Title says it all. I'm looking for a rwd sports car for under around 14k that will be pretty reliable. I'd love to find a nice trans am with few miles on it but the prices are all jacked up on them. Anyone have any suggestions?

6/24/2008 12:26:01 AM

if you can't find a nice 4th gen. f-body for 14k or less, you're not looking hard enough. hell, you can get c5's for that now.

6/24/2008 12:29:38 AM

http://horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66649

nice low miles

6/24/2008 2:30:32 AM

^^


also, a trans am is not a sports car.

6/24/2008 3:56:29 AM

^^ "Auto"

6/24/2008 7:27:38 AM

i would go so far as to assume most people's definition of "sports car" is much more broad than the general Garage patron.


bang for the buck vote-> F-body

6/24/2008 7:59:32 AM

you can get a supercharged and reliable (enough) fox body or 2 for that. and enough spare parts to keep it running.

6/24/2008 8:03:09 AM

s2000, c5, and wrx would be on my shortlist

6/24/2008 8:38:08 AM

I paid $14K for my '99 C5 a few years ago.. had a lot of miles but was worth every penny

get one

6/24/2008 8:42:56 AM

Yeah i don't think an fbody would be on my list but thats just cause i don't like the seating position in them.

6/24/2008 9:11:01 AM

Quote :

"s2000, c5, and wrx would be on my shortlist"

6/24/2008 9:13:57 AM

rx8

6/24/2008 9:40:33 AM

Loaded and mint 1998 Z28 M6 with nice mods and 34k miles:

http://horsepowerjunkies.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65607

6/24/2008 9:44:38 AM

omg i could buy [insert number here] e30s for that

[/typical garage response]

6/24/2008 10:25:47 AM

^2 or 3 tops.

6/24/2008 10:36:16 AM

^^E36 M3 is the best solution. Anyone who thinks differently is wrong.

6/24/2008 11:21:47 AM

Quote :

"E36 M3 is the best solution. "

yeah if you're in highschool and you like running 14's

C5 or s2000, not that the s2000 is that much faster than the E36 M3...

6/24/2008 11:25:27 AM

Quote :

"^^E36 M3 is the best solution. Anyone who thinks differently is wrong. "

Quote :

"pretty reliable"

Does not compute? I've heard lots of bad stories about maintenance costs and reliability of the E36 M3.

6/24/2008 11:25:28 AM

definately looking like an early model C5

6/24/2008 11:26:17 AM

Quote :

"i would go so far as to assume most people's definition of "sports car" is much more broad than the general Garage patron. "

f-body is not a sports car by ANY definition.[quote]

6/24/2008 11:42:23 AM

then what is it?

if a mustang makes it on thetop 20 list of all time sports cars. then a camaro is a sports car

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

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 11:49 AM. Reason : i think it is one]

6/24/2008 11:45:24 AM

umm

my civic is def. a sports car

6/24/2008 11:54:23 AM

well naturally

6/24/2008 12:00:34 PM

duke im not arguing that an f-body is a sports car, to be clear with my statement above - rather that the general consensus is a sports car is one that seems more powerful or nimble (and lets not forget looks ) than the average auto.... thats my take, not gospel tho.


I've definitely seen S2K's for less than $15k

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 12:04 PM. Reason : my fucking cummins is a sports car!]

6/24/2008 12:03:43 PM

http://www.nc4x4.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44812

But I agree with everyone else...Find a C5, S2000, or WRX for around 14k.

6/24/2008 12:10:54 PM

Quote :

"Does not compute? I've heard lots of bad stories about maintenance costs and reliability of the E36 M3."

I have seen Ahmet's long line of E36 M3's. I would have to say I would never own one.

6/24/2008 12:17:25 PM

Quote :

"then what is it? if a mustang makes it on thetop 20 list of all time sports cars. then a camaro is a sports car http://www.ridelust.com/the-top-20-sports-cars-of-all-time/"

You know, I could make a website too and come up with a list, lol.

Quote :

"A sports car is a term used to describe a class of automobile. The exact definition varies, [1] but generally it is used to refer to a low to ground, light weight vehicle with a powerful engine. Most vehicles referred to as sports cars are rear-wheel drive, have two seats, two doors, and are designed for more precise handling, acceleration, and aesthetics. A sports car's dominant considerations can be superior road handling, braking, maneuverability, low weight, and high power, rather than passenger space, comfort, and fuel economy. Sports cars can be either luxurious[2] or spartan, but driving mechanical performance is the key attraction. Drivers regard brand name and the subsequent racing reputation and history (for example, Ferrari, Porsche, Lotus) as important indications of sporting quality, but brands such as Lamborghini, which do not race or build racing cars, are also highly regarded. A car may be a sporting automobile without being a sports car. Performance modifications of regular, production cars, such as sport compacts, sports sedans, muscle cars, hot hatches and the like, generally are not considered sports cars, yet share traits common to sports cars. They are sometimes called "sports cars" for marketing purposes for increased advertising and promotional purposes.[3] Performance cars of all configurations are grouped as Sports and Grand tourer cars, or, occasionally, as performance cars."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car

6/24/2008 12:32:19 PM

Quote :

"f-body is not a sports car by ANY definition."

where does all the hatred for f-bodys come from any way. ive seen you try to make this argument for quite some time.

it may not be s/c s2000 but it IS a sports car.

6/24/2008 12:53:50 PM

an F-body isn't a luxury or touring car by any means... I'd vote for it bein in the "sports" car category, even though it may not handle very well compared to most other sports cars...

6/24/2008 12:56:42 PM

I have seen Mark's EVO. I'd have to say that I'd never own one. :p

E36 M3s are very good cars IMO. I'd probably pick an S2k with a 14k budget for a "sports car" however. An Fbody nor a Mustang is a sports car. The term "muscle car" exists for a reason.
Ahmet

6/24/2008 1:24:05 PM

I retract my statement and agree with Ahmet.

F-bodies are muscle cars..

Then again, I suppose the corvette then falls in both categories no? Would that then make it a Muscular Sports car or a Sporty muscle car? I would assume the later seeing how in the beginning (well C3 era, I don't know much before then..) they were mostly muscle...

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 1:28 PM. Reason : .]

6/24/2008 1:27:28 PM

if you get camaro or firebird you need to go ahead and park it outside your trailer, grow a nice feathered mullet, and start listening to molly hatchet

6/24/2008 2:01:22 PM

Quote :

"Then again, I suppose the corvette then falls in both categories no? Would that then make it a Muscular Sports car or a Sporty muscle car? I would assume the later seeing how in the beginning (well C3 era, I don't know much before then..) they were mostly muscle..."

The Corvette has been a sports car from its very birth. I don't know how you can even argue otherwise if you know the history of the car.

Quote :

"where does all the hatred for f-bodys come from any way"

There's no hatred of the F-body in this sense. Just b/c we don't call it a sports car doesn't mean we hate it.

6/24/2008 2:05:04 PM

Quote :

"Does not compute? I've heard lots of bad stories about maintenance costs and reliability of the E36 M3."

You heard wrong. Car is dead reliable when you maintain it. It's the same "he said, she said" about VW/Audi scene. Bad coils and window regulators does not mean the entire line of cars are junk.

Most of time it is ... my cousin heard Audi and BMW are expensive and unreliable

6/24/2008 2:17:22 PM

^^I guess I've seen more corvettes taken thru the muscle car ave. (especially older ones) with loud monster motors and gobbs of horsepower that make for great dragsters and show cars over performance track cars, that is until recently. I don't know too much about their racing history (only their recent history), so please enlighten me via pm

Actually, I don't know what I'm saying. The corvette can go both ways imo.

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 2:21 PM. Reason : ^]

6/24/2008 2:21:14 PM

Quote :

"if a mustang makes it on thetop 20 list of all time sports cars. then a camaro is a sports car http://www.ridelust.com/the-top-20-sports-cars-of-all-time/"

that list loses credibility at the r33 skyline and a picture of an r34... if not before that point.

6/24/2008 2:58:48 PM

This shoulda been a current list. Not a list of "oh only 10 of these cars were produced and sold..." bs. The list is ~80% retarded. I was expecting to see a Miata, Z4, Lotus, Boxster, Cayman, GTI, A4, and a few other cars. Not this Ferrari and Lamborghini bs. That makes me sad that I won't ever be able to own a couple of those cars, but I don't think I'd want to anyways...

6/24/2008 3:12:06 PM

ferrari used to be the king of sports car.. i don't even think they make one anymore.

6/24/2008 3:13:05 PM

I would dare to say that Ferrari has never been the king of sports cars. They may be/have been the king of Race Cars, but they've yet to build a single reliable production automobile in the history of the company.

6/24/2008 3:28:45 PM

So you're ^^ saying the F430 isn't a sports car?

I think you're in the minority there.

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 3:31 PM. Reason : j]

6/24/2008 3:29:49 PM

neither did lotus till they gave up and put someone else's engine in one.



the entire point of a ferrari is having a motor tuned to the ragged edge of performance... cause you can afford to fix it.

and I'm pissed there wasn't a better Jag on there.. the E-type is pretty damned cool but its no D type

^ it really depends on your definition of a sports car... I concur with top gear's definition which is a small light weight front engined car. i think the vette has grown out of a the sports car range to its more of an econo-supercar.

But this thread has gotten so far off topic its not funny.

for his definition i would say a any of the suggestions above would be suitable.


[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 3:36 PM. Reason : .]

6/24/2008 3:31:55 PM

well the vette damn sure isnt a touring coupe, a ponycar, also isnt a muscle car no matter how much muscle it has. and its not a wagon, a van, a truck, or a sedan- so what is it? its the all american sports car. USA #1

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 3:50 PM. Reason : its not an econo supercar, or any kind of supercar. not this reliable under 14k.]

6/24/2008 3:48:32 PM

its effing huge though (even though light).... i dunno i just thing a "sports car" should have a certain feel to it... and i think the vette is way way past that feel (in a good way faster brakes better corners harder etc.) It just doesn't seem to have that "tossable" feel that i define a sports car by in my head... but thats just me.

6/24/2008 3:53:47 PM

but it is a two seater, RWD, and decidedly purpose built.

Quote :

"the entire point of a ferrari is having a motor tuned to the ragged edge of performance... cause you can afford to fix it. "

Ferrari's have never been this though. They always used massive engines that were only moderately tuned in comparison to their race cars. And it's not the engine that fails, it's EVERYTHING on the car. The production quality of Ferrari's through the years has been horrendous. It's a large part of the reason Lambourghini has prospered in the past 10 or so years.

6/24/2008 4:02:52 PM

Quote :

"its effing huge though"

The current C6 Corvette is shorter than a Porsche 911. You honestly think its too big? The total length of a C6 Corvette is 174.6 inches. My Integra GS-R is 172.9 inches long.

Most Ferraris after the F355 have been pretty reliable. I consider Ferrari's F430 a sports car, and whenever they've got a supercar (i.e. F40, F50, Enzo) that is also a sports car. There's no rule that says a supercar can't be a sports car as well.

6/24/2008 4:17:59 PM

But its wide... vipers look huge too and pulled up next to a civic they seem about the same length

6/24/2008 4:28:59 PM

72.6 inches wide. Whereas my car is 67.5 inches. Again, thats not much.

[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 4:30 PM. Reason : k]

6/24/2008 4:30:39 PM

10% seems significant.

6/24/2008 4:40:03 PM

you're being ridiculous. Admit its not a large car.

6/24/2008 4:40:50 PM

Quote :

"I concur with top gear's definition which is a small light weight front engined car . i think the vette has grown out of a the sports car range to its more of an econo-supercar. "

That's a sports car in my book. However, I also would include mid and rear engine setups as well (to include the boxster, mr2, 911, etc...)


In response to sumfoo1 and Noen, I'm not saying, ferrari or lambo aren't sports cars by definition. But to compare an F-40 to an elise? Come one. An F-40 is clearly in supercar territory which is >sports car. That's why I thought that list was bs. I'm not saying that a Carrera GT, Veyron, and the likes aren't sports cars, I just feel they are sports cars in a completely different league. There's sports cars, then there's super cars.

The Corvette looks huge because of it's wide stance and low profile.

Compare to my 944, the corvette is only 4.6" longer, 4" wider, 10" longer wheelbase and 1" shorter. I think the wheelbase makes the car look so much larger when placed next to mine...

I think the longer wheel base and longer hoods make 2 seater coupes like the viper and corvette appear much larger than they really are... it's an optical illusion



[Edited on June 24, 2008 at 4:53 PM. Reason : .]

6/24/2008 4:46:38 PM