[UltArc]

Originally Posted by tjts1

The Mustang is either a muscle car, rental car or secretary's car depending on who you ask. Its never been a sports car.

Porsche 918
7:14 around the Ring
3.3L/100km
887hp combined
20 mile EV range.
Anyway to slice it, the GM claim is bogus.

When I had the patience to listen to the ignorant remarks about all cars non Mustang (Mustang forum), the biggest argument was pony car, vs sports car, vs whatever. The point when someone non stop argued with me that his 2013 GT500 cost less to buy, operate, fuel, drive for six years vs a 2013 Fusion hybrid, all things mileage the same, was the breaking point for me. Regardless of the Fusion getting twice (~) the mileage, and costing half- math wasn't his strong point- he thought it would be cheaper because the dealer told him so.

So conversations (it doesn't seem like an argument- yet lol) like this, don't bother me. Rational individuals conversing and bringing up facts, opinions, and personal experience to me, is a conversation.

As stated, I agree there is no real firm definition. I usually start consider sports cars in the 350-450 range that are track oriented. Mustang? No- sporty car. Boss Leguna Seca? Sports. Two seaters? Unless they are cruisers, or an Elio, or smart, then I would think sports. But with so many entry level cars with performance, mileage, and being able to be a DD, and AMGs, M series, GT500s, ZL1s, Koenigseggs- "sports car" is a bit broad to classify the Miata through the Veyron.

Originally Posted by cbaber

Oh my, this thread is funny. If you buy a sports car for it's highway MPG you are buying the car for the wrong reason. Drive a Prius to work, save the sports cars for the weekend and track days. Why trade off the comforts and practicality of a commuter car for the power of a sports car if you are not going to use the power? If you drive these cars in the way they were meant to be driven you won't be getting 30 mpg. If you want to have fun in the car you won't be getting 30 mpg. Save the fuel economy for your daily driver. Focus on the fun in sports cars.

Arguing about what is a sports car and what is a super car is just absurd. A sports car is a sports car if it was designed to be one. The amount of horsepower it has or the price tag has nothing to do with it. Does it put an uncontrollable smile on your face as you hit the apex of a corner? If you have ever sat in a Del Sol you know it was a sports car. I don't care if it only had 120 hp. 2 seats, targa top, low driving position, back hugging seats, shift knob up by the steering wheel, etc. It was all designed to feel sporty, and sporty it felt. The MX-5/Miata is one of the best sports cars in history. It has proof to back it up. It is probably the most raced production car ever. If that doesn't make it a sports car what does?

Extremely disagree, and kind of agree, respectively.

If I could afford a Prius (24k to start) and a GT500 ( 48k to start), I would have bought a real commuter car and a real "sports" car. Since I'd rather not pay interest for the rest of my life on a depreciating liability, I bought a commuter (saved 5k, 60~% of the fuel economy) and a sporty car (saved 29k, 60~% of the horsepower), and got what I got. But if I had so much money that I could drop 72 grand on cars just so my daily drive sucks, I wouldn't buy either of these two.

Maybe buying a car that satisfies several needs rather than just being a specialty car built for one thing is the wrong reason. Although, I drive it like it's supposed to be driven, I am getting 137% of the highway mpg. But until I am getting 100k+ /year in interest, I couldn't fathom wasting money like that.

Like, buying a phone that won't play music, or take pictures, so I can buy an mp3 player and a separate camera for more money (based on my practical wants).