Return to trombonista's garage

25 Views
No Comments
No Likes
Published on 21 October 2019

So two doors with a soft top equals sports car? Methinks not. Surely a better definition has to be the intent of the designer not a bureaucrat. Morgan, Caterham, Cobra, Corvette, NOT COMARO!!!, etc etc etc were designed with the obvious possibility of going to a motorsport of some sort. I don't think an MGB-GT is any less a sports car because of the roof. Although an MGC-GT is definitely a Gran Tourer not a sports car as it wasn't required to, nor indeed could, handle as well as the B. Do we think an Astra soft top or a Vectra soft top is a sports car? What about the Mercedes convertibles. Beautiful Gran Tourers but definitely not sports cars. Then again, an XU1 has all the qualities of a car that can attend motor sport events successfully, or the Mini Cooper S, or Cortina etc. For me the best definition I can come up with is this: It must be relatively small, lightweight, relatively high power to weight ration, nimble and most of all - FUN - irrespective of the roof material or the number of doors. VW Beetles were one of the cars of choice for motorkhanas and rallies in the late 50s and even early 60s so they might, in those days at least, qualify as sports cars although the designers NEVER thought of taking them in that direction so I guess that discounts them. The Gran Tourer on the other hand Usually has more refined looks, smoother suspension, higher ratios for easy running, plush interiors and so on. They usually had big engines (usually equates to relatively poor handling) although I know that the Aston Martin et al have large engines yet handle nicely (until you put them up against a Morgan or Caterham). So many points to compare and conrast and I don't think any rational outcome that will appeal to everyone is possible.