ShinnyGroove (Forum Supporter) said:
Its kinda like the Supreme Court said about pornography- hard to define but you know it when you see it.
I heard that it was a Priest who is credited with that quote. The Supreme Court contracted the Priest to watch 1,000's of hours of pron in an effort to come up with an object definition (and to protect his flock of course) and he later testified, while wiping sweat from his brow, with that famous quote. I don't know if that's true but it is fun to remember it going down that way.
Oh, what makes a great sports car...
Small, light, basic (but with good mechanicals), RWD, 2 or 2+2 seating, manual transmission, and either hard or soft top.
All very nice, but I cannot agree on the FWD exclusion.
Examples:
Of course, everybody has an opinion, and they all do stink.
I think what makes a "great" sports car is subjective. 10 years ago for me it would have been power. 5 years ago it would have been character and precision.
Today, its involvement and enjoyment. Each time I get in my car it's an experience. Some days it scares me and some days I just love it but everyday I turn and look at it as a I walk away. That's pretty "great" I think.
Lots of opinions, obviously. I have two.
The first would be, this is a question that is entirely subjective and the answer doesn't even matter.
The second is that sports cars are exactly like pornography. It isn't so much about the content, it's about the intent of the thing. Sports cars are designed to be driven hard and driven for pleasure. There's a requisite element of raw experience, whereas a GT car can be quick and enjoyable, but the intent is a higher level of driving refinement.
"Norman Garrett", finally, a name to direct the cussing involved in working on a Miata towards!
Got tired of the Miata hassles* and sold it, now back to Triumph, Alfa-Romeo, and home built specials. Simple to work on, even simpler for the Specials as that is a major design criteria.
*No one will wax nostalgic for a Miata clutch change, access to the coil pack, changing valve stem seals, or the constantly failing plastic bits.
The original definition of Sports Car was more rigid, max performance as rule one, no matter what the displacement might be, no roll-up windows or anything else that might hinder performance, and certainly no CUP HOLDERS!
I still remember when Porsche owners considered it a point of pride that the brand had never put cup holders in anything.
From the original article:
"Sports cars also have to be two-seaters. Three is a crowd: You can only have a driver and a navigator/cop-spotter/friend/skilled mechanic in the passenger seat."
Go home BAC Mono and McLaren F1. It appears that 1-seat and 3-seats exclude you from being sports cars. 
Review Ford vs Ferrari, note the scene where Ken Miles bashes UP the trunk of his Cobra?
Sports Cars were required to be able to carry a minimum amount of luggage.
I think sticking to what the article said about defines a sports car is pretty fair. However, I think it's foolish to claim that a car has to be a sports car to be fast/fun/cool/etc. M3s are no joke, but I wouldn't call one a sports car. Same thing with all those AWD boost buggies. Any one of them will smoke my Miata in any performance setting but they still aren't sports cars. I even have a hard time calling the McLaren above a sports car. It's a supercar to me.
Shaun
Dork
8/3/20 9:31 p.m.
For starters I can not make "a sports car must be a convertible" and "a sports car must be suitable for road racing" fit into a logical thesis. "Unmodified" Ragtops are not good race cars. I love Miatas, appreciate the importance of the car, and hats of to Norman forever. However as an argument defining a sports car, this piece of writing starts with the answer (har) in hand, 'Miata'- and works to the inevitable conclusion, Miata. I found several of the short comments here noting qualities along the lines of fun and driver involvement much more compelling.
100% with Mr. Garret on this one. (Of course, I was born while Ike was still in the White House...so there's that.) My idea of pure fun is throwing an "underpowered," skinny tire, antiquated transmission, old two seater down a country road...on a summer day, with the top down. That will always be a sports car, in my world.
I think "affordability" might be an ingredient to the equation.
The MG was affordable in its time. The Miata is affordable. The little FWD hatch rockets were affordable.
You don't see a dozen Ferrari 458s lined up at an autocross.
Visceral engagement.
Lightweight and nimble
Underpowered but a chassis that's capable of handling much higher power output. (A car that challenges your skill not your body)
Reliable enough and easy enough on consumables to have you think "I could drive this everyday if I wanted to" so that the punishment in enjoying it is often merely utility.
Ooooooh, I'm getting a case of deja-vu here. Can discuss what makes a hatchback next? That'll be just about as productive! 
With that said, I'll (of course) throw in my 2 cents, although it's not worth even that. Count me in the porn analogy camp. The intent of the design matters more than any specific configuration. Otherwise you get into the realm of absurdity.
Well I didn't mean the conversation had to be productive. Never stopped us before!
#threadkilla4lyfe
In reply to Matt B (Forum Supporter) :
It's a convertible... The chassis is stiff as a pool noodle. It has a lackluster longstroke engine that just does no like to rev the least bit. Sure, muh rwd... the weight distribution... It's not a sports car... It will never be a car for the enthusiast to pick up and love when they've driven even a geo prism... A base honda civic ed and ef or ee up... Don't kid yourself. Lookup Aslan garage in osaka. You'll see a honda civic almost 40 years old kill gtrs and rx7s. Rediculous suspension investments and track gearing, but much less money. And for twice the cost, a miata would not see half the performance. No convertible is a sports car. They're for people that like to use clay bars, and not drive...
In reply to RichardSIA :
Jesus christ... I felt that in every fiber of my being. Especially the maintenance. Only worked on the first two generations. I'm a real lanky guy, but... Sorry, I'm getting worked up over the many times I got destroyed on the flate rate for a simple job, only because the car was meant to be worked on by keebler elves.
I agree with just about all of the attributes above. But in the context of modern cars, a sports car is one that you can see out of.
Big glass, low beltlines, narrow pillars.
In reply to thatsnowinnebago (Forum Supporter) :
So it begins...
I don't care about anything else if the engine isn't worthy of the chassis. Until the ND.2, the Miata has always been nealry soulless under the hood, as well as anemic. Swap in a K20, and it's a bit of a different story.
The perfect sports car is the 987.2-981 Cayman/Boxster (base, S, GTS [my favorite], or GT4/Spyder). Anything more is welcome but unnecessary; anything less just isn't enough (unless of course you just have to have a carb for some reason).
350z247 said:
I don't care about anything else if the engine isn't worthy of the chassis. Until the ND.2, the Miata has always been nealry soulless under the hood, as well as anemic. Swap in a K20, and it's a bit of a different story.
The perfect sports car is the 987.2-981 Cayman/Boxster (base, S, GTS [my favorite], or GT4/Spyder). Anything more is welcome but unnecessary; anything less just isn't enough (unless of course you just have to have a carb for some reason).
I suppose the issue is that if you're buying something that falls into the most commonly accepted definition of "sports car" the only way to get both a great engine and a great chassis is to spend Porsche money. Yeah for decades the engine in the Miata wasn't a match for the rest of the car, and the 2.0 in the FRS/BRZ is pretty "meh" as well, but at the current equivalent of around $30,000 you have to make some compromises or else you end up with something like the MkIV Supra was was pretty amazing in virtually every way but so expensive that not enough people bought them when they were new.
I hear you on that though, which is why I've made my own compromise and stuck to my GTI. The enthusiastic engine combined with short, tight gearing makes for an excellent sports car drivetrain, and with a few tweaks to the chassis it turns and feels like a "proper" sports car as well.
In reply to MrFancypants :
I would have loved a Z4M coupe with the S65B40 from the E92 M3. That could have been a strong contender. I just need a special loud pedal.
pirate
HalfDork
2/15/21 9:48 p.m.
My only qualifications I have of what makes a great sports car are:
Puts a smile on you face when you simply look at it.
Somewhat dependable.
You enjoy the hell out of it when your driving it.
Doesn't matter to you what anyone else thinks or says about it.
