"Just buy a C5 Corvette anon" >Search for C5s >nothing

Am i the only one that would be okay with getting an A/T C5?

File: next.jpg (247KB, 1024x767px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1024x767px

I'm sorry

But to me, this is just unacceptable for a near top of the line performance car. Just, why.

>>16001981
Yes, you are the only one.

>>16001981
No, I'm sure the manual version feels terrible anyways. C5s are overrated aside from the zo6.

C5 owners are obnoxious

>>16001981
>4 speed
>V8

You're on thin ice

>>16002014
Personally all i would ever use it for is cruising down the highways and mountains where i live.
No hektik skidz for me.

File: chevy-corvette-c5-generations.jpg (55KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 640x426px

>>16001984

I like the look of the Targa better than the fixed roof. just buy it black put some bird-wing vinyls on the hood and become the 21st century smokey and the bandit.

>>16002014
>C5s are overrated

I mean, what other car are you gonna buy stock for under 13k with 330hp+?

File: h9b7k8odd6nx.jpg (101KB, 816x960px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 816x960px

>>16002033
Horsepower is just a number. Give me a s2000 instead.

>>16002049
That's a convertible anon

It's luxury first, sports car second

I want a sports car first

>>16002060
>S2000
>luxury
Ha

>>16002049
S2000 is overpriced for what it is. Rice tax.

File: didntwant.png (231KB, 1251x601px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1251x601px

>>16002073
I didn't want to believe it either, but it is. It's a "hardcore pleasure vehicle" meant to be daily driven.

I originally wanted one, but the electric power steering feel ultimately made me decide against it.
It wasn't until later the roof became my biggest issue as I'm used to the comfort of having one.
also this>>16002083

It's not a racecar anon. Just ask S2KI.

>>16002049
>>16002083

For the price of an S2000 couldn't you just buy a dirt-cheap miata and sink money into performance mods that would let you match if not surpass an S2000 all whilst not exceeding the price of an S2000?

>>16002097

performance isnt everything anon

>>16001967
Two words. Leaf, springs. Why corvettes disgust me.

>>16002107
NA Miatas have the S2000 beat as a drivers car too

>manual rack steering
>drive by cable direct throttle
>no ABS or electronic assists

>>16002117
Can't you just replace those for a couple hundred bucks?

>>16002097
Yeah pretty much. $3K Miata + $3K turbo kit. Half the price of a $12K S2000.

File: 6a00d83451b18a69e20168e74684d6970c.jpg (171KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1024x683px

>>16002060
>That's a convertible anon
No, its a roadster. Big difference. Roadsters and targas are cool. Convertibles are for women.

File: 1443417511136.gif (721KB, 446x251px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 446x251px

>>16002122
>manual rack steering
agreed EPS is gay
>drive by cable direct throttle
this is a non-issue, besides on cars that allow you to remap it is a very nice feature. i've never been able to tell the difference between a drive by wire or cable except I don't have to fuck with the damned cable and the cruise control is way better electronically.
>no ABS or electronic assists
Turn them off or pull the fuse.

File: image.jpg (2MB, 2632x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2632x2448px

>>16001967
Bought an 02 C5 a week ago. I don't really notice the targa to be honest.

>>16002145
>FRC
sweet. def consider a C5 Z06 for a DD. Kinda lame interior but I think they look worlds better than the C6.

>>16001967
Only to a bench racer does a removable targa top bother them. Get over it.

>>16002135
Look motherfucker, I probably like the S2000 way more than you. I've read more threads and classifieds on s2ki than I can care to remember.

The point is the electric steering feel sucks ass, there's no factory frame roof models, and as fast as it is in the turns it's still too slow for the money (spending 10k+ on a car is a lot for most people).

>>16002144
>this is a non-issue
It's always an issue with used cars. Usually the throttle sensor needs to be recalibrated either because it's been damaged or the response is slower than a cable throttle

>Turn them off or pull the fuse.
That's not how removing ABS on the car works unfortunately

>>16002170
What about people who like solid roofs that don't creak, rattle, or leak?

Do we even need to mention chassis rigidity

>>16002183
They don't creak, rattle, or leak unless you trash or neglect your car.

>>16002153

you can actually dd a c5

you can get over 30mpg if you actually know how to drive it.
you only need to tap the engine to accelerate and you can pretty much idle to maintain 65mph on highway

very very little throttle needed

File: car.jpg (842KB, 1422x800px) Image search: [Google]

842KB, 1422x800px

>>16001967
I paid 12k for a pretty modded FRC
Built engine
Nice suspension
CCW classics

>>16002189
>implying previous C5 owners take care of anything

eventually it's gonna start to make noise, there's no way around it

File: 1453182769582.jpg (49KB, 402x604px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 402x604px

>>16002171
I agree, I didn't buy an S2k because shitty EPS and not enough power.
>It's always an issue with used cars. Usually the throttle sensor needs to be recalibrated either because it's been damaged or the response is slower than a cable throttle
Never have had such an issue, then again I've never bought a used car where I didn't have to adjust the cable. It goes both ways, imo non-issue.
>>16002183
The don't creak or leak unless your car sucks. Only S2ks are notorious for shitty soft tops that rip. BMW and Porsche this is unheard of. And as far as chassis rigidity a Z4M is more rigid with a soft top than a C5 Z06. Its all in the design man. Not every car without a fixed roof is a wet noodle (like the miata), and just having a roof doesn't make your car better per se (as in every shitbox)
>>16002192
I dd a faster car at the moment, but I do agree I would like to get better mileage. A C5 Z06 would be a 50% mileage improvement.

>>16002145
>I don't really notice the targa to be honest.

Have you tried taking it off yet?

>>16002202
>those wheels

Paint looks nice, good catch.

>>16002214
*about as fast
my bad

>>16002202
Mileage?

>>16002215
Yeah, to check the seal and repair a scratch on the paint. It went back on with ease and it functions like a fixed roof...until you crash. You really don't notice it until you decide you want to remove it.

File: carvette.jpg (732KB, 1422x800px) Image search: [Google]

732KB, 1422x800px

>>16002224
Yea best wheels IMO
Makes 430whp on motor
>>16002236
has about 94k on it now
>Tfw I hate the headlights but w/e


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZtQrAGX0gc

>>16002258
I feel you on the headlights. The pop-ups may be a meme by now, but they look way better than the frog-eye fixed lamps IMO. Nice purchase though

File: MrBill.jpg (443KB, 1023x768px) Image search: [Google]

443KB, 1023x768px

>>16002258
Not a bad deal at all, I'd snatch that up for a DD in a moment after I got done dry heaving from looking at those headlights. Get the OEM pop ups and put a projector unit with HIDs in there asap man.

File: frc.jpg (276KB, 640x478px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 640x478px

>>16002285
>>16002277
Yea I know on the silver car they are not that bad since its similar in colour but on a black or red car its gross

>>16002255
>...until you crash

anon please, you're hurting my dreams- sounds good though
maybe I'll change my mind
>>16002258
I meant I'm not a fan of them. The number of spokes/pattern ehhh, maybe. Still nice car.
>>16002318
They look so happy though. Happiest eyed Corvette imo.

File: My Corvette.gif (95KB, 432x323px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 432x323px

>>16002318
Nah they nasty on all vettes. C5 is supposed to have that smooth no headlight look. Couldn't cost more than 1k to get a proper HID pop-up painted set up. If your car is already modded with expensive ass wheels you may as well s
>>16002342
>I meant I'm not a fan of them. The number of spokes/pattern ehhh, maybe.
nigga what? do you even know what wheels those are?

>>16002357
Chicago deep dish, heavy on the spoke and chrome?

File: NSX-black.jpg (78KB, 1140x400px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1140x400px

>>16002365
Three piece forged lightweight rims where a single one costs more than your set of Rotas.

In person they really do look amazing on vettes. I'm not vette guy but these rims are wildly popular and pics don't do them justice. All go, with plenty of show.

Maybe on rice burner you'd like them more?

File: 2z80mzc.jpg (921KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

921KB, 1600x1200px

>>16002365
chrome?

Polished aluminum

File: 6416781493_cf9d6438ff_b.jpg (291KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1024x683px

>>16002390
Don't be bothered by the foolish poorfag man. Those rims are a hell of a deal. I would have parted them out before selling the car to you imo. You did good, damned good.

>>16002380
>>16002390
calm down assblasters, was a joke

I think it's the little circle rivets going around the outside of the spokes on the inside of the wheel that makes it less appealing to me

the spokes are still a little funky to me imo

File: e45d7379a5f7fb54f44cd140d221c0cc.jpg (242KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 1024x768px

>>16002406
Do you understand how two or three piece wheels are assembled? Those aren't rivets my man.

>>16002415
either way still looks weird to me

I like wheels with 5/6 spoke and the only holes are for the lugs, sorry

File: c4 c5.jpg (209KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1024x768px

op here

I've been contemplating this for a while, but I noticed the C4 has much shorter wheelbase than the C5 and is lighter

Which one handles better in tight corners? I think the C4 would be able to outcorner the C5, no?

File: 964_Party_14.jpg (326KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 800x533px

>>16002425
Those bolts are a a sign of top tier expensive "race car" wheels man. You'll learn to love them eventually. Like beer or coffee.

>>16002430
C4 has better cornering, but not by much

>>16002430
Are you actually serious about buying a vette or just trying to learn more? The C5 is an infinitely better car than the C4. No one in their right mind would buy a C4 over a C5 unless it was a ZR-1 or a rare collectible.

File: WTAC-Daihatsu-Charade-02-1200x800.jpg (231KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 1200x800px

>>16002430
>tfw no 96 C4 to rice the everliving fuck out of
I really want to do this to a Corvette.

>>16002449
Dead serious

I'd take handling over any other modern engineering anyday. Shorter wheelbases are superior to longer wheelbases on sharp cornering/transitions.

The C4's wheelbase is literally 1 inch off from the Rx-7's and S2000's wheelbase which to me looks very promising on paper.
LT4 engine isn't bad either- heck even the LT1 would be okay as it's still more powerful than a 350z.

>>16002449
C5 is better than C4, yeah. But C4 is cheaper. So you know, get what you pay for.

>>16002488
In comparison the C5's wheelbase is 8 inches longer
>>16002448
That's what I figured

File: bmw-z4-m-coupe-car-8.jpg (98KB, 500x223px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 500x223px

>>16002488
There is more to handling than simply wheelbase length or weight. And money can solve other issues. Take for instance the S2000. The Z4M Roadster, while being heavier and with a longer wheelbase, is a far better handling car

File: 2014-porsche-919-hybrid-12_1600x0w.jpg (164KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 1600x1067px

>>16002434
Except the very highest tiers of motorsport use monoblock wheels almost exclusively.

>>16002512
>is a far better handling car

I hope we're talking about auto-x here (sharp tight handling corners)

>>16002512
When will this "Z4 is good" meme finally die? Would you please go to a dealership and ask for a test drive so you can see for yourself that it's shit?

>>16002512
S2000 rapes Z4's at Tsukuba mate

File: Untitled.png (233KB, 545x495px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 545x495px

>>16002512
>a far better handling car

nah

File: 20160721_090718(1).jpg (301KB, 1328x747px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1328x747px

>>16002525
This is true, but those wheels also are prohibitively expensive. I'm talking lower calsses obviously.
>>16002529
>>16002535
>>16002538
Sorry, I've driven S2000, Z4M, and Boxster S. Z4M is better on paper and in real life, hence why I bought one.

If you think I am speaking of just a "Z4" non-M they are shit. Z4M /= Z4.
>>16002572
That is the e89 Z4. It is a GT car and not an M and yes, its handling blows.

Unlike the S2000 there was more than one model of Z4 made guys. Only the M is not shite.

>>16002572
Not that I think the Z4 is any good, but that's an E89 base model roadster, not an E85 M coupe.

File: ZM3.jpg~original.jpg (128KB, 1024x682px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 1024x682px

>>16002535
As I said the new one is shit. I'm talking 2006 S2000 vs 2006 Z4M. They are both great cars don't get me wrong tho.
>>16002596
The e85 M roadster is better handling than the s2k, and the M coupe actually has the chassis code of e86.

Planning to buy a twin coupe for my roadster, as the M2 really disappointed me.

>>16002590
>>16002596
M models are a LOT more expensive to maintain, hence why most people don't go for them used and this a pretty fair comparison.

Just look at the hp/tonne

S2000 wins in handling when you don't have more super brute force

>>16002610

Jesus christ, that Z looks like complete garbage sitting next to an M3. Too bad BMW hasn't made a good looking car since the E46.

File: jdm.jpg (155KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 500x375px

>>16002485
>yfw

>>16002610
No, they're both garbage cars. The S2000 just happens to be less shit. Clearly you've never driven either.

File: 17d44750.png (707KB, 640x426px) Image search: [Google]

707KB, 640x426px

>>16002611
Non-M BMWs are for losers. And at 16k for an S2000 vs 20k for a Z4M they are in the same class today thanks to the rice tax. Both have over 100hp/L but the Z4M does have a better chassis objectively. Then again, the chassis is quite a bit newer than the S2000 so that is to be expected as there were better computer design tools around.
>M models are a LOT more expensive to maintain
No, not really man.
>>16002621
You're stuck in the 1990s man. The Z4M Coupe is pure sex on wheels. I'm shopping for a coupe or a nice e36 M3 as we speak. Ideally I will own both one day

>>16002624
As I said I own a BMW Z4M Roadster, and have driven an S2000, Z4M Roadster and Coupe, Boxster S, and a C5 Corvette Z06 when shopping for my last car.

Clearly you've driven none of them. The Z4M is a nasty car and the last one BMW made before they died.

>>16002626
>No, not really man.

Why does every BMW owner say this when it's known for a fact M models are expensive as everloving fuck to maintain compared to a non-M?

Numerous websites, forums, video channels cover this all the time and always suggest to get the non-M models on wallet draining pain alone.

>>16002622
It's the 180sx FC Rx-7 of Corvettes

I think I'm in love

File: Scorch1.jpg (97KB, 803x428px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 803x428px

>>16002622
Nah, I plan on doing a lot more than shitty paint and wheels on cut springs. I'm talking an 80" swan neck mounted two element wing, 10" front splitter, flat undertray with a huge diffuser, vented fenders,

>>16002654
that poor car...

>>16002637
Short of replacing the engine parts are maybe 1.5x times more expensive than a base shitbox bimmer. But for that 1.5x more you get way better hardware. Take my brakes for instance. I spent $600 on new rotors all around but I have 13+" vented two piece M3 CSL floating rotors on there. M's are more expensive to maintain as they have better hardware, it's a no brainer. A solid tiny non-vented rear disk will obviously be cheaper, but you don't get as good of brakes.

The only thing on my car that is costly outside of a base BMW is that I have to adjust my valves like an old car or sportbike. Easy as shit, and that is how they squeezed 333hp out of a 3.2L engine.

Don't buy into the memes man. As a long time BMW owner ALL parts are more expensive than other marques, but the M is no more expensive to maintain when you consider what you are getting. You aren't replacing parts on a 2.0L euroshitbox, you are replacing parts on a serious street car built for casual track use.

>>16002634
Wow, you just reminded me how utterly desolate the mid-2000s sports car market was. These are dark times we live in.

File: no more fun allowed.jpg (203KB, 1280x894px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1280x894px

>>16002678
Is it over yet

Are they ever gonna let us have carefree fun ever again? . . .

>>16002673
Now how much is that to bring those parts to the US?

File: 1475814617400.jpg (2MB, 3264x2176px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2176px

>hey candlejack let's see if we can talk about corvettes on /o/ without it reverting to a miata clone thre-

File: 2017-Shelby-GT500-redesign.jpg (238KB, 582x485px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 582x485px

>>16002678
It's only worse today, with electronic power steering, turbos for fuel economy and not power, hybrid on anything fast, no manual in the GTR, belt lines so high you can't stick your arm out the window, and safety regs killing anything that is under 3300lbs.

Mid 2000-s was the end of fun. Honda and the S2k, BMW and the Z4M which lived on barely past the e46 M3.

Only people making good sports cars today are sadly Porsche and the Americans. BMW and Honda are dead to me

File: is gud.jpg (132KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1280x720px

>>16002700
>Only people making good sports cars today are sadly Porsche, Lotus, Alfa Romeo, and Mclaren

ftfy fampioli

let's not forget that manual steering rack

>>16002672
That's one of the five fastest production-based cars in the world. It'll thrash anything short of an LMP1 or F1/GP2.

>>16002695
this threads pretty good

maybe you should just enjoy it

>>16002694
Are you not American? Many BMWs are actually assembled in the USA like the Z4. And to bring parts from Germany is no more expensive than to bring parts from Japan.
>BMW memes
>They are expensive to maintain because they break alot
No, they are actually very reliable as any yuropoor will tell you
>Parts are expensive
This is 100% true. However shopping around online and DIY will save you tons of money, but there is no doubt BMW plans to make more profit off replacement parts than other brands.
>M's are expensive to maintain
In general there are a few more maintenance things to do but when you consider what you get vs a base model appliance car it is fair. They are no more expensive than any other BMW when you take into account the better hardware.
>>16002707
>Lotus
Are they even sold in the US still?
>Alfa Romeo
Lol no. That car is a horrifically poor car for the price. Manual steering sucks as anyone over 30 can tell you.

>>16002707
>Auto only
Is the Cayman GT4 the last true driver's car?

File: plz kill me.png (114KB, 511x161px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 511x161px

>>16002710

>>16002718
Cayman GT4, Corvette Grand Sport, and Viper for a few more months.

>>16002716
>Are they even sold in the US still?
Yep

>Manual steering sucks
Nah, you can go fuck yourself
I shouldn't need to defend perfectly direct steering

File: wtac_2016_aero_dino_dalle-carbonare_29-1200x800.jpg (403KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

403KB, 1200x800px

>>16002723
At least it's still identifiable. Guess what this car was.

File: hnng.jpg (115KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 640x480px

>>16002728
>I shouldn't need to defend perfectly direct steering
Which is why the Alfa is an automatic track car. When it comes to the street give me the slower manual and hydraulic pump power assisted steering any day.

Have you ever driven an old truck or car? Dealing with the choke, no power assisted brakes or steering? I'll pass. Not all technology is bad...besides EPS and DSG foc.

>>16002713
Ay ay Cap'n

>>16002739
Power brakes aren't a feature, it's a bandaid for rotors that aren't big enough. Ideally, you should have rotors big enough and pads aggressive enough that you have the same stopping force for the same pedal effort that you have now, just without the booster.

>>16002737
>that fucking leafblower

DELET THIS
E
L
E
T

>>16002769
>the same stopping force for the same pedal effort
100% absolutely not true. At a driving school I drove a WRX without power brakes and it takes substantially more pedal force (obviously). While you brake the same there is no reason to tire out your leg as you have to push harder, otherwise what is the point of the assist dude? They only disconnected hydraulic power as it made left foot braking easier for those used to a clutch so they wouldn't slam the brake with the left foot not used to feathering on and off. It made zero difference in braking ability, it just made a huge difference in how much leg strength you require. Just like a hydraulic clutch.

Sorry man, but you are way wrong here.

>>16002769
If you haven't driven an old car or truck then try braking with your engine turned off. It takes way more pedal effort and in no way does the hydraulic assist make your brakes more effective, just as EPS doesn't make your steering more effective.

>>16002751
post flags

>>16002049
Fucking tacky beyond belief.

File: Corvette-Sinkhole-4.jpg (285KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1000x666px

>2016
>seriously considering any GM product

lol - no

File: americanflag.png (3KB, 220x116px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 220x116px

>>16002820

File: race fags.jpg (118KB, 468x277px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 468x277px

>>16002826
bruv

>>16001984
are you retarded?
you have nearly the same rigidity, but you can remove the roof if you want
> i dislike features
cuck

>>16002825
Too much pigfat for one room

Was the floor ok and get fix?

>>16002835
>nearly

I like it just right

>>16002832
Oh, I assumed you were calling out nationalities. Shame the corvette has never seen the flag on the right huh?
>joking
>>16002835
OP is a busriding bench racer.
>>16002842
It makes no difference you will ever notice sweet cheeks unless you are running slicks on a race track. Stop believing what the tards on /o/ tell you and try out real life. The only deal breaker out there that isn't autistic is transmission and aspiration. Weight, power, roof, marque, displacement, etc. is just silly as every car is different.

>>16002846
But what If I'm not fast enough on touge?

>implying penfed hasn't already qualified me for a ridiculous loan cap

File: 211.jpg (25KB, 500x495px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 500x495px

>>16002859
A C5 vette with a targa top handles way better than anything you are used to. Only on a race track with slicks would one likely notice the difference between it and a fixed roof coupe. Its like adding strut tower bars to your street car, its so minimal anyone who claims to "feel it" is full of shit.

Real question is how much are you looking to spend? Judging by your choice I assume you are me a year ago.

So number one choice is sports car right? Comfort, storage space, etc comes second to performance and feels? Lets forget the retarded shit /o/ has told you over the years and give me a budget OP

>>16002808
>>16002816
You guys are completely missing the point. Of course disabling the brake booster on a car designed for power brakes will make it require more effort, and of course 50s cars are shit in every possible way.

What I'm saying is if you take off the dinky little 250mm rotors and 0.45 mu pads that came on your car and install 350mm rotors and 0.7 mu pads, you will have the same or more stopping power for any given amount of pedal effort, better pedal feel with less squish, greater heat capacity, etc.

Properly sized rotors are better than power brakes in literally every possible way except for cost. Therefore, in 4chan parlance, power brakes are the result of the Jews cucking your car.

>>16002872
>Jews cucking your car

What's a jew car, do jews drive?

>>16002872
But that is simply asinine. You are suggesting installing a bigger and far superior fade-wise brake system just so that your pedal requires the same effort. That is dumb from a financial and a practical point of view. Push the pedal harder vs shell out way more money for larger brakes is retarded anon.

Power assist or not makes no difference in braking ability, only in the amount of force you must use to press the brake pedal. Putting expensive brakes on a shitbox just to avoid a power assist for women makes absolutely zero sense.

I'll take the big brakes and power assist, please.

File: pontiac.png (950KB, 543x965px) Image search: [Google]

950KB, 543x965px

>>16002033
>under 13k

how about under $5000

>>16002891
>*what other good car

>>16002869
>>16002891
>tfw 300+ hp V8
>cruising with the ttops off at 130mph high on adrenaline

my T/A handles pretty well. it is capable of high speed cornering (90mph+). this car is a live-rear axle. a C5 with IRS with better weight distribution and a shorter wheel base and lighter curb weight; i can only image how good it actually is

>>16002883
>Manufacturer is designing a car
>Well, we could do it the right way, or we could save $400 per vehicle
>Why don't we do it the right way and pass the cost through to the consumer? It's only like 2% of the price of the finished product
>Even better, we'll hike the price AND use the shitty brakes, and then offer a crappy OTS Brembo kit as an option for a 100% markup.

>>16002891
Did Pontiac ever do anything good besides look cool?

I miss oldsmobile

>>16002912
But that is to avoid fade on the track or downhill runs. You really are retarded man.

File: TA rear meat.jpg (345KB, 433x770px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 433x770px

>>16002899
>not having a 160 mph factory limited top speed
>not running 12s with tires and bolt ons
>spending more than 5k usd

>>16002919
>Did Pontiac ever do anything good besides look cool?

performance
>not driving a 455 or 400 cubic inch pontiac V8

File: mustang confused.jpg (195KB, 800x611px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 800x611px

>>16002927
but

did it turn?

>>16002940
>short-long arm coil-over front suspension (see: double wishbone)
>17x9 wheels squared
>wide as fuck and low

probably better than your shitbox

>my other car is a 2000lb gutted EF hatch

the pontiac is way more capable

File: too old for this shit kid.jpg (11KB, 297x170px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 297x170px

>>16002933

>>16002924
It does a lot of things, all of them good. All power assist does is keep pedal effort under control for cheaper. And when I say cheaper, I'm not talking about the cost of an aftermarket big brake kit. The OEM brakes probably cost just as much. The price difference to just spec something a bit larger is miniscule.

>>16002951
>needing 17x9

no? oh ok

>>16002973
>not running 275/40ZR17 comp summer tires

>>16002940
this entire time i thought the mustang was just under-steering off the track in typical fashion


>broken tie rod

>>16002171
While I agree that the s2000 is much too expensive compared to the power, one of the big reasons I got one, was that the resale price should be a hell of alot better than a Miata with a turbo as some suggest

File: image.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

Join us, fagg/o/t

a c5 z06 is like 20k around here with an s2000 AP2 going for 18k+my insurance + 2.5x. I'm starting to consider just turboing my miata at this point since my other options are beyond expensive.

>>16002952
What is that, I need a year and model

>>16002891
I can't even fucking buy a 4th gen LS1 TA in any condition for less than 15k in western canada. There are 20x more C5 to choose from and most of them are manual, and most are the same 15-20k people are asking for TAs.

Auto C5 would be terrible. 4 speed auto? Jesus christ.

>>16003503
My 4th gen was auto. Although it was no stick, a 3600 stall really do those well.

>>16002202
shit colour, shit wheels, kill yourself

>>16001967
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_92ubnlRGW0

>>16002125
Yeah, but why do that when you can just buy a Cobra that comes with stock springs?

>>16001981
Youre not, id take an auto c5 and suit it for the strip. its quite a common practice

>>16002737
porsche 924/944/968

File: National-Corvette-Museum-315-626x382.jpg (88KB, 626x382px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 626x382px

>>16002837

the floor got taken back to hades by lythotropes of strato

>>16003794
>muh IRS

>>16003266
How much can these things drop exactly?

I don't wanna pigfat if I don't have to

>>16001967

What... you can't afford high 20's for a C5 z06? Typical /o/...

>>16003955
this looks like a small hole in a backyard with matchboxes

>>16004807
suck my dick cuck

your kid is either gonna be my whore or my gay buttslut

>>16002097
S2000 retains value, Miata sinks to $1,000.

>>16004800
Drop as in price, weight, height?

>>16006080
weight

>>16006108
3150ish wet. Not much to pull out but there is some, seats mainly.

>>16002872
>Properly sized rotors are better than power brakes in literally every possible way except for cost
Unsprung weight.

Proper sidewalls without resorting to huge total diameters (which, of course, increases the amount of brake you need).

I could go on.

>>16006108
A track rat can get down under 2700 with cheap shit like thin lexan replacement windows, throwing away content, and similar.
Going lighter means spending loads on custom thinner or CF body panels.

File: yee.png (192KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 640x480px

>>16002622
I always wanted to rice out a Greenwood C4 corvette but it looks like ive been beat

>>16002033
>300zx turbo
>$5k
>put $5k into it
>450whp no problem

Corvettes are a shit.

>>16008378
>cramped engine bay
>shit aftermarket compared to c5
>engine is already pushed stock
>almost 500lb heavier than the corvette

look man i love the 300zx but that is a shit argument

>>16007954
>Unsprung weight
Irrelevant. GRM did a test on this a while back and found that 80 pounds of unsprung weight adds less than a tenth of a second over a one and a half minute course.

>>16007822
>3150ish wet

Any way to get under 3000?

I wanna be on par with a Porsche (even though the C5 wheelbase sucks)

>>16008378
>put $5k into it

nigga did you read, he said *STOCK*

>>16009854
Yeah but under 3k usually means money. Like other anon said you CF whatever body panels you can and switch out what you can with lightweight replacements

i really want to buy a c5 and and trash it. keep the suspension/drivetrain/etc all good but just intentionally fuck up all the body panels for aesthetics

>>16012043
I am disappoint

Why is it so heavy again?

>>16012118
>i really want to buy a c5 and and trash it

I'd rather do that with a late 90's C4 and make it look like a Silvia

>>16012118
there was a guy on vetteforum that bought a shitty c5 for 4k and sold all the unnecessary body panels, door handles, door glass, interior parts over the course of 2 years and ended up making more money than he paid for the car

>>16002030

That was a firebird, the brother of the camaro. Do it to a camaro if anything, but that's still a disgrace. Just buy a 2nd gen.

>>16012130
I believe its one of the lightest vettes with only the c1 and c6z06 carbon maybe being lighter. If it got a carbon treatment/track spec you can easily get it sub 3000. Pretty light for a v8 factory sports car

>>16001967
>wtf, I don't want a removable roof
tryhard detected

File: 8567345.jpg (293KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1600x1200px

>>16013895

C6RS was like sub 2800 or 2900 lbs full carbon fiber and 600 HP NA. makes my balls sweaty thinking about how it never made a run on any track (too exclusive/limited).