Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The 3 American cars are big heavy boats.
I don't like the looks of Hatchbacks and us older guys don't understand young guys acceptance of 4 door cars. 4 doors are the family sedan, not sporty.
I'd get the previous generation Civic Si with the 2.4 L engine and a coupe instead of that little tiny engine with a turbo .
Saw a recent Motor Trend magazine article (print) comparing the four super hot hatches including the Civic Type-R and Golf R. Looks good until I saw the price. The base and as tested price were in the $40,000 range. For roughly the same level of power and performance they could spend roughly $10,000 less and get a Camaro, Mustang, Challenger, or 370Z. That price range offers a huge amount of choices, many of which offer similar performance. So why would someone want to buy one of these super hot hatches other than for rally or rally cross racing?
Actually, they do not offer "similar performance." Camaros and Mustangs are designed more for straight-line speed and gentle, banked turns like you'd find on a track. They handle better than muscle cars of yesteryear but there's no getting around the fact that they have a relatively long wheelbase, and that makes them far less maneuverable.
Short wheelbase cars like the Golf R, Civic R, and several others can take tighter turns, and take them faster. That's due to weight, suspension tuning, and wheelbase. Its an entirely different kind of performance car and performance driving.
I know you weren't serious about your rally/rallycross statement but it's as good an example as any. Camaros and Mustangs are oriented more towards NASCAR-style performance racing, where long sweeping turns and straightaways and dozens of laps mean top speed will matter more than anything, and you can take a long time to get there, since there's few situations where you'd slow down. Golf-R, Civic-R, WRX, and the like are oriented more towards Rallycross-style performance racing, where top speed takes a back seat to accelleration and manueverability through tight turns maintaining as much speed as you can. You'll almost never see top speed in one of those cars because BOOM you're at the next turn and it's time to brake, turn, and accelerate again, oops time to turn again, ok, speed up, WHOOPS, brakes!
Actually, they do not offer "similar performance." Camaros and Mustangs are designed more for straight-line speed and gentle, banked turns like you'd find on a track. They handle better than muscle cars of yesteryear but there's no getting around the fact that they have a relatively long wheelbase, and that makes them far less maneuverable.
Short wheelbase cars like the Golf R, Civic R, and several others can take tighter turns, and take them faster. That's due to weight, suspension tuning, and wheelbase. Its an entirely different kind of performance car and performance driving.
I know you weren't serious about your rally/rallycross statement but it's as good an example as any. Camaros and Mustangs are oriented more towards NASCAR-style performance racing, where long sweeping turns and straightaways and dozens of laps mean top speed will matter more than anything, and you can take a long time to get there, since there's few situations where you'd slow down. Golf-R, Civic-R, WRX, and the like are oriented more towards Rallycross-style performance racing, where top speed takes a back seat to accelleration and manueverability through tight turns maintaining as much speed as you can. You'll almost never see top speed in one of those cars because BOOM you're at the next turn and it's time to brake, turn, and accelerate again, oops time to turn again, ok, speed up, WHOOPS, brakes!
Know how I know you haven't dealt with modern Mustangs and Camaros (especially GT350s and ZL1s) in an autocross or road race environment?
I drove VW GTIs as my commuter car from 2001 to 2015. When I bought the 2001, I had a miniature garage and that was the biggest car that was going to fit in it. I'm 6'2" and I fit in the car just fine. I always thought of it as an econobox commuter car with a soul. When I first bought the car, I had a 100 mile per day commute.
I also owned a body-on-frame SUV I used to haul the boat, ski, and do the Home Depot runs. For my lifestyle, a hot hatch isn't quite up to it if it's my only car. I no longer commute. I merged the hatchback and the SUV into a 6-cylinder Outback. I miss having the engaging car to drive but I couldn't justify two cars.
For my use, I couldn't justify a VW Type R. I bought my GTIs as leftovers with a steep discount. I think the 2001 was $19K and the 2007 was a Fahrenheit special edition marked down $4K. I'm not going to pay $40K for an econobox where I need a second car. If I had another big commute, I'd consider another hatchback but it wouldn't be a $40K hatchback.
I've never bought a car that didn't have some kind of tailgate, liftgate, or hatchback. I've always thought sedans are impractical for my lifestyle. Where do you put your stuff?
Sure no one is going to be drifting because they donot know how, but you look much much cooler if you drive a popular drifting car.
2. Video games.
Video games have popularized performance economy hatches and made them immensely popular with the younger crowd. What games still features Camaros or mustangs? Those are old people cars. Those are for people who still use Facebook. Ewwwwww!
No, because you've not seen how modern GT350s and ZL1s handle. And that's obvious if you think they are suited only to NASCAR type wide corners and straightaways.
Now, yes, the Camaro is harder to see out of and has mass to deal with, but it's just as quick through tight autocross courses as the hot hatches. That's just a fact and has nothing to do with my ass.
No, because you've not seen how modern GT350s and ZL1s handle. And that's obvious if you think they are suited only to NASCAR type wide corners and straightaways.
<snip>
Now, yes, the Camaro is harder to see out of and has mass to deal with, but it's just as quick through tight autocross courses as the hot hatches. That's just a fact and has nothing to do with my ass.
I said more suited, not only suited. And the OP wasn't talking top of the line muscle cars, he was talking about the base V8 models, given that he was talking about undercutting $40k "R" line cars. You're talking about spending $60k to beat out a $40k car...which even then you're not going to do in the $40k car's native environment. We were also talking rallycross courses, not autocross courses, which are completely different animals. When it comes to rallycross courses, the large muscle cars turn too wide, don't accellerate fast enough, oversteer way too much, and are too biased towards tarmac. Partially because of all that mass.
Mod cut.
Last edited by PJSaturn; 07-03-2018 at 02:57 PM..
Reason: Personal barb.
Now, yes, the Camaro is harder to see out of and has mass to deal with, but it's just as quick through tight autocross courses as the hot hatches. That's just a fact and has nothing to do with my ass.
A V8 Camaro is around 4,000 pounds. A physics problem in corners.
Video games have popularized performance economy hatches and made them immensely popular with the younger crowd. What games still features Camaros or mustangs? Those are old people cars. Those are for people who still use Facebook. Ewwwwww!
The Golf GTI, arguably the genesis of all hot hatches, came out in 1985.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We were also talking rallycross courses, not autocross courses, which are completely different animals. When it comes to rallycross courses, the large muscle cars turn too wide, don't accellerate fast enough, oversteer way too much, and are too biased towards tarmac. Partially because of all that mass.
