What's the best sports convertible for $60K in cash, new or used?
- Thread starter caesar
- Start date
You can always get one of these .....chassis built in So Africa ..
Is that a Superformance GT40 do they cost $60k only thats the most bang for the buck car?
Great conversation! My wife is telling me she wants a back seat for our toddler and a 94 lb German Shepherd. Is the back seat functional at all on the 911? My impression was always that Porsche was wasting money putting the back seats in their cars. So seems like M3 is the most likely choice, now.
Any thoughts, advice, or suggestions?
Any thoughts, advice, or suggestions?
I've owned an M3 (circa 2005, a convertible) and several Porsches (all 911 variants). The back seats of the Porsche are basically shelves for your bags or briefcase, they are not useable. (Perhaps for little kids, not big dogs, and I'm not sure I like the idea of either a toddler or a big dog in a sports car). The M3 is a fast car, I'm sure the latest ones are faster than the one I had, but you sit upright, it doesn't feel like a sportcar, it feels more like a smallish 'uber-sedan' if that makes any sense. (We still keep BMWs, we are probably on our 7th one now- my wife has a new 335 coupe, which is a ball to drive given that it is a 'sporty' coupe, with a stick, but it is not a sports car in the true sense). So, different cars in my estimation. Lot's of people look at 0-60 speeds which are pretty irrelevant. And while BMWs have a lot of nice road feel for what they are- better, in my estimation than any M-B or Audi I've driven, they still don't (and can't) give you that low center of gravity, turn on a hair quality that a true sports car can. (Here, I'm not judging by price, but by nature of the car, in the sense that even something like a Miata is more of a sportscar than an M3). The M3 will be faster, but that's not really the point of a sportscar in my estimation.
Whart, I think you make some excellent points. I have owned a Miata, and loved the handling, but was always wishing for more speed. What is your definition of a sports car, out of curiosity?
Interestingly, here's a Car and Driver comparo b/w the 2009 M3 and 911, and they favored the M3. I wonder how similar or different their criteria is to yours.
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2009-bmw-m3-page-3
Also, for what it's worth, other than the 3 series, I think BMW has really evolved into a luxury car brand. Not quite an M-B or a Lexus, but more luxury than sport. Definitely not the raw driver's machine it used to be, excepting the M cars. My Audi is definitely more sporty than my father's 5 series.
My wife has one of the new Miata's with the retractable HT and 6-speed manual. It's very nimble and can take a corner like nobody's business. I really don't see it lacking in speed as long as you keep the rev's up.
Caesar: I'm not sure my criteria are objective, but here goes:
1. I guess lap times might be a defining characteristic of 'best' performance, I gather that was one of the reasons the Car&Driver comparo chose the M3 over the Porsche, but I'm not racing, competitively or otherwise, so, like a measurement of a piece of audio gear on a test bench, that's one criteria, but may not be telling. A car with paddle shifters, and computer controlled everything might deliver more performance, but have all the character of a Sub-Zero refrigerator on wheels.
2. I have been veering away from electronic aids, high horsepower, overweight cars. I'd put all the uber cars into that category; frankly, even the newish Porsches are too big and heavy- I actually like the size of the Cayman better than the 911, but a 911 is iconic- sort of like a Rolex Daytona- not the best watch around, but hard to argue with.
3. I'd say a rough definition for me is lithe, tossable, nimble, corner carving, visceral, low center of gravity, low seating position, no extra room for golf clubs,no cup holders, no electric seats, chuck the sound system kinda car. By these standards, the 3 Wheeler from Morgan is more of a sports car than a 911 Porsche, and that's hardly fair- but it is a question of degree. I never loved the build quality of Lotus, but Colin Chapman's edict about 'adding lightness' is more meaningful than ever.
4. I'm not sure BMW ever built a true sportscar- the 507 is classic, but still a boulevardier. (So, too, was the two seater they made circa 2000 modeled on it. I haven't driven the current 2 seater BMW's but sort of like the look of them).
5. I also like open cars- again, most hardcore track guys would eschew these for rigidity and safety. But, I like the feeling of driving in an open air car.
6. Ultimately, its a personal choice, based not only on practical and financial considerations, but what turns you on.
7. Having said all of that, I'd still love to own a 20's Bentley, which is a truck by these standards.
1. I guess lap times might be a defining characteristic of 'best' performance, I gather that was one of the reasons the Car&Driver comparo chose the M3 over the Porsche, but I'm not racing, competitively or otherwise, so, like a measurement of a piece of audio gear on a test bench, that's one criteria, but may not be telling. A car with paddle shifters, and computer controlled everything might deliver more performance, but have all the character of a Sub-Zero refrigerator on wheels.
2. I have been veering away from electronic aids, high horsepower, overweight cars. I'd put all the uber cars into that category; frankly, even the newish Porsches are too big and heavy- I actually like the size of the Cayman better than the 911, but a 911 is iconic- sort of like a Rolex Daytona- not the best watch around, but hard to argue with.
3. I'd say a rough definition for me is lithe, tossable, nimble, corner carving, visceral, low center of gravity, low seating position, no extra room for golf clubs,no cup holders, no electric seats, chuck the sound system kinda car. By these standards, the 3 Wheeler from Morgan is more of a sports car than a 911 Porsche, and that's hardly fair- but it is a question of degree. I never loved the build quality of Lotus, but Colin Chapman's edict about 'adding lightness' is more meaningful than ever.
4. I'm not sure BMW ever built a true sportscar- the 507 is classic, but still a boulevardier. (So, too, was the two seater they made circa 2000 modeled on it. I haven't driven the current 2 seater BMW's but sort of like the look of them).
5. I also like open cars- again, most hardcore track guys would eschew these for rigidity and safety. But, I like the feeling of driving in an open air car.
6. Ultimately, its a personal choice, based not only on practical and financial considerations, but what turns you on.
7. Having said all of that, I'd still love to own a 20's Bentley, which is a truck by these standards.
I would consider the BMW M1, Z1 Z3, Z4 and Z8 sports cars. the M3 is a sports coupe and shares its chassis with a sedan variant and wouldnt be considered a sports car. if i were younger and my budget were ~25k id look at the Scion FRS/Subaru BRZ, i drove one and its a great little sports car in the early datsun Z mold.
My e46 was crazy good in the twisties. Fast, balanced and communicative with little body roll. Still I think it did make compromises for comfort and daily usability so perhaps it couldn't be called a pure sports car. It sure could bring the adrenalin though. Sporty enough for me.
Puro- we rarely disagree and I'm not going to start now. I had completely forgotten about the M1- pretty rare bird. The Z8, however, was to me, in the spirit of a boulevardier or GT style car- if memory serves, when BMW quit distributing them, they were branded Alpina, but only came with a slush box to my knowledge. Beautiful car- yes. Hard edged sports car, not so sure. (Frankly, just to put my skewed perspective into context, I'd put most of the standard issue modern 12 cyl. Ferraris in the GT category as well- big, fast, powerful, far too heavy, but quite comfy doing the Autobahn thing. On a track, the ones I drove were pigs). Ditto, Lambo. On the Z-3/4, I think you are right, they are sports cars. Never much cottoned to the look of the Z3, but the current one is good looking.
they look much better in the flesh , lotus Exige racer without the roof
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_GAyrSeM0o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_GAyrSeM0o
I like this one the KTM X bow , there is a version for around 60 K $ secondhand , looks like a fundrive , its a street car and can be adjusted for the track
http://www.ktm.com/x-bow/x-bow-rr/model-info.html#prettyPhoto
http://www.ktm.com/x-bow/x-bow-rr/model-info.html#prettyPhoto
Mercedes??? we re talking sportscars not taxies
Ha!
Guess you have never ridden in a 12 cylinder SL600! (It's the one with TWO seats.)
SL 600: 0-60= 3.5 seconds
Porsche 911 GT2: 3.8 seconds
Dodge Viper: 3.9 seconds
Amsterdam Taxis: ZZZZZZZZZZZZ!
Mercedes??? we re talking sportscars not taxies
as I said earlier, I would buy a used SL55 AMG over an SL600 any day
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |