|
Cream_Filling posted:The previous gen Legacy was, in my opinion, one of the the best looking midsize sedans of its day. I'm having trouble thinking of a mid-size car that looks better than the LGT, regardless of time period. I find it to be the perfect mix of classy, understated and sporty for a sports sedan.
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
The new 1 series hatch looks like a god drat Vibe/Matrix with a longer hood.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 19:29
|
|
|
eames posted:2012 1 series I swear they're now actively trying to make them as ugly as possible. Even Chris Bangle must think "drat, that's an ugly car". And that's the guy who thought it would be a good idea to screw up the kidney grille on the 3-series.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2011 23:55
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:The previous gen Legacy was, in my opinion, one of the the best looking midsize sedans of its day. YES. Seriously, the newest generation of Legacy is disgusting. Subaru's designs have always been a little quirky, but 99% of them end up looking pretty drat good. The 4th gen Legacy is amazing, especially in GT trim - a sporty sedan that looks the part without being obnoxious. If you get one without the spoiler the only thing even hinting at the turbo under the hood is the scoop. The 08-09 facelift of the 4th gens is the pinnacle, it looks gorgeous. I saw pictures of the MY10+ Legacy and just figured it had to look better in person...and then I saw one in person last time I was at the dealer. Christ is it terrible. Just a big ugly mess, emphasis on the big. What were they thinking with those fenders? Just looks like every other boring midsize sedan now. Why Subaru 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:04
|
|
|
FENCH DIGGITY posted:Just looks like every other boring midsize sedan now. Why Subaru I suspect crash safety, in particular the pedestrian rating has a lot to do with it. Its affected pretty much everything, for instance look at the current Japan/Euro Accord next to the previous model and you'll see how big and bulbous the nose has got:  
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:13
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:The previous gen Legacy was, in my opinion, one of the the best looking midsize sedans of its day. The Legacy Spec B is great looking in a good way not in the Subaru way. I would get rid of my bugeye for one in a heartbeat if I had the funds edit: http://www.autofans.be/galerij/bmw-1-reeks-m-pakket-eerste-fotos/bmw-1-reeks-m-pakket-eerste-fotos-7824 This is the new 1 series with some M stuff slapped on. Can't say I'm a fan but it looks better than the model without the bumper and all. 69sofine fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Jun 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:20
|
|
|
el topo posted:I swear they're now actively trying to make them as ugly as possible. Even Chris Bangle must think "drat, that's an ugly car". And that's the guy who thought it would be a good idea to screw up the kidney grille on the 3-series. I've heard the inspiration was 'Angry Birds'
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 00:35
|
|
|
dissss posted:I suspect crash safety, in particular the pedestrian rating has a lot to do with it. Eh, yes and no, I think. I believe (correct me if wrong) that the crash safety regulation most responsible for the bulbous fronts of current cars is the new Euro ones which require a certain amount of space between the hood and engine. But the the engine in Subarus is relatively flat and usually placed low and back enough that it seems like this wouldn't really matter. (oh wait - TMIC? whoops) I feel like the styling was just sort of a "me, too" response to look similar to the other mid-size sedans. Well, also, the bulky high beltlines required to maintain side impact standards also mean that it's tough to make a low cowl height look proportional. Maybe? Also, of course, the front ends of most new cars are now so tall that the scenario imagined, that the bumper hits your legs and your head hits the top of the engine, is now less likely. Instead, a massive wall of car hits your legs, then your hip or torso (shattering it) slightly above your center of gravity, you are thrown to the ground, and then run over. At least that's how it goes in my imagination.   
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2011 05:08
|
|
|
Report: Audi R4 Roadster Confirmed for 2014 Debut, Porsche and Volkswagen Versions Still Coming Included in the article, but clearly not an Audi automobilemag.com posted:We’ve long known that Audi, Porsche, and Volkswagen will each launch a unique, mid-engined roadster based on the same platform over the next few years. A new report from Autocar confirms that Audi’s version, dubbed the R4, will arrive by 2014 or 2015. It also reaffirms that the Volkswagen Bluesport and a Porsche version are still on track for production.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 01:52
|
|
|
grover posted:
I can't help but think VAG is getting too 90s GM like - too many divisions without clear enough differentiation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 01:57
|
|
|
dissss posted:I can't help but think VAG is getting too 90s GM like - too many divisions without clear enough differentiation. Don't worry, in about 15 years it will crumble.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 02:09
|
|
|
grover posted:Report: Audi R4 Roadster Confirmed for 2014 Debut, Porsche and Volkswagen Versions Still Coming Because when I think affordable, fun cars, I think Audi. I mean a Boxster in the US starts at $48k base with the top of the line Spyder at like $60-70k, nipping at the heels of the base 911's MSRP of $80k. The Audi TT roadster currently has an MSRP of $42-48k. In other words, the Audi Boxster will have to end up costing... the same as the current Boxster. Are they going to jack up the price of the Boxster? Drop the price of the TT? Hell, the current VW Eos, a loving folding hardtop Golf, costs $34-40k. Where the hell will these things slot in? And by what standard are they "affordable"? [edit] By contrast, the so-called standard for "affordable" imported mid-engine roadsters was the 2005 Toyota MR2 Spyder, which cost $25k in 2005, which is $29k in 2011 dollars. So I guess it's not too outrageous... OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jun 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 02:18
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Where the hell will these things slot in? And by what standard are they "affordable"?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 02:53
|
|
|
I want to see how Porsche manages to get 380HP out of a production turbo flat-four. I have a hard time believing they will be able to find the right mixture of compression ratio, boost, and compressor efficiency to make an engine responsive enough to be worthy of the Porsche name while maintaining a certain degree of durability. They may be able to get away with an 8,000 RPM redline and short enough gearing that reaching full boost at 6,000 RPMs isn't an issue for driving around town. Of course, if Porsche manages to do it there is hope that maybe we can finally get an STI with over 350HP from the factory (in the U.S.).
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 03:20
|
|
|
grover posted:The VW Bluesport is expected to be priced to compete against the MX-5; the Audi and Porsche models... won't. So like $23-28k? About the same price as the Golf GTI or the Pontiac Solstice? Or maybe more realistically maybe $26-35k to account for the VW premium and slightly increased cost of a midengine layout? Good on them if they can do it, I suppose. I guess technically there will basically be no competition for similarly sized roadsters or even coupes beyond the MX-5, although at the price range you will see the pony cars begin to compete in price if not in actual size/product class. Who knows? Maybe by 2015 or whatever, this will be the start of a new roadster fad and even Hyundai and Kia will put out affordable Solstice/Sky cousins at 20k or under.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 04:12
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:Who knows? Maybe by 2015 or whatever, this will be the start of a new roadster fad and even Hyundai and Kia will put out affordable Solstice/Sky cousins at 20k or under. It's not quite a roadster, but I think the Genesis Coupe shows the future could be good for sporty Hyundais, roadsters possibly included.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 04:19
|
|
|
I think the Genesis Coupe is a great example of why they can probably pull that off, minus the 'affordable' part.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 04:59
|
|
|
Q_res posted:I think the Genesis Coupe is a great example of why they can probably pull that off, minus the 'affordable' part. I don't get what you're saying. That the Coupe isn't affordable? Or that a Hyundai convertible would necessarily be expensive?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 05:34
|
|
|
Um, both really. The Genesis coupe isn't really expensive, but it's definitely not affordable for what you get either. So I sincerely doubt their ability to make an affordable roadster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 06:17
|
|
|
Q_res posted:Um, both really. The Genesis coupe isn't really expensive, but it's definitely not affordable for what you get either. So I sincerely doubt their ability to make an affordable roadster. The timing of their Genesis product cycle was unfortunate. Their new entry to the catergory got completely overshadowed by Ford's putting in a great new motor into an existing and presumably costs-minimized chassis. I would expect them to be able to get more power and a soft top out of the Genesis with less effort. Dunno if you could call it cheap.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 06:23
|
|
|
I mean "oxcart" bullshit aside, the design compromises in the Mustang do effectively cut costs without significantly compromising quality. Also, I feel like the Genesis Coupe was a little too big, a little too luxury focused, and a little too expensive compared to what I would have expected. It's benchmarked on the Infiniti G37, after all. I would have preferred an entry-level sports car to the grand tourer that we got. Still, I'm not one to complain about more enthusiast choices, and if or when the new 275 hp turbo 4 from the Sonata Turbo gets put in, I feel like there's still room for improvement on the platform. 275 hp in a 3300 pound chassis is not bad at all (though i suppose the v6 mustang still beats it in raw numbers). The new V6 that was recently announced also has a modest power boost up to 333 hp, 291 ft-lbs, which actually beats the pony cars in V6 engine output at least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 07:30
|
|
|
I would really, really like to see the Hyundai Genesis get a new front end. The grimacing look on the front end makes the car look like its biting down on a horse bit or something. The fluidic design language Hyundai has started to use has grown on me so I wouldn't mind to see a front end like that on the Genesis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 13:31
|
|
|
Cream_Filling posted:I mean "oxcart" bullshit aside, the design compromises in the Mustang do effectively cut costs without significantly compromising quality. They've done a lot with an oxcart design as far as putting power down. An impressive amount. But I've always wondered just how much costs IRS could possibly add to the price. It's been done in the aftermarket for years, and you'd think it would be a whole lot cheaper to do on a mass scale right out of the factory. Seems like it would make the car quite a track beast. But maybe that's just not their market focus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 15:37
|
|
|
dissss posted:I can't help but think VAG is getting too 90s GM like - too many divisions without clear enough differentiation. I have a feeling that the vast majority of new car buyers have no idea that there are any similarities between VW and Audi, let alone Porsche.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 15:59
|
|
|
Motronic posted:They've done a lot with an oxcart design as far as putting power down. An impressive amount. But I've always wondered just how much costs IRS could possibly add to the price. It's been done in the aftermarket for years, and you'd think it would be a whole lot cheaper to do on a mass scale right out of the factory. I just caught an episode of Top Gear where they're reviewing the new (at screening) GT500 Mustang and they compared it with a Roush that had the suspension modified. They said Ford said it would cost $5000/car to add independent suspension.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 18:31
|
|
|
Linedance posted:I just caught an episode of Top Gear where they're reviewing the new (at screening) GT500 Mustang and they compared it with a Roush that had the suspension modified. They said Ford said it would cost $5000/car to add independent suspension. Couldn't be _that_ bad. Otherwise the Fusion would have a beam suspension out back, too. My guess is that it'd just be an organizational hassle to make some proportion (custom orders) of Mustangs IRS on the assembly line.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 19:33
|
|
|
The thing you have to remember is the majority of Mustang buyers don't care enough to change it. In fact owners were swapping out the IRS on terminators for a solid axle set up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 19:42
|
|
|
If enthusiasts matter at all in that situation, I bet more people drag Mustangs than track them, though that might be a "chicken or the egg" situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 22:52
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:If enthusiasts matter at all in that situation, I bet more people drag Mustangs than track them, though that might be a "chicken or the egg" situation. I think that's exactly the chicken and egg. They aren't often tracked because they aren't the best choice; people who track cars aren't the market so they don't make them more trackable. Too bad. They seem like they'd be a fun mid-level track flogger for a stock prepared division if they put their power down better. But I'm kind of a Ford guy, so my opinion probably shouldn't count for much on this topic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 22:59
|
|
|
Motronic posted:I think that's exactly the chicken and egg. They aren't often tracked because they aren't the best choice; people who track cars aren't the market so they don't make them more trackable. A new stock GT can do comparably with an M3 (as driven by Randy Pobst) on the track. I think that counts as a decent track car. Randy even remarked that the GT was more fun. Track performance is not a big factor for switching to IRS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:04
|
|
|
This sounds a little too good to be true: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/06/08/mazda-targeting-1-760-pound-target-for-next-miata-400-pounds-l/ (Next gen miata) quote:According to Inside Line, the head honchos at the Japanese automaker have instructed the company's engineers to strip a whopping 720 pounds from the vehicles already comparably light 2,480-pound curb weight. If successful, that would put the new comer into the feathery 1,760-pound range, which is 400 pounds less than the first-generation roadster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:09
|
|
|
I hope if they ever go to IRS they use transverse leaf springs and keep trolling people forever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:14
|
|
|
Hog Obituary posted:This sounds a little too good to be true: There's no loving way they get it under 2000 lbs. But I'm sure it'll be down in the 2200 range.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:17
|
|
|
Hog Obituary posted:This sounds a little too good to be true: Drop a rotary engine in and you're halfway there already. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:A new stock GT can do comparably with an M3 (as driven by Randy Pobst) on the track. I think that counts as a decent track car. Randy even remarked that the GT was more fun. I did mention that I thought they did some amazing things with putting power down, given what they have to work with. I'm not sure why track performance wouldn't be improved by switching to IRS. Sure, not on all tracks in all situations, but the increased suspension agility and what could be done with it to improve performance even further seems quite appealing. But again, that really depends on the track. I don't think it much matters on the main ring at Pocono, for example. But let's talk about the hairpin and corkscrew at Laguna Seca. Situations like those (banked, but not incredibly so, hanging wheels out into the berm, etc) would seem to make independent rear wheel suspension travel quite advantageous.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
Real racers know to remove that heavy owner's manual before ripping up the track yo. Why not just say their target is 0 lbs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2011 23:24
|
|
|
Dave Inc. posted:I have a feeling that the vast majority of new car buyers have no idea that there are any similarities between VW and Audi, let alone Porsche. Leaving Porsche aside I'd say the similarities between Volkswagen and Audi products are pretty widely known and in some cases actually overstated. All you have to do is look at the motoring section of a newspaper, if they've reviewed say an A1 they'll be sure to mention you could just get a more powerful Polo for less money. Ditto with an A4, they'll say the Passat is bigger and cheaper and mechanically the same (even though there are some important differences between the two). It gets even more complicated in markets where Skodas are available. Then you have VW splitting the American Jetta/Passat off from the international versions - presumably this is an effort to add further differentiation by making them bigger and cheaper
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 00:37
|
|
|
Motronic posted:I think that's exactly the chicken and egg. They aren't often tracked because they aren't the best choice; people who track cars aren't the market so they don't make them more trackable. At every track day ive been to there have been at least a few mustangs... People track them all the time. Hell NASA has an a few classes that are basically dedicated to racing mustangs (AI and AIX are like 5 to 1 mustangs vs camaros/other) More people drag race mustangs because drag racing is a $30 a day/night enterprise so any jackass with some power under the hood can do it. The ~10x increase in price and having to register in advance for most track days is what causes there to be fewer mustang owners tracking their car then going drag racing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 05:05
|
|
|
Motronic posted:I did mention that I thought they did some amazing things with putting power down, given what they have to work with. Motor Trend had a race driver take a new Boss 302 for a few laps at Laguna Seca. It did a 1:40.2. For comparison, a '10 GT500 clocked 1:44.3, a '09 BMW M3 did 1:42.9, and a '10 Audi R8 did 1:40.8. I think Ford has perfected the live axle if their 4-passenger $41k car beats a mid-engined near-supercar around Laguna Seca.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 07:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
kill me now posted:At every track day ive been to there have been at least a few mustangs... People track them all the time. Hell NASA has an a few classes that are basically dedicated to racing mustangs (AI and AIX are like 5 to 1 mustangs vs camaros/other) I remember back in the day people would put a lot of money into Griggs suspension for AIX classes (and AI? I don't remember the rules). I have not been to a NASA event even since the '05 models came out, though. But really the 2010 Track Pack and 2011 models are just awesome. Who cares how it works, if it does?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2011 07:14
|
|
