You have $15K and you want a weekend fun car...GO!

[Zenmervolt]

As a Porsche enthusiast, I would not recommend a 944 Turbo with that many miles on it without a top-end engine rebuild listed on the sheet. They had nicer interiors than the 911's of the time though

Have to disagree here. My 951 has 175,000 miles on it and the only reason the head has ever been off was when the gasket blew (I may have been running slightly more boost than stock...). There's no way a well-cared-for 951 should need a top-end refresh at only 111,000 miles. The 951's engine is incredibly robust for the most part (sensors and whatnot tend to get fiddly after 25+ years but the mechanical bits are strong).

ZV

 

[Fritzo]

Have to disagree here. My 951 has 175,000 miles on it and the only reason the head has ever been off was when the gasket blew (I may have been running slightly more boost than stock...). There's no way a well-cared-for 951 should need a top-end refresh at only 111,000 miles. The 951's engine is incredibly robust for the most part (sensors and whatnot tend to get fiddly after 25+ years but the mechanical bits are strong).

ZV

The fact of the matter is the 944 required a lot of maintenence to keep it in good shape. It was also a lower-cost car. Therefore most of the people buying them didn't put a lot of money into them keeping them up. That's why the engines in these cars tend to self destruct around the 110K-130K range.

Second, the car is fast...it was one of the fastest production cars of the 80's. Cheap performance means a lot of them were hooned to death, meaning you see a lot of suspension and brake system issues.

You'll probably be looking at a timing belt around 110-130K miles, and the waterpumps in the 944 were notorious for conking out. Motor mounts were not galvanized and tended to degrade (you can detect this if you have vibration and upping the RPM to 1400-1500 or so makes it disappear).

Oil cooler leaks, a poor power steering pump, issues with water leaks....the car can be a handful.

 

[exdeath]

I may have been running slightly more boost than stock.

ZV

:sneaky:

Quoted for epic. That's sig material.

 

[phucheneh]

Have to disagree here. My 951 has 175,000 miles on it and the only reason the head has ever been off was when the gasket blew (I may have been running slightly more boost than stock...). There's no way a well-cared-for 951 should need a top-end refresh at only 111,000 miles. The 951's engine is incredibly robust for the most part (sensors and whatnot tend to get fiddly after 25+ years but the mechanical bits are strong).

ZV

Yeah, but with 15k and a cheap Camaro, I could build a different engine for every day of the week.

I'm surprised more people don't agree with the 'buy a Mustang/Camaro and do whatever you want with it' approach. No, you don't get the best, most interesting car, but you probably end up with the most bang/buck and you can build it any way you want.

Better than getting an 'already good' Porsche and then realizing you're gonna rebuild the whole thing, anyway.

 

[manimal]

Yeah, but with 15k and a cheap Camaro, I could build a different engine for every day of the week.

I'm surprised more people don't agree with the 'buy a Mustang/Camaro and do whatever you want with it' approach. No, you don't get the best, most interesting car, but you probably end up with the most bang/buck and you can build it any way you want.

Better than getting an 'already good' Porsche and then realizing you're gonna rebuild the whole thing, anyway.

really is hard to beat a ls F body in speed and cost.

 

[Zenmervolt]

Yeah, but with 15k and a cheap Camaro, I could build a different engine for every day of the week.

I'm surprised more people don't agree with the 'buy a Mustang/Camaro and do whatever you want with it' approach. No, you don't get the best, most interesting car, but you probably end up with the most bang/buck and you can build it any way you want.

Better than getting an 'already good' Porsche and then realizing you're gonna rebuild the whole thing, anyway.

Fair. You can do a hell of a lot with a muscle car and they're ridiculous amounts of fun. But for me I'd be looking at '64-'68 Mustangs or something like exdeath's car (or newer) and for those the price goes up.

Of course, a C4 Corvette could be a lot of fun with a built engine and some suspension work...

ZV

 

[Samus]

S2000 is definitely the best "fun" car for 15K.

Mazda RX8 is also a lot of fun and the 3rd door is useful, especially if you are installing a child seat, etc. They are pretty reliable, fuel economy and oil consumption is ridiculous though.

If you want something practical and fun, but don't mind the maintenance, consider a VW R32 (2004) but the complexity of the AWD system and suspension will get to you. I personally just love hatchbacks and this is one of the 'best' the USA has ever had.

Depending on what you want it for, a Mustang GT is always a reliable choice, too. I wouldn't take it to track day, but for yee-haw thrills a big V8 is a lot of fun. They are incredibly cheap to maintain because they are so basic, and newer models have pretty good fuel efficiency if you still want to drive it to work.

 

[Danimal1209]

95-99 Mitsubishi Eclipse AWD/Eagle Talon TSi AWD.
5-6k for the car, 10k for upgrades = 500awhp 2700lb MONSTER.

 

[Fritzo]

Yeah, but with 15k and a cheap Camaro, I could build a different engine for every day of the week.

I'm surprised more people don't agree with the 'buy a Mustang/Camaro and do whatever you want with it' approach. No, you don't get the best, most interesting car, but you probably end up with the most bang/buck and you can build it any way you want.

Better than getting an 'already good' Porsche and then realizing you're gonna rebuild the whole thing, anyway.

I'm not much of a "it's only fast in a straight line" guy

Mazda RX8 is also a lot of fun and the 3rd door is useful, especially if you are installing a child seat, etc. They are pretty reliable,fuel economy and oil consumption is ridiculous though.

That's the problem with buying a used one. You HAVE to do frequent oil changes with rotary engines, and a lot of people just treated it like a normal car. Therefore it's a bad gamble to buy a used RX8. I heard reports of people adding 2-cycle oil to their fuel tanks to extend the life of their engines

 

[Railgun]

That's the problem with buying a used one. You HAVE to do frequent oil changes with rotary engines, and a lot of people just treated it like a normal car. Therefore it's a bad gamble to buy a used RX8. I heard reports of people adding 2-cycle oil to their fuel tanks to extend the life of their engines

Not oil changes...rather stay topped up. I don't know specifically about the 8, but common(ish) practice is to remove the oil metering pump which is responsible for injecting oil into the combustion chamber. That is what necessitates adding 2-cycle oil as it's required for lubrication. Just how the motor is designed.

Some do use 2-cycle in addition to maintaining the OEM setup for extra protection, but I feel it's uncessary.

That said, I'd prefer a 7 over an 8 anyway.

 

[JCH13]

Yeah, but with 15k and a cheap Camaro, I could build a different engine for every day of the week.

I'm surprised more people don't agree with the 'buy a Mustang/Camaro and do whatever you want with it' approach. No, you don't get the best, most interesting car, but you probably end up with the most bang/buck and you can build it any way you want.

Better than getting an 'already good' Porsche and then realizing you're gonna rebuild the whole thing, anyway.

If one is building for some form of racing, the cheap muscle car is a good option.

For a "fun weekend car" I think the car should be interesting, ultimate speed/grip/handling is secondary to a pleasurable driving experience.

 

[JulesMaximus]

\thread

 

[pauldun170]

For 15K

Finally get around to buying and restoring a first generation MR-2.

First gen Miata with the 1.8, replace\fix the important bits...set cash aside for future V8 swap.

1995 BMW 540i with the 6spd (IF I could find one that's in good enough condition to START fixing it. )

2006 Pontiac GTO - Lowest 6spd model I could find.


Since I'm up north, I might go combo
Early Miata 1.8 or late 1.6 + Bronco II V6 5spd = summer toy and snow toy with money left over for engine and suspension work.

 

[Fritzo]

For 15K

Finally get around to buying and restoring a first generation MR-2.

First gen Miata with the 1.8, replace\fix the important bits...set cash aside for future V8 swap.

1995 BMW 540i with the 6spd (IF I could find one that's in good enough condition to START fixing it. )

2006 Pontiac GTO - Lowest 6spd model I could find.


Since I'm up north, I might go combo
Early Miata 1.8 or late 1.6 + Bronco II V6 5spd = summer toy and snow toy with money left over for engine and suspension work.

The GTO is a real sleeper car. Too bad it looked so...plain.

I love MR-2's..real head turners, just can't fit in the damn thing

 

[Vdubchaos]

15k budget?

And you are a car enthusiast that will most likely want to tinker around/modify?

That leaves you with about 5-7.5k budget for a car.

Fox body 5.0?

 

[Sluggo]

Just about a year ago I made this exact decision for myself.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2218403

Boxster was the end result.

 

[phucheneh]

15k budget?

And you are a car enthusiast that will most likely want to tinker around/modify?

That leaves you with about 5-7.5k budget for a car.

Fox body 5.0?

The Foxes have really climbed in price over the last few years. Once '93 models hit 10+ years old, they got more desirable and didn't really come up in the general 'used car' circuit much. But there were enough to satisfy enthusiasts. At over 15 years old, people really started coveting them. Very few left that are stock and in good condition. And subsequently, buying a modded one is no longer the lucrative venture that it used to be...even if the car was kinda crap, you got it for cheap because people knew it had been beat on; but you also often got a giant pile of parts that would've cost more new than you paid for the whole vehicle.

Now, if you want cheap, you need to specifically look for the less-desired 79-86 models. And 4/6cyl cars...though their originality might net them enough cash to outweigh the benefit of going the engine swap route.

Prolly still pretty cheap to get a V8 swap candidate, though. Same with V6 Camaros/Firebirds. Heck, I6 first gen Mustang coupes still go for a pretty reasonable amount...I could buy a really decent car for half the 15k budget or less, and then make that old pig handle pretty dang respectably and have a reasonably strong V8.

I'm not much of a "it's only fast in a straight line" guy

For the money, 'cheap muscle car' is still going to net the fastest vehicle on a track with turns. Solid rear axle is not the end of the world, especially in this price range. Redo everything with urethane bushings, put decent springs and shocks on it, add some swaybars, stuff as much tire under it as you can...that's not a bad handling car. Primitive, but not bad. Invest in some of the more complex setups, and it might even become downright 'good'.

 

[JCH13]

Note: thought experiment is for a 'fun weekend car' not a 'track car'

 

[Fritzo]

Just about a year ago I made this exact decision for myself.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2218403

Boxster was the end result.

You didn't get a 2005 Boxster S for $15K

Great choice though! Did you end up with the 986 or the 987? (BTW- The IMS issue is overblown. You worry about it if your car is a garage queen and you don't drive it. All the research says it's most likely caused from letting the car sit for long periods of time without running).

 

[phucheneh]

Note: thought experiment is for a 'fun weekend car' not a 'track car'

I know; I considered quoting you, too, in response to the 'only fast in a straight line' thing. Cheap American V8 cars with gobs of cheap parts available will get you the best performance for the money, period.

I didn't say that was everyone's ideal of a 'fun weekend car.' ...it's just my ideal. If I'm saving it for the weekend, that bitch is gonna be fast. I'm not wasting my budget on perceived prettiness, rareness, brand prestige...whatever.

In the eternal words of James Hetfield,

GIMME FUEL FIMME FIRE GIMME DABAJABAZA:whiste:

 

[Sluggo]

You didn't get a 2005 Boxster S for $15K

Great choice though! Did you end up with the 986 or the 987? (BTW- The IMS issue is overblown. You worry about it if your car is a garage queen and you don't drive it. All the research says it's most likely caused from letting the car sit for long periods of time without running).

Mine is a 986, it's been a fun car.

My wife ended up driving it as much or more than I have. Eventually I am just going to declare it "hers" then I can go find another toy while still getting to enjoy that when I want.

 

[JCH13]

I know; I considered quoting you, too, in response to the 'only fast in a straight line' thing. Cheap American V8 cars with gobs of cheap parts available will get you the best performance for the money, period.

I didn't say that was everyone's ideal of a 'fun weekend car.' ...it's just my ideal. If I'm saving it for the weekend, that bitch is gonna be fast. I'm not wasting my budget on perceived prettiness, rareness, brand prestige...whatever.

In the eternal words of James Hetfield,

GIMME FUEL FIMME FIRE GIMME DABAJABAZA:whiste:

I'm not arguing that it'd be a bad weekend car, certainly some people would enjoy that. I am just pointing out that maximum performance does not always create fun for everyone.

I think that cars can have too much grip to be fun on the street. It mutes the feedback of the car, steering gets heavier, and chassis behavior cannot be explored at all. Sames goes for power. Lots of power might make some people's junk wiggle, but it's not universally fun for everyone. Driving a slow car fast can be fun. Having to wind out gears and downshift is engaging and enjoyable in the right car.

I'm not saying one approach is 'right' and the other is 'wrong', I am saying that there are many ways to get to 'fun' and the characteristics that make a car truly fun are not always directly related to ultimate performance.

 

[Railgun]

I think that cars can have too much grip to be fun on the street. It mutes the feedback of the car, steering gets heavier, and chassis behavior cannot be explored at all.

1...there is no such thing as too much grip. If all you care about is smoking tires, put some 175 width bias-ply on there and go to town.

2...if you want to swing the tail out on the street, leave this thread now else I'm sure many will come down on you for that notion.

3...if you have the right car, there's no amount of grip that's going to mute feedback. That alone does not dictate what the chassis is(n't) doing.

 

[Fritzo]

1...there is no such thing as too much grip. If all you care about is smoking tires, put some 175 width bias-ply on there and go to town.

2...if you want to swing the tail out on the street, leave this thread now else I'm sure many will come down on you for that notion.

3...if you have the right car, there's no amount of grip that's going to mute feedback. That alone does not dictate what the chassis is(n't) doing.

Sure there's such a thing as too much grip. Lack of grip is what makes the BRZ and FR-S so much fun to drive. What makes sports cars fun is the ability to induce controllable oversteer.

 

[JCH13]

1...there is no such thing as too much grip. If all you care about is smoking tires, put some 175 width bias-ply on there and go to town.

2...if you want to swing the tail out on the street, leave this thread now else I'm sure many will come down on you for that notion.

3...if you have the right car, there's no amount of grip that's going to mute feedback. That alone does not dictate what the chassis is(n't) doing.

*le sigh*

1) No, I have never done a burnout in my entire life.
2) No, I'm not a drifter.
3) You completely miss my point.

To expand on (3) based on my personal experience: I've got three sets of tires for my Miata, 195 wide S.Drives, 205 wide RA1s, and 225 wide RS3s. I almost always put on the S.Drives when I'm driving on the street. Why? Because at reasonably sane speeds I can feel the car throttle-oversteer just a bit. I can feel the rear end nudge around a little if I trail brake. The manual steering feels lighter and more responsive because the tire is lighter and I'm not scrubbing a wider, stickier, tire.

Unless one changes the widths of front/rear tires, no, tires will not change a chassis' inherit characteristics. They will change the speeds one needs to reach for those characteristics to show through and the forgiveness of the tire when it's being pushed.

When I drive with the RS3s on I'd have to wildly exceed the speed limit everywhere to get the same sorts of sensations and feedback I get with the S.Drives at about the speed limit. Same amount of fun (for me) with way less risk of getting a ticket or crashing. Which makes the less-grippy tires more fun because there's little or no stress involved.

And if you try to argue that a Miata isn't one of the most responsive chassis ever, i.e. the 'right car' to get feedback from... well... I can't argue with that level of ignorance.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3jqmGTOz4kQ skip to 3:15 where James May makes my point all over again.