speaking of cates and gt2s, heres a good dice at an obscure and little known track sometimes referred to as simply "the 'ring" 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxwRgSZiKTk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxwRgSZiKTk
Best Sports Car Under $100K
- Thread starter LesAuber
- Start date
Imagine the skill required for someone to drive the Ring well, and at anywhere close to the limit, in something as small, light and quick as the Caterham. Then, put that car in the hands of a very average untrained driver on the street or highway in the United States.
Puroagave: if your point was that small and light can kick the living **** out of fast, powerful and heavy, you are preaching to the converted as far as I am concerned. My point was that the 'average sports car driver' who is driving on the street, not the track, isn't really looking for that level of driving, and is probably not capable of it since it requires skill, reflexes and a level of training that goes far beyond 'putting your foot down' and aiming.
Puroagave: if your point was that small and light can kick the living **** out of fast, powerful and heavy, you are preaching to the converted as far as I am concerned. My point was that the 'average sports car driver' who is driving on the street, not the track, isn't really looking for that level of driving, and is probably not capable of it since it requires skill, reflexes and a level of training that goes far beyond 'putting your foot down' and aiming.
I must say am lucky that he often drove me in these cars and even ones I went to purchase for myself, and at performance speeds when at limits control was nearly lost (and to show how tricky can be in damp conditions at high speed were lost but recovered).
I can say in the hands of a qualified high performance instructor the 355 is very capable.
My point is that it is not just about mid engine cars and there are some great exceptions such as Caterham (and why I mentioned their better models beyond the earlier Lotus Seven they bought rights to).
Going further, it could be said weight and balance is more critical than engine layout in general (emphasise here), which you rightly mention with Caterham.
That said, as an owner in the past of a Group homologation B rally car (was mid-engined) I appreciate mid-engined.
However there are clear examples of what can be done with front engine designs.
A classic example of an affordable circuit car of the past was the Ford's Sierra Cosworth RS500 that set new standards back in the 80s when 1st brought into the more open championships.
On Top Gears track, a Nissan Skyline is 15th on their car lap time table; ahead of many mid-engined cars, and those ahead of it are very expensive mid-engined cars or very specific like the Ariel Atom and that is only 0.2s faster.
However in comparison to the specific lightweight Ariel Atom, the front engined Caterham R500 is 1.6s faster.
So front engined is still very much a part of high performance sports cars in these modern times.
http://www.topgear.com/uk/track-guide?LapType=Power-Laps
In some ways we are arguing about semantics with regards to technical details as we agree on engine-driveshaft /angle of engine/etc.
But one cannot just say in real world motor sports front engine chassis died in the 60s, as we are discussing cars used by us in this thread and not specific F3/F1/Indy/etc, which is also selective in ignoring touring cars championships/modern rallying/etc.
By the context of the post Rupenzell, one would argue that Porsche 911 and its various models should not be classifed as real world sports cars due to the mounting of the engine, weight balance,etc.
Not trying to argue as I appreciate we agree on some of the technical aspects but diverge on the generic performance design scope and meaning of real world motorsport and focus on mid-engine.
And there are enough examples out there IMO.
Thanks
Orb
I can say in the hands of a qualified high performance instructor the 355 is very capable.
My point is that it is not just about mid engine cars and there are some great exceptions such as Caterham (and why I mentioned their better models beyond the earlier Lotus Seven they bought rights to).
Going further, it could be said weight and balance is more critical than engine layout in general (emphasise here), which you rightly mention with Caterham.
That said, as an owner in the past of a Group homologation B rally car (was mid-engined) I appreciate mid-engined.
However there are clear examples of what can be done with front engine designs.
A classic example of an affordable circuit car of the past was the Ford's Sierra Cosworth RS500 that set new standards back in the 80s when 1st brought into the more open championships.
On Top Gears track, a Nissan Skyline is 15th on their car lap time table; ahead of many mid-engined cars, and those ahead of it are very expensive mid-engined cars or very specific like the Ariel Atom and that is only 0.2s faster.
However in comparison to the specific lightweight Ariel Atom, the front engined Caterham R500 is 1.6s faster.
So front engined is still very much a part of high performance sports cars in these modern times.
http://www.topgear.com/uk/track-guide?LapType=Power-Laps
In some ways we are arguing about semantics with regards to technical details as we agree on engine-driveshaft /angle of engine/etc.
But one cannot just say in real world motor sports front engine chassis died in the 60s, as we are discussing cars used by us in this thread and not specific F3/F1/Indy/etc, which is also selective in ignoring touring cars championships/modern rallying/etc.
By the context of the post Rupenzell, one would argue that Porsche 911 and its various models should not be classifed as real world sports cars due to the mounting of the engine, weight balance,etc.
Not trying to argue as I appreciate we agree on some of the technical aspects but diverge on the generic performance design scope and meaning of real world motorsport and focus on mid-engine.
And there are enough examples out there IMO.
Thanks
Orb
...FYI C., the second generation R8 is coming right behind the minor facelift for this year's production.
On the otherhand, the 458 is now catching up with demand and a dealer will sell you one at list instead of delivering your car to you with the market premium add-on...
Cheers!
On the otherhand, the 458 is now catching up with demand and a dealer will sell you one at list instead of delivering your car to you with the market premium add-on...
Cheers!
Jack, it looks even that much better when it's on the road, in motion. We were out a few weeks ago, and a convertible was coming at us. Breathtaking! Even my wife was sold! I just need a few years to save up the sheckels.
Ack, even Lambo isn't what it was- it became a better car, and in the process, lost its character. The R8- i don't really keep track of the exact models these days-with the motor from the Gallardo or baby Lambo- is pretty cool in my book. These days, you don't want to be exactly flashing conspicuous consumption on the road. (That's why we spend what we do on hi-fi, right?) And I agree with a later posting here, the convertible Audi looks fab on the road.
Me, I've sorta done these cars. Gimme something old, with tons of character.
None of these will make much sense (OK a couple might):
Bentley 3.0 with a 4.5 motor - sort of a 20's hot rod. Value is in its age and craziness- these things are like a truck and can go very fast- little intrinsic value to collectors unless it was a 'special' that was done 'in period' but you still see them running competitively!
Citroen Chapron Decapotable-stupidity extraordinaire, the french way-know any good Citroen mechanics? Know any Citroen mechanics? Exactly!
Dino 246, but a good one.
a 73 or earlier 911S not an RS or uber car, just a nice straight coupe.
Oh, and throw in a 66 or earlier Caddy convertible.
Like I said, with the exception of the Dino and Porsche, the rest are purely for kicks and make little sense.
something built before you were born...
i totally get where whart is coming from, when you're jaded towards the latest and greatest you realize its not all that great. driver aids, twin clutch gear box and paddle shifters, ECUs with more computing power than your average desktop from a handfull of years ago. GPS, bluetooth, backup cameras, warning senors/buzzers up the wazoo. carbon fiber everywhere - egads, im so sick of the exposed boy racer carbon look - and its usually never under the paint where it would do the most good! thats another thing, todays cars are way over weight as much as twice what yesteryears sports cars weighed. none of these things enhance the driving 'experience'.
yeah, ill take a '73 RSR over anything porsche makes today, as far as p-cars go and i like their current models.
something built before you were born...
i totally get where whart is coming from, when you're jaded towards the latest and greatest you realize its not all that great. driver aids, twin clutch gear box and paddle shifters, ECUs with more computing power than your average desktop from a handfull of years ago. GPS, bluetooth, backup cameras, warning senors/buzzers up the wazoo. carbon fiber everywhere - egads, im so sick of the exposed boy racer carbon look - and its usually never under the paint where it would do the most good! thats another thing, todays cars are way over weight as much as twice what yesteryears sports cars weighed.
yeah, ill take a '73 RSR over anything porsche makes today, as far as p-cars go and i like their current models.
Rob, i was alive in 73. In fact, I think i was driving my ignoble FIAT 124 Sport Coupe!
given enough time it will be recognized as the great classic it once was and the chinese will build a superior knock off of it, deflating the 124 market as we know it...oops that was a different thread
There's a 124 convertible i see around sometimes in the hood that is just immaculate, yes it has the late rubber bumpers, but what a gorgeous line. amazing when you consider how cheap a car it was (and still is), pininfarina really had some fabulous design work back then.
Postscript: Ceasar- none of the stuff I listed above was meant to satisfy the itch for a good under 100k dollar sports car; it's all odd-ball stuff that turns me on, having had a bunch of so-called supercars.
As I think I mentioned earlier in this same thread, if I had to pick something under 100k that would be visceral, and readily fixable, i'd look for a slightly older Porsche- not a brand new one- they depreciate like rocks, and not a vintage one, because the 'right ones' can be bigger bucks. Puro what's a used GT3 cost these days, say on a 997 platform? (Not big on the 996). If you could find one that didn't have all the boy racer stripes, that would be a 'go' and wouldn't be too much of a PITA to keep. 993's are nice, but are long in the tooth and will require money to be spent, on suspension and upkeep, including the horrendous 'CIL' from the secondary emissions tunnels- a total PITA over nothing, but you can't get the car inspected without addressing it, and it can be costly.
You won't have bragging rights, it will look like every other P car on the planet, but if it is set up right (and I think the GT 3 is pretty much ready to go out of the box), it is a real sports car, not necessarily the fastest on the planet, but you can have a ball, and the owner's/driver's clubs are there if you want to track the car or just go for a multi-day rally through the mountains.
Postscript: Ceasar- none of the stuff I listed above was meant to satisfy the itch for a good under 100k dollar sports car; it's all odd-ball stuff that turns me on, having had a bunch of so-called supercars.
As I think I mentioned earlier in this same thread, if I had to pick something under 100k that would be visceral, and readily fixable, i'd look for a slightly older Porsche- not a brand new one- they depreciate like rocks, and not a vintage one, because the 'right ones' can be bigger bucks. Puro what's a used GT3 cost these days, say on a 997 platform? (Not big on the 996). If you could find one that didn't have all the boy racer stripes, that would be a 'go' and wouldn't be too much of a PITA to keep. 993's are nice, but are long in the tooth and will require money to be spent, on suspension and upkeep, including the horrendous 'CIL' from the secondary emissions tunnels- a total PITA over nothing, but you can't get the car inspected without addressing it, and it can be costly.
You won't have bragging rights, it will look like every other P car on the planet, but if it is set up right (and I think the GT 3 is pretty much ready to go out of the box), it is a real sports car, not necessarily the fastest on the planet, but you can have a ball, and the owner's/driver's clubs are there if you want to track the car or just go for a multi-day rally through the mountains.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |