By Robert Emslie
Practicality and fun don’t have to be mutually exclusive. In fact, I’ve always harbored the opinion that one of the reasons that Ford’s Mustang at times outsold the Chevy Camaro and Pontiac Firebird combined, and outlived both as a continuing model, was because its roomier cabin and trunk. That, as well as wider range of available engines increased its appear across a broader audience. You’ll note that the current retro-mod Camaro channels the earlier, smaller and more up-right cars and not the sleek but lugubrious later models.
When it comes to sports cars, especially those for the extremely well to do, practicality is usually the first attribute to be omitted in the pursuit of sex appeal and performance. You might have at some time or another seen a Lamborghini Countach owner attempt to back his car up, and act that frequently involves popping the door open and sitting on the sill like a catamaran captain. Sure it gets the job done, but practical? Ask him when it’s raining cats and dogs.
I happen to like practicality in all my cars, even the sporty ones. I appreciate the fact that the 240Z has a huge hatch and a commodious load area behind the seats, a feature that its contemporary, the Opel GT, couldn’t offer. It also provides this practicality without loss of its sportiness or capability, a pretty cool feat. That’s just one example of a sports car that didn’t ignore function over form, but what about the utmost in that pairing? What do you think has been history’s most practical sports car?
Image source: The Samba Forums
Jeff Glucker
<img src="http://www.egarage.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/CTSV-wagon-Canepa.jpg" width=500>
We're not worried about fuel, right?
Love. This. Car. Make mine a manual please.
It's like an Accord, even at Autobahn speeds:
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-Lh_RQEGRJWLWh5csXdN1j28gk9NpbnLqQfKCTiSDqTU-GkwI6w" width=550>
Ding ding ding!
I got several:
– BMW M3 – room for four, trunk, folding rear seat for skis, bike, etc.
– Porsche Boxster/Cayman – two trunks and you can add a roof rack on the Cayman or a hardtop-equipped Boxster.
– Pick a hothatch, I'm partial to the Integra as I had six people in it once, can fit skis, two bikes, etc.
<img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6066/6070662413_c5cb34b6b4_o.jpg" width=500 /img>
Although, if Mazda could ever take all they learned from the reliable, economical (but small) MX-5 and the roomy enough (but thirsty and finicky) RX-8, they'd rule the world (by which I mean my wallet).
To add to your suggestion, I'm suggesting the V70R – it had a great blend of power, MPG, and decent reliability.
Handling? I dunno about that one… but still a sports car in my mind.
<img src="http://www.volvo-cars.co.jp/photo-car/0022-2.jpg">
Great car. Not sure it counts as a sports car. The AWD system prefers the front wheels, iirc.
It is a 95/5 split.
related: is it a family wagon? or a sportkombi?
[youtube 158eggdKNBI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=158eggdKNBI youtube]
It is fast, handles well enough to be considered sporty, seats seven, has a roof rack, all three rows of seating can fold flat, so you can carry a longboard INSIDE the car using the front pass seat folded down…
and yes, that is my V70R in the video.
yes. i shot it myself. yes. it is terrible. do i care? no. i enjoy the hell out of my car regardless of what anyone else thinks.
It's a sportwagon. I loved mine, until this happened:
http://www.importandvintage.com/hallofshame2
I was never convinced that the extra weight of the AWD on the R model was worth it. My 850 turbo had a tighter turning radius and seemed to handle better in general.
Only if combined with truck tires, otherwise you're gonna need a chiropractor after every trip in that car.
Well, that's the jackpot then. Let me add something relevant to please the eye:
<img src="http://gaycarboys.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/1972-1973-volvo-p-1800-es-06.jpg" width="600">
Honestly, the P1800/1800ES is actually a pretty great answer. Perhaps a little bit staid Swede in sexy clothes, but it's undeniably practical. Plus, worthy of inclusion on most topics around here, just for the hell of it.
Reposting Volvo propaganda on the Hooniverse is my new purpose in live. That said, I totally agree that the "sports-" in sportscar covers the P1800 only in a liberal way.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?client=mv-google&g…
Basic idea pushed closer to the limit
<img src="http://volvoforums.com/forum/members/somthngfrce-18563-albums-volvo-vox-@sema-52-picture-a-340.jpg" >
All Mazda needed to do to fix the RX-8 was add the engine from the Mazdaspeed 3. I'll admit that the one I drove (my first rotary experience) was smooth, but that chassis deserved better.
I completely agree. If the RX-8 had offered the DISI MZR in place of the rotary, there would be one in my driveway right now. It really is the best daily driver chassis I can imagine, but the Renesis is just so dissapointing. Now that the LS swap is getting more common for the 8, I think this may be happening in my near future. A brilliantly handling RWD chassis with plenty of space for 4 real adults, but now with torque, engine reliability, cheap maintenance, and 30 mpg highway? Sign me up!
I know. It is sickening that they let purity stand in the way. They could have wiped BMW 3 coupe sales into the ditch with that.
We would def have one too. As it is, we have a car you can't shut off when warm if yo are just popping into the shops…
I'm admittedly sort of on the fence – I've driven enough of them at low speeds that I want to spend much more time with it, and the rotary's part of it. And as an added bonus, it's certainly helped grenade resale values of the things. Really, with the packaging and weight, no piston engine would maintain the same balance (no doubt the LS1 would come close enough, but not quite), and it's a vital part of the RX8's character.
But, I'm also in a place where I can't have a car that gets 18mpg, and could randomly be out of commission for a couple days. If I change jobs, sure, but not right now. That's where the Miata comes in, at least for a year or two until I have kids and need a back seat.
I am happy, thanks you're right, the lot of you! Rover SD1 3500 ties with Volvo's BMW fighter 960 too.
I'm seeing a theme but the RS2 has quattro.
<img src="http://cdn.carthrottle.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/carsourcing.com_.jpg" width="600">
because Lambo V10 in a station wagon
<img src="http://image.motortrend.com/f/photo_gallery/9246362+w623+h388+cr1+ar0/112_0801_01l%2B2009_audi_RS6_avant%2Brear_view.jpg">
An actual Lambo V10 vs Porsche tuned Audi 5… I can see your point.
Yes this one too. I still have the episode where Hammond lashed this model up a mountain saved on my tivo for when my blood pressure gets low.
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/09/2012-tesla-model-s-fd.jpg">
It's a gamble, given that it takes at least an hour to recharge, but lots of storage space and possibly better dynamics than something carrying an internal combustion engine.
The Model S is getting more of my attention.
20 minute supercharger recharge or a 90 second battery change out.
Has recharge time gotten down that low? I guess it's more practical than I thought, given that the owner can afford it.
Only at the Tesla supercharger stations. Pretty cool stuff.
I've had a Tesla Roadster for a week (am returning it today). I have something to say about all this, from a practicality point of view. Maybe I'll make a post out of it.
I'd be interested in reading that.
I'll be tweeting today at @TamerlaneBlog. I have 152 miles of range left. I have to drive 100 miles with headlights, wiper, defrost, and radio on in a few hours. My blood pressure is already rising.
Do tell.
I think it's 20 minutes to recharge it 50%.
I can't remember where that 20 minutes came from but Tesla's site says 200 mile range on 30 minutes of charge.
<img src="http://photos.evo.co.uk/images/front_picture_library_UK/dir_1103/car_photo_551923_25.jpg" width="660/">
Goes rallying in the weekend and does the shopping during the week.
The steelies totally make it.
THANK you!
And those steelies rock bigtime
The video is in French, but you can listen to the engine…
[youtube vpRkSn2IdTw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpRkSn2IdTw youtube]
It does have to be the French one. Compared to UK on different engine, suspension pick up points and a whole lot more.
Yes indeed, it needs to be the 1.3 with 2 double barrel Webers!!!
Being liberal with the term "car"…
<img src="http://blog.caranddriver.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/1991-GMC-Syclone-14.jpg" width="600">
<img src="http://www.meguiarsonline.com/forums/photopost/data/501/medium/2003_Ford_Lightning.jpg" width="600">
<img src="http://www.bjmotors.biz/images/inventory/2005BlkViperTruckSRT_7905/large_01.jpg" width="600">
I would have to say the Typhoon might be more practical than the Syclone.
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/03/typhoon1_opt.jpg"width=500>
I didn't add the Typhoon since I couldn't haul a refrigerator in it.
Not that the Syclone payload is anything special.
It's also more of a compromise, being a couple hundred pounds heavier. The Syclone is definitely a better hoon, despite not having that word in its name.
Besides, a true sports car doesn't have a full back seat.
Closer to subject and practical depends on the needs.
<img src="http://www.thetorquereport.com/2010_g8_sport_truck2.jpg" width="600">
Interestingly, in their homeland they are often called the "blue collar sports car".
Speaking from Experience, I'd have to nominate the '85 Corolla GT-S and the Celica Supra of the same vintage. I used the GT-S as a courier vehicle- it never failed to start and always delivered the goods, while the Supra is my current Asian stalwart.
From getting groceries to grabbing bags of soil and material from the gardening and home improvement store,then handling the twisties on 49, 1 and sundry other lovely roads, those two are the most practical in my book ( Even if the Supra is more properly a GT).
Miata is too easy, probably the all time, grand slam sports car. So, I'd also consider the Austin Mini, the 240Z, the first gen RX7, and the Datsun, 510 wagon. For starters.
For our purposes here, it might be helpful to restrict the definition of a sports car to the classic characteristics: small, sporty, two seat, convertible. Otherwise, the Porsche Cayenne might win.
If we're restricting to a 2-seat convertible, the Coxster wins every time. (Or the 914 if you prefer old-school.)
I mean, the Miata's cheapness and reliability makes it quite practical, but… the Coxster has more cargo room.
Well, if we don't have some bounds on 'sports car', then we're just talking about 'cars I like'. Boxster and 914 are great entries. But, at root, there's a real conflict between the concept of 'sports car' and 'practical'. Sprots cars are essentially impractical and frivolous.
To be fair, practical's relative. 99% of the time, I haul around nothing more than a couple days worth of groceries (for two), or a week's laundry and a couple backpacks. There are few cars that won't fit into. Sure, I took full advantage of driving a hatchback last time I moved, but two seats and a bit of trunk space isn't entirely impractical for my meagre needs.
As someone who drives a Miata, I can assure you that practicality is not one of its strong points.
I can either carry a passenger or my laptop bag; doing both requires a special type of small, highly understanding, passenger.
Oh, come on, it's not that bad. The trunk isn't *THAT* small, and even if it's full, you've got the parcel shelf (and with a sufficiently thin laptop bag, that option might even work if you're putting the top down).
I've brought most of my retrocomputers (I have a sizable collection) with me on a roadtrip in a Miata, complete with everything for about half a week. For that, I ended up using every trick up my sleeve except for the trunk rack – trunk was full of equipment (including some stashed between the bulkhead and spare tire), luggage was on the parcel shelf, and more equipment was in the main cabin where the passenger seat was.
Golf Mk1 GTi this was where sport and practical all started
<img src="http://www.16v.net/wallpaper/golf_1_7.jpg" width="600">
Corvette's had an optional towing package until at least the early 1980s.
<img src="http://i799.photobucket.com/albums/yy280/AndyT_2009/VettepullingBoat.jpg"width=500>
I'd also mention the C5 Corvette – plenty of space for two, 702L of cargo space, reliable, and fairly easy 30mpg on the highway (even the EPA numbers aren't far removed from contemporary V6 sedans.
From the C4 on up the Corvette has been fairly practical for a sports car. The C2s and C3s with no exterior luggage access were sort of a pain though. The cargo space on my 77 Vette is pretty limited. If you did get the optional exterior luggage rack, it covered the fuel door.
Oh, definitely – I just threw out the C5 as it was the Corvette's pinnacle of fuel economy and cargo space. I was playing around with an '80 that got traded in to a dealer I represent, and I don't exceptionally mind accessing the cargo hold through the passenger compartment (it's no worse than tossing stuff in the back seat of my two-door compact), especially since the seatback folds so flat.
<img src="https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRErzNYUjjP77MWNiyPqSiBysDX90Wo1TqgHxAbRVabcpAq_uMR">
Here's a couple of contenders…
<img src="http://flameroad.com/pics/Datsun/fa/b2/6604_Datsun-240-Z_1.jpg">
<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2566/4179096644_94b7cae63b.jpg">
Cayman, Corvette, Boxster, 240Z, clownshoe, RX-8, RX-7, Miata and NSX are sports cars. The rest are just sporty versions of family cars.
Still, I'd say it's the 911. It has a reasonable boot and a backseat you can use for storage or short trips with four people or taking the kds to school. For me it would more practical than the Cayman or the Corvette. And also the RX-8 because I can't reach the dipstick to check the oil on them.
<img src="http://boman993.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/cruise3-3.jpg"width="600"</img>
image from <a href="http://boman993.com/” target=”_blank”>http://boman993.com/
Why yes, it's so good for taking the kids to the school that they made an advertisement out of it:
[youtube 9oFZS-sEa0Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oFZS-sEa0Q youtube]
I take my child to school with my antique-plate-eligible Volvo. The curbside helpers couldn't figure out at first how to open the doors at first, since every new car has pull handles instead of the old timey squeeze handles.
Hah, the inside door handles on the 740 are fun too. Everyone who hasn't been in one before takes a while to figure out how to open the doors from the inside..
Or the front seat belts that have only like 10 cm of slack on the top and you have to reel them from the bottom. That one gets people tugging on the belts like the retractor is jammed and fooled me to the point where I tore the interior apart trying to figure out why it's stuck. I'm planning on upgrading my front seats to the more comfortable 960 style while retaining the old style belts and gigantic seat controls just for WTF factor.
I think there was some kind of an European award issued for the most incomprehensible door handle design in the 80's. The completely hidden pull-up handle ala Alfa 75 or Renault 25 is my favorite.
<img src="http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y237/simontibbett/DSC_0054.jpg" width="500">
1991-94 Sentra SE-R. Never the fastest thing on the road, but pretty damn zippy for the time and more importantly, legitimately sporty handling, shifting, etc. An unholy blast in tight twisties. Also managed to be reasonably comfortable for four full-sized humans. Affordable to buy, maintain, and fuel, plus reliable as a hammer.
This got downvoted? Really?
It was at the time advertised as the spiritual successor to the 2002tii. It's also one of the better-styled Sentras.
Sports cars with hatchbacks….
-MkIII/MKIV Supra: 2 vestigal rear seats that fold flat, liftgate
-Acura RSX Type-S: banzai K20, 6-speed rifle bolt shifter, you can move your whole apartment in it
-Acura Integra Type-R: see above
-Nissan 240SX S13 hatchback: same
etc etc!
In terms of practicality and versatility, it's really hard to argue against a minivan, especially an Odyssey.
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b3/Honda_Odyssey_2007.jpg" width=600>
Between the jillion cupholders, storage bins, removable seats, flat loading floor, big sliding doors, and excellent driving position, it's almost the perfect car.
No, it's not flashy or fast, but for a truly useful car, this is one of the best.
My wife will be pleased to know that her beast of burden has been upgraded to sportscar status.
Let me guess: you live in Lineland, and therefore cannot grasp the concept of a curve.
I would agree, so long as it's an Odyssey Touring, or one of the new Sienna SEs, with the big wheels and Altezza LED taillights.
This was the closest a minivan got to being a sports car:
<img src="http://www.motorstown.com/images/renault-espace-f1-03.jpg" width="500">
But it wasn't built in numbers, alas.
<img src="http://www.turbovan.net/byronburn.jpg" width=500>
The turbo Caravan finds your lack of faith disturbing.
Shame, that.
<img src="http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/1413/ms5a.jpg" width=500 /img>
If only enough nutters would see the light for Mazda to make a business case for this one.
Being the proud owner of a Mini Clubman, i would nominate it wholeheartedly.<img src="IMAGE URL" width="600">
Anything on the more exciting end of Subaru's lineup.
<img src="http://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2011/10/08/00/39/2011_subaru_impreza_wrx_sti_hatchback-pic-292652650327762354.jpeg" width="600">
<img src="http://www.part-box.com/images/p1.jpg" width="600">
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the WRX wagon.
Room for two people and a large, hatchback-accessed trunk. Stellar fuel economy. Stellar reliability. Simple. Lightweight. Easy to park. And fantastic (at least by front-drive standards) handling.
The defense rests, Your Honor…
<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZyWYGMs074o/Tqp0vV7gjrI/AAAAAAAACg4/3ZC8y7z_56E/s1600/0506_01z%252B1990_honda_crx_si%252Brear_side_view.jpg" />
^^^^
Winner, right there. Spent 6 years with an 88 Si as a daily driver.
Sporty? Yep! Even stock, it could buzz up and down canyon roads with the best sport bikes out there. Deep Recaro buckets kept you and your passenger firmly locked in place, even under the highest of G-loads. And that little d18 just loved to sing in the upper stratosphere of the RPMs, while you worked that wonderful 5 speed.
Practical? Check! Small enough to zip through traffic like a scooter through downtown during rush hour. The hatchback could easily hold a weeks worth of groceries, enough luggage for two to get lost for a month, or a 42" CRT TV you found on Craigslist for your bachelor pad. 30+ MPG (even driven hard) and Honda reliability were icing on the cake.
A true hoon could do a lot worse for a DD, that's for sure.
“The Jeep is America's only real sports car.” – Enzo Ferrari
<img src="http://www.aemintakes.com/images/press/teamatk2.jpg" width=500>
It's not practical compared to most SUVs, but it's pretty practical when compared to a Ferrari. Also, goes over speed bumps more gracefully.
To be fair, the TJ and KJ Unlimiteds are practical enough (my wife was asking me if I'd want one as our future kiddie hauler in light of having to get rid of my long neglected project YJ – if it wasn't for the fuel economy, I'd definitely be pushing for it).
If we are puting said car in its historical context, its this
<img src="http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3401/5700440949_c6303a1a86_z.jpg" width="600">
A Meadowes engine Frazer Nash. Up to town for a show, get the groceries, then take the lights and wings off and win at Prescott.
Porsche 944.
Probably not far wrong, here.
<img src="http://www.nexus6.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/Ford_Sierra_RS_Cosworth_2.jpg" width=450>
Sierra Cosworth is the official "I grew up in Essex" answer.
<img src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Bk_cLBF1ZJ4/TaMlUqzf_7I/AAAAAAAAAWc/Xct056K15Yw/s1600/IMG_5813%2Bps.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://www.speedhunters.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/InterClubHCR-475.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_gryRbyQ-ZYs/TD2j39RVF8I/AAAAAAAAAH0/SKJCkxy2OJQ/s1600/scimitar3.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.luxist.com/media/2010/07/1972-ferrari-daytona-shooting-break.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2526/3840911830_4764326fc9.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://forum.avtoindex.com/foto/data/media/44/Lynx_Eventer_1983_30.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://www.findaporsche.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/porsche944cargo12dpmotorsport-vi_4GN_PakWheelscom.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/images/gallery/porsche/19709.jpg
<img src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8D930_x0PdY/UTXquI1UMaI/AAAAAAAAEn0/nkNVTOBcPK4/s1600/NISSANEXACANOPY+1.jpg"width="600">
<img src="http://hooniverse.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/g3e_1.jpg"width="600">
This came immediately to mind:
<img src="http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u16/capedcadaver/IMG_0239.jpg" width=600>
<img src="http://www.dragtimes.com/images/1084236943maxfront.JPG" width=600>
BTW – Googling 'four door sports car' also led me to this, uh, thing:
<img src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lTVfb4qUtJk/TSDfO2z__8I/AAAAAAAABEA/ycrrrdyvABc/s400/Wings-of-Nike-Sport-Cars-Concept-4.jpg" width=600>
It's called the 'Wings of Nike Sports Car Concept', I guess. Silly car, silly name, why not.
Umm. Half of the cars above are not sports cars, IMHO. My answer would be this:
<img src="http://img13.exs.cx/img13/8174/456wagon.jpg" width="655">
Or
<img src="http://www.pestalozzi.net/sb/am_virage/virage_400.jpg">
All of these posts and no one has mentioned the other Swedish contenders.
Saab 900 hatchback (any vintage)
Saab 9000 Aero