In reply to mr2peak :
Yep, that's definitely the answer if I go rwd. I really want a 318ti but they're very rare
In reply to mr2peak :
Yep, that's definitely the answer if I go rwd. I really want a 318ti but they're very rare
In reply to DeadSkunk (Warren) :
Thank you!
In reply to Evanuel9 :
Precisely. But what you usually get with the heavier car is a heavier drivetrain, with more HP, a stronger gearbox & differential, so your acceleration and top speed and even sometimes reliability tends to go up as well. Some people think that's fun. Shrug. That's why the newer performance cars are still way faster than the older cars despite pushing 2 tons of weight around. Big brakes, big tires, big HP.
I agree the 350z is very heavy for it's dimensions. 3400 lb for a little 2 seater with barely any trunk. But it's a stout reliable fun car (and it will lap way quicker than my NC2... And I know which one I'd rather be in if I had to take a hit/crash)
If you like the looks and somewhat unique 6 cylinder rumble and scream, it's quite a bargain at this point.
https://youtu.be/j6oBiBa8JQ8?si=ko8IMuBNco0QyMFJ
https://youtu.be/vtoJ6kr_5hI?si=x8uKntUq3xelmYzy
Likewise, that SN197 is a good useful car that would be super fun to drive with some suspension & tires.
https://youtu.be/ajU9t93GGwo?si=4TgK29cDWF8bIujc
And to put things in perspective: a new 992 911 will likely be over 3,400 lb. Nobody calls those ponderous or unresponsive.
Audi R8s are 3,600+
Nissan GTR are 3,900+
etc. do your own research if so inclined..
In reply to gencollon :
That is, frankly, one of the problems I have with modern cars. People think sheer speed, more features, horsepower, and numbers make a better car but there is truly something to be said for the benefits of a lighter, simpler, less complex car with a more analog feel. Like you said, 3400 lbs for a 2 seater with barely any trunk is absurd to me. Especially when I can save 300-400 pounds by going with a 3 series. It's cool, but it doesn't strike me.
The sn197 is a cool car - i'll give you that. I don't dislike them. But, once again, weight rears its ugly head (3400 ish lbs right?) and my parents have outright banned all mustangs (and muscle cars) anyway.
A new 992 911 has years of technology, millions of dollars of technical development, and motorsports engineering behind it. The weight is made up for with immense resources put into tuning, engineering, and building a responsive car. Plus it's 3400 lbs with 500 horsepower not 3400 lbs with 300 horsepower. I don't think the z is a bad car, or that weight is everything, but it is a big factor. R8s and GTRs have the similar deal, but they also are not known for being as responsive and nimble as lighter cars. I understand the perspective of those who preach the "more" school of driving enjoyment, but I just have a different persepctive.
Evanuel9 said:In reply to gencollon :
That is, frankly, one of the problems I have with modern cars. People think sheer speed, more features, horsepower, and numbers make a better car but there is truly something to be said for the benefits of a lighter, simpler, less complex car with a more analog feel. Like you said, 3400 lbs for a 2 seater with barely any trunk is absurd to me. Especially when I can save 300-400 pounds by going with a 3 series. It's cool, but it doesn't strike me.
The sn197 is a cool car - i'll give you that. I don't dislike them. But, once again, weight rears its ugly head (3400 ish lbs right?) and my parents have outright banned all mustangs (and muscle cars) anyway.
A new 992 911 has years of technology, millions of dollars of technical development, and motorsports engineering behind it. The weight is made up for with immense resources put into tuning, engineering, and building a responsive car. Plus it's 3400 lbs with 500 horsepower not 3400 lbs with 300 horsepower. I don't think the z is a bad car, or that weight is everything, but it is a big factor. R8s and GTRs have the similar deal, but they also are not known for being as responsive and nimble as lighter cars. I understand the perspective of those who preach the "more" school of driving enjoyment, but I just have a different persepctive.
It's worth considering things like a car's stiffness relative to weight. If you're planning on caging it, NBD, but older cars are generally pretty floppy. You do get something for the extra weight in newer cars anyways. Still I'd rather have the same hp/lb at a lighter weight if possible. Feel and running costs suffer.
Let me preface by saying I enjoy your enthusiasm and it reminds me of myself.
With that out of the way I'm going to say you're over analyzing specs, weight, etc.
When I was in highschool a couple decades ago I had a 1988 Honda Accord sedan 5 SPD.
Especially in Chicago winter with tons of snowy parking lots? I learned a ton about car control. It was still an entertaining car to drive in normal conditions. I've been a Honda fanboi ever since.
I've owned and driven tons of rwd and fwd cars since then (several AWD). There is always something to like and learn something different in every car.
For a myriad of reasons today I daily drive a 2007 Civic Si sedan with 225,000 miles. I bought it used with 172,000 miles.
You're in a tough spot with being a car enthusiast in the current used car market. And your budget. I strongly suspect insurance rates may have a bigger influence on your car choices than you think. Might want to get estimates on some of the cars towards the top of your list in order to find the yes/no $ amount your parents will go for.
In reply to Evanuel9 :
I don't think anyone is trying to make a light, simpler car with a more analog feel anymore. Not the 86, not the ND. They all have a more numb EPS, all the aids, very light and smooth gearboxes, super easy clutches, big screens taking up the dashboard. That's the cost of progress I guess. They're still fun to drive, while lacking some of the more analog charm of older cars.
Who knows, maybe when you spend big money, maybe the Murray T50 or Alpine are going for more driver-focused? Ha.
I don't know anyone that preaches the 'more' school. I'm just trying to tell you not to worry so much about weight. It matters much less than you think it does. You aren't trying to dead lift the car. You're steering (power assisted) braking (power assisted) and using the accelerator (more power moves a heavier car at least as fast as less power moves a lighter car). You feel the dynamics of the car, not its' weight. CG height, track width, wheelbase, MOI, bushing flex, roll center height, F/R relative roll stiffness, ride frequency, tyre loading, sidewall flex, lift or downforce etc... A heavier car can and often does out-handle a lighter one.
Now fun is another thing entirely. That's why I have a NC2. I want a slowish car that I can thrash with excellent feel and feedback from brakes and steering, excellent sightlines, great suspension geometry, a close-ratio gearbox that requires a lot of shifting at sane speeds, a narrower track that lets me move a bit in my lane... And dropping the top in the canyons makes the drive better than I would care to admit. And I always thought I liked coupes...
Have you heard any of the Grid Life Sundae Cup drivers talking about wheeling a Honda Fit around a big track? They're hopelessly slow, and pretty technically poor cars, but those guys are having the best time trying to get every MPH out of every corner.
https://youtu.be/4zCIyNylQZE?si=_v7ZclKOmhq3grtW
https://youtu.be/ZKx7cA731jA?si=QCdi30rgqwtcumgJ
https://youtu.be/ZlpGwjItYmk?si=5btHGSrsgksRSr-t
And a 992 C2 has 380 hp FWIW, and it can still get you a free ride to the county jail in around 10 seconds ;)
In reply to theruleslawyer :
Yeah, I totally understand why people are moving towards heavier cars even if I dislike it, but it's just not something I value.
Stiffness relative to weight is something I'm taking into account for certain cars. For example the e46 3 series is supposed to be much (IIRC 40%) stiffer than the e36 but with the cost of only 150 ish lbs.
But I agree. For fun it seems like lighter weight with the same power to weight ratio is more fun, cheaper on consumables, and smaller power increases have a greater effect on power to weight
In reply to clutchsmoke :
Thanks! I definitely agree that I am over analyzing, but I kind of don't know what else to do. I can't make a decision on which specific cars I want to look for until I decide whether weight, drivetrain, speed, or track ability is most important to me and, until I can test drive more cars, the only way in which I can approach the problem is through analyzing specs. I'm a bit of a nerd and analytical thinking like that is my default, but it becomes much less relevant when applied to qualitative factors like fun.
So far most of the cars that I've suggested have been approved by parents, although I suspect they aren't differentiating between, for example, a regular Impreza or a WRX, a regular Cooper or a Cooper s, a regular 500 or the abarth. Still, until they say no I'm going to pursue some of my more preferential cars.
I'm definitely in a tough spot. My ideal cars would be a toyobaru, 240sx, or 318ti but the first one is too expensive, second is too expensive to find a non-destroyed one, and the latter is just incredibly rare in stick.
Since you've driven many different drivetrains, can I ask the relevance of drivetrain vs weight for fun and learning?
I don't dislike the 8th gen si, but my mentality is that if I'm going with a 2800 lbs vehicle, I can go with a 3000 lbs e36 instead which is rwd.
In reply to gencollon :
I mean you're right, nobody is making cars in the vein as an NA Miata or a MR2 or a lotus Elise or what have you. But there is a massive difference between the design philosophy of a ND Miata and that if the new M2 or new Nissan z. And I'm firmly on the side of the Miata.
I wish we got alpines here, and I wish they came in stick. The t50 is my number one dream car - maybe once I make millions...........
Frankly, I can't really know if I agree or disagree with that. I know inertia is a big deal, and I also know that the Honda fit that I've driven has felt much more ninble than the new generation Corolla, 350z, or my mom's SUV which I've driven. But I've never driven any lightweight rwd cars to compare to the Z and try to narrow down the weight variable. That does help though, because it helps me be less hesitant about the weight of the 3 series.
Fun is among the biggest factors for me. I won't be going to the track or autocross every day, but I will be driving on roads more often than tracks.
I know all about sundae cup! One of the cars that I'm looking at is a sundae cup prepped fit! I love the class. The dominant car is the Honda fit (takes the top 5 every time), but the mazda2 and mini Cooper are also competitive.
Just buy the fit. You're not getting married. If it's not your thing you can sell it and be on to the next car on your list.
^^That. Especially if you like Sundae Cup.
Though I suspect my Miata on 205s, with 200lb of ballast bolted to the passenger floor and a intake restrictor to make 111 hp would show a Fit what for...
But I digress: The Fit is a great daily, and it looks like fun to wheel.
Analysis paralysis is real. The answer to your question is a bit different for everyone as you can see from the responses you're getting from your threads. Find a good example of any of the cars on your short list below budget so you've got a little money to play with for maintenance and upgrades, and start driving it. If you love it, great, if not, after a couple years, sell it and try something else. It's about the only way to figure out what you really gel with.
I know for me, FWD is fine on the street and can be a blast on back roads, but I don't find it as enjoyable for motorsporting where you're actually going 10/10ths. Other people love a well set up FWD car on track. Personal preference.
Don't get stuck in the spec sheets. A 3500 lb+ car can be just as enjoyable as a something lighter. I love my E30s and have had a blast ripping around in a 1700 lb Festiva, but possibly the most fun I've had with a car was my old Caprice Classic wagon with some decent suspension and steering under it, a bit more engine, and a 5 speed. That thing went across the scales at 4200 lbs but gobbled up back roads and made me giggle like a kid autocrossing it. Sure, it wasn't competitive in class, but I've had competitive cars that were way less fun than that wagon was.
E46 is only ~120lbs more than a comparable e36, and they used alloy suspension for all the e46 cars so unsprung mass should actually be less. Unsprung mass is a huge factor in weight feel. They also have much better ABS, traction control, interior, and plenty of space so you can do actual Car stuff like take your girlfriend and her friends to the beach or fit your friends in the back to go cheer for your favorite sports thing, or whatever stuff. Your grandma will prefer to sit in an E46, and you should spend time with family while they are around.
E46s are as old as E30s were when I was making this decision in college.
Get a normal E46, add mods, keep the original parts, and when you have more cash, move up to a better E46 and bring the aftermarket stuff with you. Get that Miata as a 2nd car in a few years, and you'll still have the E46 for normal car stuff
OP, you are SERIOUSLY overthinking this. As I mentioned in the other thread, you just need seat time. A 2000lb fwd car can be as much fun as a 2000lb rwd car which can be as much fun as a 3500lb rwd car which can be as much fun as a 3500lb fwd car.
There are a lot of variables in car control, not just weight. For example placement of the weight (not just the weight itself). When pushed just beyond the limit of grip, a mid-engine car will behave drastically different than a front engine which is drastically different than a rear engine car. Of those three, which would you guess is the hardest? Another factor, is the center of gravity high or low?
Since you don't have any performance driving experience yet, stop overthinking it and get a reliable and cost effective car. I promise you can have fun with it... even a Honda Accord can be an absolute riot on the track and road. I'm lucky enough to have tracked pretty much every combination of driven wheels and weight, every price point, etc... I can't say there have been many that I didn't enjoy. E36 M3, I ran a Rolls Royce Silver Cloud on a race track and laughed my ass off.
In reply to twowheeled :
True, but my parents don't lvoe the idea of me selling the car until after college unless soemthing goes wrong. In their words "this isn't your forever car, just the car to last you through college"
In reply to gencollon :
God I want a miata so damn bad!!
But yes, fit is a great option once you get past the looks lol. Just gotta decide between it and the mazda2
In reply to gearheadE30 :
Yep! The variety of answers was unexpected and has almost amde it harder lol. Definitely looking below overall budget, this budget is just for the car itself.
That's my dilemma, will I be able to learn as well with FWD.
Thanks for the advice!
In reply to mr2peak :
Isn't the chassis also supposed to be 70% stiffer than the e36? And the sedans aren't much heavier than coupes.
Will the e46 destroy me on maintence. I've had people in the thread say no, and also people say to stay away from bimmers
In reply to SKJSS (formerly Klayfish) :
You're right - I am 100% overthinking it, I just can't figure out how not to. It's in my personality I guess - I alsways have to figure out the optimal answer to a problem.
Mid-engine is harder due to the lower polar moment of inertia, then rear engine due to oversteer tendency (and snap oversteer), and then front engine. This is all assuming rear wheel drive. CoG is also a factor I'm considering- part of what makes pulling the trigger on a Fit or mazda2 harder when considering cars like impreza sedans, 3 series, or 90s civics.
I will stop overthinking lol. Going to do some test drives of the cars on my short list (90s civic, mazda2, honda fit, 500 abarth, cooper S, fiesta, e36 and e46 3 series, impreza) and pick the car I enjoy the most, with reasonable upkeep costs.
Yes!! Mid-engine is the hardest by a significant margin over rear or front. People are stunned by that when they try the different ones. You have a very good handle on vehicle dynamics. Just don't let that drive you to paralysis by analysis. You honestly aren't going to notice a significant difference between a Mazda2 and Honda Fit. On a broad scale, they are very similar dynamically.
Remove the Fiat, Mini and BMW from your list right away. Fiat and Mini reliability is non-existent. I've had an R56, stupid fun but prone to problems you don't want. I love my BMW to death but it's not something I'd recommend for a teen to own. Upkeep ain't cheap. The Impreza is...well... Subaru. I'd heavily lean towards Fit, Mazda2 and Civic. The Fit and Mazda are so fun and nimble with little power, very much like an NA Miata. Mazda3 is a great one if you want a bit more power. You will be very happy with any of those.
I am at Autobahn Speedway a few times a year. If you're home the next time I'm up there I'll take you for a few fast laps.
In reply to SKJSS (formerly Klayfish) :
I've got a lot of so-called theoretical knowledge, I just haven't had much chance to apply it lol. Sim time is useful but not the same. I'm going to drive the civic, fit, mazda2, and if I see anything else in the same vein that's interesting and then once I've driven them I'll make a decision.
Disappointed to hear that about the mini, it is the only modern b segment with IRS. Also disappointed to hear that about the abarth - it's seems so fun and makes such a fun noise.ive heard the r56 is among the worst generations for reliability.
Regarding the Subaru - can you expound on that. I've heard bad things about Subaru but also really good things. They are Japanese, and my parents think they're even more reliable than Mazda.
I'd love the chance! Thank you so much!!
The problem with Subaru is the engines, most of them need mods to survive track use and will quickly run into reliability problems when modified for increased power, some of them (especially boosted models) have engines that can self-destruct with normal street use (mostly higher-end Imprezas). Head gaskets, ring lands and oiling systems are common weak points with them. Other than that the only weak points you commonly see with Subarus are wheel hubs (again mostly on Imprezas) and susceptibility to rust on older models (like '90s and before).
I'd say Mazdas are generally more reliable, mostly because they use ordinary engines...apart from the rotaries which are high-maintenance and need oiling system mods out of the box to help keep the various rotor seals alive.
I haven't done much competitive driving other than racing my buddies on moutian roads, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. I have owned an 88' crx and a 01' Infiniti G20T in the past, these cars are by far the best handling cars I've Driven. The G20T in particular has plenty of room, comfortable, and handles very well. Gave my miata friends a run for their money lol. They come with a FWD sr20, which is god damn bulletproof. Mine had just over 300,000 miles on the original engine and trans before I wrecked it. I'd keep your eyes peeled for a manual one, they are hard to find but often are cheap. (Most importantly, just find something fun!)
BMWs are cheap to maintain as base models. Older cars like e46s parts are everywhere, they are cheap because tons of e46s were built, and they are easy to work on.
M cars are the opposite.
You'll need to log in to post.
