And the IS-F... It's true that the past decade, Toyota has been putting out luxury sedans but they still have cars that are fun to drive.
the is-f is like a like the mercedes AMG line for their sedans....a highly tuned sports Sedan not a sports car. i think toyota and acura need to return to their roots and release a 21st century NSX and Supra...i mean nissan brought back the skyline.
So, by that standard, none of the cars from BMW's M line up can be considered sports cars. I don't think the GTR ever died out. IMO, the time between the end of production of the R34 to the announcement of the R35 was spent in research and development. I'm sure you'll agree that the technology behind the R35 is no 8th grade science fair project. And I think there were rumors of the Supra and NSX coming back.
I disagree, but not because Celicas are anything, but the fact of the matter is, is that both companies are tier in the 90s, and tier in the year that launched them to success. It's sad to say though, that as of the past few years; Toyota is spiraling down slowly in it's reliability factor. The NSX is a COMPLETE different class and shouldn't even be compared to any of the cars mentioned in this thread ! Lexus' are still very luxurious and reliable. But given the OP's question, I'd take the RL. The IS is nice, and I've been in a few. I can't say the same for the RL, but I like it's specs ! It's quite funny how engine size is talked about, but a total disregard to everything else. People do realize a bigger engine has MORE HP, TORQUE, but do they realize how overweight these cars are now a days? How much gas it'll burn ? LOL These G35s, these big fat overweight buldging cars are a waste of money. I imagine my days banging in my 5 speed accord. Yes, when HONDA engines ARE< and STILL infinite ! When clogged grimy air filters, manual buttons counted. Not all these electronic shit. Hondas are known to have high revving engines too. LOL Was fun. Oh well..
I would like to say that people only realize and know about Supras/NSXs/GTRs, R34 as code/chasis/base projects. That is, these cars have a 'platform' in which it's being released. At least from a business standpoint, that is how it is ! Think civic ! Practicality, new driver, gas dependant, affordable. Think accord ! More luxury, pricier, more options, 1-2 years in the work force. See, it's not about the technology anymore, given the advancement. Rather, the objectives of companies are to cater the masses, not what import tuner advertises. To be more realistic, a lot of that scene has died too ! Saying that, the cross in car companies and features allow them to 'cross' sale. We can see this 'change', much like the production stops in customer specific pools. I.E. bad sales of S2k will eventually kill it. We as consumers are getting the best of both worlds now. So basically a lot of the cars carry the power, the luxury, the everything you want all in one !
well i'm basing my standard on the definition of a sports car a sports car is an automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds. hence the sporty 4 dr sedans wouldn't fall under this category M3 coupe would have fallen under my definition of a sports car but the m3 sedan, m5 sedan would not have
nah...a super car is a car that has got a MR engine and would go by the definition seen here...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercar but i guess everybody has a different stand when they say sportscar or super car but these are what i use as my base
So, by definition, the Ferrari 599 isn't a super car? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_classification#Sports_cars_and_grand_tourers
I think there's total misunderstanding. We realize that a ferrari isn't normally on the roads ! And that it's in a diff't class that shouldn't be in the same damn sentence as your typical 'sports car' ! Like I've said before, the market creates a lot of cars for cross overs and selling points to attract diff't audiences ! SIMPLY PUT. A racer, would be sold on HP/TORQUE/ WHP that type shit, but if you had a family walk in, you would be sold on the 'electronics', the features, the etc. ! Lets get real about a 'sports' car ! We all know what these cars are. We can look @: S2ks MR2s Supras EVOs STis WHY?! Now if you don't know why, then I think you should really consider. Basically, a 'sports car' is geared towards 'speed' ! So the makeup is for that group of consumers. Like I've said before, so what if it has 200+ HP, the car is made as a sedan ! It has extra weight, extra gadgets, built w/ space ! nuff said.
that link is exactly how i classify my cars but with all classification systems there are little grey areas that are left for people interprtation and preferences... anyways to the 599 and why i think it isn't a super car The 599 doesn't have mid engine rear wheel drive design...its a front engine rear wheel drive car. That is the first biggest distinction...second biggest distinction is the exclusivity of the car. If you got money to blow and want a 599 you can go to your ferrari dealrship and order one...but with a Ferrari Enzo you can't do that....you gotta get picked by ferrari and you have to meet a whole host of requirements to own one that is what a super car can create a level of exclusivity. third the 599 doesn't give ferrari that halo brand when you you hear 599 you think ferrari but when you hear enzo other things come to mind besides just ferrari it ellicits that same feeling that you get when you hear corvette or the Audi R8 don't get me wrong that car is a beast and it deserves to be up there in the category of supercar but its just another high performace sportscar or what they call Gran tourer... i lost you on your logic espresso...anyways ferraris in the most generic term are yes sports car but if you actually were to classify them properly they would be called gran touring cars...and a sports sedan is a sports sedan not sports car
A super car is essentially a high end sports car that usually (read it usually) uses the MR platform. Even the very source you used says that the 599 is a super car. Also, what does your argument have to do with what I've said about Toyota making cars that are fun to drive? That statement is enough to put their car into any one of the performance car category excluding sports cars.
none of the sources that i used said a 599 is a supercar and i checked those sources over to confirm that you need to go back and read them again kontra...even the wiki for the 599 has it listed as a gran touring car not a super car http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_599_GTB_Fiorano this argument spured from the the interpretation taht we have for what is classified as a sports car....it has nothing to do with the issue of whether toyota made cars that were fun to drive..i've driven my fair share of fun toyota cars and don't knock them i just wished the would produce those fun cars again.
I may be wrong about the classification of the 599 but you were the one who brought the issue up. If you take a bit of time to read the previous posts, it's pretty clear that this sports car discussion spawned from your response which had no relation to what I said about the ISF or any cars made by Toyota.
ya i brought the issue up because i was making a distinction between a sports sedan and a sports car in my original argument i compared the isf to a e63 to give a comparrison to the person that you were responding to about the isf and not about the cars that are made by toyota...
