Login Register Sign up for the GRM e-newsletter

Login to post Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Is the Mustang a Sports Car? « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
  • Chris_V

    Jan. 20, 2009 3:43 p.m. Chris_V SuperDork

    fiat22turbo wrote:

    Chris, it is one thing to race a car with a live axle because it is cheap and it works or because that is what the rules dictate, because it is historically accurate.

    It is another deal to buy a brand new "sports car" that has a live axle and all of its compromises.

    Really the question is whether or not it is a sports car, I say with the rear seat and comfort options that it is more a GT car or a Sports Coupe than a Sports Car, which is more pure in its purpose.

    I've never seen the Mustang as a sports car, but a GT. Considering there have been Mustang GTs since that term meant something (and not just a tag that everybody threw on their little hatchbacks), I think the fact that it still says GT in the name means something.

    I also don't see a need to change something that works just because a couple fanbois want feature-creep to keep up with the Joneses.

    the point is, Mustangs use live axles to good effect in racing even when racing against same-class cars that have IRS. If it doesn't make things worse for handling in the sort of venues where handling is paramount, then we need to stop complaining about it.

  • confuZion3

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:06 p.m. confuZion3 Dork

    I can't believe this is being debated. Of course it is a sports car. You talk about weight - it weighs about as much as a 350Z (that is a sports car). Four seats - Porsche 911. Front-engine RWD is not exactly economy car realm. It has a V-8 (so do most Ferraris). For the money (hell, for any car) it goes pretty fast straight and from what I see in auto-x and track days, it can turn decent too. You buy them for excitement, not for practicality. They are raced at the drag strip, you see them at formula-D (drifting) events, and road racing: and they do pretty dern well in all of those catagories.

    The solid rear axle is robust, has consistent camber, and functions well on streets. It's great for the drag strip. It could have been IRS, but most people didn't want that. My dad's 745LI has IRS and that is not a sports car.

    My 2 cents.

  • fiat22turbo

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:17 p.m. fiat22turbo SuperDork

    The 911 is not a Sports Car, it is a Sports Coupe. So is the Mustang.

    Just because you can do sporting events in a car, does not make it a Sports Car, it merely makes it a Sporty-car.

    A Sports Car has two seats, and is built to be sporty first, comfortable and practical second. They were historically built from true racing cars with a more upright body bolted in place with an extra seat.

    I would argue that the 350Z isn't a pure Sports Car, but it is close enough that I won't argue too much. Obviously the Miata is a Sports Car, the Capri should have been but it didn't come out that way (not because it is FWD, just that it wasn't as good as planned, the Elan was a better attempt at a FWD Sports Car). The Elise/Exige obviously are, the Del Sol is hard to pin down. The Solstice/Sky are as is the S2000, etc. The CRX while really planned for economy, it was a Sports Car due to its focus on weight which made it perform well.

  • driver109x

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:20 p.m. driver109x Reader

    It is kinda confusing. Maybe you can ask your insurance company how they label a car lol. When I use to own a AE86 corolla gts coupe, the insurance was slightly higher than if it were a 3 door hatch gts because according to them it is a "sports coupe". Anyway, to me, a sports car is a Porsche, Ferrari, Corvette, Miata.... A GT is a Camaro, Mustang, Supra, BMW 6 series.... The rest are just coupes and sedans to me.

  • John Brown

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:26 p.m. John Brown UltimaDork

    P71 wrote:

    No need to calm down, I never got excited. I hate Mustangs, but I knew they weren't leaf springs. Everybody knows the only car made with a leaf spring is the Corvette!

    And we all know how they suck on an autocross course.

  • Strizzo

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:41 p.m. Strizzo Dork

    fiat22turbo wrote:

    The 911 is not a Sports Car, it is a Sports Coupe. So is the Mustang.

    Just because you can do sporting events in a car, does not make it a Sports Car, it merely makes it a Sporty-car.

    A Sports Car has two seats, and is built to be sporty first, comfortable and practical second. They were historically built from true racing cars with a more upright body bolted in place with an extra seat.

    I would argue that the 350Z isn't a pure Sports Car, but it is close enough that I won't argue too much. Obviously the Miata is a Sports Car, the Capri should have been but it didn't come out that way (not because it is FWD, just that it wasn't as good as planned, the Elan was a better attempt at a FWD Sports Car). The Elise/Exige obviously are, the Del Sol is hard to pin down. The Solstice/Sky are as is the S2000, etc. The CRX while really planned for economy, it was a Sports Car due to its focus on weight which made it perform well.

    how can you say that in one paragraph that a car has to be designed for sporting intentions to be a sports car, then in the next paragraph say that the crx was designed for economy, but ended up being a sports car. also, how is the 350z not a sports car? only two seats, built with sporting intentions, seems to fit your criteria, or are you just making it up as you go along?

  • fiat22turbo

    Jan. 20, 2009 4:48 p.m. fiat22turbo SuperDork

    Strizzo,

    I hate to break it to you, but this is all OPINION as in, yes I am making it all up as I go along.

    99.99% of what has gone on today has been opinion. That is why there has been so much back/forth in various threads. Everyone is expressing their opinions formed with whatever bits of data they are choosing to be important to them and no one is winning because you can't change another's person's opinion very easily.

    I see it as a sign that we're all very passionate about the subject matter, but for the most part we're fairly articulate about expressing that passion while respecting another's opinions and position. Don't think my grouping on Sports Cars is right? Great, correct it with your opinion, I'll respect it, I may not agree, but I'll respect it.

  • maroon92

    Jan. 20, 2009 5:29 p.m. maroon92 SuperDork

    I would argue that the Mustang is a Sporty-car...however the Shelby Terlingua V-6 (even without the supercharger) would be a sports car.

  • DILYSI Dave

    Jan. 20, 2009 5:36 p.m. DILYSI Dave PowerDork

    Labels are dumb.

    Miatas, Elans, Mustangs, and 911's all kick ass.

  • Salanis

    Jan. 20, 2009 5:44 p.m. Salanis UltraDork

    I think this is one of those things that's kind of like porn:

    I'm not sure how to define it, but I sure know it when I see it!

    And it's all very arousing too.

  • mad_machine

    Jan. 20, 2009 5:56 p.m. mad_machine SuperDork

    this has to be the first forum where I saw handling as being a criteria for sports car hood... most forums (mostly inhabited by teens and 20somethings) rank the supercars as sports cars... and think that anything that cannot do 150+ mph, have less than 500hp, or pulls less than a G while turning is not a sports car...

  • B02S4

    Jan. 20, 2009 5:57 p.m. B02S4 Reader

    Within limits a Mustang can be whatever Sports/GT you want it to be; how much or little are you willing to spend?

  • ReverendDexter

    Jan. 20, 2009 8:56 p.m. ReverendDexter Reader

    Depends on your definition of sports car.

    I own a Cobra, and I would classify it as a GT car. My definition of a GT car is a vehicle that is designed for eating up long stretches of road quickly and comfortably. It has enough handling that you won't get slowed down in the twisty bits, enough power to maintain illegal speeds and pass anyone in your way, and be comfortable enough to be in long enough to burn the whole tank of gas in one sitting. It's the car you want to take when you have to make that 10 hour drive over the mountains and through the woods, even if you end up having to take the SUV that fits the kids and dogs.

    I think of a sports car as a momentum car. It doesn't have the power to catch back up if you lose all your speed in a corner, so it's designed to take the corners as fast as it can go in the straights. It's the slow car that, once you know how, you drive really, really fast.

  • mtn

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:14 p.m. mtn Dork

    DILYSI Dave wrote:

    Labels are dumb.

    Miatas, Elans, Mustangs, and 911's all kick ass.

    DING DING DING!!!

    We have a winner!

  • Luke

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:38 p.m. Luke Dork

    The Mustang will always be a 'muscle car' to me, I think.

  • Apexcarver

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:43 p.m. Apexcarver UltraDork

    mad_machine wrote:

    this has to be the first forum where I saw handling as being a criteria for sports car hood... most forums (mostly inhabited by teens and 20somethings) rank the supercars as sports cars... and think that anything that cannot do 150+ mph, have less than 500hp, or pulls less than a G while turning is not a sports car...

    2 out of 3 AINT bad...

    top speed rated at 152mph

    I logged 1.27g (lateral) with my Max-q (gotta love Rcomps)

    I only have 305hp factory though. (dont know what my mods have given me)

    if its not a "sportscar" you have to admit it has decent sporting aspirations.

    The IRS that was put on 1999-2004 cobras wasnt exactly the best thing ever. it was designed as a drop in assembly to bolt up in place of the solid rear and had some compromises. most stuff ive seen on NASA AI and AIX cars have them sticking to solid rears with a torque arm or 5link added.

    poopoo it if you want, you CAN make a solid rear work, if you fix fords crappy geometry on 1979-2004 mustangs. but hey, you can get a bolt in kit to fix that.

  • ReverendDexter

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:45 p.m. ReverendDexter Reader

    Apexcarver wrote:

    mad_machine wrote:

    this has to be the first forum where I saw handling as being a criteria for sports car hood... most forums (mostly inhabited by teens and 20somethings) rank the supercars as sports cars... and think that anything that cannot do 150+ mph, have less than 500hp, or pulls less than a G while turning is not a sports car...

    2 out of 3 AINT bad...

    top speed rated at 152mph

    I logged 1.27g (lateral) with my Max-q (gotta love Rcomps)

    I only have 305hp factory though. (dont know what my mods have given me)

    if its not a "sportscar" you have to admit it has decent sporting aspirations.

    {cough}156mph{cough}

  • Apexcarver

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:48 p.m. Apexcarver UltraDork

    sorry, i couldnt remember and had to rely on a crappy site. ( i knew it was over 150 though.)

  • Lugnut

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:49 p.m. Lugnut Reader

    DILYSI Dave wrote:

    Labels are dumb.

    Miatas, Elans, Mustangs, and 911's all kick ass.

    Seriously!

    In this day and age of automotive development what car could NOT be considered a "crossover?" All of these labels, truck, sports car, sedan, station wagon, these were all labels from way back when those were the kinds of cars you could buy. How many fancy coachbuilt cars were sport sedans back then? Or fast station wagons?

    All of these categories, these buckets of ideas, were all thought of before we had cars that could do so many things for so many people. People point back to MGs, Triumphs, Lotus Elans and little brazed-together Sevens and say, "Well, those are sports cars!" Sure, sure, they were. But now that a Camry or a rental Sebring can completely demolish the performance of any branded through-and-through, dyed in the wool "sports car," who gets to decide anymore?!

    How about this? Racing is a sport. They race Mustangs. Mustangs are sports cars. They race Miatas. Miatas are sports cars. They don't race Lincoln Continentals. Maybe that's not a sports car.

    A modern-day Mustang will out-drive, out-cruise, out-tour, out-handle, and out-last some old "proper" sports car. Put an '09 Mustang GT against a '52 XK120 and point out a measurable way that the Jag out-sports the Mustang. If we can't, then all of this is just pure opinionated nonsense.

    My Volvo station wagon isn't a sports car. But how many more laps has it run, how many more cones has it smashed, how many more timing lights has it tripped, than some well-polished Morgan Aero 8 sitting in a garage under a cover?

    Classify that. Label that. Tell the guy coming home from a long weekend, with chunks of rubber glued to the insides of his wheel wells, too wiped out to take the numbers off the side of his Mustang that his car isn't a sports car.

    Maybe it's not the shape or the number of seats or whether it has a clutch or a torque converter that makes some hunk of metal a sports car. Maybe that has more to do with us.

  • P71

    Jan. 20, 2009 11:54 p.m. P71 HalfDork

    By Lugnut's definition my P71 is a sports car, and I'm cool with that. Great post!

  • ddavidv

    Jan. 21, 2009 7:16 a.m. ddavidv SuperDork

    You guys can argue about labels and terminology for the duration of the Obama presidency for all I care. Mustangs are cool, and I want one. That's all that matters.

    Oh, and Del Sols are chick cars, sorry.

  • confuZion3

    Jan. 21, 2009 7:43 a.m. confuZion3 Dork

    fiat22turbo wrote:

    The 911 is not a Sports Car, it is a Sports Coupe. So is the Mustang.

    Coupes are cars.

  • Feb. 6, 2010 7:53 a.m. Jackman222

    Sports Cars

    The CARS program achieved the objectives set out by Congress to increase automotive sales and aid the environment. In just a few short weeks of sales, nearly 680,000 older vehicles were replaced by new, more fuel-efficient vehicles. The nation's economy benefited immediately from this stimulus program, which caused a distinct upward movement in GDP and created or saved tens of thousands of jobs at a very critical time in the recovery process.

    Image converter, image search, resize photo, photography, image analysis, digital image processing, photo sharing websites, photo bucket, image upload, image gallery

  • Feb. 6, 2010 8:04 a.m. paul New Reader

    Definition: ...typically of two seats and two doors, with precise handling, brisk acceleration, sharp braking, and attractive aesthetics.

    Technically has 4 seats, but then again so does the 911 and countless other cars considered sports cars (apologies for directly comparing the two :). With some minor suspension boltons, it's definitely meets the precise handling criteria...

  • minimac

    Feb. 6, 2010 8:09 a.m. minimac Dork

    Real sportscars don't come with cupholders.

« 1 2 3 4 5 6 »  

You'll need to log in to post.