This lady Likes her car

[The ClayTaurus]

Yup - have you driven one? I test-drove a 2004 before buying my RX8. I liked it - until the first on-ramp.

Felt like I was riding in a car with mattress springs for suspension - HUGE amounts of body-roll, Vague braking, and numb steering. I'd never call it a "sports car".

I haven't driven one, actually. From what I've heard, they're torque monsters and THE definition of straightline performance.

Some people say they're bland to look at, but I think they have a minimalist/sleeper appeal to them.

I will agree that they don't attract attention like a 'vette does. Or a rex

Perhaps instead of sports car we should call it a "power car."

[darin]

I haven't driven one, actually. From what I've heard, they're torque monsters and THE definition of straightline performance.

Some people say they're bland to look at, but I think they have a minimalist/sleeper appeal to them.

I will agree that they don't attract attention like a 'vette does. Or a rex

Perhaps instead of sports car we should call it a "power car."

Muscle Car





I have seen some ppl do great things w/ the GTO at the track - they just let the body roll (as it does) and just go.

[BBA]

Perhaps instead of sports car we should call it a "power car."

I think it fits the definition of Muscle Car; no need to invent new classifications. Unfortunately, many of the people interested in a muscle car seem to prefer a solid axle, ride quality be damned. Those interested in a car that handles well go for the IRS.

As far as IRS only being common on higher-end cars, I'd have to disagree. Most RWD cars anymore have IRS. You just don't find a whole lot of inexpensive cars with RWD - most are FWD econoboxes. The least expensive of the RWD cars, as far as I know, are the little roadsters (Miata, Solstice, Sky), and they all have IRS.

[glockmail]

No, Ugly is a design failure - NOT a marketing failure. You were stating GM failed to market IRS correctly. I'm saying IRS isn't unique enough for ppl to get past the car's looks.



I believe Volvo has no RWD cars. The ONLY volvos with IRS would be their Car-platform-based SUVs, or AWD cars.



Car guys aren't typically into FWD cars (which ALL have IFS -Independent FRONT Suspension, fwiw), save the Mini, and to some extent the 'tuner' variants of other pocket-rockets (Mazdaspeed3, Cobalt SS, etc). Frankly, IRS is the NORM for RWD cars nowadays - especially sports cars (Maybe we can thank the Miata for that, starting in 1989?) In fact, other than the Mustang, I can't think of another current RWD car with a solid axle.

1. You're entitled to your opinion, but again, several posters have stated otherwise.
2. Unless things have changed Volvo has no FWD cars. It's been a while since I looked at Volvos so it is possible that I am wrong. But I doubt it. Saab, the other Swedish manufacturer, is all FWD.
3. All FWD cars have IFS. It's not necessary to specify "FWD-IFS". Any car guy would cuff you off the side of the head for that.
4. I see "car guys" (take Clay Taurus for example) driving those FWD rice rockets all the time. You must be referring to college kids with rich parents or the more well heeled penny loafer types. I never hung with either.
5. Other than the Mustang, I can think of no other low priced "sporty car" on the market with RWD.

[glockmail]

I think it fits the definition of Muscle Car; no need to invent new classifications. Unfortunately, many of the people interested in a muscle car seem to prefer a solid axle, ride quality be damned. Those interested in a car that handles well go for the IRS.
.... .

I think muscle car lovers would jump at the chance for IRS in an affordable package. The only way to get one is with a Mustang fitted with a Motorsports conversion. Large dollars and large weight penalty.

The last time I read about that was in Hot Rod magazine years back when they still had the FOX chassis, and before they began to go retro in '97. Remember that boxy body they had for over 10 years? As I recall the IRS was a bolt-on subframe, added a bit of weight and did not improve skid-pan performance at all. But they still claim it rode better, and I suspect that it did, especially on bumpy turns.

[The ClayTaurus]

1. You're entitled to your opinion, but again, several posters have stated otherwise.
2. Unless things have changed Volvo has no FWD cars. It's been a while since I looked at Volvos so it is possible that I am wrong. But I doubt it. Saab, the other Swedish manufacturer, is all FWD.
3. All FWD cars have IFS. It's not necessary to specify "FWD-IFS". Any car guy would cuff you off the side of the head for that.
4. I see "car guys" (take Clay Taurus for example) driving those FWD rice rockets all the time. You must be referring to college kids with rich parents or the more well heeled penny loafer types. I never hung with either.
5. Other than the Mustang, I can think of no other low priced "sporty car" on the market with RWD.

I can guarantee you that Volvo makes FWD cars, as a friend of mine has an S60 that is FWD.

Also, my "rice rocket" is RWD and you can get one starting around 24-25K, same as a stang.

[glockmail]

I can guarantee you that Volvo makes FWD cars, as a friend of mine has an S60 that is FWD.

Also, my "rice rocket" is RWD and you can get one starting around 24-25K, same as a stang.

Well I stand corrected on both counts then. I always figgered the rice rockets were FWD because they all handle so poorly.

[darin]

1. You're entitled to your opinion, but again, several posters have stated otherwise.

Otherwise? Otherwise to what?

2. Unless things have changed Volvo has no FWD cars. It's been a while since I looked at Volvos so it is possible that I am wrong. But I doubt it. Saab, the other Swedish manufacturer, is all FWD.

Well - as of 2007 the S40, S60, S80, V50, V70, XC70, XC90, C30, AND the C70 are either FRONT or ALL wheel drive.

I know it's been the case for some time.

3. All FWD cars have IFS. It's not necessary to specify "FWD-IFS". Any car guy would cuff you off the side of the head for that.

That's my point.

4. I see "car guys" (take Clay Taurus for example) driving those FWD rice rockets all the time.

Clay's car isn't FWD.

You must be referring to college kids with rich parents or the more well heeled penny loafer types. I never hung with either.

Weird - it's like you live in bizzaro world because The VAST majority of the college kids around here have Civics and Junk. Ricers.

5. Other than the Mustang, I can think of no other low priced "sporty car" on the market with RWD.

I can help you:

MX5, Solstice/Sky twins, RX8, and GTO, off the top of my head, too.

[darin]

I think muscle car lovers would jump at the chance for IRS in an affordable package. The only way to get one is with a Mustang fitted with a Motorsports conversion. Large dollars and large weight penalty.

Research late model Mustang Cobras, with IRS. The Mustang Crowd Shit a brick - and demanded the solid axle be returned.

[The ClayTaurus]

Well I stand corrected on both counts then. I always figgered the rice rockets were FWD because they all handle so poorly.

My car does not handle poorly. Not in the slightest. It doesn't accelerate exceptionally, but it handles well.

[darin]

My car does not handle poorly. Not in the slightest. It doesn't accelerate exceptionally, but it handles well.

Caveat - it accelerates WONDERFULLY....laterally. Straight-ahead acceleration, though, is it's weak point.

If it were silver, it'd be faster. Course, like mine, it might be on it's 2nd engine, 2nd Transmission, and 3rd Cat.

[The ClayTaurus]

I think it fits the definition of Muscle Car; no need to invent new classifications. Unfortunately, many of the people interested in a muscle car seem to prefer a solid axle, ride quality be damned. Those interested in a car that handles well go for the IRS.

As far as IRS only being common on higher-end cars, I'd have to disagree. Most RWD cars anymore have IRS. You just don't find a whole lot of inexpensive cars with RWD - most are FWD econoboxes. The least expensive of the RWD cars, as far as I know, are the little roadsters (Miata, Solstice, Sky), and they all have IRS.

I guess you're right... for whatever reason when I hear muscle car I have an age qualification in my head. Muscle car makes me think 1970's/early 1980's. It works for the GTO, though, I suppose.

[The ClayTaurus]

Caveat - it accelerates WONDERFULLY....laterally. Straight-ahead acceleration, though, is it's weak point.

If it were silver, it'd be faster. Course, like mine, it might be on it's 2nd engine, 2nd Transmission, and 3rd Cat.

Your car can't be faster without a functioning powertrain, silly man. It should also be pointed out that you can get decent straightline acceleration, so long as you clutch drop around 7-8K...

No thanks on replacing the clutch every 10k.

[darin]

Your car can't be faster without a functioning powertrain, silly man. It should also be pointed out that you can get decent straightline acceleration, so long as you clutch drop around 7-8K...

No thanks on replacing the clutch every 10k.

Straight line Acceleration isn't bad either, from 5,000rpms up. Keeping the tach 'on the boil' can mean fairly good passing power.

And yup - I'm losing love for the car...quickly.

S4 maybe? 911? as replacement 4-seaters?

BOTH of those, btw, For the record HAVE IRS. :

[The ClayTaurus]

Straight line Acceleration isn't bad either, from 5,000rpms up. Keeping the tach 'on the boil' can mean fairly good passing power.

And yup - I'm losing love for the car...quickly.

S4 maybe? 911? as replacement 4-seaters?

BOTH of those, btw, For the record HAVE IRS. :

11K in camera equipment and a 911? What are you; made out of money?