point of an automatic zl1?

[PQ]

Sports cars to me are street cars. WITH ammenities. I personally think there is a difference between racing cars and sports cars.

You are leaving out 95% of all fast cars on the street.

Ferrari, Lambo, Vette, Viper, Buggati, GTR, 370Z etc................. NONE are sports cars?

You are talking about go carts or racing cars.

I'd move that to at LEAST 3500 pounds these days.

I won't argue that the Camaro and Mustang aren't though.

[dangjohnny]

I have no need for training wheels, aka auto transmission, as I am a grown man not a little baby that pretends to have a real mans car... just kidding!

Seriously though. Nothing wrong with an auto in a car especially since it can be faster and makes a better daily driver. But, some people are a better fit with a GT500 over a ZL1. The GT500 has a tradition of only offering a manual. It is made for certain enthusiast not to the masses. If I had to choose between the two, I would get the GT500. Of course the SS with 1LE package only comes in manual and it is more of my price range. So I will be in a camaro for a while.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by PQ

Sports cars to me are street cars. WITH ammenities. I personally think there is a difference between racing cars and sports cars.

You are leaving out 95% of all fast cars on the street.

Ferrari, Lambo, Vette, Viper, Buggati, GTR, 370Z etc................. NONE are sports cars?

You are talking about go carts or racing cars.

I'd move that to at LEAST 3500 pounds these days.

I won't argue that the Camaro and Mustang aren't though.

With the possible exception of the early Vipers (which if big and heavy were at least bare-bones as daily-drivers), none of those are truly sports cars. GT cars and exotics, yes.

Amenities are luxuries and are what distinguish GT-class cars and exotics from true sports cars. I'm not saying that it's bad to have a few amenities, just that it's out of character for a true sports car to have much more than is minimally required for legal road operation. And it's not a put-down for any car to fall into GT classification, it simply has a slightly more luxurious and "softer" overall character than a sports car, which in turn is "softer" than a race car. Various shades of grey, not just black and white.

For a sports car, other than the A/C part of HVAC and a basic radio, I can't offhand think of anything I'd need (A/C, recent years) or want that did anything that isn't currently required. Don't use much more than that very often in any of my cars as it is. Lots of required stuff I could do without as well, but that's a whole 'nother story.

I am not talking about either karts or out-and-out race cars. I'd define sports cars as cars like MGs, Triumphs, various Lotus roadsters, Fiat124s, Austin-Healeys, Datsun 1600s and 2000s, the Porsche 914, and Miatas. I'd also include cars like the Datsun 240Z/260Z/280Z, TVRs and at a slight stretch (due to FWD) the Honda CRX and Saab Sonnett. I know I've left a few out, but I hope there's enough there to get my point across


Norm

[zl1bro]

Personally the manual is more appealing to me and thats what I bought. The sports car/performance car category has evolved to the point that automatics with paddle shifters are seen as being consistent with the category. Many of the highest end performance cars come only with this set up. Automatic transmissions have improved dramatically over the past 10-20 years. They are NOT the "slush boxes" they once were. I understand the appeal that these automatics have and do not believe they are in any way "less than" the manuals. They simply offer a different driver experience.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

With the possible exception of the early Vipers (which if big and heavy were at least bare-bones as daily-drivers), none of those are truly sports cars. GT cars and exotics, yes.

Amenities are luxuries and are what distinguish GT-class cars and exotics from true sports cars. I'm not saying that it's bad to have a few amenities, just that it's out of character for a true sports car to have much more than is minimally required for legal road operation. And it's not a put-down for any car to fall into GT classification, it simply has a slightly more luxurious and "softer" overall character than a sports car, which in turn is "softer" than a race car. Various shades of grey, not just black and white.

For a sports car, other than the A/C part of HVAC and a basic radio, I can't offhand think of anything I'd need (A/C, recent years) or want that did anything that isn't currently required. Don't use much more than that very often in any of my cars as it is. Lots of required stuff I could do without as well, but that's a whole 'nother story.

I am not talking about either karts or out-and-out race cars. I'd define sports cars as cars like MGs, Triumphs, various Lotus roadsters, Fiat124s, Austin-Healeys, Datsun 1600s and 2000s, the Porsche 914, and Miatas. I'd also include cars like the Datsun 240Z/260Z/280Z, TVRs and at a slight stretch (due to FWD) the Honda CRX and Saab Sonnett. I know I've left a few out, but I hope there's enough there to get my point across


Norm

OH, I get what you are saying. Dogmaticly I'd agree with you. But, to me, I define it how the masses would.

I'd bet if you lined up 1000 people at random and asked them I'll bet 999 of them would describe the Vette as a sports car.

Now line up 1000 'car guys'. I'd bet 950 of them would also.

It's all in where he/she is coming from I guess.

[SlingShot]

I think the masses would define anything with two seats as a sports car.

[Pro Stock John]

I love automatics, I can drag race and drink coffee at the same time.

[zl1bro]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

I think the masses would define anything with two seats as a sports car.

The definition of a sports car is a moving target which is why the topic generates so much discussion. It has changed over the years. Generally, cars in this segment have gotten heavier as cars in all categories have gotten heavier. Traditionally a 4 seat configuration weighing more (and sometimes with 4 doors) was considered a GT. Not so sure this would be the defining criteria it once was. If the definition is mainly about weight and # of seats, then a Smart car would meet criteria for being a sports car as well as a Miata. A lot of reviewers have referred to the ZL1 as having "made it" or morphed into the sports car category when traditionally pony cars were considered muscle cars exclusively. There's been a lot of blending going on and some of the traditional lines of demarcation have blurred. One thing that strikes me as most important is how the car performs. From a performance standpoint does it compare with cars that are built to be (and marketed as) present day sports cars..

[PQ]

Originally Posted by zl1bro

The definition of a sports car is a moving target which is why the topic generates so much discussion. It has changed over the years. Generally, cars in this segment have gotten heavier as cars in all categories have gotten heavier. Traditionally a 4 seat configuration weighing more (and sometimes with 4 doors) was considered a GT. Not so sure this would be the defining criteria it once was. If the definition is mainly about weight and # of seats, then a Smart car would meet criteria for being a sports car as well as a Miata. A lot of reviewers have referred to the ZL1 as having "made it" or morphed into the sports car category when traditionally pony cars were considered muscle cars exclusively. There's been a lot of blending going on and some of the traditional lines of demarcation have blurred. One thing that strikes me as most important is how the car performs. From a performance standpoint does it compare with cars that are built to be (and marketed as) present day sports cars..

I bet the insurance companies have a classification list.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by PQ

I'd bet if you lined up 1000 people at random and asked them I'll bet 999 of them would describe the Vette as a sports car.

Now line up 1000 'car guys'. I'd bet 950 of them would also.

Probably true. It's kind of a shame when a very distinct category gets blurred mainly by people either outside it or new too it who don't understand where it came from or what it's all about.

It has the same feel as hearing people call the color orange the same as red because it isn't yellow.


Norm

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Probably true. It's kind of a shame when a very distinct category gets blurred mainly by people either outside it or new too it who don't understand where it came from or what it's all about.

It has the same feel as hearing people call the color orange the same as red because it isn't yellow.


Norm

Fair enough but it is a very small amount of people that would classify them as you are. I did a Google search for sports cars and even how insurance companies and car companies see them.

You seem to be a traditionalist. Nothing wrong with that.

I found a 'Top 20 List' or the top 20 sports cars in history. The Mustang was on the list.

As was a Mitzubishi Lancer Evo and a Subaru Impreza.

http://www.ridelust.com/the-top-20-s...s-of-all-time/

[69NMYSS]

Originally Posted by PQ

Fine. So you are fond of balls. Gross.

I actually like the v agina.

I always felt pretty good about benching 305 pounds, building our barn, roofing my house, doing my own engine work and even having my kids. Shifting gears was elementary and not much of an accomplishment. Drove an 18 wheeler for 10 years and it's not on that list.

Maybe you need to try something a little tougher?

well played

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by PQ

You seem to be a traditionalist.

Very much so. I guess you had to have been there . . . and yes, I did file for Medicare Part A just yesterday



I know I've been much more oriented toward traditional sports cars and cornering/handling since before I had my driver's license, and that my perspective on topics such as this can't help but be affected. What I don't know is why.

But I'm much impressed at what today's ponycars can be made to do when the road suddenly heads off in a new direction. If I wasn't, and couldn't see any ready improvements to make that happen, I doubt I'd own a Mustang or maintain active membership on a Camaro forum.


Norm

[BigCee66]

Originally Posted by PQ

Fine. So you are fond of balls. Gross.

I actually like the v agina.

I always felt pretty good about benching 305 pounds, building our barn, roofing my house, doing my own engine work and even having my kids. Shifting gears was elementary and not much of an accomplishment. Drove an 18 wheeler for 10 years and it's not on that list.

Maybe you need to try something a little tougher?

Well said PQ GOTTA love those internet tough guys.