Cheapest V8 2 seater?
Discussion
Not much to say about Corvette or TVR. But since the SLK came up, I must say it was the dullest car I ever owned when it comes to supposed sports cars. Mine was a SLK350 with a 6-speed box. Tried the autos and couldn't stand them. Not even the V8.
It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
SPKR said:
Not much to say about Corvette or TVR. But since the SLK came up, I must say it was the dullest car I ever owned when it comes to supposed sports cars. Mine was a SLK350 with a 6-speed box. Tried the autos and couldn't stand them. Not even the V8.
It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
Thanks. This is good to know. But I have zero intentions of going with a SLK. The V8 is auto only and the V6, well, is not a V8. It's also not the type of car I'm looking for at all. Impression I have is it's just not raw enough or fun enough, of enough of an event. It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
braddo said:
Where are the best places to find C4/C5 Vettes for sale?
UK Corvette club. I'd imagine that the FB clubs for US cars would be a good shout too - other than that just set yourself up with an alert on ebay/autotrader, car-show season is coming and so there will be some for saleCM2020 said:
Did I infect you? 
A bit of idle classifieds browsing never hurt anyone 
My usual places for looking - PH, carandclassic, autotrader (not so much for older stuff) - have basically nothing.The C4 was my favourite Vette growing up because Face in the A-Team drove one and I thought it looked awesome. If I lived in the US they would be a nice old classic these days that could be modified to make better to drive. In the UK, not for me.
braddo said:
Where are the best places to find C4/C5 Vettes for sale?
There's a C5 ZO6 just gone up for sale on the Corvettes for sale UK FB group, 2004 so uprated engine output (405bhp) with 102k miles on it. Electron Blue, £18,000 which is an absolute bargain for a Z06 IMO. Looks very tidy. SPKR said:
Not much to say about Corvette or TVR. But since the SLK came up, I must say it was the dullest car I ever owned when it comes to supposed sports cars. Mine was a SLK350 with a 6-speed box. Tried the autos and couldn't stand them. Not even the V8.
It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
The difference between the 55 and the 350 is night and day. The 55 is a totally different car. I’ve had 3 SLK’s: A MY15 350, MY11 200 and a 2005 55. The 55 is in a different league straight out of the box. Every car I’ve owned apart from the SLK 200 I’ve modded to make it faster, handle better, sound better or stop better. The 55 is just right as it is. Too fast, scary fast. It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
The 171 55, the cheapest V8 2 seater that you can buy, is the size of an NC MX5 with 360 bhp and 0-60 in 4.3 secs, 12.7 1/4 mile. There are not many cars faster than it on public roads, the roof comes off and they’re reliable because they’re an AMG.
But it’s not for everyone.
maz8062 said:
SPKR said:
Not much to say about Corvette or TVR. But since the SLK came up, I must say it was the dullest car I ever owned when it comes to supposed sports cars. Mine was a SLK350 with a 6-speed box. Tried the autos and couldn't stand them. Not even the V8.
It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
The difference between the 55 and the 350 is night and day. The 55 is a totally different car. I’ve had 3 SLK’s: A MY15 350, MY11 200 and a 2005 55. The 55 is in a different league straight out of the box. Every car I’ve owned apart from the SLK 200 I’ve modded to make it faster, handle better, sound better or stop better. The 55 is just right as it is. Too fast, scary fast. It's not that it's bad. It's just that it isn't great in anything. It doesn't even feel like a Mercedes. The interior is trashy. Looks cheap and feels worse. It rattles and makes cheap plastic noises, which just shouldn't be there in a Mercedes. Doesn't handle that well or is fun on B-roads. The engine is a V6 but doesn't sound particularly intoxicating. The best part for me was the hot air scarf and the gear change, believe it or not. I didn't keep it very long.
Despite being down on power and somewhat sound, a MX5 is a much better and fun car. Mine was a R171.
The 171 55, the cheapest V8 2 seater that you can buy, is the size of an NC MX5 with 360 bhp and 0-60 in 4.3 secs, 12.7 1/4 mile. There are not many cars faster than it on public roads, the roof comes off and they’re reliable because they’re an AMG.
But it’s not for everyone.
Let's be honest. When somebody asks for a sports car, any SLK is just the wrong car. When you add the need for a manual gearbox, a SLK just doesn't belong in the conversation IMO.
Shifter1 said:
But in the contest of this thread it's useless, as it's slushbox only. OP asked manual. At least the 350 came with manuals. Also, despite being similar size to MX5, by how much more it weighs you would think it swallowed the MX5.
Let's be honest. When somebody asks for a sports car, any SLK is just the wrong car. When you add the need for a manual gearbox, a SLK just doesn't belong in the conversation IMO.
Disagree.Let's be honest. When somebody asks for a sports car, any SLK is just the wrong car. When you add the need for a manual gearbox, a SLK just doesn't belong in the conversation IMO.
I seem to recall a couple of the car mags quite liked the basic SLK200 (2nd gen) manual as an actual sports car. It'll be quicker down a twisty road than a C4 too.
AMG is a different beast but look, most cars are auto these days so a performance auto is the norm. It means older AMGs don't feel so unusual now. Obvs the torque converter locks above certain revs, so you select the gears manually and the in-gear performance and response is very similar to a manual, e.g. staying in 3rd along a twisty bit of road.
Far too many people think of older autos as being slushboxes that you just leave in D.
Anyway, the best answer to the thread title is still a Chimaera.
braddo said:
Shifter1 said:
But in the contest of this thread it's useless, as it's slushbox only. OP asked manual. At least the 350 came with manuals. Also, despite being similar size to MX5, by how much more it weighs you would think it swallowed the MX5.
Let's be honest. When somebody asks for a sports car, any SLK is just the wrong car. When you add the need for a manual gearbox, a SLK just doesn't belong in the conversation IMO.
Disagree.Let's be honest. When somebody asks for a sports car, any SLK is just the wrong car. When you add the need for a manual gearbox, a SLK just doesn't belong in the conversation IMO.
I seem to recall a couple of the car mags quite liked the basic SLK200 (2nd gen) manual as an actual sports car. It'll be quicker down a twisty road than a C4 too.
AMG is a different beast but look, most cars are auto these days so a performance auto is the norm. It means older AMGs don't feel so unusual now. Obvs the torque converter locks above certain revs, so you select the gears manually and the in-gear performance and response is very similar to a manual, e.g. staying in 3rd along a twisty bit of road.
Far too many people think of older autos as being slushboxes that you just leave in D.
Anyway, the best answer to the thread title is still a Chimaera.
And he asks for a manual. So there really isn't any suitable SLK.
Besides, I very much doubt a SLK200 would beat a C4 LT1 down a twisty road. Driving the C4, I would be willing to race anybody in a a SLK200 in these conditions.
Short of a pro F1 driver, before anybody brings it up. But seriously, the power to weight difference is just too much. You would have to be a totally useless driver to loose. The C4 does the sprint to 60 in about 5 secs. The SLK200 in almost 8 secs! It would probably look like that Top Gear episode where Clarkson claimed he could beat Hammond in the C6, because his car was better in the curves, whatever car that was. But Hammond annihilated him with the C6. The myth that Corvettes from C4 and up are not curve cars. Just a myth. And that a soft SLK would be beat it is hilarious honestly. Watch footage of late C4s on track. It doesn't even flitch or roll.
CM2020 said:
CABC said:
can we ask why not a TVR?
I suspect most of the forthcoming suggestions will not be any more reliable than a Rover engined one, and probably less involving too.
Because I would be buying it for the engine only. There is nothing else I enjoy in the V8 TVRs. I never liked the style, the interiors and I don't even think they are necessarily the cheapest.I suspect most of the forthcoming suggestions will not be any more reliable than a Rover engined one, and probably less involving too.
The OP is obviously deaf and blind.
braddo said:
A bit of idle classifieds browsing never hurt anyone My usual places for looking - PH, carandclassic, autotrader (not so much for older stuff) - have basically nothing.
The C4 was my favourite Vette growing up because Face in the A-Team drove one and I thought it looked awesome. If I lived in the US they would be a nice old classic these days that could be modified to make better to drive. In the UK, not for me.
shame you didn't write this 6 months ago - there was a lovely looking black rose for sale in Brentwood then (and a manual!) My usual places for looking - PH, carandclassic, autotrader (not so much for older stuff) - have basically nothing.The C4 was my favourite Vette growing up because Face in the A-Team drove one and I thought it looked awesome. If I lived in the US they would be a nice old classic these days that could be modified to make better to drive. In the UK, not for me.
Shifter1 said:
The C4 does the sprint to 60 in about 5 secs.
Ah, I assumed it was more like 7.And in fact a quick google suggests the early ones were 7.9...
https://www.thrillist.com/cars/nation/cheap-fast-c...
Shifter1 said:
The myth that Corvettes from C4 and up are not curve cars. Just a myth.
This is all in good fun. But I saw this video of a C5 loosing a race to a Fiero and thought of this comment:Maybe if it was a straight line the Corvette would have won.
Only taking the p. Still love Corvettes. Back at looking for C4s.
Edited by CM2020 on Monday 27th March 21:41
CM2020 said:
Shifter1 said:
The myth that Corvettes from C4 and up are not curve cars. Just a myth.
This is all in good fun. But I saw this video of a C5 loosing a race to a Fiero and thought of this comment:Maybe if it was a straight line the Corvette would have won.
Only taking the p. Still love Corvettes. Back at looking for C4s.
Edited by CM2020 on Monday 27th March 21:41
Corvettes are fine sports cars. Many times their problems ae their owners.
That poor Vette didn't deserve that. But it's a foolish mistake to underestimate Fieros, specially at the track. They have no problem putting the power down and when cornering they are very good, despite what you might be lead to believe from the internet. There is a white supercharged Fiero on YT beating several new V8s. Even got the jump on a C8.
braddo said:
Shifter1 said:
The C4 does the sprint to 60 in about 5 secs.
Ah, I assumed it was more like 7.And in fact a quick google suggests the early ones were 7.9...
https://www.thrillist.com/cars/nation/cheap-fast-c...
But the C4 is always slated based on the 1984 model, which barely made 200hp and was not a very good example. Fortunately that version only lasted 1 year and by 1985 it was on the way up. But by the time they went out, the C4 LT4 was putting out 330HP. This is just 15HP shorter of the mighty LS1. And of course, there was the king of the hill C4 ZR1 which put out 400HP. In 1995, this was quite the output.
Same with the Fiero for the record. All the bashing is mainly based on the 1984 4-cyl. base car. But it got a V6 in 1985 and the engine problems went away. It was then revised in late 1987 and the 1988 model, which was the last year, is almost a different car underneath. They basically threw the parts bin suspension in the trash and put proper sports car suspension on and a few other mods. Driving a 1984 and a 1988, besides looking the "same" feel like totally different cars. But still, what you see on the internet is the same criticism based on the earlier cars.
Shifter1 said:
No worries. This seems to be how most cars are judged to be fair. Always based on their first outing. I guess it makes sense. First impressions and all right.
But the C4 is always slated based on the 1984 model, which barely made 200hp and was not a very good example. Fortunately that version only lasted 1 year and by 1985 it was on the way up. But by the time they went out, the C4 LT4 was putting out 330HP. This is just 15HP shorter of the mighty LS1. And of course, there was the king of the hill C4 ZR1 which put out 400HP. In 1995, this was quite the output.
Same with the Fiero for the record. All the bashing is mainly based on the 1984 4-cyl. base car. But it got a V6 in 1985 and the engine problems went away. It was then revised in late 1987 and the 1988 model, which was the last year, is almost a different car underneath. They basically threw the parts bin suspension in the trash and put proper sports car suspension on and a few other mods. Driving a 1984 and a 1988, besides looking the "same" feel like totally different cars. But still, what you see on the internet is the same criticism based on the earlier cars.
then you need to ask yourself if the Buick GNX lump or Cyclone/Typhoon lump would fit the poncho... But the C4 is always slated based on the 1984 model, which barely made 200hp and was not a very good example. Fortunately that version only lasted 1 year and by 1985 it was on the way up. But by the time they went out, the C4 LT4 was putting out 330HP. This is just 15HP shorter of the mighty LS1. And of course, there was the king of the hill C4 ZR1 which put out 400HP. In 1995, this was quite the output.
Same with the Fiero for the record. All the bashing is mainly based on the 1984 4-cyl. base car. But it got a V6 in 1985 and the engine problems went away. It was then revised in late 1987 and the 1988 model, which was the last year, is almost a different car underneath. They basically threw the parts bin suspension in the trash and put proper sports car suspension on and a few other mods. Driving a 1984 and a 1988, besides looking the "same" feel like totally different cars. But still, what you see on the internet is the same criticism based on the earlier cars.
Shifter1 said:
CM2020 said:
Shifter1 said:
The myth that Corvettes from C4 and up are not curve cars. Just a myth.
This is all in good fun. But I saw this video of a C5 loosing a race to a Fiero and thought of this comment:Maybe if it was a straight line the Corvette would have won.
Only taking the p. Still love Corvettes. Back at looking for C4s.
Edited by CM2020 on Monday 27th March 21:41
Corvettes are fine sports cars. Many times their problems ae their owners.
That poor Vette didn't deserve that. But it's a foolish mistake to underestimate Fieros, specially at the track. They have no problem putting the power down and when cornering they are very good, despite what you might be lead to believe from the internet. There is a white supercharged Fiero on YT beating several new V8s. Even got the jump on a C8.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff