More Advice on a sports car purchase (celica, eclipse, rsx, ,wrx, altima)

Thanks for all the help and advice, however, I think some posters
mistook my question.

I am in my twenties - I am not shelling out cash for a super-turbo RWD
hyper-sports car here. I'm just looking for something that is nice,
incredibly reliable, and fast as hell.

It sounds like the Celica, WRX, and Altima are the best way to go?

If you have any other opinions on what the best low-end sports coupe
is, let me know - this is all great advice. Thanks particularly to
the posters who provided specific details about the Celica.

Andrew

 

Falling asleep through Andrew's post...

Altima is not a sports car, by definition

--
"If you can't change a tire, you're not allowed to have a beard. It's the
most basic part of a car: If you don't know that much about a car, you
really shouldn't be driving, should you?" - Jimmy Kimmel

I have no life - Takatomon -

 

Depends on whose definition you use. I think he should use _his_, but that's
just me....

Some have posted a sports car has to be blindingly fast in a straight line.
Then a TR6, Elan, or X1/9 aren't sports cars, which I would find absurd.

Instead of telling us all what a sports car *isn't*, "by definition", why
don't you suck it up and tell us what it *is*?

Cheers!

 

Falling asleep through Stephen Bigelow's post...

Okay, WRX

That's not how I single out a sports car

I have a broad definition of a sports car, as Miatas and Diablos both fit
into thier. But I don't consider the Altima one because within it's same
platform, the Maxima has a stronger engine.

--
"If you can't change a tire, you're not allowed to have a beard. It's the
most basic part of a car: If you don't know that much about a car, you
really shouldn't be driving, should you?" - Jimmy Kimmel

I have no life - Takatomon -

 

(Andrew) wrote in

WRX - and take a performance course so you know how to get the best out of
it.

Alex Devlin

 

I am looking for a car that has a fast acceleration (high horsepower
to weight ratio) and looks good and is reliable (low maintenance)

Which of the cars do you recommend? I don't want to spend more than
25K. I'm looking at low end here.

 

Altima and WRX may not have all the reliability you are hoping for. Celica
probably does.

When "sports cars" were popular in the sixties, the Lotus Elan was generally
regarded as the ultimate roadster. As Italian GT cars such as Ferrari,
Lamborghini etc. came out, that was a departure from the idea of "sports
car." These GT's were very extravagant cars, and included A/C, electric
windows, and other luxuries. Today, the closest thing to the Lotus Elan
roadster would be the Miata. In fact, this is now a better pure sports car
than the original Elan ever was!

As to performance, the Miata can be driven right up to the ragged edge! Its
skidpad figures are right up there with Porsche etc. Like most "real" sports
cars, it is not a star in the raw top speed and acceleration competition.
But for fun driving twisty roads, it's hard to beat! On the reliability
aspect, I can say that with 90K miles on one of the first ones, I have had
absolutely no mechanical problems! They say this excellent engine will be
good for 250K miles in such a small car!

Good luck finding a car you will like!

 

Hi Andrew,
Might I suggest that you check out the Mitusbishi EVO VIII, I know its a
little more than you wanted to pay but
seems to be worth the extra coin.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/frame.mv?file=commentcomplete.mv&num=1563
Regards
Grant

 

wrx

 

This is probably blasphemy... but have you test drove a Mustang GT
lately? Their handling isn;'t all that bad and they are definitely
fast. Reliability? Well... the 4.6L engine is pretty solid. But
Fords are cheap to fix and you'll get a warranty.

 

A '69 Mustang, it will appreciate in time if you take care
of it.

manual or auto? coupe or 4-door? 4 cyl. vs. 6 cyl. (insurance
considerations)

 

Is it just me or does it seem like there are 3 types of "low end
sports cars":

1) The non-sports car just added with a spoiler and better interior
(Corolla S, Camry Solara, Mazda 626, etc)

2) The low end car that looks good but isn't crazy fast (Celica,
Eclipse, RSX, etc)

3) The low end car that doesn't look that good, but is damn fast (WRX,
Mit Lancer, etc)


Do you always have to trade off looks for horsepower (well, at least
without having to pay more than 25-30K). This is my first sports car
- I don't want to spend too much money, but I want the look factor,
even if I have to trade off hp. That may the only reason I wouldn't
get a WRX.

Sounds to me still from what people are saying that Celica and RSX are
the only low end sports car that have decent styling and decent
performance at a low price. Please correct me if I'm wrong?

 

(Andrew) wrote in

These are not sports cars. You may as well put a spoiler onto any car and
call it sports if this fits what you want.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think the Celica looks ugly but
the WRX and EVO are just this side of ugly.

I think you need to have a long hard think to yourself about what it is
you want in a car. Out of the ones you listed I would take the WRX or EVO
for sheer driving pleasure. If others don't like the look of it then
tough! You drive it so you know what it can do. But if you want your
peers to "OOO & AAA" over your car then just look round and see what all
the kiddies are driving.


Alex Devlin

 

Well, if we're going to nic pick the Mustang isn't really a Sports
car... its a muscle car with OK handling. My advice would be a new
2002 GT (V8) manual. If I had to do it all over again I would
have looked harder at the Stangs - whether I would have bought one...
I dunno.
The reliability would def be a concern. Fords are not as reliable as
Toyotas/Lexus, Hondas/Acuras... But there's a Ford dealer on every
street corner so that might offset it. The best advice I can give is
make a list, and test drive each one on that list. Write down likes
and dislikes.

 

You definitely don't want a WRX. Anything turbo is a problem waiting
to happen.

Celica is OK, but visibility is poor. You have to use mirrors and can
hardly see out of the back at all. The acura may have better
visibility so I'd give that a shot.

If you're considering an Altima, then you probably wouldn't like the
cramped space, poor visibililty, and harsh ride of many sports cars.
Try the Nissan SE-R sport sedan, or just the plain Nissan SE. Maybe
the Civic EX, nice car and somewhat sporty. Miata's are great but
very small.

I would guess you'll end up with an Altima.

 

If you're going to nitpick, you have to define sports car, not just blather
on about what it _isn't_.

 

Lol.....still can't do it I see.
You're still attempting to define it by what it _isn't_.

What is a sports car?

Blather away...

 

You're right... come to think of it he won't be able to get a GT for
under $25,000 anyway.

 

you blather more than the rest of the posters on this thread combined! spit
it out, which under powered, under tired, poorly damped "sports car" do you
keep about?

 

"You definitely don't want a WRX. Anything turbo is a problem waiting
to happen."

huh? says who? been driving turbo cars since '91 and never experienced a
turbo related failure.
i've busted plenty of shit due to the power from the turbo but the turbos
have never busted.
you've never owned a turbo have you?

You definitely don't want a WRX. Anything turbo is a problem waiting
to happen.

Celica is OK, but visibility is poor. You have to use mirrors and can
hardly see out of the back at all. The acura may have better
visibility so I'd give that a shot.

If you're considering an Altima, then you probably wouldn't like the
cramped space, poor visibililty, and harsh ride of many sports cars.
Try the Nissan SE-R sport sedan, or just the plain Nissan SE. Maybe
the Civic EX, nice car and somewhat sporty. Miata's are great but
very small.

I would guess you'll end up with an Altima.[/QUOTE]