C&D November: C&D sports car under $30k shootout

[LonghornTX]

What a silly way to classify the cars....

Anyways, my buying order:
Mustang
GTI
350Z
MX-5
RX-8
Evo MR
Si
Cobalt SS

[Eye of the Tiger]

A 6 speed RX-8 might change your world.

Watch out for third gear though.? For some reason, I had trouble engaging that gear.? Every other shot was fine, but the 2-3 was troublesome.

When I considered purchasing an RX-8 I did some research. It turns out that in addition to the engine, the manual transmission can be very problematic; this includes not being able to engage one or more gears.

I would love a 350Z, but they're not cheap enough yet.

[cawimmer430]

A 6 speed RX-8 might change your world.

Watch out for third gear though.  For some reason, I had trouble engaging that gear.  Every other shot was fine, but the 2-3 was troublesome.

That's just it. I heard the manual RX-8's were hard to launch. I think it was Rotor on C&D who said that you had to rev the engine up a bit before releasing the clutch.

[Raza]

When I considered purchasing an RX-8 I did some research. It turns out that in addition to the engine, the manual transmission can be very problematic; this includes not being able to engage one or more gears.

I would love a 350Z, but they're not cheap enough yet.

I would buy a 350Z for 20 grand.  Not a penny more.  And on top of that, I'd probably only get one that is a Touring model, since a performance car should either have racing seats or leather.  It has the unique position of the most unengaging and least fun car in its class.  If you see where I placed it on my buying list, it only finished ahead of the Cobalt SS and the Civic Si, mainly because I'd never buy the Civic, and I haven't driven the Cobalt SS supercharged yet, so I'm making a biased judgment. 

I even placed it behind the Mustang GT, which is, by most modern standards, a bad car.  It's not good.  It really is a neanderthal of a GT, whose shifter is almost as rubbish as the Hyundai Tiburon's (it's more straightforward, but notchy as all hell.  I bounced off of third gear in that one, too--during hard shifts, the Mustang's transmission doesn't like you).  It's obviously not a polished handler, and it does nothing as well as any other car in its class.  The RX-8 is more engaging, and sharper, and more practical, the 350Z is faster and sharper as well, and both the Japanese cars are of higher quality. 

But hell, the Mustang is at least charming, as opposed the 350Z.  The Mustang is like large breed dog.  Playful and warm; it greets you by jumping on you, knocking you over, and licking your face.  The 350Z is like a robotic vaccuum cleaner.  It's there to get the job done.  Forgive me stretching the analogy since vaccuums don't actually interact with people, but if the 350Z were to greet you, it would politely shake your hand, and then say "I'm a machine for going fast.  That's what we'll be doing today."

On top of that, the 350Z's interior is like a large plastic V6 coffin.  There's virtually no light at all.  The only thing it has going for it is that it's a hatchback. 

[Raza]

That's just it. I heard the manual RX-8's were hard to launch. I think it was Rotor on C&D who said that you had to rev the engine up a bit before releasing the clutch.

Well yeah, you always have to rev up a bit to release the clutch.  I didn't do any hard launches with it, so I don't know if they mean revving it up and then dropping can be tough.  I've heard that the old STis were tough to launch in that fashion. 

[SVT666]

It's not that ironic.? He used to have a Mustang.

Yeah, I've had several Mustangs.  I'm already buying the parts for the next Mustang.

[JYODER240]

I got you.? But still, I think it's a stupid system.?

What about bodystyles?? The 350Z TR has the same basic package as the 350Z coupe, but is pretty much a different car.? I don't think even they'd say "all it takes is a chainsaw" for an open top, yeah?

350Z TR?

[Raza]

350Z TR?

Touring Roadster.

[SVT_Power]

Can you believe that is the first time anyone has ever called me that?  I can't believe I'm a Mustang Troll.  Yay!   

Mustang troll with Hemi sig and avatar

[SVT666]

Mustang troll with Hemi sig and avatar

Yeah, it's great ain't it?    When I buy my next Mustang, maybe I'll change my name back to Stang666 again.

[SVT_Power]

Yeah, it's great ain't it?    When I buy my next Mustang, maybe I'll change my name back to Stang666 again.

V6 auto convertible right?

[SVT666]

Yeah just like all my other Mustangs were  .  Only GT Coupes for me.  The last one I had was a GTS.  It had the very base V6 interior package (roll up windows, manual locks, no cruise, no ABS, no T/C, no power seat, no nothing) so it weighed quite a bit less then the GT, but it had the GT powertrain, suspension, and wheels.  Although when I was finished with it, it had 165hp more then stock without supercharging.

[LonghornTX]

I would buy a 350Z for 20 grand.  Not a penny more.  And on top of that, I'd probably only get one that is a Touring model, since a performance car should either have racing seats or leather.  It has the unique position of the most unengaging and least fun car in its class.  If you see where I placed it on my buying list, it only finished ahead of the Cobalt SS and the Civic Si, mainly because I'd never buy the Civic, and I haven't driven the Cobalt SS supercharged yet, so I'm making a biased judgment. 

I even placed it behind the Mustang GT, which is, by most modern standards, a bad car.  It's not good.  It really is a neanderthal of a GT, whose shifter is almost as rubbish as the Hyundai Tiburon's (it's more straightforward, but notchy as all hell.  I bounced off of third gear in that one, too--during hard shifts, the Mustang's transmission doesn't like you).  It's obviously not a polished handler, and it does nothing as well as any other car in its class.  The RX-8 is more engaging, and sharper, and more practical, the 350Z is faster and sharper as well, and both the Japanese cars are of higher quality. 

But hell, the Mustang is at least charming, as opposed the 350Z.  The Mustang is like large breed dog.  Playful and warm; it greets you by jumping on you, knocking you over, and licking your face.  The 350Z is like a robotic vaccuum cleaner.  It's there to get the job done.  Forgive me stretching the analogy since vaccuums don't actually interact with people, but if the 350Z were to greet you, it would politely shake your hand, and then say "I'm a machine for going fast.  That's what we'll be doing today."

On top of that, the 350Z's interior is like a large plastic V6 coffin.  There's virtually no light at all.  The only thing it has going for it is that it's a hatchback. 

C&D deamed the Mustang good enough to give it a Ten Best award the past two years in a row (something that the 350Z can not claim).  The mustang also gets better mileage (despite having a much more powerful engine and one less gear) than the RX-8, can out accelerate both the 350Z and RX-8, and when equipped with better rubber and suspension (like in the Shelby GT) can handle quite nicely.  The RX-8 does have better dynamics (no doubt because of it's much lighter weight) and a better interior, but it's exterior looks rather silly to me, and I would prefer to go without the suicide doors.  In addition, it's engine sucks oil, has no torque, and gets bad mileage.  The last 350Z I drove did not strike me as particularly involving or sharp in it's controls, but it does have a much more track oriented set up out of the box, including much better brakes.  However, IMO the interior doesnt look great, the rear strut tower brace makes for a rather frustrating cargo compartment, and the current VQ just doesnt good to me on the top end (maybe the HR will remedy this). Either of the three cars, though, would make for a fun ride, each in their own respective ways.

[MX793]

C&D deamed the Mustang good enough to give it a Ten Best award the past two years in a row (something that the 350Z can not claim). 

That doesn't mean much.  10Best isn't open to every car on the market.  Only new or significantly revised models qualify as well as winners from the previous year are considered and some years have a better batch of eligible cars than others.  The Z made 10Best in '03.  '04 was a good year for new/revised models, a much stronger showing than '03.  The eligible list was roughly 25% larger in '04 than '03.  Included were a revised S2000 (which had already won thrice prior to being bumped in '03), the Prius, the RX-8, the much loved TSX, the new GTO, the Lancer Evolution, the Mazda3, Acura TL, the all-new 5-series (a multi-time winner in the past) and new S4.  All were serious contenders for 10Best slots, IMO.  When all was said and done, more than half of the '03 winners got bumped in '04.

'06, on the other hand, was kind of a weak year for new/revised models.  Only 3 cars from the '05 list got bumped.  The Boxster replaced the SLK, and the RL and Magnum exchanged places with the MX-5 and A3 (a car I overlooked but apparently struck a cord with the editors).  Besides the three new winners, the only other cars from the eligible list that I'd consider serious contenders were the Solstice, all-new Civic, Lancer Evo IX, and maybe the SLK55 AMG.

[Raza]

And Accords have been on the list for the past 43 years.

[93JC]

Woulnd't be a C&D Ten Best list without an Accord on it.

[Raza]

Woulnd't be a C&D Ten Best list without an Accord on it.

Up to four Accords, I think. 

[LonghornTX]

That doesn't mean much.  10Best isn't open to every car on the market.  Only new or significantly revised models qualify as well as winners from the previous year are considered and some years have a better batch of eligible cars than others.  The Z made 10Best in '03.  '04 was a good year for new/revised models, a much stronger showing than '03.  The eligible list was roughly 25% larger in '04 than '03.  Included were a revised S2000 (which had already won thrice prior to being bumped in '03), the Prius, the RX-8, the much loved TSX, the new GTO, the Lancer Evolution, the Mazda3, Acura TL, the all-new 5-series (a multi-time winner in the past) and new S4.  All were serious contenders for 10Best slots, IMO.  When all was said and done, more than half of the '03 winners got bumped in '04.

'06, on the other hand, was kind of a weak year for new/revised models.  Only 3 cars from the '05 list got bumped.  The Boxster replaced the SLK, and the RL and Magnum exchanged places with the MX-5 and A3 (a car I overlooked but apparently struck a cord with the editors).  Besides the three new winners, the only other cars from the eligible list that I'd consider serious contenders were the Solstice, all-new Civic, Lancer Evo IX, and maybe the SLK55 AMG.

That is an astute observation, but it still does not take away from the poignancy of the statement (especially in the context that it is made) IMO, especially when you consider that these cars only compete with cars of their own category.  So even though 04' included many big models like the Prius, TSX, and TL, none of those models had any affect on the Z's chances in the sport coupe class (or so it seems given the titles they give the certain categories, correct me if I am wrong).  However, it should be noted that the Mustang does occupy a class in which it is really the only model on sale (Musclecars).

In the end, though the statement is not particularly convincing on it's own, it was only intended to rebuke the statement "by most modern standards, a bad car.  It's not good. ", which I think it does sufficiently.

[MX793]

That is an astute observation, but it still does not take away from the poignancy of the statement (especially in the context that it is made) IMO, especially when you consider that these cars only compete with cars of their own category.  So even though 04' included many big models like the Prius, TSX, and TL, none of those models had any affect on the Z's chances in the sport coupe class (or so it seems given the titles they give the certain categories, correct me if I am wrong).  However, it should be noted that the Mustang does occupy a class in which it is really the only model on sale (Musclecars).

Firstly, the categories in 10Best (like "best musclecar" that the Mustang won) were a new thing for 2005.  Back in '04, there were no categories for different types of cars in the 10Best competition.  Every eligible car competed directly with every other eligible car.  So yes, the Prius, TSX, TL, et al did affect the Z's chances of a repeat 10Best win in '04.

Secondly, I'm not entirely sure why the started using categories because based on '05 and '06, the categories don't make a lot of sense.  For starters, the 10 categories in '05 weren't the same as the 10 in '06.  It would make sense that if you're going to start choosing categories, that you'd keep them the same from year to year.  Secondly, there's a huge degree of overlap between some of the categories.  Also, there were some major categories that weren't listed in either year (like "best economy car").   To illustrate the point:

The categories for '05 were
-Luxury Sedan (RL)
-Sports Sedan (TSX)
-Luxury Sports Sedan (3 series)
-Performance Car (Corvette)
-Full Size Sedan (300)
-Wagon (Magnum)
-Muscle Car (Mustang)
-Family Sedan (Accord)
-Sports Coupe (RX-8)
-Luxury Sports Car (SLK)

For '06
-Sports Sedan (TSX)
-Sport Compact (A3)
-Luxury Sports Sedan (3 series)
-Performance Car (Corvette)
-Full Size Sedan (300)
-Muscle Car (Mustang)
-Family Sedan (Accord)
-Roadster (MX-5)
-Sports Coupe (RX-8)
-Luxury Sports Car (Boxster)

What happened to the Wagon and Luxury Sedan categories for '06?  There were certainly some luxury sedans and wagons in the eligible list.  Why isn't the TSX classed as a Luxury Sports Sedan?  I'm quite certain the "categories" have little if any bearing on the cars they select.  Seems to me the selection process is the same as it's always been (they pick the 10 eligible cars they like best, making an effort to consider and select cars from a variety of market segments) and they just started tacking fitting category names onto the winners to make it more apparent to readers that they try to pick cars from a variety of car types and not just their favorite 10 sports cars. 

In other words, had '06 been a stronger year for new/revised models, you might not have seen the Mustang make a second appearance.  You might not have seen a "best muscle car" category at all if none of the 10 cars they liked best were muscle cars, just as the wagon and luxury sedan categories were removed and replaced for '06 because they liked a roadster and a sport compact better than any of the eligible wagons or luxury sedans.

[SVT_Power]

Yeah just like all my other Mustangs were  .  Only GT Coupes for me.  The last one I had was a GTS.  It had the very base V6 interior package (roll up windows, manual locks, no cruise, no ABS, no T/C, no power seat, no nothing) so it weighed quite a bit less then the GT, but it had the GT powertrain, suspension, and wheels.  Although when I was finished with it, it had 165hp more then stock without supercharging.

Just joking. But anyway, good man going with that combination

[ifcar]

MX-7, I'm pretty sure they just picked their 10 favorites as they usually did, and then tried to assign categories to those 10.

[omicron]

MX-7, I'm pretty sure they just picked their 10 favorites as they usually did, and then tried to assign categories to those 10.

That's what I thought, too - pick a spread of cars they like, and fit different categories to each one.

[MX793]

MX-7, I'm pretty sure they just picked their 10 favorites as they usually did, and then tried to assign categories to those 10.

I picked up my '05 issue and that's exactly what they said they did.  Cars don't compete by category, they compete with every other eligible car and then are given a category after the fact.

[LonghornTX]

I picked up my '05 issue and that's exactly what they said they did.  Cars don't compete by category, they compete with every other eligible car and then are given a category after the fact.

Silly C&D.....BTW, thanks for the explanation of the 10Best thing, I kind of thought that was the case, but I was far too lazy to research it  .

[Raza]

Silly C&D.....BTW, thanks for the explanation of the 10Best thing, I kind of thought that was the case, but I was far too lazy to research it  .

I remember widespread confusion the first time they categorized, so you're not alone.