 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Dodge / Dodge Trucks / June 2007About 2008 Dodge Avenger SE
2008 Dodge Avenger SE The News from www.takeauto.com Pricing Information MSRP $18,220 Invoice $16,923 Standard Engine:2.4L I4, 16 valve, 173 hp @ 6000 rpm 4 speed automatic transmission 21 mpg city / 30 mpg hwy Optional Engine(s):2.7L V6, 24 valve, 189 hp @ 6400 rpm 4 speed automatic transmission 19 mpg city / 27 mpg hwy Standard Features: Driver Airbag With Multi-Stage Deployment Front Power 294-mm X 26-mm Vented Disc and Rear Power 229-mm X 35-mm Drum Brakes AM/FM Radio With 4 Speakers Total; CD Player; MP3 Player Options: 4-Wheel Anti-Lock Brakes Engine Block Heater AM/FM Radio; 6-Disc CD Changer; MP3 Player Review the pictures to www.takeauto.com > 2008 Dodge Avenger SE > The News from www.takeauto.com [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Review the pictures to www.takeauto.com No manual transmission? No thanks then. Autos take the fun out of driving a car. Bob And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even look if a standard shift is not available. Then there is also the thought that if the car is not available with a standard shift, then it really isn't much of a performance car and is just a wanna be, much like the Mustang II  SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > > 2008 Dodge Avenger SE > > The News from www.takeauto.com [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Bob >And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the >cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even look >if a standard shift is not available. Then there is also the thought that >if the car is not available with a standard shift, then it really isn't much >of a performance car and is just a wanna be, much like the Mustang II Dodge has bigger problems. They need to convince the public that they are going to still be around in a few years now that corperate raiders own them. I would hate to see them go under but things do not look good unless its workers accepts some serious concessions and reduce labor costs to save capital to be used to help turn them around and keep them off the auction block. Daimler paid 500 million to unload them after that monies for sale were distributed and you do not spend that amount to unload something unless there is a lot more red ink in the pipeline and you are cutting your losses. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the > cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even look > if a standard shift is not available. Then there is also the thought that > if the car is not available with a standard shift, then it really isn't much > of a performance car and is just a wanna be, much like the Mustang II That is true but the Avenger was never designed or marketed as a performance car. Not in the 90's version and not now. It's a sedan. Even sports or performance cars today are sold over 80% autos. Only a few want manuals. How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? How many new Mustangs? Take a trip to your local drag strip and tell me how many funny cars, dragsters, and even performance bracket racers are manuals these days. There just isn't enough public demand for manuals except on low end models or in trucks. I do see manuals often in small sporty coupes. > > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the > > cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even look [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That is true but the Avenger was never designed or marketed as a > performance car. Not in the 90's version and not now. It's a sedan. That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The guy is testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their autosticks and making them play that song and why would he be doing that unless they are trying to show this as a performance vehicle? > Even sports or performance cars today are sold over 80% autos. Only a > few want manuals. The problem is that few are the Jones and if they don't buy them, then the rest of the flock really doesn't either. > How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. > How many new Mustangs? Take a trip to your local drag strip and tell me how many > funny cars, dragsters, and even performance bracket racers are manuals > these days. That is not the point. I am not arguing performance here, only perception and both the Mustang and the Vette are offered with standard shifts. > There just isn't enough public demand for manuals except on low end > models or in trucks. I do see manuals often in small sporty coupes. That is not as true as you might think and while the auto can in most cases outperform a standard in a flat out run, a standard can easily keep pace and outperform the auto in winding hilly runs where downshifting the auto will cook it after a while and it is a hell of a lot more fun and what is the real purpose of a sports car anyway but to have fun. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when >> > the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > to > show this as a performance vehicle? A dhifter similar to that is in the SRT. It shifts as quick as a standard. >> Even sports or performance cars today are sold over 80% autos. Only a >> few want manuals. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. I guess none of them drive a Z06. >> How many new Mustangs? Take a trip to your local drag strip and tell me > how many [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > cook it after a while and it is a hell of a lot more fun and what is the > real purpose of a sports car anyway but to have fun. >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool >> > when the cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > autosticks and making them play that song and why would he be doing > that unless they are trying to show this as a performance vehicle? The current Avenger is a FWD weeniemobile. Nothing about it is a serious performance vehicle. To address your question, you're a victim of a successful marketing ploy. >> Even sports or performance cars today are sold over 80% autos. Only >> a few want manuals. > > The problem is that few are the Jones and if they don't buy them, then > the rest of the flock really doesn't either. Serious enthusiasts go for the sticks; most other people go for the autos. Except for base entry level weenieboxes, automatics are standard equipment whereas a stick is optional. >> How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? > > A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. Most Corvette drivers nowadays aren't serious performance enthusiasts. They're older guys who just want to be seen in one. >> How many new Mustangs? Take a trip to your local drag strip and >> tell me [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > perception and both the Mustang and the Vette are offered with > standard shifts. And they're both offered with automatics too. Most dealers stock automatics because that's what sells the most. >> There just isn't enough public demand for manuals except on low end >> models or in trucks. I do see manuals often in small sporty coupes. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > lot more fun and what is the real purpose of a sports car anyway but > to have fun. Sticks are great on a course as you say, but the percentage of people that buy them for that reason is inconsequential to makers and dealers. The vast majority of buyers will go for an automatic because it fits their lifestyle. > >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool > >> > when the cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > serious performance vehicle. To address your question, you're a victim > of a successful marketing ploy. And you don't have a complete understanding of the thread. I never said that it was, only that DC is trying to market it as such and I didn't fall for anything. > >> Even sports or performance cars today are sold over 80% autos. Only > >> a few want manuals. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > autos. Except for base entry level weenieboxes, automatics are standard > equipment whereas a stick is optional. Actually, the automatic is almost always the option and at extra cost. The dealerships carry mostly automatics because they are easier to sell. The point is that the enthusiasts in many cases are the driving force behind sales, especially with performance oriented vehicles and if they don't look, neither does anyone else. > >> How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? > > > > A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. > > Most Corvette drivers nowadays aren't serious performance enthusiasts. > They're older guys who just want to be seen in one. That sounds like you don't like Chevy. Either way, they are still offered with standard shifts, just like the Mustang. > >> How many new Mustangs? Take a trip to your local drag strip and > >> tell me [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > And they're both offered with automatics too. Most dealers stock > automatics because that's what sells the most. You are just unable to see the point. These cars sell because they are thought of as cool to own and that is in some ways because the enthusiasts buy them first but if they ignore it..... > >> There just isn't enough public demand for manuals except on low end > >> models or in trucks. I do see manuals often in small sporty coupes. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > The vast majority of buyers will go for an automatic because it fits > their lifestyle. While true to a point, they still buy what they perceive as cool and if the car is ignored by the cool people..... SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The guy is > testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their autosticks and making > them play that song and why would he be doing that unless they are trying to > show this as a performance vehicle? Thats just a commercial. Mitsubishi does has a commercial that kinda implies the Lancer is a sports car. It's nothing of the sort. To me they're marketed as inexpensive sporty 'looking' fun cars to drive. A 2.4L engine or the V6 is not performance by anyones standards. >> How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? > > A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. Thats your crowd. The vast majority of Vettes and Mustangs sold the past few decades are automatics. > That is not the point. I am not arguing performance here, only perception > and both the Mustang and the Vette are offered with standard shifts. Thats true but its a small market share. Most of both those models are sold as automatics. > That is not as true as you might think and while the auto can in most cases > outperform a standard in a flat out run, a standard can easily keep pace and > outperform the auto in winding hilly runs where downshifting the auto will > cook it after a while and it is a hell of a lot more fun and what is the > real purpose of a sports car anyway but to have fun. It only cooks an auto if an idiot keeps it in drive in hilly areas. > > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The guy is > > testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their autosticks and making [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > they're marketed as inexpensive sporty 'looking' fun cars to drive. A > 2.4L engine or the V6 is not performance by anyones standards. I never said that it was but the commercial indicates that it is. IF it came with a 5 or 6 speed, sales would increase. > >> How many Corvettes do you see with manuals? > > > > A hell of a lot more than automatics in the crowd that I hang with. > > Thats your crowd. The vast majority of Vettes and Mustangs sold the > past few decades are automatics. They are sold that way because that is what most of the dealerships order because since anyone can drive them, they are easier to sell and I don't recall ever saying that standard shift was more popular, only that sport and performance cars need to have it available for them to be taken seriously. > > That is not the point. I am not arguing performance here, only perception > > and both the Mustang and the Vette are offered with standard shifts. > > Thats true but its a small market share. Most of both those models are > sold as automatics. Once again Miles, you can't see the forest thru the trees. > > That is not as true as you might think and while the auto can in most cases > > outperform a standard in a flat out run, a standard can easily keep pace and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > It only cooks an auto if an idiot keeps it in drive in hilly areas. You really don't seem to know a hell of a lot about cars if you believe that. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > I never said that it was but the commercial indicates that it is. IF it > came with a 5 or 6 speed, sales would increase. Highly doubtful. The Calibers are available with a 5 speed but only account for about 15% of sales and only on the base models. Manual transmissions are just not very popular. Every single one of my cars from 1984 till 2000 were manuals and I struggled each time at the dealers to find one. No, they weren't out of stock because of high demand. The dealers stocked so few because they don't sell. People want automatics. > They are sold that way because that is what most of the dealerships order > because since anyone can drive them, they are easier to sell Yep. The public demands automatics FAR more than manuals. > recall ever saying that standard shift was more popular, only that sport and > performance cars need to have it available for them to be taken seriously. Taken seriously? Ok, so they produce a manual but it accounts for only 10% of sales of a particular model. Does that make the public take it seriously even though they don't buy it with a stick? > Once again Miles, you can't see the forest thru the trees. No Tom. Fact is people prefer automatics. You seem to be saying that more cars of a given model will be sold if they simply have a manual available even though people won't buy it. >> It only cooks an auto if an idiot keeps it in drive in hilly areas. > > You really don't seem to know a hell of a lot about cars if you believe > that. An auto cooks when it continually shifts up and down. A typical car will not cook climbing a hill if its held in the proper gear. We're not talking about towing a heavy trailer with inadequate cooling here Tom! > > I never said that it was but the commercial indicates that it is. IF it > > came with a 5 or 6 speed, sales would increase. > > Highly doubtful. The Calibers are available with a 5 speed but only > account for about 15% of sales and only on the base models. Then that would indicate a possible 15% increase in sales now, wouldn't it but I think that it could go higher. > Manual transmissions are just not very popular. Every single one of my cars > from 1984 till 2000 were manuals and I struggled each time at the > dealers to find one. No, they weren't out of stock because of high > demand. The dealers stocked so few because they don't sell. People > want automatics. No, the automatics can be sold to anyone since anyone can drive them. It is not just a matter of demand, it is a matter of faster sales and since many will just buy the automatic off of the lot rather than order it and wait but those who really want one will order it so they normally don't lose the sale by not carrying the standard shift in stock. > > They are sold that way because that is what most of the dealerships order > > because since anyone can drive them, they are easier to sell > > Yep. The public demands automatics FAR more than manuals. Demand has little to do with it since most dealerships are heavy in auto's and light to non-existant in standard shifts. > > recall ever saying that standard shift was more popular, only that sport and > > performance cars need to have it available for them to be taken seriously. > > Taken seriously? Ok, so they produce a manual but it accounts for only > 10% of sales of a particular model. Does that make the public take it > seriously even though they don't buy it with a stick? Yep, because many of the trend setters are enthusiasts and in a sports car or roadster, they are looking for the standard shift and if they don't buy them, then the trend has a much harder time getting started. > > Once again Miles, you can't see the forest thru the trees. > > No Tom. Fact is people prefer automatics. You seem to be saying that > more cars of a given model will be sold if they simply have a manual > available even though people won't buy it. In the sports car, muscle car, and roadster arena, yep. > >> It only cooks an auto if an idiot keeps it in drive in hilly areas. > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > will not cook climbing a hill if its held in the proper gear. We're not > talking about towing a heavy trailer with inadequate cooling here Tom! No, we are talking about sports cars and driving them as such where the gears are being used to control the cars speed and forcing the auto into lower gears at high speeds will cause excessive heat and is for the most part boring as well. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Then that would indicate a possible 15% increase in sales now, wouldn't it > but I think that it could go higher. It most certainly would not. A fair amount of those buyers may have purchased an automatic had a manual not been available. They may have bought the manual simply because it was much lower priced and not because they wanted a stick shift. Thats why so many cars come with a stick only in the stripped base models. > No, the automatics can be sold to anyone since anyone can drive them. It is > not just a matter of demand, it is a matter of faster sales and since many > will just buy the automatic off of the lot rather than order it and wait but > those who really want one will order it so they normally don't lose the sale > by not carrying the standard shift in stock. Hmmm..I said it was higher demand for automatics and you reply NO...then explain to me how its demand...easier sales. Yes TBone, people buy automatics because thats what they want and prefer. If more people wanted sticks then more would be on the lot. > Demand has little to do with it since most dealerships are heavy in auto's > and light to non-existant in standard shifts. Tom, this is because of higher demand for automatics!! You seem to think dealers stock what they want to sell and people follow. No Tom, dealers stock what people want. > > Then that would indicate a possible 15% increase in sales now, wouldn't it > > but I think that it could go higher. > > It most certainly would not. And you know this how???? Oh, that's right, you don't. > A fair amount of those buyers may have > purchased an automatic had a manual not been available. Funny, I thought that I said this as a reason for so few standard shifts being found on the lots. Thanks for backing up my point. > They may have > bought the manual simply because it was much lower priced and not > because they wanted a stick shift. LOL, yea Miles, that's a good reason for someone to buy a car that they probably don't know how to drive. > Thats why so many cars come with a stick only in the stripped base models. Once again, you prove your lack of knowledge. While this ,ay be one reason, the more likely one is that the standard shift that comes with the bargin basement model is not strong enough to deal with the increased weight and HP of the upgraded models. This IS the reason that you could not get the 1500 series Ram with a 5 speed and the 360. > > No, the automatics can be sold to anyone since anyone can drive them. It is > > not just a matter of demand, it is a matter of faster sales and since many [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Hmmm..I said it was higher demand for automatics and you reply NO...then > explain to me how its demand...easier sales. You act as if there is no demand at all for standard shifts but said yourself that you searched for one multiple times. The demand is there and it is not as great as it is for the automatics but it is not non-existant either. There is a much greater chance of converting someone wanting a standard to an automatic then it is to convert someone wanting an automatic over to a standard shift so they stock mostely automatics. > Yes TBone, people buy > automatics because thats what they want and prefer. If more people > wanted sticks then more would be on the lot. Sorry, but no. Sticks cost less and that equates to lower profits. Why would you make it easier to lose money? Since just about all of the dealers tend to stock the more expensive options, there is no motivation to stock the cheeper ones. If people really want one of those, they can order it. > > Demand has little to do with it since most dealerships are heavy in auto's > > and light to non-existant in standard shifts. > > Tom, this is because of higher demand for automatics!! You seem to > think dealers stock what they want to sell and people follow. That is because that is EXACTLY how it works. While there is a higher demand for automatics, especially in the granny cars, the demand is not 100% for them and yet, Dodge makes it damn hard to get anything but.... Perhaps that is why they are # 4 or is it #5 now. > No Tom, dealers stock what people want. Dealers stock what they can move the easiest and sometimes, that means telling the customer that is all that they can get or all they can get today and it is something that they can live with. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Once again, you prove your lack of knowledge. While this ,ay be one reason, > the more likely one is that the standard shift that comes with the bargin > basement model is not strong enough to deal with the increased weight and HP > of the upgraded models. Not true at all. The Caliber's 5 speed is the same transmission found in the older Stratus which had a V6 with the 5 speed and is much heavier. The CVT's are what can't handle high torque very well. > You act as if there is no demand at all for standard shifts but said > yourself that you searched for one multiple times. The demand is there and > it is not as great as it is for the automatics but it is not non-existant > either. Never said it was non-existant. I said the reason for dealers having so few is because of very low demand for them. It's a select group that wants manuals and not an easy sale. > There is a much greater chance of converting someone wanting a > standard to an automatic then it is to convert someone wanting an automatic > over to a standard shift so they stock mostely automatics. Like I said. It's market demand. Too few people looking for manuals. > Sorry, but no. Sticks cost less and that equates to lower profits. Why > would you make it easier to lose money? Since just about all of the dealers > tend to stock the more expensive options, there is no motivation to stock > the cheeper ones. If people really want one of those, they can order it. Lower end base model cars do not sell anywheres near at the rate of better equipped cars. Look at the Calibers. They are Dodges low end entry level car. Yet the base model SE's will sit on the lot and be passed up for higher end SXT's and R/T's. You're way off base thinking that dealers stock what they want to sell and people just buy whats available!! Sorry Tom, dealers stock what people want to buy, not the other way around. > That is because that is EXACTLY how it works. No Tom, it most certainly is NOT. Dealers stock what people want. They don't shove what they want to sell onto the consumer. It does not work that way. Good thing you're not in sales!! > > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The guy is > > testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their autosticks and making [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > they're marketed as inexpensive sporty 'looking' fun cars to drive. A > 2.4L engine or the V6 is not performance by anyones standards. Miles, you are only partially correct here. If you are refering to just the Lance, like the one they show in the commercial with the new paddle shifters, yes, it is a sporty looking but not a sports car. If you are generalizing the "Lancer" this is where you are incorrect as the Lancer EVO is a sports car. >> > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The >> > guy is testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > you are generalizing the "Lancer" this is where you are incorrect as > the Lancer EVO is a sports car. I wouldn't consider the EVO or the WRX STi (EVO's main competitor) "sports cars" by any means, as they are both 4-doors and have their roots as FWDs. The original American sports car is the Corvette. These days, makers' marketing departments are doing their damndest in trying to convince potential buyers that weeniemobiles are "sporty- cars" or "muscle-machines". Unfortunately, it's still just marketing. > >> > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? The > >> > guy is testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > "sports cars" by any means, as they are both 4-doors and have their > roots as FWDs. The original American sports car is the Corvette. Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being "required" to classed as a sports car. I'll give you that "back in the day" only the US made "sports cars" and yes they were all (almost at least) manuals, with only two doors, but wake up and smell the coffee, this is not "back in the day" anymore. > These days, makers' marketing departments are doing their damndest in > trying to convince potential buyers that weeniemobiles are "sporty- > cars" or "muscle-machines". Unfortunately, it's still just marketing How is the EVO and the WRX STi a "marketing ploy, please explain. Though I personally don't care for either of them, what they are able to do in both performance and handling right out of the box is far from a ploy. > Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a > "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being > "required" to classed as a sports car. I had a similar discussion with a guy I use to work with (an Indian) that absolutely would not budge off of his position that to be considered a "real sports car" it had to be RWD. He consider the Honda S2000 a "real sports car" because of this. I still get a good chuckle from that. Wanna talk about a "real sports car"? Aston Martin DB9. That car gives me a chub. Craig C. >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Craig C. Wasn't there some sort of deal that a car had to have two seats only and so many horsepower per pound?. Or maybe cubic inches of displacement per pound to qualify as a sports car.. > >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a > >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Wanna talk about a "real sports car"? Aston Martin DB9. That car gives > > me a chub. I would love to be able to get my hands on a Porsche 911 Cararra tt! > Wasn't there some sort of deal that a car had to have two seats only and so > many horsepower per pound?. Or maybe cubic inches of displacement per pound > to qualify as a sports car..- Hide quoted text - Maybe back in the late 60's and early 70's that was the case. You take the EVO and it has as much or more power then some V-8 that are coming out today, and pound for pound they are lighter. A true EVO comes with a lot of carbon fiber and light weight panles already on it. >> >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > EVO comes with a lot of carbon fiber and light weight panles already > on it. If an EVO is a sports car, then what's a Neon SRT4 or even an Omni GLHS? > >> "Craig C." <mcraig...@gmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > - Show quoted text - I would class the SRT4 in the same category as the EVO and the WRX, can't comment on the Omni, don't know anything about it. Again though, a car can be a "sports car" with 4 doors and FWD, but hey, you are free to feel/think as you like, just as I and anyone else is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and religion. > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and religion. Interesting observation, Larry. I imagine all subjects that are left up to each one of us to define for ourselves has a good chance of ending up being fought about at one point or another. Craig C. > > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and religion. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Craig C. Yup. I see a sports car as something that was made to go FAST and handle very well, regardless of doors and drive train configuration. > I see a sports car as something that was made to go FAST and handle > very well, regardless of doors and drive train configuration. Me too. For some reason, I just can't put any Japanese car in that category. I suppose that the Honda S2000 has just as much right to be considered a sports car as a Mini Cooper S. Must be that bombing incident 65 years ago. :-) Craig C. "Craig C." <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote in news:IIBei.474$K44.163 @newssvr13.news.prodigy.net: >> I see a sports car as something that was made to go FAST and handle >> very well, regardless of doors and drive train configuration. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Craig C. The S2000 is way more of a sports car than the Mini. And that's even by Larry's posted definitions.. > The S2000 is way more of a sports car than the Mini. And that's even by > Larry's posted definitions.. I think these folks might disagree with you: http://www.mini7.co.uk/ Those races are a riot to watch. Craig C. > > The S2000 is way more of a sports car than the Mini. And that's even by > > Larry's posted definitions.. Once again, those are not MY definitions. I cited the sources for both and sorry to say neither are referenced as Larry's. Sorry Joe, follow along please. :) > > > The S2000 is way more of a sports car than the Mini. And that's even by > > > Larry's posted definitions.. > > Once again, those are not MY definitions. I cited the sources for > both and sorry to say neither are referenced as Larry's. Sorry Joe, > follow along please. :) Speaking of sports cars, I just saw this and thought it was rather fitting for this thread. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070620/ap_on_re_us/crushed_hot_rods >> > The S2000 is way more of a sports car than the Mini. And that's >> > even by Larry's posted definitions.. > > Once again, those are not MY definitions. I cited the sources for > both and sorry to say neither are referenced as Larry's. Sorry Joe, > follow along please. :) No problem. I'd just love to hear the DB9 owner's response to the Mini owner who says his Mini is a sports car. >> > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >> > religion. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I see a sports car as something that was made to go FAST and handle > very well, regardless of doors and drive train configuration. Larry, ya gotta make up yer mind. Is it what you said above, or is it the definition from your other post?? > >> > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and > >> > religion. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Larry, ya gotta make up yer mind. Is it what you said above, or is it > the definition from your other post?? No I don't have to make up my mind. A statement was made about there not being a specific definition of "sports cars" so I provided two different ones. No where did I ever indicate that they were MY definitions. >> >> > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >> >> > religion. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > different ones. No where did I ever indicate that they were MY > definitions. LOL! O-kay. >> >> > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >> >> > religion. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > different ones. No where did I ever indicate that they were MY > definitions. I don't see how anybody can call a car that weighs in excess of 4,000 friggin' pounds a sport car. You folks telling me that my Charger SRT is a damn sports car???? >>> >> > is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >>> >> > religion. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > friggin' pounds a sport car. You folks telling me that my Charger SRT > is a damn sports car???? That thing's a muscle car, and a damn good one at that. >>>>>>is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >>>>>>religion. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > friggin' pounds a sport car. You folks telling me that my Charger SRT is a > damn sports car???? Only if it had a 5 speed manual in it. <g> Bob >>>>>>>is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and >>>>>>>religion. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] >> a damn sports car???? > Only if it had a 5 speed manual in it. <g> Okay! <VBG> The Z06 was a 6speed and after a few trips spending time in stop and go traffic for a hour it was getting old. Now with the automatic in the Charger I have the option of doing it myself or letting the trans do it's thing. Now that I think about it, one trip to FL I never used cruise control until SC. Shifting constantly for about 18 hours. It sucked. Roy > Bob >>>is. This is prob as bad a subject to discuss as politics and religion. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I see a sports car as something that was made to go FAST and handle > very well, regardless of doors and drive train configuration. Well I don't know if I'd call it a sports car or not but I bought a brand new 93 Ford Probe 2 dr with a 5 speed manual back in 93. That car drove and handled very well. I remember taking 90 degree turns in that car at over 50mph and not once did the tires lose traction. I took it out on our police driving track and it handled better than the squad car I drove every day. I called it my "go kart on steroids." To me it was so fun to drive mainly because of the 5 speed manual. I wouldn't have had nearly as much fun with an auto. And I still feel that way today with any similar car I drive. I wouldn't even look at the new Avenger now since a manual isn't available. Too bad for me and Dodge too since other people that feel like I do won't buy one. Bob >>> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >>> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > and so many horsepower per pound?. Or maybe cubic inches of > displacement per pound to qualify as a sports car.. I don't know that there's a specific definition, but it's probably easier to figure out what isn't a sports car. > >>> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a > >>> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Actually there is, here you go right from the American Heritage Dictionary online. sports car (n.) An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds. Another From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car >> >>> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is >> >>> a "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car I don't know that either of those qualify as a specific definition, but both definitions pretty much preclude some of the cars already considered in this thread. "Craig C." <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote in news:1Wyei.2696$vi5.2394 @newssvr17.news.prodigy.net: >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Craig C. What FWD is considered a sports car? BTW, I'll agree 100% with you on the DB9. The Vantage and Vanquish are no slouches either. > What FWD is considered a sports car? Well, a hand full come to mind that are AWD, but only one that I can think of that I personally would consider a "sports car" that is FWD. That's the Mini Cooper S. Not so much for the power (although it's no slouch), but the maneuverability. I took a test drive with the sales guy and I'll never forget it. He took a 90 degree turn going 70 mph. The only skid marks were the ones in my underwear. It was amazing. > BTW, I'll agree 100% with you on > the DB9. The Vantage and Vanquish are no slouches either. Yeah ... I wouldn't refuse one if it was given to me. :-) Craig C. "Craig C." <mcraigchr@gmail.com> wrote in news:HZAei.2728$vi5.1915 @newssvr17.news.prodigy.net: >> What FWD is considered a sports car? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > guy and I'll never forget it. He took a 90 degree turn going 70 mph. > The only skid marks were the ones in my underwear. It was amazing. Yeah, they are cool. But no way can it be called a sports car... >> BTW, I'll agree 100% with you on >> the DB9. The Vantage and Vanquish are no slouches either. > > Yeah ... I wouldn't refuse one if it was given to me. :-) > > Craig C. > I had a similar discussion with a guy I use to work with (an Indian) > that absolutely would not budge off of his position that to be > considered a "real sports car" it had to be RWD. I don't consider a FWD a sports car as they just do not handle high torque as well as a RWD in steering. But I don't get bent out of shape of who calls what a sports car. Everyone has their own opinions. >> >> > That is simply not true. Have you seen the commercial for it? >> >> > The guy is testing a bunch of them banging thru gears with their [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being > "required" to classed as a sports car. Then what's your definition of a sports car? The EVO and STi are known as "compact sport sedans". > I'll give you that "back in the day" only the US made "sports cars" > and yes they were all (almost at least) manuals, with only two doors, > but wake up and smell the coffee, this is not "back in the day" > anymore. WTF are you talking about? "Back in the day" as you say (I certainly didn't) there were a lot more sports cars than the Corvette. Dude, you might want to have a few cups of that stuff yourself. >> These days, makers' marketing departments are doing their damndest in >> trying to convince potential buyers that weeniemobiles are "sporty- >> cars" or "muscle-machines". Unfortunately, it's still just marketing > > How is the EVO and the WRX STi a "marketing ploy, please explain. They're not. If you'd have read, you would've seen that I said the marketing ploys pertained to weeniemobiles. The EVO and STi are the real deal. The Lancer mentioned earlier in the commercial is the marketing ploy. > Though I personally don't care for either of them, what they are able > to do in both performance and handling right out of the box is far > from a ploy. Exactly. > Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a > "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being > "required" to classed as a sports car. Because FWD cars are well known to have torque steer issues when high output engines are used. They just don't compete with RWD sports cars with everything else being equal. >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > output engines are used. They just don't compete with RWD sports cars > with everything else being equal. Although, gotta admit - AWD is pretty cool. > Although, gotta admit - AWD is pretty cool. Thats true. AWD in some sports cars works well. Hmm...is my AWD Hemi Durango a sports car? miles <nope@nopers.com> wrote in news:rPGei.626576$2Q1.452657 @newsfe16.lga: >> Although, gotta admit - AWD is pretty cool. > > Thats true. AWD in some sports cars works well. Hmm...is my AWD Hemi > Durango a sports car? Dunno - is it a stick? ;) >> Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > output engines are used. They just don't compete with RWD sports cars > with everything else being equal. As do some rwd cars with a bunch of hp. > As do some rwd cars with a bunch of hp. Thats true but the problems of a bunch of HP and Torque are easier to solve in a RWD car. > > As do some rwd cars with a bunch of hp. > > Thats true but the problems of a bunch of HP and Torque are easier to > solve in a RWD car. Same thing applies to a FWD miles. The right people with the right knowledge and abilities can correct a lot of the issues inherant to them. Problem I see here is that there are to damn many closed minded and biased old bastards that still think we should be driving hot rodded lead sleds! <bg> >>>As do some rwd cars with a bunch of hp. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > biased old bastards that still think we should be driving hot rodded > lead sleds! <bg> As long as they have heated seats!! Bob > > Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a > > "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > output engines are used. They just don't compete with RWD sports cars > with everything else being equal. Ok, this is a performace inhibitor, at least in some cases, but it does not address the question as to why it can not be called a sports cars. There are performace inhibitors with RWDs also but you didn't mention any of them, why? azwiley1 <wiley156@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1182486451.758609.143800 @j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com: >> > Why just because it is a FWD vice RWD, has 4 doors vice 2 and is a >> > "ricer" is it not a sports car? I never saw/heard any of those being [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > cars. There are performace inhibitors with RWDs also but you didn't > mention any of them, why? Start talking to a DB9 owner (or even a Carrera owner) about "FWD sports cars" and note the reaction. > Ok, this is a performace inhibitor, at least in some cases, but it > does not address the question as to why it can not be called a sports > cars. There are performace inhibitors with RWDs also but you didn't > mention any of them, why? Because overall a RWD performance car will out handle and out perform a FWD all other things being equal. Currently there just isn't a way to make a FWD high powered performance car work. The only FWD performance cars I know of are all low end (SRT4 etc.) cars where people aren't very picky. > Miles, you are only partially correct here. If you are refering to > just the Lance, like the one they show in the commercial with the new > paddle shifters, yes, it is a sporty looking but not a sports car. If > you are generalizing the "Lancer" this is where you are incorrect as > the Lancer EVO is a sports car. Since the Lancer is built on the same platform as the Caliber is the EVO similar to the Caliber SRT4 which Dodge keeps delaying its rollout? I suppose the SRT4 might be classified as a sports car as it does have a 300hp engine. But to me its a low end affordable fast car for those that can't afford a real sports car! It's front wheel drive so I wonder how they've dealt with torque steer issues. miles <nope@nopers.com> wrote in news:fJFei.57398$2K1.36772 @newsfe18.lga: >> Miles, you are only partially correct here. If you are refering to >> just the Lance, like the one they show in the commercial with the new [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > that can't afford a real sports car! It's front wheel drive so I wonder > how they've dealt with torque steer issues. All three cars are sport compacts and not true sports cars. The basis for those cars is a weeniemobile platform, not a sports car platform. The Neon SRT4 and the up-and-coming Caliber SRT4 are the same thing - weeniemobile platforms tweaked out to actually handle decently. Too bad they're only FWD. Torque steer nightmares. > > Miles, you are only partially correct here. If you are refering to > > just the Lance, like the one they show in the commercial with the new [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Since the Lancer is built on the same platform as the Caliber is the EVO > similar to the Caliber SRT4 which Dodge keeps delaying its rollout? Honestly couldn't tell you. Like I said before, I personally don't care for these type of cars, (EVO, SRT4, etc.) but I also don't feel that because they have more than 2 doors and are FWD that they can't be classed as a sports car. > I suppose the SRT4 might be classified as a sports car as it does have a > 300hp engine. But to me its a low end affordable fast car for those > that can't afford a real sports car! It's front wheel drive so I wonder > how they've dealt with torque steer issues. > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the > cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > much > of a performance car and is just a wanna be, much like the Mustang II Yes and no. The plus of a srandard is less weight and maybe a couple of hp. Other than that the auto is more consistant and a heck of a lot easier in traffic. The auto in the SRT8 will light the tires on a 1st-2nd shift, so it shifts real firm. I guess with a low hp torque engine a standard might help it out some. A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day in day out use I'd rather the auto. >>And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the >>cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day in day > out use I'd rather the auto. And it's just personal preference. I prefer the standard but I guess I'm out of luck with newer vehicles. Bob > > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when the > > cool people own them and sadly, most of the "cool" people will not even [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Yes and no. The plus of a srandard is less weight and maybe a couple of hp. It is not performance that I am talking about here but image and then there is the cost reduction. > Other than that the auto is more consistant and a heck of a lot easier in > traffic. I agree but the standard shift is a hell of a lot more fun in sport driving situations and while you can make your auto do it to a degree as well, you will be beating the sh.t out of it while a 5 speed is not as greatly affected. > The auto in the SRT8 will light the tires on a 1st-2nd shift, so it > shifts real firm. I guess with a low hp torque engine a standard might help > it out some. That Charger of yours is a true example of what I'm saying. It really is a kick a.s car that can beat many "performance " cars but it doesn't sell worth sh.t. Why is that? Because it is a boxy 4 door with nothing available but an automatic and doesn't exactly ring the cool bell for many. When the new Challenger was shown to the corporate idiots they were against it because it would require modifications to the assembly lines until a higher exec with a brain (a rarity indeed) pointed out the dismal sales of the Charger and the soaring sales of the Mustang. If you want to sell cars, you have to give the people what they want, even if it is simply a choice that many will never take. Most of the best selling cars are offered with a standard shift, especially the sport and sport styled ones. > A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day in day > out use I'd rather the auto. I agree with you but we are talking about sports cars here or at least the appearance of sports cars. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when >> > the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > kick a.s car that can beat many "performance " cars but it doesn't sell > worth sh.t. Why is that? Well partly because they don't make a whole lot of them. You don't often see them sitting too long at a dealer. Also there is a 2k gas guzzler tax on them. > Because it is a boxy 4 door with nothing > available but an automatic and doesn't exactly ring the cool bell for > many. Well, the boxy 4 door will hold it's own with anything in it's price range. High 12's low 13's are nothing to sneeze at. That's about where most vettes run. Other than the Z06. > When the new Challenger was shown to the corporate idiots they were > against [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > a > standard shift, especially the sport and sport styled ones. >> A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day in >> day >> out use I'd rather the auto. > > I agree with you but we are talking about sports cars here or at least the > appearance of sports cars. If that's the case the only sports car is the vette or porsch. >>> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool >>> > when the [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] >> really is a >> kick a.s car that can beat many "performance " cars The Hemi Charger _is_ a performance car. The SRT8 is even moreso. > but it doesn't >> sell worth sh.t. Why is that? Don't know where you live, but they're extremely popular around here. Tons of 'em on the road. > Well partly because they don't make a whole lot of them. You don't > often see them sitting too long at a dealer. Also there is a 2k gas > guzzler tax on them. >> Because it is a boxy 4 door with nothing >> available but an automatic and doesn't exactly ring the cool bell for >> many. Gotta wonder where you live. I've never heard of a Hemi Charger not being "cool". > Well, the boxy 4 door will hold it's own with anything in it's price > range. High 12's low 13's are nothing to sneeze at. That's about where > most vettes run. Other than the Z06. Not too many cars can touch a Hemi Charger right out of the box, especially in the price range. The SRT8 is simply awesome. >> When the new Challenger was shown to the corporate idiots they were >> against [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> offered with a >> standard shift, especially the sport and sport styled ones. That's nonsense. Autos are the big sellers as far as volume. >>> A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day >>> in day [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> > If that's the case the only sports car is the vette or porsch. Corvettes and Porsches are certainly sports cars, but then you have a whole different thing when you talk about cars like Miatas, Skys, Solstices, etc. I don't consider them true sports cars, but some do... >>>> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool >>>> > when the [quoted text clipped - 85 lines] > whole different thing when you talk about cars like Miatas, Skys, > Solstices, etc. I don't consider them true sports cars, but some do... > Corvettes and Porsches are certainly sports cars, but then you have a > whole different thing when you talk about cars like Miatas, Skys, > Solstices, etc. I don't consider them true sports cars, but some do... the Mazda Miata is a roadster not to be confused with a sports car. its made to be nimble and handle well. it cant run down a vette or even a low end v6 stang. but what it can do is out handle them hands down. when the high horse power cars have to slow around the corner the Miata will just cruise around it like its not there. they are fun little cars to drive, but damn hard to get out of. Signature____________________________________________ Chris 05 CTD 06 Liberty CRD > >>> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool > >>> > when the [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Don't know where you live, but they're extremely popular around here. > Tons of 'em on the road. Then it sounds like where you live is the exception. I see them on the road here as well but I see a lot more Mustangs, hell, I see a lot more Superduty's then Chargers. > > Well partly because they don't make a whole lot of them. You don't > > often see them sitting too long at a dealer. Also there is a 2k gas [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Gotta wonder where you live. I've never heard of a Hemi Charger not > being "cool". That is more of a personal opinion but I don't recall it getting any specail attention for its stunning looks. > > Well, the boxy 4 door will hold it's own with anything in it's price > > range. High 12's low 13's are nothing to sneeze at. That's about where [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > That's nonsense. Autos are the big sellers as far as volume. LOL, what you just said is nonsence. Where did I say that standard shifts were the big seller as far as volume goes. What I said was that the bigger selling vehicles were offered with standard shifts, not that the standard shifts versions outsold the auto's. Learn how to read. > >>> A car that is used for autoX ,sure you want a standard, but for day > >>> in day [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > whole different thing when you talk about cars like Miatas, Skys, > Solstices, etc. I don't consider them true sports cars, but some do... They are not sports cars, they are roadsters and while they could not touch the Charger or Mustang in a flat out run, they can out handle them with ease. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving > Then it sounds like where you live is the exception. I see them on the road > here as well but I see a lot more Mustangs, hell, I see a lot more > Superduty's then Chargers. I see far more Chargers here than Mustangs. But then I see far more Dodges than Fords in general here despite Ford outselling Dodge nationwide. Depends on where you live. Arizona is Dodge country, not Ford. > >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when > >> > the [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > them sitting too long at a dealer. Also there is a 2k gas guzzler tax on > them. That's because the dealers don't order a whole bunch of them. The dealer by me had one for months but that was a while ago. They are selling faster now that people know how fast they are but they are still far from flying off of the floor and DC is still dissapointed with the sales numbers. > > Because it is a boxy 4 door with nothing > > available but an automatic and doesn't exactly ring the cool bell for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > High 12's low 13's are nothing to sneeze at. That's about where most vettes > run. Other than the Z06. I never said that it was slow. In fact, I do recall calling it a kick a.s car but is is still a boxy 4 door. > > When the new Challenger was shown to the corporate idiots they were > > against [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > > If that's the case the only sports car is the vette or porsch. I don't understand. SignatureIf at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving >> >> > And for some reason Dodge has forgotten that. Cars become cool when >> >> > the [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > of > the floor and DC is still dissapointed with the sales numbers. With regard to the Charger SRT not the other Chargers. They were and are a limited production item. The dealers are asking list and in some cases list+ That is why they may sit. When I decided to buy mine there were 3 from Philly north. Reading last night, they are now tough to find in new england and the nothwest. I sorta figure the popularity will increase as a 4 door they are a heck of a lot more practical than a vette and straight line performance and stopping ability is about the same. . > That's because the dealers don't order a whole bunch of them. The dealer by > me had one for months but that was a while ago. They are selling faster now > that people know how fast they are but they are still far from flying off of > the floor and DC is still dissapointed with the sales numbers. Dealers here in Arizona have a large stock of Chargers and Avengers. Both models are selling very well.
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.