The Great Affordable Sports Cars of the 1980's

mndsm wrote: That first one looks familiar for some reason.... Also happened to be the first car that popped on images when i googled that car.

I'm pretty sure that's the worst picture of my car out there. Go figure that it happens to be the first result in google.

ShadowSix wrote: In reply to mndsm: I drive a blue turbo once, nice car. They are pretty rare on the ground here in OH these days. I think the one I drove was an auto, but there was a manual turbo, right?

Mine is a manual, as is that red one with the yellow headlights....

Seriously, the miata belongs in the decade with the boy bands and Nirvana. Not Depeche Mode and Madonna.

GTi hands down. Especially when considering purchasing then. To buy now, yes C4.

FlightService wrote: I vote against the C4

Why?

4 seats does not make a real sports car IMHO

In reply to aussiesmg:

Take the backseat out of the Gti. Lighter to boot!

I bought mine new. Like the photo, just brown. Still have it, although it needs a pretty heavy freshening.

Its kind of depressing that I have to buy parts for a car I got new, from a restoration company.

aussiesmg wrote: 4 seats does not make a real sports car IMHO

Porsche 911, Porsche 944, RX-7 2+2, and Mazda RX-8 all disagree with you strongly.

A good handling hot hatch does not a sports car make. And it is a strech calling a 911 a 4 seater back seats or not.

Wait, those are seats in the 911? I thought they were bag perches with belts to hold them in place. I never thought a real person could fit in one of those.

You didn't say it had to be a full-size seat. Just pointing out that some of the most iconic sports cars in the world have more than 2 "seats".

Sadly it's too late to change the thread title, but I personally would accept anything sportier than a Cadillac Allante.

OK, Buick Reatta.

Omni GLHS

oldsaw wrote: More of a GT but still nice. Too many OE parts are NLA and way too little aftermarket support.

A 1985.5 Prelude 2.0 Si was my first car. Even in the 90's there was little to no aftermarket support. By that time everything was going vtak yo!

Ok I don't often play the lotto yet when I see posts like this I run out and get tickets!!

Both of my cars are from the 80's yet a MK1 MR2 would be nice.....oh and a MGB with a V6....and a X1/9 with a Honda conversion....or maybe I just need to win the lotto. I did win once but the $3 didn't go very far:(

In reply to Sultan:

X 1/9 w/ Honda conversion? You better get a lottery ticket for me too...

Drove one of these for eighteen years, sold it six years ago, not a day passes without missing it...sniff

ShadowSix wrote:

FlightService wrote: I vote against the C4

Why?

My experience with a C4 has a more flexible chassis than a Fox body convertible. Had one actually pop a door open on me. Stone stock.

For the time, beefy motor and fat berkeleying tires are the only reasons to buy one.

IMHO just a waste of a car with a few bandaids on it, with the stereo typical penius joke/mid-life crisis stigma thrown in.

If I wanted a Chevy with fat tires and a strong motor I would get a Red-Necked IROC-Z and save the questionable man hood/age insecurities

fasted58 wrote:

Interesting choice

Sports car by idea, POS by execution maybe? I would have loved to have seen Fiero Gen 2.

pinchvalve wrote:

Wow copy from page 2, already?

I like the Quattro but I wouldn't call it a sports car. Definitely a GT but maybe not a sports car.

RX Reven' wrote: Drove one of these for eighteen years, sold it six years ago, not a day passes without missing it...sniff

So pretty... My plan for my current P^$$% Magnet Yellow Turbo car is to turn it into a White Comet clone like your car.

Speaking of which, I like FCs so much, I've got two!

I've been trying to sell the blue one, if you're interested...