How About That, 2014 Corvette Gets 37.3 mpg

[Frank Lee]

[gone-ot]

Frank, is that your Tijuana-Taxi cruiser?

[gk_ghig14]

Well the new pony/muscle/sports cars coming out are actually able to corner with the benchmarks from Germany, Italy, Japan, Britain, etc. One of the magazines tested a 5.0 against an m3 and they were dead even. Boss 302 is even better, 1le camaro, z28 camaro, zl1 camaro are good too. But that's a whole different forum lol

[cbaber]

I would argue that a muscle car is a sub-category of sports car. In fact, anything can be a sports car. To classify them only as small 2 seaters is not correct. I would call an M3 or M5 a sports car, and they come in sedan versions, and are not small. And if you call a Miata a sports car but not an M5, yet an M5 out performs it nearly every aspect, then your logic is severely flawed.

There are different niches of sports cars. You can't compare a Mustang to a Miata, or and M5 to a Ferrari 458. All sports cars, all for different purposes.

[LeanBurn]

It doesn't matter the classification...with mpg numbers like that it looks like I have even more reason to save up and get one now.

I have loved the C7 since it debuted...it's the full package - most bang for the buck performer out there right now...and now even gets decent fuel economy?! Help Me!

[niky]

Originally Posted by cbaber

And if you call a Miata a sports car but not an M5, yet an M5 out performs it nearly every aspect, then your logic is severely flawed.

To be utterly pedantic, the Miata is one of the few cars on the road that fits the definition.

The classic definition of "sports car", if you take lightweight as meaning "compared to most other cars on the road", only fits very few cars on the road today, among them, the MX-5, the Elise, the Boxster/Cayman and a bunch of trackday specials.

The techhnical term for 2+2s like the BRZ, 911, M3 and Mustang is "Grand Tourer"...

Outright performance does not signify a sports car, body style and purpose do. Otherwise, you could consider the R63 a better sports car than most actual sports cars.

-

After all of that, I actually agree with you, as I have a fairly liberal interpretation of the word, myself, but the classic definition is fairly narrow and antediluvian.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by cbaber

I would argue that a muscle car is a sub-category of sports car. In fact, anything can be a sports car. To classify them only as small 2 seaters is not correct. I would call an M3 or M5 a sports car, and they come in sedan versions, and are not small.

That just means that you're using the (IMHO) wrong definition of sports car. It's not, in the final analysis, about absolute performance, but about fun. Sport, in other words. For instance, many of the classic sports cars of the '50s and '60s - Austin-Healey, MG, Triumph, etc - were honestly not all that great at performance, but they were small & fun to drive.

Maybe if you take an analogy, it's like the difference between riding in a Boeing, and buzzing around at treetop (or sagebrush, hereabouts) level in your Piper or Citabria.

Originally Posted by niky

To be utterly pedantic, the Miata is one of the few cars on the road that fits the definition.

Which is why I think it's a pity that Mustangs and such are thought of, and sold as, sports cars: it crowds a market niche that could have real, affordable sports cars. As Lee Iacocca is quoted as saying of the declining sales of the increasingly porky original Mustang, "The Mustang market never left us, we left it."

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Frank, is that your Tijuana-Taxi cruiser?

No! No no no no no

Re: Sports cars: Triumph Spitfire Mk 1, no doubt supposed to belong in the sports car category... but what an ill-handling P.O.S.; all it did well was look cute. A Buick station wagon could handily outperform it in just about every conceivable way.

[XYZ]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Sports car = small, nimble, go-around corners like a 'bat-out-of-hell' vehicle.

Muscale car = Mustang, Camaro, Challenger, etc.; americana 'goes-like-hell' (straight-line) boulevard dasher.

For practical purposes, I think your off-the-cuff definition is spot on.

It's probably a ratio of having superior handling and cornering ability, with adequate acceleration so as to compliment those aspects, enough to make the car great fun to drive.

Sadly, there are few sports cars made today that resemble those of yesteryear. The Corvette of today is very different than what it was first designed to be. At least the fiberglass body is light and it doesn't rust, but it's always been a rather expensive model, out of reach of most enthusiasts.

Between the mandatory safety equipment and all the other add-ons, cars are now generally heavier than they used to be. It's harder to be nimble when you are overweight.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by XYZ

It's harder to be nimble when you are overweight.

What? You can't visualize Miss Piggy or Dumbo as being 'nimble' tip-toeing-thru-the-tulips-types of vehicles?