Resurgence of the 50k sports car...

[swagmeister]

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959, its choice at the end of the day but why would someone prefer to 'row' a car these days ? By that I mean imagine yourself in the driving seat, use your left arm to simulate changing gear, 10,100, 1000 times - see where Im going with this ? In the modern era why burden yourself with pressing an additional pedal countless times per journey and manipulating a lever by hand countless times per journey.

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

[CABC]

swagmeister said:

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

seriously? did you listen to the answers you received the first time?

[Guvernator]

swagmeister said:

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959, its choice at the end of the day but why would someone prefer to 'row' a car these days ? By that I mean imagine yourself in the driving seat, use your left arm to simulate changing gear, 10,100, 1000 times - see where Im going with this ? In the modern era why burden yourself with pressing an additional pedal countless times per journey and manipulating a lever by hand countless times per journey.

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

Oh you were serious?

[Daston]

Well Toyota have not ruled a manual out for the BMW Coupe. So at least there is a little hope.

Would an auto put me off any of these cars? Probably not, I would of course test drive them and then make the decision, what is annoying is the lack of choice.

[otolith]

swagmeister said:

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959, its choice at the end of the day but why would someone prefer to 'row' a car these days ? By that I mean imagine yourself in the driving seat, use your left arm to simulate changing gear, 10,100, 1000 times - see where Im going with this ? In the modern era why burden yourself with pressing an additional pedal countless times per journey and manipulating a lever by hand countless times per journey.

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

Why burden yourself with driving at all when you can get a taxi? Perhaps because you enjoy the process?

[ORD]

Composite Guru said:

Because whenever "sports car" is mentioned then average Joe will tick the Porsche box without a thought. That's the last car I would go for. They are such a common sight now they aren't looked at as something special now.

Surely you buy a car because you like it, not because of what others perceive as special?

[ORD]

Guvernator said:

Oh you were serious?

What's funny is that I actually would prefer manual lights and manual windscreen wipers! I dont need help noticing when it is dark or that is raining.

[300bhp/ton]

CABC said:

300bhp/ton said:

GiveItSomeWellie said:

Since the 370Z was launched in 2009 (and taking heavy influence from the 350Z launched in 2003), the 86/BRZ in 2012, and the current MX-5 in 2015, then yes I would say it's dated.

Nothing wrong with that, however.

I think you are just looking at the year it was introduced and seeing if that was earlier than another. How does this make is 'dated'?

What exactly is dated about it as a car and it's abilities?

Caterhams are 60 yrs old in design. look at what bad driver's cars they are after all this time.

[Composite Guru]

ORD said:

Surely you buy a car because you like it, not because of what others perceive as special?

If I'm paying £50k for a car I want it to be something special!!!

[300bhp/ton]

ORD said:

Herbs said:

You have an issue with people who have a different preference to you?? wow...

Bearing in mind we are talking about sports cars, I think the lack of a manual option is something very much worthy of a comment on.

I suggest maybe go and have a read of the "are cars too fast for the road" thread and you will see why some people, like myself prefer a manual box.

A sports car is meant to be enthralling and engaging - an autobox regardless of how good it is, removes an element of engagement with the car. I've owned both manual, auto and automated manuals - some of the same car and in every case the manual version is more fun for me - albeit slightly slower.

A daily driver on the other is most definitely suited to being an auto for me.

I know this is all a matter of preference, but I am genuinely perplexed that anyone would want an auto box in a sports car. It takes away a large part of the experience. Much worse than a 4 cylinder turbo engine (and those are horrid enough).

For an out and out sports car, something either lightweight and balanced or something that is a weekend type of car I fully agree.

However for a Grand Turismo (GT) or something that might be used daily and often for long distance, the option of an automatic does likely make sense to many.

It's still probably not what I'd choose, I do like manuals.

I can't comprehend why anyone would want a manual GT86 or MX-5 unless they have a disability requiring them to need one.

[300bhp/ton]

Reark said:

Wow are people not bored of the auto/manual debate?

I genuinely feel sorry for people that feel the need to get a certain type of car or transmission etc. due to it's perceived acclaim.

The liberation you'll feel when you stop caring what people think is truly magnificent....

GET WHAT YOU WANT. fk EVERYONE ELSE

Nothing perceived at all.

Also if they don't make it as a manual, you last comment is somewhat pointless.

[300bhp/ton]

swagmeister said:

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959, its choice at the end of the day but why would someone prefer to 'row' a car these days ? By that I mean imagine yourself in the driving seat, use your left arm to simulate changing gear, 10,100, 1000 times - see where Im going with this ? In the modern era why burden yourself with pressing an additional pedal countless times per journey and manipulating a lever by hand countless times per journey.

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

I think you are being deliberately obtuse and missing the point. You don't need to change the windows or temp as you do gears.

It's about the experience. If you don't know what this is, then I pity you. Or maybe you've just not driven any fun cars.

If you care not for driving, why even bother with a sports car. Get a taxi!

EDIT: Beaten by otolith

[Composite Guru]

300bhp/ton said:

swagmeister said:

As Ive said in previous threads re Manual v Auto, its 2019 not 1959, its choice at the end of the day but why would someone prefer to 'row' a car these days ? By that I mean imagine yourself in the driving seat, use your left arm to simulate changing gear, 10,100, 1000 times - see where Im going with this ? In the modern era why burden yourself with pressing an additional pedal countless times per journey and manipulating a lever by hand countless times per journey.

If speccing your new sports car to have a manual box, would you also spec it to have manual windows, manual climate control instead of auto, manual wipers instead of auto, manual lights instead of auto etc etc etc

I think you are being deliberately obtuse and missing the point. You don't need to change the windows or temp as you do gears.

It's about the experience. If you don't know what this is, then I pity you. Or maybe you've just not driven any fun cars.

If you care not for driving, why even bother with a sports car. Get a taxi!

I agree with you on this. I would never buy a sports car without a manual. Changing gear with the stick is all part of the enjoyment of driving. Pressing a paddle really doesn't have the same effect imo.

I always thought that Ferrari's with the metal gates were the best thing. That's all gone now. Such a shame.

[zygalski]

300bhp/ton said:

ging84 said:

300bhp/ton said:

Why such a derisive comment ? You got a chip on your should or what

I do
It is supporting the legacy preferences that holds back the motor industry, and people yearning for a manual box in a non specific group of cars that never came with one is the absolute epitome of the issue.

The car companies know that a number of people will take 1 look and say its not a manual not interested, another number of people will consider it, maybe talk to friends read reviews and ultimately be put off because of the other groups opinions.

Manufacturers will know how many millions more it will cost them to design, test, approve, build and support 2 gearbox types. If the numbers don't add up they simply won't build the car. It won't be profitable enough with 2 gearboxes and won't sell well enough with only 1.

Basically people like this are a factor in why these type of cars went away.

Gearboxes already exist. R&D cost is likely minimal, maybe even small enough not to really show on a balance sheet. Do BMW use manuals with this engine already?

And given the choice, I'd be one of those to buy the manual.

As a nation we've become lazier & fatter - QED - auto boxes on sports cars as the norm.

[Composite Guru]

zygalski said:

300bhp/ton said:

ging84 said:

300bhp/ton said:

Why such a derisive comment ? You got a chip on your should or what

I do
It is supporting the legacy preferences that holds back the motor industry, and people yearning for a manual box in a non specific group of cars that never came with one is the absolute epitome of the issue.

The car companies know that a number of people will take 1 look and say its not a manual not interested, another number of people will consider it, maybe talk to friends read reviews and ultimately be put off because of the other groups opinions.

Manufacturers will know how many millions more it will cost them to design, test, approve, build and support 2 gearbox types. If the numbers don't add up they simply won't build the car. It won't be profitable enough with 2 gearboxes and won't sell well enough with only 1.

Basically people like this are a factor in why these type of cars went away.

Gearboxes already exist. R&D cost is likely minimal, maybe even small enough not to really show on a balance sheet. Do BMW use manuals with this engine already?

And given the choice, I'd be one of those to buy the manual.

As a nation we've become lazier & fatter - QED - auto boxes on sports cars as the norm.

Nail on head!!! that's why SUV's are a big seller now. People cant be bother to crouch down into a normal car nowadays.

[shalmaneser]

300bhp/ton said:

ging84 said:

Trevor555 said:

It's a shame some of these are auto only.

yawn
If you love playing with knobs that much go buy a capri (they are perfect for dogging)

Why such a derisive comment ? You got a chip on your should or what

Can't believe the day has come that I agree with 300bhp/ton!

[Pulse00]

Are people forgetting that auto boxes nowadays have paddles and can be driven in full manual mode?

[white_goodman]

300bhp/ton said:

Are 911’s really any more expensive than they were a decade ago? Or is it largely inflation?

Also wasn’t there a Z4 prior to this new one.

Not a mention of Lotus

Nor the 370z which actually seems somewhat of a bargain vs the others.

And of course you have the pony cars such as the Mustang, Challenger and Camaro. Which all probably deserve a mention if you are including Mercs and the F-Type.

Plus more niche offerings such as Morgan.

Is the inclusion of the Supra really that radical? Seems there was plenty of choice really.

A decade ago maybe not but my point was that there was some pricing parity between the mk4 Supra TT when it was new and a base 911 Carrera. Supra is still 50k, 911 is getting on for double that...

370Z is a 10 year old design, looks dated and cheap inside and down on power. Come on, it's well below 300bhp/ton! Kind of sits in a class of its own in between the 50k sports cars and the GT86/MX5.

Mustang GT is a great shout. It's a big/heavy old bus but the option of a 5 litre V8 and manual box for 50k is pretty compelling. Camaro or Challenger is not available on the UK market and besides the Challenger is no sports car (nice car though).

Morgan is surely more than 50k and probably a waiting list of several years? If I was spending 50k on a car, it would need to be something that I could live with every day. I would love an Elise but could I live with one every day? The Exige/Evora would be a good deal more expensive.

I'm pretty sure that I could live with a Supra/Alpine/Z4/Cayman/Mustang/F-Type/SLC every day but an Elise/Morgan maybe not so much?

Z4 was on a 3 year hiatus and the last one seemed more SLK than Boxster rival. Like the original Z4, this new one seems like a more credible Boxster rival with the bonus of a 6-pot motor.

The introduction of the new Z4, Supra and Alpine certainly seem to have opened this market up and potentially stolen some sales from Porsche.

Edited by white_goodman on Friday 17th May 14:06

[white_goodman]

300bhp/ton said:

Are 911’s really any more expensive than they were a decade ago? Or is it largely inflation?

Also wasn’t there a Z4 prior to this new one.

Not a mention of Lotus

Nor the 370z which actually seems somewhat of a bargain vs the others.

And of course you have the pony cars such as the Mustang, Challenger and Camaro. Which all probably deserve a mention if you are including Mercs and the F-Type.

Plus more niche offerings such as Morgan.

Is the inclusion of the Supra really that radical? Seems there was plenty of choice really.

A decade ago maybe not but my point was that there was some pricing parity between the mk4 Supra TT when it was new and a base 911 Carrera. Supra is still 50k, 911 is getting on for double that...

370Z is a 10 year old design, looks dated and cheap inside and down on power. Come on, it's well below 300bhp/ton! Kind of sits in a class of its own in between the 50k sports cars and the GT86/MX5.

Mustang GT is a great shout. It's a big/heavy old bus but the option of a 5 litre V8 and manual box for 50k is pretty compelling. Camaro or Challenger is not available on the UK market and besides the Challenger is no sports car (nice car though).

Morgan is surely more than 50k and probably a waiting list of several years? If I was spending 50k on a car, it would need to be something that I could live with every day. I would love an Elise but could I live with one every day? The Exige/Evora would be a good deal more expensive.

I'm pretty sure that I could live with a Supra/Alpine/Z4/Cayman/Mustang/F-Type/SLC every day but an Elise/Morgan maybe not so much?

Z4 was on a 3 year hiatus and the last one seemed more SLK than Boxster rival. Like the original Z4, this new one seems like a more credible Boxster rival with the bonus of a 6-pot motor.

The introduction of the new Z4, Supra and Alpine certainly seem to have opened this market up and potentially stolen some sales from Porsche.

Edited by white_goodman on Friday 17th May 14:06

[cerb4.5lee]

white_goodman said:

370Z is a 10 year old design, looks dated and cheap inside and down on power. Come on, it's well below 300bhp/ton!

It is all those things granted, but it does have one vital ingredient though...a manual gearbox!!

You can keep your slushers with paddles for me!!

I've only had one car with over 300bhp/ton and that was my Cerbera.