I participated in an auto focus group that compared the 370Z, BRZ, Cayman, and etc.
 

Last night I participated in an automotive focus group on sports cars. I dominated the discussion portion, but I think they were turned off by my "extreme" views on the definition of a sports car. I think I just got too Jeremy Clarkson on them. There were three VW GTi owners in the group and they kept insisting what they drove was true sports car. Sorry dudes, RWD or GTFO! The GTi is a sports compact/hatch at best. Also, there were two Genesis coupe owners mixed in. Sorry, your Korean made car is a soulless appliance just like Samsung phones. During the second portion, they showed us a 2013 BRZ, tC, Cooper, 370Z, and Cayman. They then asked us to compare rate them based on look and feel. I was honest and I didn't say a whole lot of good things about the tC or Cooper. Unfortunately I didn't get a callback for the test drive phase. Also, I suspect they thought I was a bit 370Z biased; but they knew what I drove before I signed up. At least I got paid $200 for two hours of car talk and had a chance to check out the BRZ, which impressed me a little.


http://media.ziptied.com/members/fil...26_164126.jpeg

These are fun events to attend. Last one I went to was a focus group on the kia optima. They only paid $150 for about 4 hours of my time. No test drives, just a multimedia presentation. I kept going on about how there's nothing sporty whatsoever about the car in substance. It just looks sporty.

:icon18:
As much as I like the GTi, I find this to be hilarious. I like the car, its "sporty", but still it isn't a sports car. However, I disagree with your statement about the genesis coupe, I wouldn't go far as to say it doesn't have a soul. I feel that the car was meant to be more of a hybrid between sports car and grand tourer. Its moderately quick, has a neat set of equipment (if you decide to go the techy route), is a comfy car for what it is.

Can I ask why you didn't like the mini cooper? I always like the little car as far as looks go. Seems like it'd be more fun yet less practical than a GTi.

sign an NDA? :)

I hate to say this but with the 2013 price increase on the 370Z its not worth the price tag anymore. 37-39K just for a sports package? wow

:icon18:

Right on, Kenny. I am a purist as well. A sports car is RWD and has only two seats. The Cayman and the 370 are the only two sports cars I see in that group.

I agree.

Good work if you can get it too.

Was this with Davis Research? Just wondering.

GTi = golf cart on steroids.......

:icon18: That's pretty funny. Anyways that's awesome to get paid for that and get to drive some different rides. How'd you get the invite?

I'm not going to mince words about the Genesis coupe but, compared to the 370Z, the Genesis to me felt soulless. When I was in the market for a new car, it was on my short list of cars to consider. But when I got behind the wheel of one, I was not at all impressed. The Koreans have demonstrated that they know how to make a car, but they still haven't quite gotten there yet in refinement.

Based solely on looks and sitting in the driver seat, I have to give the Mini Cooper coupe the thumbs down. I prefer the regular Coopers in the looks department. I find the coupes to be absolutely hideous. I have driven my friend's Cooper and it's a fun little car. But our assessment did not include driving it so I did not take anything into account except for the superficial.

Sooooo uglyyyyy:

http://media.ziptied.com/members/fil...oper_Coupe.png


Nope.


Tough to say. In my book, the BRZ would be consider a sports car too. Perhaps you're more of a purist than I am.


Maybe, maybe not ;)


Funny that you ask. It was a slow day at work a few weeks ago and I saw an email in my spam folder with the title, "Get paid to give us your thoughts on sports cars!" So I figured what the heck and clicked on the survey. A few days later, someone called and left a message on my Google Voice account (never use your cell phone in case it's real spam) and they sounded legit. I called back and the next thing I know, I was sitting in some room with other car folks.

So how did you spend your $150.00?

Honestly... I think you messed up a perfectly good opportunity because of your highly limited Fanboy thinking. You had the chance to drive 4 excellent platforms and compare differences between cars objectively and blew to be a fanboy????? Seriously????? :facepalm:

RWD is the defined form of sports car. Being that they had varying drivetrains. They needed an evo n wrx there... You could have tested all cars and given your objective preference in the end and draw an educated conclusion going from car to car.

Just because a Drivetrain is different does not discount it a real sports car. The only reason why RWD is considered first in sports is because in the beginning of auto history. The first cars were RWD. In laws of physics, RWD does carry more advantages overall. But put it on certain tracks against an AWD car and RWD is rendered useless as a sports car.

Your thinking is narrow.

As far as the genesis coupe being soulless? Have you ever driven one? I have. I can say this much. It drives better than a G37s (which I owned before) and not as well as a Z. Transmission responsiveness is questionable under certain sport driving conditions. Getting a tune takes most of that out.

Wow...:shakes head:

Sounds like a lot of fun, Kenny!

Eh, I don't think he's wrong. The GTi is most definitely not a sports car. It is a sporty compact, and actually is marketed to that end. It does not have much going for it as a sports car, primarily because it's a hatch. Rarely are hatches considered sports cars. EVO would probably fit in there, if it were merely a focus group for sports cars only. The WRX would not fit there, but an STi would. But I feel as if the EVO and STi fit in different categories rather than sports car.

That also said, drivetrain ultimately does not matter whatsoever; a properly tuned AWD car can hold its own versus a RWD car, and vice versa. To say either has an advantage on tarmac is a bit ignorant, I think. I suppose if you wanted to go offroad...

The Genesis has become more of a competitor in recent years (now that their 3.8 V6 makes 35x horse, instead of the ridiculously anemic < 320 hp of previous generation). It is around the same weight and delivers similar power and torque. Unfortunately, I have never been a fan of Hyundais as they are always prone to breaking down and they often steal styling cues from other manufacturers (although not so much anymore). They're still ugly IMO, and especially their newest model, where the facelift looked more like a botched plastic surgery job. I really don't know how it compares to Samsung, who makes appliances and electronics... and fine ones at that, lol. That Galaxy S3, bro! Beats the piss out of Apple's stupid iPhone anyday.

BRZ would be considered a sports car, although it fits in a class more so with the Miata instead of the 370Z. The power difference is too massive. I'm sure it can handle just as well, but the lack of power is something too much. I suppose on that note that the Cayman also is pretty much the same class (wasn't the Z supposed to fight the Cayman while the GT-R fights the 911?). It's still pretty heavy IIRC and I suppose they're fine cars. At least they don't depreciate like Boxsters do.

Also, a tC and a Cooper? LOL. I think the focus group was just for sporty cars in general; there's no way a tC could EVER be called a sports car. The only one of notable mention is Rado's tC, but that's just a shell now. Indeed, the Coupe-rs (sorry, lol, it's what I do) are simply ugly. The boxy look worked fine... just extending the doors would have been a fine path. Instead they do some weird mix between a box car and a coupe. Gross.

Sports cars must have two seats. Drivetrain is irrelevant in my opinion (although you'll find I agree more that a car is a sports car if it is RWD), but two seats and two doors. Completely agree with you on that point.

There's a lot of 911 owners who would disagree with that statement.

The 911 only has two seats that fit an actual adult human :roflpuke2:

True, but the back seat in any 2+2 is pretty brutal for a normal sized adult. I just wouldn't go so far as to say that any vehicle with more than two seats is automatically not a sports car.

Drivetrain is irrelevant, number of seats is not?

You've got your priorities in the wrong place.

FWD, seats 7 is really what I consider a sports car. If you can't beat a Mustang with a Honda Odyssey, then imo, you have no business on a race track.

I think of that as more of a sporty GT, unless you get the convertible.

The entire reason for this confusion over sports car definition is that we older folks grew up with a dictionary definition, not a marketing definition.

1992 American Heritage Dictionary: Sports car: An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one or two passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds.


Additionally, Men and women were defined by their reproductive organs at birth, not by mutilated genitalia later in life. Ask Mr. Garrison

I am not confused as to what a man, woman or car is.


.

Well then you, sir, have not spent a lot of time at bars in Miami!!!

:roflpuke2::roflpuke2::roflpuke2:

Lamborghini aventador awd

I like this one better:

Main Entry: sports car
Function: noun
Date: 1928
: a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving

Nissan GTR AWD and 4 seats

The only sports cars I saw in that comparison were the Z, Porsche, and BRZ.

Like you all have said, the others are just "sporty" cars (aside from the TC).
Seats/Drivetrain/etc. don't warrant a sports car - I define it as built with intention for driving, not for being a people mover.

However I do feel RWD, 2 seater coupes are generally the purest defintion. And 911 backseats aren't real, children have a hard time fitting in there. I think they only do it for insurance purposes which is brilliant, as a 4 seater generally insures for less - thank you Porsche! :)

You guys get way too caught up with the names and configuration. Who cares if it drives good?

Same logic as the GTR! Except that fits actual people in the backseats a bit easier than a 911 might.

Since high horsepower engines became the norm, having a heavier car isn't the biggest issue anymore. Not all that long ago, super high displacement V8s had trouble making 400 horsepower. Sure, a lot (like, a LOT) for the time, but times have also changed... having an extra 200 pounds can be sort of made up for now, a bit easier than in the past.

Sitting in the backseat of a G35 coupe = impossible.

Mustangs are more so pony cars unless you get the 5.0 V8. Sure, fast, but is it really a sports car? Wikipedia's definition of a pony car makes perfect sense:

Pony car is an American class of automobile launched and inspired by the Ford Mustang in 1964. The term describes an affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image.

I don't see the American revival of the muscle car so much a muscle car as it is a sporty car with a MASSIVE engine. But isn't that basically a muscle car? I suppose so.

Then we have grand tourers, or GT cars. Again, Wikipedia (yes, yes, not reliable, whatever):

A grand tourer (Italian: gran turismo) (GT) is a high-performance luxury automobile designed for long-distance driving. The most common format is a two-door coupé with either a two-seat or a 2+2 arrangement.

e.g. G35, G37. Pretty much exactly a GT car.

By that logic, I suppose the Z is a perfect definition of a sports car, such as people hail the Miata for being the ideal sports car: lightweight, two seats, 50/50 weight distribution.

At the same time I don't think anyone really cares about the "technical" terms for cars anymore. Now it's just minivan, sports car/coupe, sedan/saloon, truck, etc. Well, no one cares except for fools like me who try to classify EVERYTHING.

Well. If it drives well. :tup:

For that reason, read above. The ultimatum, however, still stands... a car is better if it is a bit lighter, so having fewer seats and less weight makes for a faster, more responsive car. If your Dodge Caravan (one of the heaviest passenger vehicles in the world) still weighs 6500 pounds but makes 1000 horsepower, does it really matter since you can barely turn the thing? Even as a drag racer, less weight = more power (sort of).

:werd:

A sports car is defined by how it drives, not how many seats it has.

Nobody said anything about mustangs.

We're considering what defines a sports car, are we not? Mustang still doesn't handle all that well. Might change since they're apparently going to finally kill off the live rear axle.

Good lord.

Remember that I'm a young'un. Might be a good reason for my priorities being in the wrong place.

And you've been a member here since June '09. One would think you know better by now. :bowrofl::bowrofl::bowrofl:

I don't know what I'm doing anymore! :tup:

EDIT:

I forget what this thread is about anymore.

You're saying you knew what you were doing before?

Uh. Maybe.

Get your butterflies in a row, buddy. :yum:

http://www.duluth.lib.mn.us/Images/D...utterflies.gif

Done!