How many consider the M3 as a Sporty GT? Sports Car?

[Pointerman]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Because a 911 S is not a sports car whereas a Cayman S is?

Maybe you would say "yes" to that, but the question is whether classifying them like that is even remotely useful and sensible. And then there's the fact that things end up being confusing as hell when you start talking about the GT3, which does not have a backseat.

Pretty sure the back seat is an option on the GT3. My brother has one and is installing a rear seat any day now. It just pops right in (well, almost).

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by Pointerman

Pretty sure the back seat is an option on the GT3.

I don't think it is an option (I could be wrong), but yes it can be retrofitted. I know it is not an option for a GT3 RS, so it doesn't really matter either way. The point remains that there are cars out there whose seat count varies depending on the trim level. Another one is a TT - the roadster seats two but the coupe seats four.

[sensi09]

I wouldn't call the M3 a sports car, but it's definitely faster than some so-called sports cars.

[duk]

/sports coupe

[Eau Rouge]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

I would say this: a sports must be designed on a purpose-built chassis. An M3 does not fit this category - it is built on a "family car" chassis.

[Erhan]

Sorry, but who ever thinks M3 is a sports car, doesn't know much about cars.

[FVM3]

In Hong Kong, some say M3 is in the same category as Ferrari, Lambo as supercar

[cawest19]

I'd like to change my vote to sporty gt, thanks

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by christopherchenm

In Hong Kong, some say M3 is in the same category as Ferrari, Lambo as supercar

The same people probably also think that Eminem is a musician.

CA

[crackberry]

Originally Posted by christopherchenm

In Hong Kong, some say M3 is in the same category as Ferrari, Lambo as supercar

[-=Hot|Ice=-]

Originally Posted by nirvanayoda

I despise the word "sporty".

"Sporty" is a word used to describe a normal car that has small details sometimes associated with a sports car. A civic with a spoiler is "sporty". A cavalier with the z51 package or whatever is "sporty". A corolla with aluminum dash trim is "sporty".

An M3 is not sporty. It's a sports car. Or a sports coupe. It's not a "sporty" anything. An M3 is built for performance with a special emphasis on handling, and it's extremely fast compared to most cars (and is faster than some supercars from less than a decade ago). That qualifies as a sports car. Or coupe. Or whatever noun you want to place behind "sports". In fact, I guess you could even call it a sports GT. But it's not a freaking "sporty" anything.

If it's a "sports coupe" then why do the brakes suck for track use? Why is the cooling not sufficient enough?

[captainaudio]

Originally Posted by nirvanayoda

I despise the word "sporty".

"Sporty" is a word used to describe a normal car that has small details sometimes associated with a sports car. A civic with a spoiler is "sporty". A cavalier with the z51 package or whatever is "sporty". A corolla with aluminum dash trim is "sporty".

An M3 is not sporty. It's a sports car. Or a sports coupe. It's not a "sporty" anything. An M3 is built for performance with a special emphasis on handling, and it's extremely fast compared to most cars (and is faster than some supercars from less than a decade ago). That qualifies as a sports car. Or coupe. Or whatever noun you want to place behind "sports". In fact, I guess you could even call it a sports GT. But it's not a freaking "sporty" anything.

After World War II when "Sports Cars" started to become popular in the US it was very clear what a sports car was. They were two seaters, usually open cars, had manual transmission, did not have power windows or brakes, and were two passenger cars, They were much smaller than and looked nothing like the full size American cars of the era and they were not higher performance versions of four door sedans. These sports cars were dual purpose. They were road cars and they were race cars,

Today that definition is not so clear when there are cars like the M3 Sedan that are based upon and are for all practical purposes visually indistinguishable to most people from a car that is marketed as a family sedan. Although these cars offer a very high level of performance and are taken to the track by thier owners the days of the dual purpose road/race car are long gone.



So is an M3 a sports car? Not in the classic definition but many owners use it as a sports car and it certainly performs like a sports car. I personally would categorize the M3 as a GT car. IMO the term GT car does not need to be prefaced with "Sport" or "Sporty" because that attribute is included in the definition of a GT car.




1954 4 Door Sedan



1954 Sports Car

CA

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by pman10

Leather electric seats, Nav, 'comfort' suspension settings, back seats, large trunk, relatively heavy, poor brakes and brake pads, climate control/cruise control, heavy interior insulation, tire/suspension set up leaning towards understeer...

All of these add up to a grand tourer (or more accurately, a 'sports sedan'), not a sports car. That being said, I'm very happy with it.

I don't agree with this entirely. There are many sports cars that have all or most of these items. Come on a sports car cannot have climate control, does that mean heating and AC or just those with an automatic setting?

Also what production car does not lean slightly or even heavily toward understeer.

Now that being said I also think you are on the right track to distinguish one car type from another. You just have not hit the nail on the head.

[OC3]

Originally Posted by captainaudio

The same people probably also think that Eminem is a musician.

CA

[crackberry]

Originally Posted by nirvanayoda

I despise the word "sporty".

"Sporty" is a word used to describe a normal car that has small details sometimes associated with a sports car. A civic with a spoiler is "sporty". A cavalier with the z51 package or whatever is "sporty". A corolla with aluminum dash trim is "sporty".

An M3 is not sporty. It's a sports car. Or a sports coupe. It's not a "sporty" anything. An M3 is built for performance with a special emphasis on handling, and it's extremely fast compared to most cars (and is faster than some supercars from less than a decade ago). That qualifies as a sports car. Or coupe. Or whatever noun you want to place behind "sports". In fact, I guess you could even call it a sports GT. But it's not a freaking "sporty" anything.

I strongly disagree with what you wrote. The m3 is a compromise. It is designed to haul four people and emphasizes comfort. Although it may perform well, because ///m built the m3 with that in mind, it makes the m3 a sporty gt, and not a sports car.

[crackberry]

Originally Posted by nirvanayoda

Since when is a sports car or sports coupe defined by its trackability? And what is our basis of comparison? Do the brakes suck compared to Porsche ceramic brakes? Probably. Do they suck compared to 99% of other production cars? Doubtful.

I should note that we aren't talking about a "race car", which would likely be defined by trackability.

No, you missed hot ice's concept.

The m3 is not built as an all out sports car, and he uses the brakes as an example why. If it was built for serious performance (a word that you used) and not everyday street use (which a sporty gt would be used for), then ///m would have thrown in better brakes on the m3.

If a sports car is not defined by its trackability, then the m3 gts and cls are not sport cars either, which is something I disagree with.

[crackberry]

Originally Posted by nirvanayoda

I appreciate your well written and thoughtful reply. With that being said, I do disagree with you on a point -- I'm not sure I agree that GT would necessarily encompass "sports" without the adjective preceding it. I'll provide a counterexample. Many people might consider a 550i a GT car, but it's by no means a "sports sedan", so "sports" isn't necessarily encompassed in GT.

I think one can define "sports car" by looking at the car's purpose. I'd propose this:

328i sedan/coupe -- compact luxury sedan / compact luxury coupe
335i sedan/coupe -- sports sedan / sports coupe
M3 sedan/coupe -- sports car

I do understand why people may disagree with me, but I don't think the answer is to call something "sporty". The answer is more or less to coin a new term, for instance "performance coupe", if no other term works.

Because you are using a different vernacular or assigning different meanings to "standards" that everyone is accustomed to.

[stuka]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Because a 911 S is not a sports car whereas a Cayman S is?

Maybe you would say "yes" to that, but the question is whether classifying them like that is even remotely useful and sensible. And then there's the fact that things end up being confusing as hell when you start talking about the GT3, which does not have a backseat.

I would take the M3 over a non GT 911 any day, speaking as someone who had a GT2 and a Turbo.

The GT cars are the only sports cars that Porsche makes today.

All other 911 variants don't even have the dry sump block that Porsche races with.

The GT cars are also the only ones that come only in manual so the pretender enthusiasts can't drive them, and before 997, no traction control for the hamfisted.

[stuka]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I don't agree with this entirely. There are many sports cars that have all or most of these items. Come on a sports car cannot have climate control, does that mean heating and AC or just those with an automatic setting?

Also what production car does not lean slightly or even heavily toward understeer.

996 GT3's has AC delete option.

Porsche GT cars do not understeer. They put in traction control in 997 because people kept stuffing the 996 GT2/3 into the walls or wrapping them around telephone poles.

M3's are GT's, no if's and but's.

[Erhan]

If M3 is a sports car, then Toyota Corolla S is also a sports car.

[Echo M3]

Originally Posted by swamp2

I don't agree with this entirely. There are many sports cars that have all or most of these items. Come on a sports car cannot have climate control, does that mean heating and AC or just those with an automatic setting?

Also what production car does not lean slightly or even heavily toward understeer.

Now that being said I also think you are on the right track to distinguish one car type from another. You just have not hit the nail on the head.

I was probably being a bit extreme - of course, a sports car can include air conditioning and heating.

But I think you get the gist of my post; the M3, to me, does not feel like a true sports car. I then went on to try and define what makes the M3 not sporty, but that is clearly a highly debatable subject. As another poster has already explained, the M3 fits into a niche between the standard sedan and a true, hardcore two-seater sports car. I just happen to think that this niche is the GT class.

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by pman10

I was probably being a bit extreme - of course, a sports car can include air conditioning and heating.

But I think you get the gist of my post; the M3, to me, does not feel like a true sports car. I then went on to try and define what makes the M3 not sporty, but that is clearly a highly debatable subject. As another poster has already explained, the M3 fits into a niche between the standard sedan and a true, hardcore two-seater sports car. I just happen to think that this niche is the GT class.

Speed is definetly not the major determining point here. The problem of the M3 is being too soft and detached. I don't think there is a definite rule how big/heavy a sports car should be, but M3 is beyond that size and weight.