Suggestions of a sporty ride at or less than $53K???

OK Sean, time to narrow that list down again and sort them by your preference. (I like to keep score and it will help this thread stay on course--which is has done really well considering the "political" nature of it).



Then comes the question, which to test first? What do you guys think about this in any kind of test? Do you try the one you think you will like the best first or last? This could apply to cars, waxes...etc. Personally I try to walk around my choice as much as possible--either that or leave my checkbook at home! :)
 
I've come up with a testing schema...



2003/4 BMW M3

2004 Audi S4 (the new one that's not out yet)

2003/4 SVT Cobra

2003/4 Chevrolet Corvette Z06

2003/4 WRX STi

2003/4 Infiniti G35 Sport Coupe

2003/4 Nissan 350Z

2003/4 Volvo S60R

2003/4 Maxda RX-8

2003/4 Honda S2000

2003/4 Porsche Boxter S

2003/4 Mercedes-Benz CLK

2003/4 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG



These are the cars that officially make up "the field." 13 cars in all. I, very quickly, came up with the idea that the cars will be rated on the following characteristics:



- 0-60 (a hint for quickness)

- 1/4 mile (the all out total performance of the car in a straight line)

- Lateral Acceleration (an idea of how well the car handles)

- Horsepower/Torque Rating (stock)

- Interior Styling

- Exterior Styling

- Options (number and quality of options are a factor)

- Price (obviously, this will be negatively assigned)

- Gas Mileage



I figure the top car in each category gets 13 points and the bottom car in each category gets 1 point. Thus, the cars in the middle are assigned as best as possible. When at all possible, measured data from reliable sources will be used. The cars will then be listed by total score at a time when all the necessary data has been compiled.



I will post as much as possible in my next thread. In the mean time, if you guys could go stat searching along with me, that would be real helpful.



I will post for at least the first 3 cars on the list above in a little bit, if someone else wants to grab a few of the others. I have a tiny matter of business to attend to though...



Be back in a bit...
 
Jake11375 said:
Which one are you going for the CLK320 or CLK500? They both look pretty much the same just a different engine.
Click to expand...



Um.... which is faster???



I'm gonna start digging up the straight facts on this list guys, feel free to add...
 
The links in my first message in this thread go to the Car and Driver reviews of the WRX.



The newest issue of Car and Driver has a test of the STi including stats.
 
I own a Volvo S60 and I think it is a fabulous car, but I don't think the S60R is what you are looking for. There are not many bolt-on mods available (especially for the R since it is so new), and the car weighs a lot. You will have a hard compromise with sport luxury cars and just plain sport cars. The nice options in sport luxury cars (i.e., Volvo S60R, Infiniti G35 Coupe, MB CLK) just add weight. They are not intended for autocross use. Sure, they are fun to take to the mountains or twisty country back roads, but every other car on this list will take it in an autocross, dragstrip, or track.
 
Just a quick note: I have recently compiled all the information that I believe is necessary. All of this information was acquired from Road and Track and/or Car and Driver. I believe that after I post the information, I can then start assigning the point values....



An aside... The 2003 Cobra SVT comes out ahead of the M3 on the skid pad!!! Never expected that. Anyways...



The information should be up around 7:30PM or so EST. See everyone then... Can't you just feel the anticipation?? :)
 
I should have mentioned that whenever possible, I relied on the actual manufacturer's webpages/booklets. So basically, it's about as accurate as one can get without actually driving and measuring each of the cars themselves.



And remember here, all I want is a general idea of which I should consider more heavily and doing all this will at the very least help me see as much of a side by side comparison as is possible.



Anyways... C u all at 7:30



:bounce <--- for anticipation
 
Great point about statistical numbers, be careful not to really read too much into them, if much of anything. If you're looking for meaningful numbers, manufacturers numbers are meaningless, Ford found out about posting artifically boosted numbers, now they probably err on the low side just for insurance! BMW and Porsche stats are typically slower than the cars are really capable of, these numbers aren't of much use.



If you really plan on buying a car for numbers and weekend autocross times, look at your local SCCA SOLO II time sheets. A Miata posts relatively mid-level numbers in magazines, but cleans up on much more impressive machines at autocrosses. You'll be amazed at what a Z0-6 can consistently do to a Cobra, etc. Most of all, drive the things that interest you, and listen to some of the given advice, things like a CLK and Volvo will never be sports cars, sporty, yes, but not sports car. The same can be argued about the M3, as it's based on the standard three, and the G35C and 350 Z, as they're based on the G35 sedan, but you'd have to drive them to decide if you feel that way.



Ben
 
So what happened? There's been no action on this thread for a week.



Have you driven some of the cars? What do you think so far?
 
:nixweiss :nixweiss :( :( :doh :doh



I'm really sorry ladies and gentlemen... I have not been able to be online much at all in this past week... Things got real busy, real quick...



I am going to post all the statistical stuff sometime this week, I swear to it... This time I mean it... Anyways, I'm kind of interested to see if you guys can come up with a better way to display the information for the cars.. As of right now, here's how it will go:



Car: <Car name>

0-60: <0-60 time>

1/4 mile: <1/4 mile time and MPH>

Lateral Acceleration: <skidpad g results>

Horsepower/Torque Rating: <HP/Torque>

Gas Mileage: <City/Highway>

Price: <price>



Then after that, in a different thread, I will post a columnized Excel-type thingy that shows each of the car's scores based on the numbers...



Anybody know of a better way to get all this info up on this board??



If so, let me know, otherwise, stay tuned people... :bounce :xyxthumbs
 
Alright ladies and gentlemen, it's the information you've all been waiting for, as promised...



Here it is... Now as for the format, you'll have to bear with me... Here goes...



Car: 2003 BMW M3

0-60: 4.9s

1/4 mile: 13.5 @ 104.2

Lateral Acceleration: 0.89g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 333/262

Gas Mileage: 16/24

Price: $46,500



Car: 2004 Audi S4

0-60: 5.5s

1/4 mile: ???

Lateral Acceleration: ???

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 339/302

Gas Mileage: 17/25

Price: $45,000



Car: 2003 SVT Cobra

0-60: 4.9s

1/4 mile: 12.9 @ 111.3

Lateral Acceleration: 0.90g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 390/390

Gas Mileage: ??/??

Price: $34,750



Car: 2003 Chevrolet Corvette Z06

0-60: 3.9s

1/4 mile: 12.4 @ 116.5

Lateral Acceleration: 0.98g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 405/400

Gas Mileage: 18/25

Price: $51,155



Car: 2004 WRX STi

0-60: 4.9s

1/4 mile: 13.3 @ 130

Lateral Acceleration: 0.88g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 300/300

Gas Mileage: 18/24

Price: $30,995



Car: 2003 G35 Sport Coupe

0-60: 6.1s

1/4 mile: 14.6 @ 98.6

Lateral Acceleration: 0.92g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 280/270

Gas Mileage: 20/27

Price: $32,000



Car: 2003 Nissan 350Z Track

0-60: 5.8s

1/4 mile: 14.4 @ 99.7

Lateral Acceleration: 0.88g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 287/274

Gas Mileage: 20/26

Price: $34,079



Car: 2003 Volvo S60R

0-60: 5.8s

1/4 mile:

Lateral Acceleration:

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 300/295

Gas Mileage:

Price: $36,825



Car: 2003 Mazda RX-8

0-60: 5.9s

1/4 mile: 14.5 @ 95.6

Lateral Acceleration: 0.88g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 247/159

Gas Mileage: 18/24

Price: $27,200



Car: 2003 Honda S2000

0-60: 5.5s

1/4 mile: 14.1 @ 99.6

Lateral Acceleration: 0.90g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 240/153

Gas Mileage: 20/26

Price: $32,600



Car: 2003 Porsche Boxster S

0-60: 5.6s

1/4 mile: 14.2 @ 99.2

Lateral Acceleration: 0.95g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 258/229

Gas Mileage: 18/26

Price: $51,600



Car: 2003 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG

0-60: 4.9s

1/4 mile: 13.6 @ 105.4

Lateral Acceleration: 0.86g

Horsepower/Torque Rating: 349/332

Gas Mileage: 17/21

Price: $51,120



Well, those are all the stats that I could come up with... If anybody has any filler for the empty areas, please feel free to post... In general, if these pieces of information go against what you've found yourself, please feel free to post... As soon as everyone is satisfied with the information, I will re-post the cars and information and then assign the points...



Just to make it easy, as it stands right now, these are the pieces of information that are needed:



- 2004 Audi S4 - 1/4 mile, Lateral Acceleration

- 2003 Cobra SVT - Gas Mileage

- 2003 Volvo S60R - 1/4 mile, Lateral Acceleration, Gas Mileage



Basically, Gas Mileage and Torque of all the cars listed is what's needed... Help me fill the gaps so we can rate them...



Let the corrections flow... :):D
 
I think you should just go and test drive a few to get more aquainted with them. You can't really decide by what's on paper until you get a feel for the ride, comfort, handling, ergonomics, accelration, etc.. first hand. The stats may look good but you may not actually like the car when you drive it. Stats are a good place to start and it looks like you've got an idea of what's what on paper, now it's time for a little joy riding! :)
 
HTML is your friend :D . . .

<table cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4" border="1"><tr><td><table style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"><tr><td>Vehicle</td><td>   </td><td>0-60</td><td>   </td><td>1/4 mile</td><td>   </td><td>Lat. Accel.</td><td>   </td><td>hp/tq</td><td>   </td><td>Mileage</td><td>   </td><td>Price</td></tr><tr><td>2003 BMW M3</td><td>   </td><td>4.9s</td><td>   </td><td>13.5 @ 104.2</td><td>   </td><td>0.89g</td><td>   </td><td>333/262</td><td>   </td><td>16/24</td><td>   </td><td>$46,500</td></tr><tr><td>2004 Audi S4</td><td>   </td><td>5.5s</td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td>339/302</td><td>   </td><td>17/25</td><td>   </td><td>$45,000</td></tr><tr><td>2003 SVT Cobra</td><td>   </td><td>4.9s</td><td>   </td><td>12.9 @ 111.3</td><td>   </td><td>0.90g</td><td>   </td><td>390/390</td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td>$34,750</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Chevrolet Corvette Z06</td><td>   </td><td>3.9s</td><td>   </td><td>12.4 @ 116.5</td><td>   </td><td>0.98g</td><td>   </td><td>405/400</td><td>   </td><td>18/25</td><td>   </td><td>$51,155</td></tr><tr><td>2004 WRX STi</td><td>   </td><td>4.9s</td><td>   </td><td>13.3 @ 103</td><td>   </td><td>0.88g</td><td>   </td><td>300/300</td><td>   </td><td>18/24</td><td>   </td><td>$30,995</td></tr><tr><td>2003 G35 Sport Coupe</td><td>   </td><td>6.1s</td><td>   </td><td>14.6 @ 98.6</td><td>   </td><td>0.92g</td><td>   </td><td>280/270</td><td>   </td><td>20/27</td><td>   </td><td>$32,000</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Nissan 350Z Track</td><td>   </td><td>5.8s</td><td>   </td><td>14.4 @ 99.7</td><td>   </td><td>0.88g</td><td>   </td><td>287/274</td><td>   </td><td>20/26</td><td>   </td><td>$34,079</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Volvo S60R</td><td>   </td><td>5.8s</td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td>300/295</td><td>   </td><td></td><td>   </td><td>$36,825</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Mazda RX-8</td><td>   </td><td>5.9s</td><td>   </td><td>14.5 @ 95.6</td><td>   </td><td>0.88g</td><td>   </td><td>247/159</td><td>   </td><td>18/24</td><td>   </td><td>$27,200</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Honda S2000</td><td>   </td><td>5.5s</td><td>   </td><td>14.1 @ 99.6</td><td>   </td><td>0.90g</td><td>   </td><td>240/153</td><td>   </td><td>20/26</td><td>   </td><td>$32,600</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Porsche Boxster S</td><td>   </td><td>5.6s</td><td>   </td><td>14.2 @ 99.2</td><td>   </td><td>0.95g</td><td>   </td><td>258/229</td><td>   </td><td>18/26</td><td>   </td><td>$51,600</td></tr><tr><td>2003 Mercedes-Benz C32 AMG</td><td>   </td><td>4.9s</td><td>   </td><td>13.6 @ 105.4</td><td>   </td><td>0.86g</td><td>   </td><td>349/332</td><td>   </td><td>17/21</td><td>   </td><td>$51,120</td></tr></table></td></tr></table>



Tort
 
I'm guessing the speed for the WRX is a typo, and should read "103" rather than "130". 103 is much more in line with what I'd expect for a 13.3 ET, as well. I'll fix it in the table . . .



Tort
 
What is your intended use for the car?



If you are looking for sheer PERFORMANCE, and you are willing to spend around 50K, I would go with the cobra. With the stock cobra and some modest upgrades (exhaust, change blower pulley, chip, etc..) you will have a very fast ride. If you invest an additional 10K(brembo brakes, level 3 suspension, etc..) you would be well ahead of most supercars.



Is this going to be your daily driver, and absolute 0-60 or 1/4 mile times are not that important, I would go with the M3 or G35. These cars also have alot more aesthetic value. They will probably prove more reliable and practical in bad weather.

Just my .02?????

Good Luck
 
Number 1: Thank you VERY MUCH for taking the time to HTML that list, TortoiseAWD. I didn't have the time nor energy to do it, otherwise I would have. What sort of self-respecting kind of computer nerd am I? Oh and that 130 trap speed was VERY wrong. It was late, gimme a break. :)



Number 2: I do really want a car that can out-perform (1/4, 0-60, Lateral Accel) the rest. But I do also want a slick looking car. As of right now, I am leaning towards the Cobra, but I am trying to be as unbiased as possible. I will test-drive all the cars on this list. Which kinda brings me to my next question...



Number 3:



Ok, I have no time to read responses at the moment, but I just want a quick opinion out of you. And try to make your opinions NOT based on the information that I have provided.



Basically, I'm skeptical, but I want to see if others are as well.



Your opinion:



True or False: A 2003 SVT Cobra beats a 2003 BMW M3 in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, assuming the same person drives each car.



Well????:bounce
 
True. Cobra will beat M3 on 0-60 and 1/4. M3 is lighter than Cobra, but Cobra has 128 more lb/ft of torque, and nearly 60 more HP.



Opinions should be formed with the information you provided taken into consideration. Otherwise, it's just a shot in the dark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top