Sup /o/, I know fuckall about cars, the only things I've

>>14245843
Car + American culture = muscle car

They are usually rwd, heavy as fuck with a big V8 or something.

But im from the UK so what the fuck do I know

>>14245854
You're right.

But to op, those German cars aren't luxury and the jetta is far from reliable so you may want to lurk Moar

File: black_firebird.jpg (65KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 800x600px

A muscle car is a mid-size-ish RWD car, designed for performance, with a giant V8 up front sold at an affordable price.

It's just a fun car/sports car.

>>14245877
with bad handling*

>>14245877
>designed for performance
so this means it just drives like a sports car?
>>14245861
>those german cars aren't luxury
then what is a luxury car? they've got a higher price tag than civis/corollas

>>14245891
so it drives like a pick up truck in the size of a sedan/coupe?

>>14245899
The higher price tag is literally because of "muh German engineering", which basically means you have to autistically maintain them. Exactly follow every single thing the service schedule tells you, can't skip an oil change or you'll risk blowing it up.

>>14245899
american cars in general, just have spongy steering and spoongy suspension, you dont have as many corners so theres no need.

>>14245929
Do you not service american cars?

>>14245954
American cars and Japanese cars can handle abuse or neglect a lot better.

>>14245891
No, not necessarily. Only the really huge barges like the Chevelle handled truly terribly. And the Foxbody Mustang, but that was just due to the idiotic suspension design decisions.
>>14245899
A fourth-gen F-body like that trans am or the Mustang in the first picture would drive like sports cars, yes.

Defining characteristics of a muscle car:

>larger size compared to true sports cars
>heavier weight compared to true sports cars
>worse handling than true sports cars
>large displacement engine that makes relatively low power for it's size
>offered only in automatic, or at least with automatic as an option

>>14245989
>low power for its size
wot

>>14245989
>true sports cars
And yet the Mustang, Camaro and Corvette will BTFO many of those "true sports cars".

>>14246009
>corvette
>muscle car
Corvette *is* a sports car m8

how are chrysler cars? thinking of getting a sedan by them instead of a usual honda civic or toyota corrola/camry

>>14246019
There's a good reason people normally pick Corollas/Camrys/Civics over Chryslers.
Hell, there's a lot of good reasons.

>>14246019
There is literally no reason to buy anything Chrysler apart from a Challenger, Charger, Wrangler, or Viper.

>>14245861
I see this shit posted all the time.
>but that's not REAL luxury
>that's not a REAL sports car
With no explanation of why. Take your shitbox and fuck off, quit pretending like you're some kind of high class Alfa Romeo driver or something.
>inb4 that's not luxury either

Also OP the difference between a muscle car and a high performance luxury car is that a muscle car is fat and has a shit interior.

>>14246019
I'm not familiar with the newer ones but the mid to late 2000's ones are shit. You'd be better off with the reliability of the civic/corolla/camry.

>>14246029
>muscle cars have to be heavy
>simple interiors not loaded down with faux chrome and faux leather on surfaces you'll never touch are shit
I will give you the mid-2000s Dodge cars though, those are awful interiors.

>>14246009
round a track?

>>14245972
I mean, most do. Compare most muscles cars to somethink sporty and euro like an m3 for example.

>>14246005
It's the power to displacement ratio. For example, the LS3 engine used in the 5th gen Camaro SS made 432PS with 6.2L, or 70PS per litre. That is quite low compared to, say, Honda's F20C (125PS/L).

>>14246009
Not true. Properly engineered sports cars tend to be faster while being less powerful than muscle cars.

Sports cars:
>Mazda RX-7 Series 8 RS 1:04.00 280PS
>Honda S2000 Type S 1:07.72 242PS
>Porsche Boxster S 1:06.40 280PS

Muscle cars:
>Ford Mustang GT 1:10.88 318PS
>Chevrolet Camaro SS 1:10.67 432PS

Source: http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/tsukuba

>>14246088
>fucking hondafags still cling to hp/L meme
>what is dimishing returns
>what are differing torque curves
>>14246075
A 2011 Mustang GT with a performance pack hung right with an M3 of the same year. Back in the day, the same was true for an IROC-Z turd gen camaro and a Porsche 928.

File: DSC09544.jpg (685KB, 1632x1224px) Image search: [Google]

685KB, 1632x1224px

A true muscle car is a mid size 2 door coupe with bare bones options and a huge engine. example is pic related

>>14246156
>muh torque curves
Who gives a shit. The honda is faster. End of story.

that they cant turn, and apparently people enjoy this

>>14245989
>Only in automatic
Its the opposite, actually. I can buy any muscle/pony car in manual, can't say the same for some sports cars.

>>14246088
The Mustang GT has made 420ish HP for the last few years. You might be looking at the v6 numbers.

>>14246156
>the same was true for an IROC-Z turd gen camaro and a Porsche 928
no... and please dont post that horrible video where the driver cant even stay on the track from an era where auto media in america was just advertising

>>14246621
Give me a break the new mustang and camaro pull nearly a full g stock, they turn just fine so update your memes already.

>>14246649
Not a mistake. For most years the last gen GT's V8 engine only made ~300hp. That lap time is for a 2010 Mustang GT.

>>14245989
Muscle cars are mid-sized touring cars that broke the engine displacement restrictions manufactures put on themselves during the 60s. They came with manuals, and could actually turn fairly well for their class and price.

File: dsfdfda.jpg (53KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 640x480px

>>14246686
how does it feel to know the new mustang is slower than a 10 year old british bin part car around VIR? as tested by car and driver

>>14245843
'MERICA

GO BUY A TRANS AM AND DRIVE IT WHILE DRINKING BOURBON. NO SEATBELTS ALLOWED.

>>14245891
The new ones handle very well. IIRC a Camaro Z28 beat a Nissan GT-R around a track.

>>14245963
Why are there no old, abused american cars in europe while the old abused european cars such as old bmws and Audis are still holding up good here?

>>14247223
Because Europe has a hate boner for anything with more than 1.3l

>>14247223
Old euro cars are not holding up well. They are just being poorly maintained by stupid 20 somethings that want that hella flush track life bro.

>>14247223
Because a lot of them were never sold here, or didn't sell very well.

File: And+then+the+audio+jack+rips+off+_25335cd57afd26e891ec110b06b95ae6.jpg (34KB, 497x732px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 497x732px

>>14247236
Oh fuck off.... some of us are quite wealthy and are actually able to afford 1.8 TDI's you know

File: 1373605368902.jpg (468KB, 1361x1320px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 1361x1320px

>>14247236
this

thats why americans make v12 7 liter supercars
>oh wait

>>14247261
Not every shitbox or at least midsize sedan/coupe has a 7l V12 option though.

File: surf_city13-second.jpg (203KB, 764x509px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 764x509px

>>14245843
Muscle cars come from a culture of the 60's and 70's, where low regulation, cheap sports cars, and long open highways lead to a trend of dropping large motors in stock cars. Instead of normal sports cars, American automakers have harkened back to this trend because it is the strongest most independently American aspect of car culture, but also because it's cheaper to put a big V8 in a heavy car than to focus on refining the handling and trying to shave weight off of it. But hey, shit like that is bankrupting Nissan and Toyota, so it's much better than no sports cars.

>>14247267
I was unaware geo metros in america came with 8 liter v8s

>>14247279
Foxbodies are universally seen as shitboxes and they came with big ol' vee ates.

>>14246738
Seeing as Lotus already has one foot in the grave from putting all their eggs in the Elise basket, not bad.

>>14247282
Also,
>implying you wouldn't love an LS swapped Geo Metro

>>14247236
>>14247250
Most popular/common poorfag cars are either 1.9 and 2.5 diesel golfs, audis and BMWs, and there are quite alot old Audi v6 and BMW i4/i6 petrols with a fuckton of miles on them. My 2nd car was a 400k km (about 270k miles i think) e36 323i, rusted an scratched like crazy but the engine and transmission were almosy perfect. Same with my friends cars, all are old, very high mileage golfs, audis and bmws. North/eastern european here.

File: Mustang yellow.jpg (264KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 1280x850px

Not to derail your thread OP, but fuaark I love the new Mustang. When it came out I really didn't give a shit, but I fell in love a few months ago.

>>14246738
http://m.caranddriver.com/features/lightning-lap-2015-results-historical-lap-times-and-more-feature

There are plenty of faster mustangs and camaros than your gocart, But anyhow

Lotus Exige S 3:04.5
2015 Ford Mustang GT 3:05.2
Costs way more, weights half as much and only beat it by a second, but your right mustangs can't turn.

>>14246654
You mean where they were as fair as possible and even said "this is just one day on one track, results could be different elsewhere?"
>>14246602
I'm saying it makes less hp because the torque comes on strong lower and dies off higher. Ergo the hp number is less, even though it obviously still accelerates fast.