Sports or GT?

[Howard Agency]

So, which are you? Or both Jekyll and Hyde?

I'm lucky enough to have both.
996 (good A/C, stereo, 300hp, 3000#, fast)
914 (No A/C, stereo, 100hp, 1850#, fun)

Tend to take the 996 longer trips on cold/hot days, or want to look good, but default into the 914 on a daily basis.

[BeerBurner]

Meh, it's pretty debatable for me. Personally, I'll say that I have two sports cars, but I've seen people make arguments that the 944 is a GT and the Miata is.....something....because it's "too slow to be a sports car".

BB.

[nota]

sports cars have no or/and cloth top
if it has a tin top it is a GT

[masraum]

Originally posted by BeerBurner
Meh, it's pretty debatable for me. Personally, I'll say that I have two sports cars, but I've seen people make arguments that the 944 is a GT and the Miata is.....something....because it's "too slow to be a sports car".

BB.

Bah! Sports cars don't have to be fast. People that think they do just don't get it.

[BeerBurner]

Oh, I agree. But some people still look at 1/4-mile time as a major factor in "sports car".

BB.

[Z-man]

Originally posted by Howard Agency
So, which are you? Or both Jekyll and Hyde?

I'm lucky enough to have both.
996 (good A/C, stereo, 300hp, 3000#, fast)
914 (No A/C, stereo, 100hp, 1850#, fun)

Tend to take the 996 longer trips on cold/hot days, or want to look good, but default into the 914 on a daily basis.

IMHO, those are two excellent examples of what a GT (996) and Sports car (914) are.

My choice really depends -- for the track, always that Sports car - it's a no brainer. But for other "on the road" applications, it really depends -- for daily driving, I'd prefer a GT, but then again, there are some nice twistys that I could take home instead of the boring highway, and there a Sports car would be more suitable.

I guess deep down, I'd still prefer the Sports car...
-Z

[Aerkuld]

By definition, well British/European definition at least, a Sports Car was a small, fairly inexpensive, light weight, 2 seater, open top, relatively low powered car. They are fun to drive, relatively fast, but not the sort of thing you'd want to take on vacation. Think of the early Riley's, Triumphs and MG's. Even the 60's MG Midget, Triumph Spitfire, etc. can be considered sports cars.
A GT, or Gran Turismo (Grand Tourer), was usually a fairly expensive 2+2 or four seater, more comfortable, more powerful, heavier, often a coupe or hard top. Still fun to drive, but a little more comfortable. Still relatively fast, but maybe not as agile as a pure sports car. However, they are generally much more usable and the sort of thing you want to take on a long distance drive. Good exapmles here would be the early DB Aston Martin's.
I think that things started to get confused around the late fifties & sixties when you started getting things like the MGB - a bit too big to be an outright sports car, but it isn't quite a GT either. I suppose you could call these GT Sports cars. The original Mini was another car that put the cat among the pigeons - a small, cheap family car that could run rings round sports cars and GT cars at times. This was probably the predecessor of what the Euro's call the "Hot Hatchback", and could include all of the Super Sedans we now see such as the Subaru WRX. Then you got things like Supercars - basically insanely powerful sports cars - lightweight cars with GT engines.
I think after this things got blurry and really messed up. I don't think you could fit things into neat catagories. To make it worse people started calling all sorts of things sports cars that were nothing of the sort.
I could argue that there have been very few true sports cars over the last few years and that most of the cars that are refered to as 'sports cars' are really GT Sports or Super Sedans.
My personal opinion is that modern Sports Cars would include the Miata, BMW Z3/Z4, Porsche Boxster. If you had to go back and catagorize it, the 914 would be a sportscar.
GT Sports would include the RX-7, 944, 968, Toyota Supra, etc.
Real GT cars would include cars like the DB9, Jaguar XK8, 996 etc.

What I can't work out is where an early 911 fits in. Strictly speaking it isn't a Sports car as it has more than two seats. It isn't a GT or a GT Sports car because it's lightweight and too 'raw'. I guess it is unique, which probably fits in nicely with the unusual engine layout.

[Dantilla]

Hmmmm.......

I've got a Miata, a 911 stripped down to 2200 lbs, and a 944 race car.

I think I gotta go with Sports.

[epbrown]

Originally posted by Aerkuld
GT Sports would include the RX-7, 944, 968, Toyota Supra, etc.
Real GT cars would include cars like the DB9, Jaguar XK8, 996 etc.

What I can't work out is where an early 911 fits in. Strictly speaking it isn't a Sports car as it has more than two seats. It isn't a GT or a GT Sports car because it's lightweight and too 'raw'. I guess it is unique, which probably fits in nicely with the unusual engine layout.

What I don't get - and this isn't the first time I've seen this - is how 944/968 get the GT designation while the 911 doesn't. Both have 4 seats and weigh about the same, and while GTs are typically quite powerful, the 944 family was usually less powerful than their 911 contemporaries. And unlike the 911, the 4-cylinder cars have an alibi - they've got their big brother the 928 over there, designated by Porsche themselves as being the GT member of the family.

[Howard Agency]

And the next level, the super cars. Reading the 599 Fiorano road test, the numbers are staggering. So is the price, and the thing weighs almost 4000 lbs.

Fun driver??

[Aerkuld]

Originally posted by epbrown
What I don't get - and this isn't the first time I've seen this - is how 944/968 get the GT designation while the 911 doesn't. Both have 4 seats and weigh about the same, and while GTs are typically quite powerful, the 944 family was usually less powerful than their 911 contemporaries. And unlike the 911, the 4-cylinder cars have an alibi - they've got their big brother the 928 over there, designated by Porsche themselves as being the GT member of the family.

To be honest I don't really know where the original 911 fits in. Maybe it should be in the same catagory as the 944. As I said the 944/968 I would probably put in the GT Sports catagory whereas the 928 would be an all-out GT car. The newer 911's (996, 997) are probably more pure GT cars, definitely capable of a long distance high speed trip in comfort.
It's all so much more complicated that it used to be and the Sports Car/GT car divide is getting more blurred as new cars do so many things very well.

I suppose I should answer the original question. I've always loved the styling of a well designed coupe over it's open top counterpart. I'm thinking particulalry of the early E-Type Jaguar (XKE), I just love the shape of the coupe more than the roadster.

I guess you can put me in the GT group!

[speeder]

There is a problem with trying to make cars fit into these perfect definitions of sports/GT. Porsches, at least since the 911 came out, have always aimed for a blend of luxury and sports purpose that makes their cars heavier. They are also a lot more comfortable to use, and have the power and handling to call themselves "sport" along with fairly small dimensions. (At least the original 911).

The new 997s are actually the epitome of Porsche's design mission. They are incredibly well-engineered and built like a vault, deliver numbers and behavior that is world-class for pure sports cars but also are pretty heavy and very lux. They also place a lot of emphasis on passive as well as active safety, weight be damned. That is typically German, or European at least.

A lot of early 911 owners whine about Porsche getting away from "real sports cars" with the newer, heavier cars; the truth of the matter is that there design mission has never changed one iota for the 911 and back in 1972 the car was considered an absolute lead barge in the sports car world at around 2500 lbs. Others refer to their 911SCs as "raw" and "classic", huh?? I've even heard 3.2 Carreras included in that. A 996 is "raw/light/classic" compared to what they will be building in 10 years, and that car will mop the track w/ today's cars just like a 996 will with a 911SC.

So it depends on the criteria. Using the 1950s British definitions, nothing has been a sports car for decades. Using performance measures, those early cars were not sports cars. More like speed bumps. So it remains cloudy. I just like what I like and don't worry too much about labels.

[Shaun @ Tru6]

My daily drivers will always be sports cars. My 84 Targa was gutted for weight savings and set-up specifically for DE. The only street concession was reinstalling the factory belts for day to day...5-points were just too cumbersome after only 2 weeks.


That said I truly yearn for a 928.

[Wickd89]

General internet dictionary definition:

"Noun 1. sports carsports car - a small low car with a high-powered engine; usually seats two persons."

I believe the original definition included that it Must be Open-top (convertible)....

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I guess that means my SLK is a sports car and the 944 collection is. . . what? GTs? I don't think I've ever heard the 944 referred to as a "GT car". The 928, certainly, but not the 944.

Wouldn't this also make 911 coupes "non-sports cars"?

Ditto the McLaren SLR (well, anything up to this year, since now they're making a convertable version)

[VaSteve]

Originally posted by speeder


A lot of early 911 owners whine about Porsche getting away from "real sports cars" with the newer, heavier cars; the truth of the matter is that there design mission has never changed one iota for the 911 and back in 1972 the car was considered an absolute lead barge in the sports car world at around 2500 lbs. Others refer to their 911SCs as "raw" and "classic", huh?? I've even heard 3.2 Carreras included in that. A 996 is "raw/light/classic" compared to what they will be building in 10 years, and that car will mop the track w/ today's cars just like a 996 will with a 911SC.

If you compare the SC to anything else from 78-83, yeah it was raw. My uncle had a 1983 Caddilac. That luxobarge had electronic dash, climate controls, cushy suspension, working a/c, etc, etc.

Sometimes when driving or fixing mine I have to remind myself that it's only 25 years old and not 45. When I think of my car being new (I was 10) I have to think that not all cars were as "primitive".

[trekkor]

I have my 914-6 track car and a Nissan Altima V-6.

My wife says I don't get to track the Nissan...I'm out.


KT

[austin552]

CGT

[Bill Douglas]

I always thought a sports car was a car that a young, VERY good, looking, asian girl drove.

[bigchillcar]

what's my 964 C4 cabriolet? gt?