Fifth gear show, which i think they called: "special on sportscars". Then you can see what i mean!!!!!
    "Power, Beauty, Soul" - Aston Martin

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    GB
    Posts
    1,693
    Meh. Sounds rather a lot like Porsche propaganda to me!!!

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Posts: 30,245
    Posts
    7,352
    I am backing Ralf for the win, he's always been fast there and won the Nurburgring last year so as long as he unlocks his awesome qualifying skills which we all know he has, and comes on top of Montoya in qualifying, a front row start for him could seal the victory. If not, Button or Alonso could be in with a shot, Montoya is not motivated enough this year and you can never rule out Mike.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,272
    Quote Originally Posted by CoTTerik
    Stuff about the Grand Prix
    Like the Evo/ Impreza, I don't really think Ralph is a good example of a sports car.
    Thanks for all the fish

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    412
    They're sports sedans/saloons, IMO. I'd rather stick to the stricter, classical definition of sports car (open-top, 2-seater, etc.). Closed-top versions of these cars have been historically called GT's.

    Engine layout generally doesn't matter too much, but why the rear-engine qualification over front-engined? Or is it mid-engine perhaps?...

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,272
    Quote Originally Posted by jones.dk
    If you doubt me then try to find the Fifth gear show, which i think they called: "special on sportscars". Then you can see what i mean!!!!!
    Personally, I wouldn't base my definitive description of a sports car on what 5th gear says.

    I think that proper supercars fit their description, but sports cars are a broader field.

    I agree that sports cars should have open tops but front engine RWD. Classic British Sports cars follow this pattern: TVRs, Lotuses, Caterhams, Marcos and Morgan.
    Thanks for all the fish

  10. #25
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Romania Bucharest
    Posts
    1,026
    not sports car .. just high performance sedans
    There is no terrible way of winning
    there is just winning

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,266
    perhaps you have to define sports car, with a litteral meaning not a subjectivie one.

    so far all the "sports cars must be fr or mr or closed top" bla bla bla, are all subjective ratings and definitions. with the exception of mine , no road car is a sports car since none of them were designed from the ground up as a motor sports vehicle. while some cars like the 911 may have a racing heritage but they are just derived or toned down versions of the racing version (which is in most cases derived from the stock vehicle itself).

    If the definition of a sports car is taken litterally, we see that no car on the public highways can be considered a sports car. if however we define a sports car as any vehicle which has or has had a racing heritage then there will be a whole load of these cars. From mini coopers to civics, ferraris to porsches, lan evos to imprezas, ect.

    In conclusion, this whole post is meaningless jumble of fanboys who are devoted to any one type of vehicle and will stick to it till the new version of it comes out.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    aarhus, denmark
    Posts
    371
    Quote Originally Posted by KnifeEdge_2K1
    If the definition of a sports car is taken litterally, we see that no car on the public highways can be considered a sports car.
    To make some examples of which cars fall into the true sportscar category (which i posted earlier...) i can mention the cars they showed in the program::: The BMW Z4, Porsche Boxster, Lotus Elise, BMW Z8, Honda S2000, Mazda MX5, Toyota MR2, TVR Tamora, Vauxhall VX220, Radical SR3 and Caterham Seven..... They are all Sportscars....
    "Power, Beauty, Soul" - Aston Martin

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The 905
    Posts
    652
    Quote Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine
    Switching to analytical mode, dictionary say ....
    sports car
    n.
    An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds.
    Interesting find there, Matra. When it says that a sports car is an automobile equipped for racing. Were the EVO and WRX not developed for WRC competition? Being as they were, it is concievable to regard them as sports cars.
    Fortune and glory, kid. Fortune and glory.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by cp01ae
    Interesting find there, Matra. When it says that a sports car is an automobile equipped for racing. Were the EVO and WRX not developed for WRC competition? Being as they were, it is concievable to regard them as sports cars.
    ha, hoist by my own petard

    Never thought about that cp, good point.
    Damn, I'll have to accept them as sports cars then
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,272
    The WRX and EVO aren't "equipped for racing" though.

    They can be - but in standard form they are not, and therefore by that definition not sports cars
    Last edited by Coventrysucks; 06-02-2004 at 03:37 PM.
    Thanks for all the fish

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •