Crossfire not a sports car???
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 620
From: St Louis MO
Re: Crossfire not a sports car???
Originally Posted by Brent
You had me untill you went there Brent. Blasphemey!
Truth is that the term needs to apply to vintage cars as well. Given some of the above, that would be impossible.
There is an old saying amoung airplane guys, "Real Airplanes have two wings and round engines." Some of those old kites were very underpowered but the experience of flying them was very real.
I would say sports cars have a similar mantra, "real sports cars have two seats, a rag top, and manual transmisions."
Having driven an SRT autostick, I'll cut you all some slack on the manual tranny.
roadster with a stick.
Truth is that the term needs to apply to vintage cars as well. Given some of the above, that would be impossible.
There is an old saying amoung airplane guys, "Real Airplanes have two wings and round engines." Some of those old kites were very underpowered but the experience of flying them was very real.
I would say sports cars have a similar mantra, "real sports cars have two seats, a rag top, and manual transmisions."
Having driven an SRT autostick, I'll cut you all some slack on the manual tranny.
roadster with a stick.
I'm thinking more that a definition of a sports car be based on what the car can do, and not on it's configuration. An alternate criteria is any car Consumer Reports does not "get".
Two wings and round engines. Would that be radial or rotary engines? Real airplanes also have a tailwheel.[/quote
]
By your definition my 69 Barracuda was a sports car, and so was my 75 Oldsmobile Starfire. Hell, throw in the 60 Chevy impala 348 with tripower, ragtop and manual trans.
All were fun cars, High performers in their niche and turned heads.
None were sports cars. Not even close.
That would be radial engines as rotary engine, AKA Wankel, were not round, they were curved triangles.
roadster with a stick.
Forum Regular
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 916
Likes: 1
From: Pasadena California
Re: Crossfire not a sports car????
Originally Posted by chuck65
It's probably my age but when someone says sport's car this is what pops into mind MG TD, Triumph TR 3, Austin Healy and others. The British supplied "sports cars" to us here in the US in the 1040's and 1950's because we didn't have many. The sometimes mentioned requirement that a sports car has to be high powred sure wasn't the case withe these cars. The MG TD only had about 60 HP.
I have driven almost all of these cars from this era and owned an Austin Healy. Some back then even said they weren't sports cars any more when they added glass roll up windows and eliminated the plastic side curtain's.
I have driven almost all of these cars from this era and owned an Austin Healy. Some back then even said they weren't sports cars any more when they added glass roll up windows and eliminated the plastic side curtain's.
Back when I was a teenager the standard reply to someone dissing your ride was: RACE?. Boulevard Cruiser? isn't that some bullshit term that Suzuki coined?
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 815
Likes: 0
From: Ohio
Re: Crossfire not a sports car????
Originally Posted by Mr. Max
So Chuck, to be a sports car you have to leak oil, be hard to start, and break down on a regular basis. I had a lot of them too and loved them.
Back when I was a teenager the standard reply to someone dissing your ride was: RACE?. Boulevard Cruiser? isn't that some bullshit term that Suzuki coined?
Back when I was a teenager the standard reply to someone dissing your ride was: RACE?. Boulevard Cruiser? isn't that some bullshit term that Suzuki coined?
While I worked there I got to drive TR2, TR3,TR3B and TR4, MG TC,TD and TL MGA & B, All the Jaguars from that era XK120, 150, and XKE, plus the Jag sedan's. The Austin Healy's were my favorite. Most all the sports cars from that era had disc brakes before we did on their production cars.
They were simpler cars but it also was simpler times. I'm glad I lived in that era. Gas was 29.9 cents per gallon for high octane. Some say today that they don't build cars today like they used to, inferring that they were much better back then. I say thank God they don't. Most were leaky rust buckets.
Last edited by chuck65; 09-13-2008 at 03:17 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 916
Likes: 1
From: Pasadena California
Re: Crossfire not a sports car????
Originally Posted by chuck65
LOL Max, they really weren't very good as far as quality and reliability were concerned, but they were "cool" for the era and fun to drive. The high maintainance issue worked to my advantage because I worked in, and eventually managed a Shell station and we specialized in foreign cars which at that time were almost exclusively English or German. We had our drive on lift altered so we could drive the narrow track sports cars onto it. We stocked Lucas ingition parts and spark plugs for all them. We also stocked Abarth exahust systems. Most of the members of the local Sports Car Club of America in our area used our station for oil changes tune ups etc.
While I worked there I got to drive TR2, TR3,TR3B and TR4, MG TC,TD and TL MGA & B, All the Jaguars from that era XK120, 150, and XKE, plus the Jag sedan's. The Austin Healy's were my favorite. Most all the sports cars from that era had disc brakes before we did on their production cars.
They were simpler cars but it also was simpler times. I'm glad I lived in that era. Gas was 29.9 cents per gallon for high octane. Some say today that they don't build cars today like they used to, inferring that they were much better back then. I say thank God they don't. Most were leaky rust buckets.
While I worked there I got to drive TR2, TR3,TR3B and TR4, MG TC,TD and TL MGA & B, All the Jaguars from that era XK120, 150, and XKE, plus the Jag sedan's. The Austin Healy's were my favorite. Most all the sports cars from that era had disc brakes before we did on their production cars.
They were simpler cars but it also was simpler times. I'm glad I lived in that era. Gas was 29.9 cents per gallon for high octane. Some say today that they don't build cars today like they used to, inferring that they were much better back then. I say thank God they don't. Most were leaky rust buckets.
It sounds like you could fix all those limey sports cars in your sleep. I presently own a Jaguar XJS convertible with a V12 and a blown headgasket. You live anywhere near Pasadena?lol. I'll bet you could also get an A+ on a British service manual vocabulary test.
My first English ride was hotrod hybrid, a bug eye sprite with a 220 HP 283 Chevy and 0f course different drive train (GMC three speed Olds rear end) I later had a regular sprite, an MG midget, and a mini cooper. One time I got so pissed at the midget that I kicked the whole side in with my cowboy boots. My bikes were an Ariel, Royal Enfield, and Norton Commando. I presently ride a Yamaha VMAX Hence my Mr. Max Handle. I always wanted an Austin Healey (the grown up one) but was too poor to afford one back then. By the time I could afford one I was into Eldorado Convertibles.
Those were fun times but these are fun times too. My buddy is bringing his new Shelby GT 500 over today and I'm gonna pull the SRT6 out of the garage and we're going to obsess over are rides with wax and microfiber towels. Nice chattin' with you!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Re: Crossfire not a sports car???
Originally Posted by mrphotoman
lmao, i am sorry but a 4 door fwd econobox with poor weight distribution will never be a great handling or good drag car. why pick a car that is crippled with fwd and poor weight distribution when you can pick a sports car that already has advantages and can be made faster and to handle better much cheaper? quite silly if you ask me.
Good troll. *golf clap*
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
krooner
Troubleshooting & Technical Questions & Modifications
11
07-30-2003 02:17 PM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)