Seasoned Oak's Pony Car

[Seasoned Oak]

Moved to new thread...

I don't mind spending resources on things that bring me joy, like sports cars bearing obscenely large internal combustion engines, .

On that note ,but off subject ,mulling over a retro Camaro with Standard shift for the wife . Available in a few oversized engines. Been told anything over 350 HP (The v6) is basically unusable for all practical driving purposes except racing and tearing up tires. Your thoughts?

 

[Ashful]

On that note ,but off subject ,mulling over a retro Camaro with Standard shift for the wife . Available in a few oversized engines. Been told anything over 350 HP (The v6) is basically unusable for all practical driving purposes except racing and tearing up tires. Your thoughts?

Waaaaa...aaay off topic, but since you asked, how "retro"? Yes, given how poorly most old cars were set up, putting much horsepower behind them makes little sense, other than the fun of making lots of smoke and noise. Undersized brakes, poorly-engineered suspension, crappy balance, primitive tires, and cheap interiors... no thank you.

Into modern cars, which are well balanced and engineered, a completely different story. My daily driver is just shy of 500 hp, and can put it all to the pavement under good conditions, so I don't understand the "anything over 350 hp is basically unusable" sentiment. I've never owned a car that I thought was "too fast", and I've owned cars making over 550 hp.

We're living in a second "golden age" of horsepower, in my opinion. The stuff coming out the last three years is the best we have ever seen, whether it's SRT, the ZL1, or even the ultra-techy P100D, it is a great time to be into cars. Did you ever think we'd see an 858 hp production car selling at a price within the reaches of the working man, or a 707 hp car so popular you probably see at least one every day on your way to work? Folks will look back on this era with more fondness than the late 1960's, a generation from now.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Into modern cars, which are well balanced and engineered, a completely different story. .

I meant the retro look fairly new Camaros.

 

[Ashful]

I'm beginning to realize that not all trash bills are created equal. Mine is picked up weekly with a limit of 8 bags per week for 17.75 a month. This is loosely enforced as an occasional extra bag or two or an appliance now and then is picked up without issue.

So no incentive too recycle as a money saving prospect.

I haven't checked in a few years, but I recall paying something like $90 per quarter (4x per year), for unlimited pickup. I once threw away most of a Jeep Wrangler, and just put the entire exhaust system of a Ram Truck at the curb, last week. The biggest recent pickup was 1000 sq.ft. of carpet and padding from our basement, no extra charge, but I'm guessing that guy made an extra run to the dump that day.

All that, and our recycling still outweighs our garbage.

I meant the retro look fairly new Camaros.

Then there is only one: ZL1. Any other modern Camaro is a sheep in wolf's clothing.

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/th...1le-just-smacked-down-a-7min-16sec-ring-time/

 

[bholler]

Then there is only one: ZL1. Any other modern Camaro is a sheep in wolf's clothing.

I am sorry but even the v6 camaros can be fun to drive you don't need massive amounts of power to make a car quick and fun to drive.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

I am sorry but even the v6 camaros can be fun to drive you don't need massive amounts of power to make a car quick and fun to drive.

We had a 2002 V6 firebird ,and it was faster than any car i had in the 70s. And a lot of fun to drive. was 230 -50 or so HP.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

I don't agree with this "if you don't walk the walk you can't talk the talk BS" within the context of the current state of climate change and the environment. As an individual I could go to a zero carbon footprint and it would have no effect on anything.

Exactly ,unless its a massive effort ,which its not ,not much will change. I do think this is a example of where Govt can do what individuals will not do themselves. All the good intentions, wont mean a thing if its not widely adopted.

 

[Ashful]

I am sorry but even the v6 camaros can be fun to drive you don't need massive amounts of power to make a car quick and fun to drive.

There is much more than just a bigger motor in the $40k price difference between that cheaped-out stripped-down v6 Camaro, and a ZL1. They pull just about every last engineering accomplishment that makes that car worth driving out of it, to get down to a $25k price point.

Yes, you do need HP to make a 3500 lb. car quick, in fact that's in the very definition of HP. I'm not saying you wouldn't have fun driving a v6 Camaro, I'm just saying I wouldn't.

 

[bholler]

There is much more than just a bigger motor in the $40k price difference between that cheaped-out stripped-down v6 Camaro, and a ZL1. They pull just about every last engineering accomplishment that makes that car worth driving out of it, to get down to a $25k price point.

Yes, you do need HP to make a 3500 lb. car quick, in fact that's in the very definition of HP. I'm not saying you wouldn't have fun driving a v6 Camaro, I'm just saying I wouldn't.

Yes I know there is allot more to it than just the motor. But that does not mean that the v6 camaro cannot still be fun to drive. no obviously it will never be as fast as the zl1 but unless you are going to track days how much can you use that extra performance? And yes without a doubt a lower horsepower car can be allot more fun to drive than one with tons of power. To me quick has more to do with suspension and steering than power. Yes you need enough power to make it fun but you can have a quick fun to drive car without having massive amounts of power. Just look at the miata it does not have a fantastic power to weight ratio. It is pretty good but many cars beat it. But it is still one of the most fun cars to drive on twisty back roads.

I see quick and fast as two very different things.

 

[Ashful]

Yep, totally agreed, and the Miata is a great example. No one is praising their HP, but a lot of folks find them enormously fun to drive.

My criticism was unique to cars like the Camaro, as only the higher models (eg. ZL1) actually have the suspension and braking required to make them an enjoyable sporting car. The lower models in which they install that v6, are stripped of the suspension and braking upgrades, in the name of maintaining a marketable price point.

Dodge is doing all the same, right now. They have one model car, with MSRP's ranging $26k to $85k, the lowly V6 SXT to the mighty 858 hp Demon. Only the SRT cars (SRT 392, Hellcat, Demon) have the adjustable drive modes and massive braking system (largest disc brakes on any production car). Using magnetically-biased fluids, you are able to adjust the suspension and transmission behavior on the fly, including stall point of the torque converter in launch control, reconfiguring the car from "Driving Miss Daisy" to full-on track monster.

Ford, meanwhile, has fallen so far behind I'm not sure if they'll ever catch up. The Mustang has always been marketed as a low-cost platform, but come on guys... your best Shelby GT350R is 300 hp behind Dodge, and 125 hp behind the Camaro! You're not exactly out-doing them on handling, features, or interior, either.

I'm no brand loyalist, so I'm enjoying watching the market as a whole, right now. Whereas just a few years ago, one had to scratch together $120k to buy a car of this class, today the $85k Camaro is beating Corvettes, AMG GT's, McLarens, and 911's on the track. For a modest $50k, you can buy a 500 hp car that will outperform supposed "supercars" of 20 years past, under all straight and cornered track conditions. It's a good time to be alive!

 

[bholler]

My criticism was unique to cars like the Camaro, as only the higher models (eg. ZL1) actually have the suspension and braking required to make them an enjoyable sporting car. The lower models in which they install that v6, are stripped of the suspension and braking upgrades, in the name of maintaining a marketable price point.

I totally understand what you are saying but honestly the high end cars are out of reach of most people. And really even if I was able to financially I dont know that I could justify spending that much on a car. But to each their own. I have always had more fun in small light weight sports cars with relatively little power than big high power cars. But then again I have not driven any of the new batch of high power stuff

 

[Seasoned Oak]

Im considering one 5-7 years old or so . Can get a lot more car for the same money if it has a few miles on it already. Im finding even the less expensive models go down to about 20K and stop.

 

[Ashful]

Im considering one 5-7 years old or so . Can get a lot more car for the same money if it has a few miles on it already. Im finding even the less expensive models go down to about 20K and stop.

If budget is tight, and you want a pony car, why not consider the original? Mustangs cost a heck of a lot less than similarly-fast Camaros, and Challengers, at least when shopping new. A quick perusal of truecar indicates that translates to about 10% - 15% cheaper, per trim level.

You give up a bit of interior nicety, going from an SRT or higher-model Camaro to a Mustang, but that may not be a big deal for a fun car.

What's your price range? Daily driver, or weekend fun car?

 

[Ashful]

I totally understand what you are saying but honestly the high end cars are out of reach of most people. And really even if I was able to financially I dont know that I could justify spending that much on a car. But to each their own. I have always had more fun in small light weight sports cars with relatively little power than big high power cars. But then again I have not driven any of the new batch of high power stuff

That's the beauty of living today, bholler. Not since 1970 has high performance been within reach of so many. We went thru damn near 40 years of high performance cars costing three to five times the national average annual salary, but today you can buy a brand-new 500 hp car for $40k, and these aren't just poorly-engineered straight-line cars, but cars that are actually fun and safe to drive on country roads.

Yes, I understand $40k for a car they can't drive in the snow or haul a trailer with may be outside the spending profile of the average working family man, but it's well within reach of the average gearhead, which is very different than 20 years ago.

 

[semipro]

the Miata is a great example. No one is praising their HP, but a lot of folks find them enormously fun to drive.

I've driven a lot of very nice cars and one of my favorite drives was in a Miata modified with only a supercharger, better tires and struts.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

If budget is tight, and you want a pony car, why not consider the original? Mustangs cost a heck of a lot less than similarly-fast Camaros, and Challengers, at least when shopping new. A quick perusal of truecar indicates that translates to about 10% - 15% cheaper, per trim level.
You give up a bit of interior nicety, going from an SRT or higher-model Camaro to a Mustang, but that may not be a big deal for a fun car.

What's your price range? Daily driver, or weekend fun car?

Mustang would be my last choice,never had an ounce of luck with fords. Im a chevy guy ,so im going to test drive the lineup of newer model camaros to see what the driving experience is in all flavors. Prefer to rent one so i can get a better feel after a few hundred miles . My cousin just bought a new ZL1 so ill check that out as well. This car is for the wife, who will only drive it if its standard shift. Iv been a truck guy for years now but had corvettes, HP malibu,s , fast motorcycles ,custom vans you name it when i was younger. Really dont want to go much over 20K for this toy so if its a high end model it will have to be a few years old.

 

[firefighterjake]

I totally understand what you are saying but honestly the high end cars are out of reach of most people. And really even if I was able to financially I dont know that I could justify spending that much on a car. But to each their own. I have always had more fun in small light weight sports cars with relatively little power than big high power cars. But then again I have not driven any of the new batch of high power stuff

I've heard it said that it is more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Me . . . I'm kinda partial to lighter-weight cars. I realize the Miatas, WRXs (a bit heavier thanks to the AWD), Evos (when they made them), GTIs, Honda Si, etc. will never put down the same power as the V-8 muscle cars (and honestly many of these cars now can also compete with the smaller cars on the twisty tracks which used to be where the smaller imports really did well) . . . to me I just feel more connected to the car and road with a smaller, lighter car . . . if that makes any sense. The heavier, bigger cars have gobs of power and they're fun to a point, but I feel "isolated" from the feel of the road.

 

[Ashful]

I've heard it said that it is more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Me . . . I'm kinda partial to lighter-weight cars. I realize the Miatas, WRXs (a bit heavier thanks to the AWD), Evos (when they made them), GTIs, Honda Si, etc. will never put down the same power as the V-8 muscle cars (and honestly many of these cars now can also compete with the smaller cars on the twisty tracks which used to be where the smaller imports really did well) . . . to me I just feel more connected to the car and road with a smaller, lighter car . . . if that makes any sense. The heavier, bigger cars have gobs of power and they're fun to a point, but I feel "isolated" from the feel of the road.

Yeah, they can all be very fun. A buddy was really leaning on me hard to consider a WRX or an Evo, before I bought my wife a new Audi 10 years back. They're fun cars, for sure... but they always felt like something I should've been driving at age 18, not as a middle-aged adult. Stripped down cheap plastic interiors, and an overall lack of features, aimed at keeping MSRP around $30k.

You're also right on the isolation you feel from the road in some of the higher power cars, but the winds have been changing, there. The SRT cars, and the LS1, are very responsive, and do around 1.1 lateral G's. The SRT is stiff as any small sporty European sedan I've owned in years' past, when set up in Sport or Track modes. Snap 'em back to Default mode, and they feel like your average Lincoln town car.

My cousin just bought a new ZL1 so ill check that out as well. This car is for the wife, who will only drive it if its standard shift.

Lucky wife! That's a $60k+ car. Time to make friends with your cousin!

Mustang would be my last choice,never had an ounce of luck with fords. Im a chevy guy ,so im going to test drive the lineup of newer model camaros to see what the driving experience is in all flavors.

I have also never been a fan of Mustangs, Oak. Not because I'm not a "Chevy guy" or "Dodge guy", but because I see no value in Mustang's 50-year market aim of being, "the least expensive car you can buy with a v8 in America." I also wouldn't want to be associated with the primary demographic of young and obnoxious guys who seem to gravitate toward that car. But I can't deny how damn sexy some of the newer Mustangs look. It does make me want to check one out again, someday.

Particularly, if you're looking at stuff 5+ years old, the Mustangs don't have the performance. Not only do they fall short on horsepower and brakes, but they just flat out don't handle turns very well. A 2010 SS Camaro has independently-verified lateral acceleration around 0.9 g's (depending on test house), whereas the same-aged Mustang's best is way down around 0.77 g's. Might as well be driving a 1970's Fast Back, at that point!

So, Camaro is it. Have you spent some time on truecar or Edmonds, to map out age vs. trim level, to see where each trim level intersects that $20k point? I'd be shopping for an old low-miles 6.2L SS, or ZL1 if you are so lucky, before a newer v6 LS or LT. There are those nutty guys who buy these cars, and then keep them in the garage most of their life, on taking them out on sunny Saturdays. I don't understand those folks, I don't have the same self-control to have a nice car and not DRIVE it at every opportunity, but a patient search will turn one up.

 

[Seasoned Oak]

I'd be shopping for an old low-miles 6.2L SS, or ZL1 if you are so lucky, before a newer v6 LS or LT. There are those nutty guys who buy these cars, and then keep them in the garage most of their life, on taking them out on sunny Saturdays. I don't understand those folks, I don't have the same self-control to have a nice car and not DRIVE it at every opportunity, but a patient search will turn one up.

Bingo ! Iv found it cost effective to let the other guy pay the lions share of the new car price as per depreciation the value plummetts in the first few years. I bought a 6 yr old Silverado K2500 Ext cab in very good shape a while back for 9k . Iv seen a few nice 5-8 Yrs old Camaro,s with less than 10 K on the clock. And on my cousin , he is in his 70s. Also has a dragster ,a bit of a race car fanatic ,use to race a modified vega back in the day.

 

[Squirrely]

I've heard it said that it is more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Or even slow cars slow...

I'm a total gearhead, except it's with simple no frills economical stick shift vehicles with small engines. A lightly tricked out engine, suspension wheels and tires can be lots of fun to drive especially if you live in a canyon.

Greg

 

[Ashful]

I've heard it said that it is more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow.

Maybe, Jake. But I think we can agree that driving any car near the limits of its handling capability, which is the way I read your "drive a slow car fast" statement, is dangerous. The reason I like driving 180+ mph cars isn't that I'll ever go anywhere near that fast, but that any car designed for those speeds is rock-solid at the speeds I will drive it.

 

[begreen]

Maybe, Jake. But I think we can agree that driving any car near the limits of its handling capability, which is the way I read your "drive a slow car fast" statement, is dangerous. The reason I like driving 180+ mph cars isn't that I'll ever go anywhere near that fast, but that any car designed for those speeds is rock-solid at the speeds I will drive it.

Doesn't really matter sometimes, 180+ mph cars crash just as badly at 60 mph. As daddy uses to alway say - the most important nut in the car is the one behind the wheel.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Ashful]

It comes down to judgement and luck, and it seems you need both. 30 years behind the wheel of some very fast cars, and I haven't had an accident yet. So it seems my judgement is reasonably good, I just hope my luck holds. Meanwhile, my wife had a plow truck drive full speed into the back of her weeks-old Jaguar, while she sat at a stop sign. No error in judgement on her part, just bad luck. She walked away sore and bruised, but mostly unharmed, so I guess all her luck hadn't run out.

 

[begreen]

Glad it wasn't more serious. The only accident I have been in was similar. I was in line at a traffic light when a drunk in a Ford F250 rear-ended me in our new Camry wagon. Hit hard enough to lift up the rear and drive the nose under the car in front of me. Fortunately the Camry's rear crumple zone worked well and saved me from serious injury. The cop at the scene said I was luck to walk away from that crash.