sports car with most bang for the buck?

[Rallispec]

recaclulated some of the costs to reflect base models
the power to weight to cost calculation was (((hp / weight)*1,000) / cost)*10,000

the biggest jumps were by the tiburon and the 350z. While the Srt-4 held on to the lead. Other than that, no major shifts.



NSX : $89,765 / 290 hp = 309 dollars per 1 HP
3153 lbs = .09 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 10

Porsche 911 turbo $118,400 / 415 hp = 285 dollars per 1 HP
3388 lbs = .122 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 10

M3 : $48,795 / 333 hp = 146 dollars per 1 HP
3415 lbs = .098 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 20

EVO $30,574 /271 hp = 113 dollars per 1 HP
3263 lbs = .083 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 27

G35c $29,500 / 280 hp = 105 dollars per 1 HP
3416 lbs = .082 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 28

STi $32,770 / 300 HP = 109 dollars per 1 HP
3,263 = .092 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 28

Tiburon $19,149/ 172 hp = 111 dollars per 1 HP
3023 lbs = .056 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29

RX-8 $27,200 /238 hp = 114 dollars per 1 HP
3053 lbs = .078 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29

Vette: $43,445 / 400 hp = 108 dollars per 1 HP
3179 lbs = .126 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29

Mustang SVT $36,485 / 390 hp = 93 dollars per 1 HP
3665 lbs = .106 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29

350z $27,030 /287 hp = 94 dollars per 1 HP
3188 lbs = .09 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 33

SRT-4 $20,995 / 230 hp = 91 dollars per 1 HP
2900 lbs = .079 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 37

 

[Rallispec]

Originally posted by: nan0bug
Corvette. Stupid question, and any other answer is stupid as well. No car gives you more performance for the money.

my amazing math skills say yo'ure wrong

 

[biffbacon]

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why are people talking about the Corvette?? That car is so white trashy, regardless of its performance.

its ashame the vette's image has become tarnished like this. i agree it is associated with WT, and that sucks. it is a beautiful car, and for anyone thats ever drivin one, the true epitome of a sports car

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
rx-8

Ditto ! BTW, I have driven Corvettes, and the RX-8 blows it away in handling (and practicality) Its a little slow off the line, but what can you expect out of 1.3 liters. After 4k in first gear, watch out though ! I have had more fun with this car than any I have ever owned, including the Sunbeam Tiger with a 351 Cleveland.

?????

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Old-school Beetle.
Screw new cars.

we have a winner

Like this

 

Random line: srt4 is garbage.

 

[Squisher]

Originally posted by: Apex

Little red Corvette
(Filed: 31/07/2004)
Very positive I think you'll agree.

Top Gear had the C6 on Sunday's programme and all they could moan about was the interior plastic quality and the fact that it had leaf springs (yawn). Clarkson then went on to show how flexible the rear panel was over the lights, completely failing to realise that the whole panel is impact absorbing anyway The car they were supplied with has the Magnetic Active Ride system yet they seemed not to have noticed as they complained that the ride quality was poor, yet it was the same car the Telegraph were given and they were complimentary.

They did a drag race betwen the C6, NSX, 911 Carrera 2 and TVR 350C. Now, on face value, the 350C walked it with the NSX beating the C6 to the tape (911 was nowhere) but watching it back a few times, there are shots of the C6 neck and neck with the TVR included momentarily, with no signs of the NSX, and shots of the C6 and NSX crossing the line together, the NSX having also jumped the start by a good 0.5 secs ('vette took off last) which means to say that they've edited the whole thing together to suit themselves.

Some people on Pistonheads forum were there and apparently the drag race was filmed numerous times, and also with a C6 that the crew had already ruined the clutch, damaged the bodywork and stripped the tyres of tread

It still put in an excellent lap time on their track, beating the 350C, the new Exige, the 911 GT3 and only narrowly missing out on the Evo FQ330 and Gallardos times. They even had to admit that the chassis was excellent.

Top Gear really needs better presenters IMHO. Preferably someone as opinionated as Clarkson but who actually knows what they're talking about rather than reading a preprepared script

They should be sued, and if not sued then outed to be nothing but a shill.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: Squisher

Originally posted by: Apex

Little red Corvette
(Filed: 31/07/2004)
Very positive I think you'll agree.

Top Gear had the C6 on Sunday's programme and all they could moan about was the interior plastic quality and the fact that it had leaf springs (yawn). Clarkson then went on to show how flexible the rear panel was over the lights, completely failing to realise that the whole panel is impact absorbing anyway The car they were supplied with has the Magnetic Active Ride system yet they seemed not to have noticed as they complained that the ride quality was poor, yet it was the same car the Telegraph were given and they were complimentary.

They did a drag race betwen the C6, NSX, 911 Carrera 2 and TVR 350C. Now, on face value, the 350C walked it with the NSX beating the C6 to the tape (911 was nowhere) but watching it back a few times, there are shots of the C6 neck and neck with the TVR included momentarily, with no signs of the NSX, and shots of the C6 and NSX crossing the line together, the NSX having also jumped the start by a good 0.5 secs ('vette took off last) which means to say that they've edited the whole thing together to suit themselves.

Some people on Pistonheads forum were there and apparently the drag race was filmed numerous times, and also with a C6 that the crew had already ruined the clutch, damaged the bodywork and stripped the tyres of tread

It still put in an excellent lap time on their track, beating the 350C, the new Exige, the 911 GT3 and only narrowly missing out on the Evo FQ330 and Gallardos times. They even had to admit that the chassis was excellent.

Top Gear really needs better presenters IMHO. Preferably someone as opinionated as Clarkson but who actually knows what they're talking about rather than reading a preprepared script

They should be sued, and if not sued then outed to be nothing but a shill.

Wow.
:Q

 

[r6ashih]

Ferrari 360 modena!

 

Originally posted by: Rallispec

Originally posted by: nan0bug
Corvette. Stupid question, and any other answer is stupid as well. No car gives you more performance for the money.

my amazing math skills say yo'ure wrong

Now do a hp/liter chart.
Then apply that to the $.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Rallispec

Originally posted by: nan0bug
Corvette. Stupid question, and any other answer is stupid as well. No car gives you more performance for the money.

my amazing math skills say yo'ure wrong

Now do a hp/liter chart.
Then apply that to the $.

also do track times to $ chart, see if the SRT4 is still on there, or the tiburon.

MIKE

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Rallispec

Originally posted by: nan0bug
Corvette. Stupid question, and any other answer is stupid as well. No car gives you more performance for the money.

my amazing math skills say yo'ure wrong

Now do a hp/liter chart.
Then apply that to the $.

How does hp/liter directly affect "bang for the buck"? Sure, it means a engine making identical HP is going to weigh less. Yet he has already account for HP/weight. If anything, what he is missing is accounting for handling. Throw in some skidpad numbers or something.

 

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Whoa. Mr. Mopar didn't suggest the SRT-4. You're slipping!

Much like his transmission!

ZING!

 

[Ensign]

:thumbsup: to the SRT-4. Just about impossible to beat for a new car in terms of bang for the buck. $ per whatever is nice, but it still comes down to total $, and nothing is really close to the SRT-4, except for maybe the non STI model of the WRX.

Originally posted by: AdamSnow
I drive a 2004 SRT-4... I like it a lot... there isnt -much- around here that can touch it... meh...

Pics !

 

[Rallispec]

Originally posted by: Mookow

Originally posted by: SampSon

Originally posted by: Rallispec

Originally posted by: nan0bug
Corvette. Stupid question, and any other answer is stupid as well. No car gives you more performance for the money.

my amazing math skills say yo'ure wrong

Now do a hp/liter chart.
Then apply that to the $.

How does hp/liter directly affect "bang for the buck"? Sure, it means a engine making identical HP is going to weigh less. Yet he has already account for HP/weight. If anything, what he is missing is accounting for handling. Throw in some skidpad numbers or something.

i agree--- i can see how track time to the dollar might matter to some people-- but not hp/liter.

now skidpad numbers... there's a thought. (if i can find them)

 

[Triumph]

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why are people talking about the Corvette?? That car is so white trashy, regardless of its performance.

it has LEAF. SPRINGS.

LEAF. SPRINGS.

Hey alright! I managed to quote two idiots at the same time! :thumbsup:

 

[Mookow]

Originally posted by: Triumph

Originally posted by: TuffGuy

Originally posted by: Dissipate
Why are people talking about the Corvette?? That car is so white trashy, regardless of its performance.

it has LEAF. SPRINGS.

LEAF. SPRINGS.

Hey alright! I managed to quote two idiots at the same time! :thumbsup:

That isnt much of an accomplishment in this thread

 

[CtK]

Originally posted by: Cyberian

Originally posted by: CtK
was the chevette on every car magazine this month!!
it was on my Car & Driver, Motor Trend, and Road & Track mags!!

oh to answer the question
Lotus Elise or BMW M3

I sure hope you meant Corvette !!



Fixed, thanks!

hehehe nope i meant chevette
there both made by the same company right??

 

[misterj]

im an import fan, but ill have to admit the c6 is up there. otherwise the srt4/evo/sti would be the ones to consider based on your price range. the elise i have never really considered and didn't know it was that cheap.

rx8? lol

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: CtK

Originally posted by: Cyberian

Originally posted by: CtK
was the chevette on every car magazine this month!!
it was on my Car & Driver, Motor Trend, and Road & Track mags!!

oh to answer the question
Lotus Elise or BMW M3

I sure hope you meant Corvette !!



Fixed, thanks!

hehehe nope i meant chevette
there both made by the same company right??

yes, but one was never sports car, just a small lil car that got you places back in the 70's and 80's i do believe, but i could be wrong on the years.

MIKE

 

[Rallispec]

added a few new cars and threw skidpad numbers in there for the hell of it. didnt do any rating based on skidpad numbers though, as i'm not sure how accurate all of them are.




NSX : $89,765 / 290 hp = 309 dollars per 1 HP
3153 lbs = .09 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 10
skidpad:0.93g

Porsche 911 turbo $118,400 / 415 hp = 285 dollars per 1 HP
3388 lbs = .122 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 10
skidpad:0.92 g

Viper : $81,090 / 500 hp = 162 dollars per 1 HP
3410 lbs = .15 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 18
skidpad:0.96g

M3 : $48,795 / 333 hp = 146 dollars per 1 HP
3415 lbs = .098 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 20
skidpad:0.91g

Elise: $40,780 / 190 hp = 214 dollars per 1 HP
1975 lbs = .096 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost = 23
skidpad:1.06g

EVO $30,574 /271 hp = 113 dollars per 1 HP
3263 lbs = .083 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 27
skidpad:0.94g

S2000 $33,260 / 240 hp = 138 dollars per 1 HP
2835 lbs = .092 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost = 28
skidpad:0.90g

G35 coupe $29,500 / 280 hp = 105 dollars per 1 HP
3416 lbs = .082 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 28
skidpad:0.92g

STi $32,770 / 300 HP = 109 dollars per 1 HP
3,263 = .092 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 28
skidpad:0.91g

Tiburon $19,149/ 172 hp = 111 dollars per 1 HP
3023 lbs = .056 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad: 0.84g

RX-8 $27,200 /238 hp = 114 dollars per 1 HP
3053 lbs = .078 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad:0.88g

C6 Vette: $43,445 / 400 hp = 108 dollars per 1 HP
3179 lbs = .126 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad:0.98g

Mustang SVT $36,485 / 390 hp = 93 dollars per 1 HP
3665 lbs = .106 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad:0.85g

WRX : $24,795 / 227 hp = 109 dollars per 1 HP
3,085 lbs = .074 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost:30
skidpad:86g

350z $27,030 /287 hp = 94 dollars per 1 HP
3188 lbs = .09 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 33
skidpad:0.87g

SRT-4 $20,995 / 230 hp = 91 dollars per 1 HP
2900 lbs = .079 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 37
skidpad:0.85g

 

[maziwanka]

Mustang SVT $36,485 / 390 hp = 93 dollars per 1 HP
3665 lbs = .106 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad:0.85g

that's off. its not 37k for a new cobra. more like 30-32k.

 

[Rallispec]

Originally posted by: maziwanka

Mustang SVT $36,485 / 390 hp = 93 dollars per 1 HP
3665 lbs = .106 hp/lbs
power to weight to cost: 29
skidpad:0.85g

that's off. its not 37k for a new cobra. more like 30-32k.

i'm sure its off as far as to what you might pay in the real world, but thats the MSRP listed by Edumnds.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Old-school Beetle.
Screw new cars.

we have a winner

Like this

Man... I'll be interested to see the numbers after the next upgrade

 

[exdeath]

A 2003 Cobra Convertible can be had for $30k used with less than 5,000 miles.

for $3500-4000 more Replace the stock Eaton blower with a 2.4L Kenne Bell blower with a 2.81" pulley and cold air intake, and your good for 617 RW HP with stock fuel, exhaust, and ignition.

For a few grand more, add 55# injectors, polished oval throttle body, and Bassani X pipe exhaust and we are talking 700 HP at the pavement without nitrous. Read: 9 second car on street radials.

A pulley for the Eaton blower is only $70 and you can enjoy 450 HP while you save up for the good stuff.

I never really liked Mustangs because way too many people have them, but I can admit the Cobra is quite the exception to the typical frat boy's sub 200HP V6 "sports" cars. But even the stock 400 HP for $30K for a car that is highly desireable ... you can't beat that.

I was looking to get a Porsche Boxster S and put a 350 HP 3.6L in it, but that would cost more than the Cobra and still not be as fast. Sure its plastic interior and not as nice quality, but how many people thinking about titanium gauges when some brat passes you and cuts you off and you can't do anything about it? That and I figure with only being a 2 seater it would be in the garage when I want it most when there is more than 1 passenger.

Yeah, I think I'll be getting a Cobra in March!