Definition of a hot hatch?

[300bhp/ton]

EDIT: Wow, amazed, shocked how is this so difficult. Ok, what I'm after is NOT a subjective opinion on the cars listed, but some sort of rule that would categorize them. You can't just say "not a coupe" unless you can define what is or isn't a coupe. Simples...

Can anyone figure out how to write down a definition of what a hot hatch is or isn't? I can't.

It's easy to assume we know what makes a hot hatch and that we'd know one when we see one. But some vehicles are pretty hard to classify.


Here's a selection of vehicles that must meet or be excluded from any such rule:

Edited by 300bhp/ton on Friday 3rd June 15:02

[300bhp/ton]

zakelwe said:

I thought you said snatch there for a moment. It must be this working from home I am doing whilst drinking beer.

Er, aren't some of those coupe's, like the Celica? I wouldn't class them as a hot hatch.

Andy

Exactly....

But how do you write a definition to exclude them that doesn't exclude ones you want to keep? When does a hatch become a coupe or vice versa?

[300bhp/ton]

Mark-C said:

OK - I'll bite ..... surely a hot hatch is the most sporting version of a range of what are basically shopping trolleys. Any attempt to define it by BHP\weight etc will fall down because of how things change so a 205Gti is a hot hatch despite being less powerful than a base 207.

So ... for your examples

Maestro - Yes
Honda - No, it's a little coupe
Mini - grudgingly yes, I suppose so if it's a Cooper S
Rover - no, too big but 200\25 would be
500 Abarth
Scirocco - no, too distinct from the Golf
Imprezza - no, too big
Celica - no, it's a coupe
Cozzy - no, too big
Alfa - not a shopping trolley
Sunbeam - absolutely
Clio V6 - no, too different to standard
Escort Cozzy - not sure about this one
Supra (or whatever) - no, it's a coupe

All very subjective but gave me something other than work to ramble on a bout for 5 minutes

Ok, don't disagree, but what about a Honda Integra? They did a 5 door variant and with small engines too. So using your definition it must be a hot hatch and not a coupe, but then what is so different from the Integra to the CRX??

I think a similar issue would be faced with a Ford Puma too. Different engines and performance, so sort of fits the definition.

[300bhp/ton]

V88Dicky said:

Well first of all... a hot hatch needs to be a hatchback not a coupe, and I'd imagine, FWD, not rear or 4WD.

For example; Clio 172/182 = Yes
Clio V6 255 = No (more of a junior mid-engined supercar)

ok, but how do you define what is a coupe and what isn't? That's the question really. And how do you then apply it to other cars?

The aim is so that the definition decides if a car is a hatch or not, so it removes the subjective opinion from it.

[300bhp/ton]

V88Dicky said:

300bhp/ton said:

Ok, don't disagree, but what about a Honda Integra? They did a 5 door variant and with small engines too. So using your definition it must be a hot hatch and not a coupe, but then what is so different from the Integra to the CRX??

I think a similar issue would be faced with a Ford Puma too. Different engines and performance, so sort of fits the definition.

If it's a coupe bodyshell, then by definition, it's not a hot hatch. Integra and Puma are both coupes, no?

Are they? How do we define it as such?

This is an Integra:


And this one:


I admit these ones have lame engines, but they IMO certainly aren't coupes. So why does giving it 3 doors suddenly make it a coupe?

[300bhp/ton]

otolith said:

kambites said:

The MG is definitely not a saloon - the rear window raises with the boot lid.

It's a 3 box design, though. "Notchback".

No more than a MKIII-V Escort though.

There was a saloon 400/45/ZS variant, but there was also the hatch as pictured.

[300bhp/ton]

soxboy said:

otolith said:

It would be a high performance version of a 3 or 5 door small hatchback car designed primarily for ordinary household transport duties.

This ^^^^^ (albeit edited slightly).

But wouldn't that rule out a Focus ST/RS as they are certainly not a small hatch?

And buy that rule it still would sort of let cars like a Puma count too, i.e. the 1.4 and 1.6 Puma's are small, have hatches and certainly where designed for ordinary household transport duties. Or at least designed as capable as a Ford KA mk1.

[300bhp/ton]

StottyZr said:

How the hell did this topic get so confusing. A hot hatch is a sporty hatchback. How an Impreza is even debated to be one amazes me...

Here's a little list to give you an idea of what a hot hatch is:
Volkswagen Golf Gti
Ford Focus St/RS
Renault Megane 225
Honda Civic Type-R
Pug 106 Gti
Pug 205 Gti
Pug 206 Gti
Pug 306 Gti
Ford Fiesta St
Audi S3
Mini Cooper S
Mg Zr 160
Clio 172/182/197
Seat Leon Cupra/Cupra R
Seat Ibiza Cupra
Toyota Corolla T-sport
Polo Gti
BMW 1 series (hatchback not couple) 125i/130i
Alfa 147 GTA

Notice, all hatchback cars. All sporty. Anything that = hatchback and sporty is a hot hatch

Tell tale signs = big wheels, big tyres, powerful engine (compared to rest of the range), fun and as above... a hatchback (not couple, saloon, estate or supermini)

Right, now read back what you've written.

"Notice, all hatchback cars. All sporty. Anything that = hatchback and sporty is a hot hatch "

So Impreza wagon:

hatch = check
sporty = check

Even taking your extra criteria (that most past 80's hatches would fail on)

big wheels = check
big tyres = check
powerful engine = check
fun = check
hatchback = check... it has a hatch as the back!

[300bhp/ton]

Johnboy Mac said:

I think the answer is rather simple.

Any car that can compete with the Golf GTi of '76>, provided it's based on a basic hatchback production model, be similar in size & function to the Golf and reasonably priced, have a performance advantage both in power & handling over the car it's built on and a few modest visible design 'go faster' features.

Why a Golf though? I know common folklore often cites it as the first, but it wasn't really. And certainly not for the terming.

[300bhp/ton]

SteveS Cup said:

I don't understand why this is such a difficult answer to reach but imo...

A hot hatch is something that is "nippy", fun and practical.

A bit like a classic Mini (that has no hatch ) or even an MX-5 if you only need 2 seats.... arguably if there is only a seating requirement for 1-2 people, then a 2 seater is far more practical as it actually fulfills the role better.

[300bhp/ton]

kambites said:

5pen said:

I'll stick to my original answer, but I can't help myself... Why would that exclude the Focus? It's smaller than a Mondeo. Puma? Primarily for household transport duties? Not exactly the first car I'd think of for carrying more than 1 passenger, luggage/children/crap to the tip which are all things that could be considered houshold transport duties.

I wouldn't consider any 3-door car for carrying more than 1 passenger, luggage/children/crap to the tip regularly.

Exactly.

5spen, I'm not arguing, just asking.

But how is something like a Fiat 500, MINI or even a Pug 106 really any bigger or more practical than a Puma?

As for the Focus, well I'd say it's certainly boarding on a middle class hatch. It's heavier and almost as big as a Sierra (wider and taller, just a tad shorter).

[300bhp/ton]

Thesaint01708 said:

A hot hatchback = B sector, FWD hatchback with extra 'garnish' compared to its standard model, and quicker to 60 than 9 seconds.

anything that looked sporty but didnt do the sub 9 seconds should be called luke warm hatch (Nova 1.3SR, corsa SXi etc)

Or an original Golf GTI.....

[300bhp/ton]

zakelwe said:

And this begs the question

Why do yanks not like hatchbacks?

All these great cars wasted on them, they would rather have a boring old sedan. They even put a boot on the Ford Focus so it sells over there, so turning it into a 1980's Ford Orion.

Now the Ford Orion 1.6i was a blast mind you, it had the XR3 engine in it but skinny tyres. That really was a slag willing to be abused.

Andy

I think there are several answers to this:

1. They do have hatches and many small cars called compacts.
2. The terrain is not becoming to small cars, as a rule parking spaces are big and the roads wide. There is no need to have a small car.
3. Distances, it's not uncommon for an American to drive 50 miles to dinner and back. It's just so easy with wide straight freeways, even with the old 55mph limit you'd still do the drive in under an hour. In the UK and Europe 20 miles could take just as long to travel.
4. Roads and mpg, with big roads and the grid system small engines often aren't that great on fuel. For example a Focus SVT (it was rebadged in the UK as an ST170 ) had no better mpg ratings than a V8 pony car.
5. You could also argue why does Europe and specifically the UK have such a perverted fascination with hatches? Why don't we have more saloons and coupes, think of all the great cars we're missing out on.


Some more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_hatch
and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_Compact

[300bhp/ton]

Johnboy Mac said:

Well, 'folklore', the press & owners state that there was nothing to touch a Golf GTi at the time and for many years after, right up to the end of the Mk2 and I'd agree too. Sales figures would no doubt back that up too. Even the current Mk6 by all accounts is top of the class.

Edited by Johnboy Mac on Friday 3rd June 15:23

It certainly wouldn't be top of my class...

[300bhp/ton]

5pen said:

...and I'm saying it's an impossible question to answer. There are probably exceptions to every definition so far offered.

Did you read my first post on the thread?

Yes.

But was just trying to get some idea.

[300bhp/ton]

aka_kerrly said:

Il bite, no one with a ounce of knowledge about cars or even someone with no knowledge at all would try and convince anyone a fking a MX5 is a hot hatch or a substitute for one! Can we have one single thread on this site without someone trying to justify the fking things.

I for one mostly travel alone but when I do travel with passengers it is usually more than 1 or it's 2 people + 2 mountain bikes and associated equipment. I find that having a boot which can take fairly large items easily is very useful without having to drive a tank which is barely utilised the majority of the time. Most HH are easily fast enough to cope with modern traffic and be fun, yet also will return 30+ MPG which seems to be a fine balance between performance an economy.

It would be all to easy to say a hot hatch is a jack of all trades master of none but that is far to harsh, I'd argue I get 90% of what I require from any car from 1 hot hatch, it doesn't try too hard to be anything specific, instead it does nearly everything you could ever want well enough to make them excellent all rounders which for the majority of people who have 1 car makes plenty of sense!

dave

Hi Dave. I wasn't for one second trying to claim an MX5 as a hatch. Just a vehicle that fitted the definition being given. The MX5 was to illustrate the definition was flawed and didn't work.

[300bhp/ton]

aka_kerrly said:

kambites said:

So I think the gist of all this, is that everyone has a different definition. Which isn't surprising really, I suppose.

I think we all really know what a hot hatch is as summed up by the golf GTI it's just on PH people like to make things difficult for the sake of arguing.

I bet my mum could give a better description of a hot hatch an she usually identifies cars by colour an size.

dave

To me the original hot hatch has always been the Sunbeam though. That's not being argumentative. It's just my view and always has since I knew what a hot hatch was/is.

[300bhp/ton]

diddly69 said:

The ability to happily spend a lot of it's time on three wheels?!

Edited by diddly69 on Friday 3rd June 17:48

[300bhp/ton]

Cotty said:

wombat172a said:

I'll try and define hatchback here:

• 3 or 5 door car including a rear door as a hatch (door is hinged at top, near the roofline).
• The rear part of the roof line, before it stops dropping away needs to be in the same area of the rear wheel arch. If this point is further forward it is a coupe, if it is further to the rear then it is an estate:

I agree with that. Hot hatches tend to be more upright (for want of a better word) cars with more power than lesser models. The hatch should have a 45 ish degree angle. Too sloping a hatch = coupe, too upright = estate

I kinda agree with that too However how would you rank these using this rule (hatch, coupe or estate)?

hatch


estate


coupe