When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Awd and over 315 hp, in a small, relatively lightweight car. Sounds like a winner to me. I can see the battle now, STI vs Golf R vs Focus RS vs Civic type r (wait, it's not coming to US, scratch Civic) vs (Mazdaspeed 3?). My only problem is it's based off a 4 door ecobox. It looks badass, but a little too young for my tastes. Now if only Ford would make a sexy 2 door coupe and call it the Probe, then I'd be all over it.
The only point of interest I see is that it fills the hole left by the outgoing Evo: A mid $30ks turbocharged AWD sedan based on an econobox to compete with the STI.
Other than that. Shrug. There are other cars that I'd be more likely to buy so it isn't even on my radar.
As the GTR should have taught us, that weight is not an issue, as long as the weight is balance along with awd's grip and power to exit corners. It should be a formula for an awesome car.
But that GTR is also super expensive. I don't mean to say that the two are exclusive, but I doubt it will be lighter than an Rx8 which is the chunkiest of the Rx series. However, the turbo awd platform has proven strong in power, practicality, and handling too. So yes it will likely be a good vehicle, but just as our Verbose Supermod said, you can expect it to be like the STI and Evo.
lightweight is relative. If the average weight of cars is 3800 lbs, then 3300 lbs would be seen as lightweight. If the average weight goes up to 4100 lbs, then 3700 lbs would be seen as lightweight. Cars have been getting heavier over the decades. I think it's hit its peak as most manufacturers now realize to hit mpg goals, they have to start reigning in weight.
If you have a hot skinny chick who is 110lbs and a chick who is 250lbs, and another chick who is 400lbs, then you still have one skinny chick, and two fat chicks. Even though there is a 150lb difference between the two fat chicks.
I mean, I know which one I prefer. Maybe your preference is different.
Your methodology is flawed. When referring to people there are government and medically established guidelines regarding when one is considered overweight or obese. Also, people can gain or lose weight, cars can't. Cars are different. The weight of cars has gone up over the years as technology has advanced. The average car from 20 years ago would be considered light by todays standards. What governmental guideline says when a car is considered heavy?
Last edited by RIWWP; 02-12-2015 at 07:06 PM.
Reason: removed image tags, too much quote for too little post
Your methodology is flawed. When referring to people there are government and medically established guidelines regarding when one is considered overweight or obese. Also, people can gain or lose weight, cars can't. Cars are different. The weight of cars has gone up over the years as technology has advanced. The average car from 20 years ago would be considered light by todays standards. What governmental guideline says when a car is considered heavy?
Wait... what? cars can't lose weight?
Aside from the obvious weight reduction mods, they can indeed lose weight. The first example that comes to mind is the 2016 Miata losing 220lbs over the 2015 Miata. Another is the 981 Boxster/Cayman, lost 77lbs over the 987.
There are plenty more examples. Just because people stuff their faces and get fat doesn't mean that they have to. Just because US car manufacturers don't mind getting their cars fat doesn't mean that they have to.
You think the GTR is great at 4,000lbs? Imagine what it would have been at 3,000lbs. Weight is a penalty. Weight is NOT a non-factor.
Aside from the obvious weight reduction mods, they can indeed lose weight. The first example that comes to mind is the 2016 Miata losing 220lbs over the 2015 Miata. Another is the 981 Boxster/Cayman, lost 77lbs over the 987.
There are plenty more examples. Just because people stuff their faces and get fat doesn't mean that they have to. Just because US car manufacturers don't mind getting their cars fat doesn't mean that they have to.
You think the GTR is great at 4,000lbs? Imagine what it would have been at 3,000lbs. Weight is a penalty. Weight is NOT a non-factor.
You're right, cars can lose weight, albeit not on their own. I was saying that the methodology comparing people to cars was flawed. Yes, the argument mentioned 1 skinny girl and 2 fat girls. You take a 2000 lb lotus, a 3000 lb RX8 and a 4000 lb GTR. I don't think many people would say the RX8 is heavy at 3000 lbs, in fact in every review I read they mentioned it was light. You could say it's heavy compared to the lotus. You could also say it was light compared to the GTR. In that regards I'm saying lightweight is relative. Regardless, all 3 cars handle extremely well so technology can overcome weight issues if applied correctly. And also, in my comment regarding a new Probe I mentioned that it should be lightweight.
Do you think the GTR is not great because it's 4000 lbs?
Do you think the GTR is not great because it's 4000 lbs?
In my opinion actually, yes. The GTR would be intersting to me if it was 3,000lbs. Perhaps more than interesting at 2,500lbs. At 4,000lbs it is just a fat pig and I literally have zero interest in it. They pass my vision regularly even, and I don't even bother looking. Equal footing with a Corolla to me. Don't care one bit.
The RX-8 is fat compared to a Lotus. My example is perfect. The lotus is the aspiring model/cheerleader, the RX-8 would be the sexy pretty/athletic but chunky chick (think volley ball players), and the GTR would be the Fat girl who can perform like a **** star.
In the GTR35s defense, Nissan never aimed for any of the GTR series to be super lightweight. Other models like the GTR34 were not light compared to other cars at the time either. But, IMO 4000 lbs is far heavier than it needs to be.
02-09-2015 | 07:10 PM
