Fun, Quick, Lightweight cars?

[Karas893]

Hiya!

I'm someone who loves to test my cars mobility, speed, and precision. Problem is, I really don't know where to start. I'm 21 years old, and I've been jerked around with misleading information for awhile on this subject, I'm hoping maybe one of you could give me a little insight.

I love light cars, and with light cars comes speed, and handling. I've been looking for a car that is fun to drive because of the handling, and the speed. Even if it's a turbo.

However, I thought with a turbo, you'd have to fill it with premium gas at all times, and that drinks as much gas as a 1989 5.0 Mustang, and then some extra $ with the price of premium gas for the turbo. So, I need to be talked into going this route.

I'm looking for a car that is lightweight, fun to drive, and is fast as a daily driver. It doesn't have to go 0-60 in 3.4 seconds, but something that IS fast off from the start acceleration would be awesome. As in, amazing torque. Basically, I want to be able to throw this car around, and have fun while I'm doing it. Stop at a red light, and when the light turns green, shift, and punch it just for a minor adrenaline rush from time-to-time.

I would prefer a Manual Transmission, and I would like it to at least look decent for what it's worth.

The Dodge Neon SRT4 is ugly as sin, for instance.

Now if I have to put a bodykit on it, that's fine. I like to make my cars custom to my tastes anyway.

If possible, please try to keep it in the 10,000 range. I would have loved a Mitsubishi Lancer EVO but, I highly doubt I'm affording that ANYTIME soon. So in the mean time, I just want a fun daily driver car that's lightweight, good handling, and speedy.

I really didn't have anyone to ask without them giving a bias opinion on the forums they go to so, I figured I'd try here to get real answers.

I've been told what I'm looking for is a Honda Civic (Si or not) with an GS-R Integra engine swap. However again, I'm not sure.

Is there a car that sounds like what I'm looking for? If not, is there a way to increase the torque for it relatively cheap?

Again, thanks guys, and god bless.

Please no convertibles. Sedans, and Coupes please.

 

[HugoBoss]

Hey K welcome to TC. I might be biased here, and I dono what they go for in the US but I bought a r33 Nissan Skyline GTSt for around that price and gotta tel ya I was pleasently surprised. There's a lot of aftermarket parts available the engines are very tunable and they've proven themselves a long time ago already. Good luck with your choice buddy.

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Allow me to say that while Honda's are fine and dandy, they are WAY over-rated. They are NOT the only tuner cars that are capable. The only ways to my knowledge to get torque from a Honda is to swap in a K24 engine (which enthusiasts hate due to the fact it doesn't rev high), or to get a diesel (which being in the United States is not an option).

Here are a few of my US market suggestions. The first few suggestions are Domestic, and then import suggestions.

Suggestion 1: Dodge/Plymouth Neon.
Don't let anyone tell you otherwise, Neons are awesome. Avoid the automatics like a plague and you're golden. The engine design on Neons was even considered viable for use in BMW's at one point, but BMW turned it down because they felt BMW fans would look down on a Beemer powered by an American/Japanese engine. The 2.0L SOHC engine is basically the same as in a base model 1995-1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse, but with the flow reversed. As such, there's a large aftermarket, the Neon is light weight and has a racing pedigree. The Neon dominated showroom stock SCCA racing for years. It got to the point that Honda, Nissan, and Toyota moved to (unsuccessfully) have the car banned from competition. To this day, the Neon of any age is a force to be reckoned with. This is America's equivalent to the Austin Mini.
Pros: large aftermarket. Potent engines. Adorable styling.
Cons: They aren't very safe.

Suggestion 2: Pontiac Sunfire/Chevrolet Cavalier
Avoid the 2.2L pushrod engines like a plague. They're reliable til the ends of time, but incredibly slow and not worth the money it would take to make them fast. Instead, choose one of the DOHC engines depending on the year. 1995 models had a 2.3L QUad 4 engine. 1996-2002 models had a 2.4L Quad 4 variant called the "Twin Cam". 2002-2005 models (optional in 2002, standard from 2003-2005) had the 2.2L Ecotec. The Quad 4 engines are similar to Honda engines in that they rev high and make most of their power uptop in the rev range. These engines are capable of incredibly impressive outputs, but are notably noisy and unrefined due to an absence of balance shafts. The ecotec engines have a much larger aftermarket, and the Ecotec architecture has proven reliable even up to 1,500 horsepower in drag cars. Ecotecs are MUCH more refined due to 2 internal balance shafts, but are somewhat noisy. If you're into performance, noise and unrefinement shouldn't bother you. The Ecotec is not a very high revver (though can be modified to do so), but rather is known for better all around output numbers than any Honda, and can make more power cheaper than a Honda. If that doesn't sell you on these, they can be considered JDM. 1995-2000 models were sold in Japan as the Toyota Cavalier. Toyota Cavaliers ONLY had the Quad 4 variants for their respective year. The Toyota specific parts have GM parts numbers. I still find it funny you can order Toyota badges through GM for a Chevrolet.
Pros: 2 different but equally great, potent DOHC engines, great aftermarket support. reliable power no matter the engine you pick.
Cons: GM cars of the era are known for small little electrical issues and are known for shoddy quality interiors

Suggestion 3: Chevrolet Cobalt/HHR/Saturn Ion/Pontiac G5
Yes, all these cars are heavily related. Contrary to popular belief, the only thing in common with the previous Cavalier and Sunfire is the Ecotec engine architecture. As stated, massive performance aftermarket, and even factory performance backing. Choose your power starting point ranging from 140 horsepower all the way through 260 horses straight from the factory. The Saturn is the lightest of the cars, and the HHR the heaviest. If going after the Saturn, avoid 2003-2004 model years as the computer is untuneable. I found that out the hard way. For a time, the Cobalt SS Turbo (260 HP) was the fastest FWD car around the Nurburgring before being beaten by a race prepped street legal Renault with no interior. To say these cars are a capable force to be reckoned with is a massive understatement.
Pros: large aftermarket, reliable, impressive output numbers, safe
Cons: electric power steering means driving feel is numb. known for strut/shock failures and miscellaneous suspension issues on base models. SS and Redline models do not have these issues.

Suggestion 4: Ford Focus
It doesn't matter which generation you pick as there's massive support regardless. Avoid the 2.0L SOHC from 2000-2004 and you're golden. This does not mean 2000-2004 cars are out of the question. 2000-2004 hatchbacks came standard with a DOHC 2.0L Zetec engine which was optional on the sedan and wagon. While noted for reliability across the seas, Ford USA's reliability record is notably spotty, so make sure whichever one you get has been well taken car of. First gen cars had power outputs of 140 HP (2.0L Zetec) to 170 HP (2.0L Zetec, SVT variant). 2005-2011 cars are somewhat more desirable because they use the Mazda designed Duratec engine. The reason these tend to be favored is not that it's a better design (which is up for debate) but the fact that world reknowned Tuner, Cosworth, has every single part short of a turbo kit you could want (for a turbo kit, look up FSWerks).
Pros: Aftermarket support, good looks, fully independent suspension, safe
Cons: reliability seems to be hit or miss, with most people swearing by them.

Import suggestions:

Suggestion 5: Mini Cooper
Do I really need to go into detail on this one? Try to stick with a first gen Mini Cooper S.
Pros: reliability, fun to drive, great handling, top notch quality
Cons: A bit small. Expect relentless size jokes.

Suggestion 6: Mitsubishi Mirage and Mitsubishi Eclipse
The Mirage may surprise you that I suggested it, but there's reason to this madness. The Mirage we got here was the base for the overseas Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. If you want an Evo, you can make one from a Mirage, but it's a lot of work, involving welding in the floorpan of an Evo to support the AWD. Alternatively, you could get a DSM car like the Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, or Plymouth Laser. They share the same basic drivetrain as the Evo and are well respected tuner cars.
Pros: Great platforms, large aftermarket, optional AWD on DSMs
Cons: known for an issue nicknamed 'crank-walking' which is expensive to fix and catastrophic if ignored.

Suggestion 7: Toyota Matrix XRS/Pontiac Vibe GT
Make sure it's either of these trim levels and you won't be disappointed. The 1.8L engine was breathed on by known piano tuners and motorcycle manufacturer, Yamaha. With 180 HP, it isn't hard to imagine what these hot hatches are capable of. Interesting little known fact: The Matrix was US market only. The Pontiac Vibe though was sold in Japan as the Toyota Voltz. If you don't want the high revving tuned version, the normal 1.8L is a good starting point as well, especially with superchargers available from TRD or GM Performance Parts. Other cars share variants of this engine including the Chevy/Geo Prizm, Toyota Celica, Lotus Elise, Lotus Exige, and Toyota Corolla.
Pros: 100 HP per liter stock, Toyota reliability, safe, great quality, AWD available (non GT, automatic only)
Cons: kind of a small crossover and styling is a bit fussy.

Suggestion 8: Scion tC
This car has such aftermarket support I really shouldn't even need to explain why.
Pros: massive aftermarket, designed to be modified in the first place, safe, toyota reliability
Cons: They've been done to death and seemingly nothing new can be done. And the engine is the same basic four cylinder you'd find in a Toyota Camry.

And HugoBoss, We don't have Skylines in America. In fact, they're banned here until they're 25 years old.

 

[Karas893]

Hey K welcome to TC. I might be biased here, and I dono what they go for in the US but I bought a r33 Nissan Skyline GTSt for around that price and gotta tel ya I was pleasently surprised. There's a lot of aftermarket parts available the engines are very tunable and they've proven themselves a long time ago already. Good luck with your choice buddy.

My friend, Americans got proper shafted due-to the emissions man. Not even a Silvia is allowed here legally.

No if you even see a Skyline here in America, chances are, it's close to 100 grand or so. Also, It's specs have probably been nerfed like crazy.

 

[Karas893]

Sunfire

Believe it or not, a 1997 Pontiac Sunfire was my first car, but it was an automatic. I wanted a little something different.

I was looking at Eclipse's but I heard the only ones worth a dang were the GSX, and GS-T models' from the 90's. Problem though, like you mentioned, is crank walking.

Yeah, Mazda is probably my favorite sport's car company, the RX-7 Turbo is my favorite car. That, and an Evolution VIII. (Mitsubishi)

Thing is with Mazda's is they are extremely expensive. I could use a MazdaSpeed6 2007 model, but I don't have 20 grand. lol.

I guess I'm just looking for the right look man, I dunno. A Nissan GTR isn't even sold here, and a 350z(Fairlady) is expensive as heck. Might just have to goto a repo auction, and hope for the best to score one of those in good condition.

If you think of any more cars man, please hit me up with them. Your knowledge is amazing bro, seriously. However I'm a 5'6-5'7 guy on a good day, and I like smaller cars. That's why I like the thought of throwing them around.

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Believe it or not, a 1997 Pontiac Sunfire was my first car, but it was an automatic. I wanted a little something different.

I was looking at Eclipse's but I heard the only ones worth a dang were the GSX, and GS-T models' from the 90's. Problem though, like you mentioned, is crank walking.

Yeah, Mazda is probably my favorite sport's car company, the RX-7 Turbo is my favorite car. That, and an Evolution VIII. (Mitsubishi)

Thing is with Mazda's is they are extremely expensive. I could use a MazdaSpeed6 2007 model, but I don't have 20 grand. lol.

I guess I'm just looking for the right look man, I dunno. A Nissan GTR isn't even sold here, and a 350z(Fairlady) is expensive as heck. Might just have to goto a repo auction, and hope for the best to score one of those in good condition.

If you think of any more cars man, please hit me up with them. Your knowledge is amazing bro, seriously. However I'm a 5'6-5'7 guy on a good day, and I like smaller cars. That's why I like the thought of throwing them around.

I'm 5'7" as well and I also have an affinity for small cars. If I had to pick a Honda for myself, I'd get an EF Honda Civic Wagon with AWD, or a 1986-1989 Honda Accord hatchback (flip up lights FTW!)

What you hear about Eclipses is, for the most part, true. 1990's GST and GSX's are the 4G63T cars.

I REFUSE to, under any circumstance, recommend a Mazda rotary engine to anyone. I went to automotive mechanic's school. While in class, we went over the service manual for the RX8's Rotary from Mazda. The engine has to be rebuilt every 50,000 miles and anything even remotely worn will be replaced. They're extremely unreliable engines due to their high friction nature. They also guzzle gas worse than many SUVs and emissions are horrible. Message me any time with questions. I have been nicknamed "The Automotive Encyclopedia" many times before. I will warn though, I tend to specialize in American (mainly GM) cars.

Other cars I forgot to list are the Nissan 240SX (if you can find one that hasn't been touched inappropriately (lol)), and the Nissan Sentra (QR25 2.5L models or SR20 2.0L models need apply only)

And I'll bet you any amount of money that your Sunfire had the 2.2L pushrod engine and not the 2.4L Quad 4 Twin Cam. The Quad 4 cars were notably rarer than the 2.2L pushrod cars.

 

[Karas893]

I'm 5'7" as well and I also have an affinity for small cars. If I had to pick a Honda for myself, I'd get an EF Honda Civic Wagon with AWD, or a 1986-1989 Honda Accord hatchback (flip up lights FTW!)

What you hear about Eclipses is, for the most part, true. 1990's GST and GSX's are the 4G63T cars.

I REFUSE to, under any circumstance, recommend a Mazda rotary engine to anyone. I went to automotive mechanic's school. While in class, we went over the service manual for the RX8's Rotary from Mazda. The engine has to be rebuilt every 50,000 miles and anything even remotely worn will be replaced. They're extremely unreliable engines due to their high friction nature. They also guzzle gas worse than many SUVs and emissions are horrible. Message me any time with questions. I have been nicknamed "The Automotive Encyclopedia" many times before. I will warn though, I tend to specialize in American (mainly GM) cars.

Other cars I forgot to list are the Nissan 240SX (if you can find one that hasn't been touched inappropriately (lol)), and the Nissan Sentra (QR25 2.5L models or SR20 2.0L models need apply only)

And I'll bet you any amount of money that your Sunfire had the 2.2L pushrod engine and not the 2.4L Quad 4 Twin Cam. The Quad 4 cars were notably rarer than the 2.2L pushrod cars.

Yeah man, totally. Like I said brother, keep me posted on those other cars though bro. Any, i don't care, ANY car you can think of, hit me up with it. I've got a little bit of a goal to have me a car in mind by my birthday (July 11th.) If nothing, might just save up for a 350z to pay in full. Or, I don't know, maybe an eclipse. Are the Turbo's really as bad on gas as they say though? Or is that blown WAYYY outta the water?

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Yeah man, totally. Like I said brother, keep me posted on those other cars though bro. Any, i don't care, ANY car you can think of, hit me up with it. I've got a little bit of a goal to have me a car in mind by my birthday (July 11th.) If nothing, might just save up for a 350z to pay in full. Or, I don't know, maybe an eclipse. Are the Turbo's really as bad on gas as they say though? Or is that blown WAYYY outta the water?

I think it's overblown. I will heavily push any of the American suggestions if you ask because American cars are always pegged as underdogs regardless of whether or not it's true. I will Heavily recommend looking up an Ecotec car. Check out my build of my Saturn Ion on here. It's a lengthy read:
http://www.torquecars.com/forums/f111/tommys-project-tupperware-2004-saturn-ion-quad-coupe-level-2-a-23781/

 

[HugoBoss]

Wow very interesting, thanks for that Tommy. What about the Toyota Supra then?

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Wow very interesting, thanks for that Tommy. What about the Toyota Supra then?

the 1993+ ones were sold here, but they're uber expensive and over-rated (not my words. Word of my Toyota fanboy friend who actually owns a Supra). Go for a much cheaper older model with pop up lights and you're good. Again, that suggestion is from my Supra owning friend.

 

[HugoBoss]

Lotus Elise maybe?

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Lotus Elise maybe?

about $15,000 more expensive than my suggestions at best.

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Now that I think about it, I'll also suggest the engine swap kings over here, the Pontiac Fiero and Toyota MR2. These cars are insanely popular for their mid engined layout and FWD drivetrains in the back, making engine swaps from much newer cars much easier. Though they're not very practical.

 

[old-git]

Hi and welcome

It depends on your definition of lightweight

It is interesting to note what the Americans consider to be lightweight cars.

Over here in the UK a lightweight car, IMO, would have to be less than around 800kg (1760lbs)

The present Min Cooper weighs around 1200kg (2640lbs)

The Mazda MX-5/Miata/Eunos is a round 1000kg (2200lbs)

The 1.4ltr diesel Citroën AX is light at only 640kg (1408lbs) but it is neither fast or fun to drive.

So, lightweight cars that are fun to drive over here are the Lotus 7 lookalikes, Ariel Atoms and similar. However, they are not really useful daily drivers, expecially with our climate.

What weight do you do you consider to be lightweight?

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Hi and welcome

It depends on your definition of lightweight

It is interesting to note what the Americans consider to be lightweight cars.

Over here in the UK a lightweight car, IMO, would have to be less than around 800kg (1760lbs)

The present Min Cooper weighs around 1200kg (2640lbs)

The Mazda MX-5/Miata/Eunos is a round 1000kg (2200lbs)

The 1.4ltr diesel Citroën AX is light at only 640kg (1408lbs) but it is neither fast or fun to drive.

So, lightweight cars that are fun to drive over here are the Lotus 7 lookalikes, Ariel Atoms and similar. However, they are not really useful daily drivers, expecially with our climate.

What weight do you do you consider to be lightweight?

In the United States, it is extremely hard to get lightweight cars you Europeans are used to due to strict American safety standards. Because of this American standards for something lightweight are generally different. He's obviously looking for a daily driver, so in that case, generally anything under 3,000 lbs is considered lightweight. My Saturn weighs 2,604 lbs, and my Monte Carlo weighs 3,450 lbs. The new Toyota GT86 (sold here as the Scion FR-S) weighs about 2,700 lbs and is considered extremely light for the US market, which is shocking because the car has also passed our safety regulations with flying colors, earning a Top Safety Pick from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS).

 

[old-git]

3000lbs? Geez, that's more than my house weighs!

No wonder American cars need V8s and are still slow

 

[TommyTwinCams]

No wonder American cars need V8s and are still slow

Ford Mustang GT 5.0L V8 (412 HP. 3,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 12.7 seconds
BMW M3 4.0L V8 (414 HP. 3,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 12.8 seconds
(reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muRC7WJHgmA )

my Chevrolet Monte Carlo Z34 3.4L V6 (210 HP, 3,450 lbs): 1/4 mile: 15.5 seconds

My Saturn is actually closer to normal outputs of your European cars.
Saturn Ion 2 2.2L I4 (140 HP, 2,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 16.2 seconds

So to say American V8's are slow is completely wrong. older ones yes. My Saturn could smoke a 1980 Monte Carlo SS 5.0L V8, but modern American V8's are quite impressive.

 

[SLEEPER]

Apples to apples not oranges so old v8s to older European /jap cars
New ones etc

And then there are corners..............................

And remember apples with apples .

I'm more into japenese cars so try comparing cars of the same era and type before using "impressive" as a definition

 

[Karas893]

Tommy, dude, your awesome bro. How old are you man?

You know your stuff bro, seriously.

And yeah, lightweight American cars are anything below 3,000. American's and their rules suck for regulations.

Could it be that heavier cars with heavier engines though they look good (some, and very few) actually force you to burn MORE gas, so that more money goes into your car?

NO! COULDN'T BE! *sarcasm*

American's man. Home of greed.

 

[old-git]

Ford Mustang GT 5.0L V8 (412 HP. 3,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 12.7 seconds
BMW M3 4.0L V8 (414 HP. 3,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 12.8 seconds
(reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muRC7WJHgmA )

my Chevrolet Monte Carlo Z34 3.4L V6 (210 HP, 3,450 lbs): 1/4 mile: 15.5 seconds

My Saturn is actually closer to normal outputs of your European cars.
Saturn Ion 2 2.2L I4 (140 HP, 2,600 lbs): 1/4 mile: 16.2 seconds

So to say American V8's are slow is completely wrong. older ones yes. My Saturn could smoke a 1980 Monte Carlo SS 5.0L V8, but modern American V8's are quite impressive.

I was refering to the older cars, when 'muscle cars' did 0-60 in 13 seconds

My software has the stock Mustang at 13.37 What track length were they using for the test? As they were using cones it could have been 1000ft.

412bhp from 5 litres for the Mustang and 414bhp from 4 litres for the BMW. What are Ford using the spare litre for?

0.1 secs on a drag strip is nothing and is more to do with the lane choice than the cars (they didn't change lanes for any of the many runs).

However, if you still consider that a win, check out the track test for the same vehicles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOwSPccbzl4

I will concede, however, that American cars, now that they have finally ditched the cart springs, are a lot better these days and better value for money. They just need to improve on their poor bhp/litre figures and they will be very good.

 

[T9 man]

Greetings Karas893 and a Warm Welcome to our TorqueCars Forum my Friend!

Good to have you along with us

 

[TommyTwinCams]

Tommy, dude, your awesome bro. How old are you man?

You know your stuff bro, seriously.

And yeah, lightweight American cars are anything below 3,000. American's and their rules suck for regulations.

Could it be that heavier cars with heavier engines though they look good (some, and very few) actually force you to burn MORE gas, so that more money goes into your car?

NO! COULDN'T BE! *sarcasm*

American's man. Home of greed.

I'm 23 years old and openly gay. (When's the last time you heard of a gay guy knowing more about cars than some experienced mechanics?)

I was refering to the older cars, when 'muscle cars' did 0-60 in 13 seconds

My software has the stock Mustang at 13.37 What track length were they using for the test? As they were using cones it could have been 1000ft.

412bhp from 5 litres for the Mustang and 414bhp from 4 litres for the BMW. What are Ford using the spare litre for?

0.1 secs on a drag strip is nothing and is more to do with the lane choice than the cars (they didn't change lanes for any of the many runs).

However, if you still consider that a win, check out the track test for the same vehicles:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOwSPccbzl4

I will concede, however, that American cars, now that they have finally ditched the cart springs, are a lot better these days and better value for money. They just need to improve on their poor bhp/litre figures and they will be very good.

The extra liter is used for torque to help get the car off the line. Americans in general don't like revving their engine to the moon like a Honda Civic (or BMW M3 V8 in this case) to feel power, so Americans concentrate on low down torque for a 'seat of your pants' feeling. This is why most American V8's are so large. A larger engine doesn't have to work hard to make torque.
Mustang's 5.0L "Coyote" V8
412 HP, 390 ft-lbs. Redline: 7,000 RPM
BMW M3 4.0L V8 Redline: 8,400 RPM
414 HP, 295 ft-lbs
The Mustang's higher torque is why the Mustang gets off the line quicker than the BMW and pulls on it very early if you notice the video.

And I never said it was a win, just showing how comparable they are. The reason for those 2 tests in the first place was to show that a $30,000 Mustang is comparable with the $60,000 M3. If you want a better Mustang than the M3, than the Boss 302 is available for about $42,000. There's also a hardcore "Laguna Seca" edition (made to celebrate the Mustang beating the M3's time around Mazda Raceway, Laguna Seca in California). The Mustang Boss 302 revs slightly higher than the normal 5.0L V8 to 7,500 to achieve 444 HP and 380 ft-lbs. The Boss 302 is not just about power, It comes with adjustable dampers and struts, lower ride height, and a host of other chassis upgrades (a rear seat delete is optional), and even comes with 2 keys. Not 2 normal keys. 1 normal key. The other is referred to as the "Track Key" and just using that key to start it reworks the computer for more power.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxEhnugwzCc

Motor Trend always uses 1,320 ft to measure their drag races because that's the standard unit of measure here.

And 1980's American muscle cars were notoriously slow. Performance didn't return to muscle cars until the 1990's. In 1993, GM released the Camaro and Firebird with 5.7L Corvette (detuned) LT1 V8's. in 1995, Ford replaced their ancient 4.9L 302 ci '5 point 0' with a 4.6L SOHC V8. To combat this, in 1998, GM gave the Camaro and Firebird a needed facelift (making the Camaro look like a catfish, and the Firebird even sexier in the process) and gave them the new LS1 engine, variants of which are still used in the new Camaro. The Mustang didn't shy away from the 4.6L until 2011 when a new 302 5.0L that actually was/is 5.0L was introduced. Unlike the old 5.0, this one had DOHC, 32 valves, and Ti-VCT (A very complicated variable valve timing tech. It's actually more advanced than anything BMW uses.).

 

[old-git]

I thought that you had moved over to 1000ft tracks now due to the very high speed top fuel dragsters were reaching?

American cars have come a long way in the last 10 years with regard to performance (power and handling). However there is still work to do on interior trim quality and finish, which is one reason for the price difference. I have stripped BMWs and Mustangs and the build quality of the BMW is way ahead of the Mustang but the Fords are much easier to take a part because of their simpler design. The BMW is overdesigned IMO

 

[TommyTwinCams]

I thought that you had moved over to 1000ft tracks now due to the very high speed top fuel dragsters were reaching?

American cars have come a long way in the last 10 years with regard to performance (power and handling). However there is still work to do on interior trim quality and finish.

Nope. Still 1320.

As for Interior quality, it depends on the American car in question. The Chevrolet Cruze and Dodge Dart have become well known for their high quality premium feeling interiors and have been commonly consider the best in their class in interiors. The same has been said of the Chevrolet Sonic (which competes with the Honda Fit and such. You know the car as the new Chevrolet Aveo). The Ford Focus is considered on par with most of it's class. The Mustang and Camaro have been praised for their interiors (though the Camaro is also universally panned for poor visibility). Pick up trucks have a LONG way to go on interiors if my Dad's 2011 Chevy Silverado is anything to go by.

 

[old-git]

That may be what is claimed in America but it's not what is thought over here.

Hopefully, I will be over next August (2014) for the Bonneville Speed Week and will be hiring a muscle car so I will be able to judge for myself

Any suggestions as to what would be the most fun?

 

[TommyTwinCams]

The Mustang is the lightest of the current crop of muscle cars, so there's that to consider, but it also has a live rear axle.
The Chevrolet Camaro is inbetween in weight at around 3,800 lbs, and the LS3 V8 is notoriously reliably and fun.
My personal choice would be the Dodge Challenger. It's the heaviest of the current Muscle cars, and most expensive. Engine options are either a 305 HP 3.6L Pentastar V6, a 375 HP 5.7L Hemi V8 (R/T model), or a 470 HP 6.4L "392" V8 (SRT8 model). The Dodge seems to be the best compromise to me of classic styling and modern engineering. The Challenger and Camaro both have fully independent multi-link rear suspensions. It seems to be the most refined of the 3.... and sales are low here, probably due to the higher pricetag compared with the others. The Chassis of the Challenger is notably more refined in that it's based on an old Mercedes platform (a short wheelbase variant of the one for the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger)

The Mustang is the only car available solely with DOHC engines (3.7L V6, 5.0L V8, or 5.8L S/C V8). Camaro engine options are 3.6L V6 (DOHC, 324 HP), 6.2L V8, or 6.2L S/C V8 (580 HP. ZL1).

 

[TommyTwinCams]

More suggestions. I was thinking about it and some people prefer the safety of AWD, so I came up with a list. The first few cars come with all wheel drive from the factory, and the others can be converted easily if you can find the parts.

Suggestion 1: Any 4 cylinder Subaru.
Subaru's EJ flat 4 cylinder engines are well known world-wide for their use in the Impreza WRX and STI. The flat 4 design allows them to keep the center of gravity on their cars low, resulting in better handling. Subaru's have been compared with lego's in that parts from a 2005 car will likely fit on a 1992 car as an upgrade. I personally do not like the Impreza because everyone has one. I personally would go with a Subaru Legacy wagon and swap in a WRX or STI engine. No one'll suspect your wagon for an exotic-raping beast!
Pros: Large interchangeability, reliable, safe, awesome power outputs
Cons: A bit common. Engines are hard to service while in the car. known for munching through transmissions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk3bpHuNmUk

Suggestion 2: Suzuki SX4
Most people in America are shocked that Suzuki still exists and the company has an undeserved bad reputation in the USA. Suzuki recently pulled out of the American market but not before giving us a brilliant hatchback. The SX4 is available as a 4 door sedan or a 5 door hatchback, but only the hatchback is AWD. Designed in Italy by Giugiaro, this is a beautiful car with style and flair unlike most Japanese cars. The AWD system is adaptable, intelligent, and selectable so you can have it FWD when you want it, and AWD when you need it at the flick of a switch. The downside to such an unpopular car is that there isn't much aftermarket. However, you can still find turbo kits, body kits and coilovers as Suzuki North America contracted Road Race Motorsports to drum up an aftermarket for the car. The only things I can think of the aftermarket doesn't have for the car at the moment is a short throw shifter and a catback exhaust, though I suppose you can import a short shifter from Suzuki Sport in Japan and have a custom exhaust made at a local exhaust shop. I almost got one of these but the dealer only had them in automatic. The AWD model was available with a 5 or 6 speed manual depending on the year. If you want to turbo it, go after a 2007-2009 model year car. There is only one engine choice in America, a 2.0L DOHC I4, with either 143 HP or 150 depending on the year. The car also has just as much a rally heritage as a Mitsubishi Evo or Subaru Impreza STI. Suzuki raced this car in the WRC in 2008, and continue to campaign it in the JWRC.
Pros: Great looks, safe, potent engine
Cons: Not much aftermarket support, but enough. Company recently left US market.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD2ZgHrFLCw

Now for the easily converted cars:

Suggestion 3: 2005-2009 Volkswagen Rabbit and Volkswagen Jetta.
The chassis on these cars was designed with AWD in mind from the start so you don't need to weld in a new floorpan. If you are using a Rabbit though, you do need to weld in a new trunk floor so the AWD specific gas tank can bolt up. The Jetta and Jetta wagon do not need this mod due to their longer length and repositioned gas tank. Other than that most everything for an AWD swap is plug and play. Gas tank, rear dif and driveline can be sourced from a VW R32 (MK5 only), and the transmission would be from an Audi TT 4 cylinder with AWD. A haldex controller and wiring harness and you should be set. Take your pick of engines between the 2.5L 5 cylinder or the 2.0L Turbo. You could also spend a lot more and find a 2008 R32 which had the 3.2L VR6 and AWD, but as only 5000 were imported into the US, they can be hard to find, and the R32 is automatic only.
Pros: Large aftermarket, quick, 5 cylinders sound extremely exotic with an aftermarket exhaust
Cons: reliability is below average, parts are expensive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnoFtyKCgE8

Suggestion 4: 2004-2006 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart
I'm suggesting this specific variant. The reason is no other model has a chance of being converted cheaply. the 2.4L SOHC Mivec engine is potent and has a large following. As for the AWD swap, you can swap in a system from a first gen Mitsubishi Outlander if you can find the rare Outlander AWD manual transmission. Beyond that, everything bolts up. The Outlander AWD system is a mechanical AWD system so there's no computers to worry about.
Pros: Reliable, potent 4 cylinder engine
Cons: AWD manual parts are rare and hard to find

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HL9fDAstzw

 

[SLEEPER]

A useful insight into American muscle cars but I think that this quote completely sums up why American cars are in general are way behind in the handling stakes.......................

The Chassis of the Challenger is notably more refined in that it's based on an old Mercedes platform


If you want a real lightweight car that has awesome potential without engine swops etc get a integra or civic type r or a focus rs/sti

 

[TommyTwinCams]

A useful insight into American muscle cars but I think that this quote completely sums up why American cars are in general are way behind in the handling stakes.......................

The Chassis of the Challenger is notably more refined in that it's based on an old Mercedes platform


If you want a real lightweight car that has awesome potential without engine swops etc get a integra or civic type r or a focus rs/sti

BLASPHEMY!
I never suggested a muscle car to the OP, and the only car I suggested a swap on was a Subaru (Which doesn't necessarily need one). OP asked for something just as quick with more torque than a Honda. That's what I suggested. And we never got the Civic type R or Focus RS here. OP is in America. And I believe an STI suggestion was listed under "Any 4 cylinder Subaru".

And though the Mustang is the lightest and the Challenger the most refined, the Camaro is the best handler. Despite the Camaro ZL1 being down almost 100 HP on the Shelby GT500, the ZL1 is generally 3 seconds quicker per lap around any track.

 

[SLEEPER]

Err......
Please read posts before going into one
The Focus Sti is a ford not a Subaru

And a civic was actually one of his first choices . He did also mention corners

 

[TommyTwinCams]

I believe you mean the Focus ST. The was no Focus STI. And we didn't get that. The American Ford Focus split from the European model in 2005 when the European model received the second generation, whereas the American model received a facelift of the first gen. There WAS an ST "Performance" trim level of the American Focus, but it wasn't powered by the 2.5L turbocharged Volvo 5 cylinder You Europeans got in your Focus ST. The American Focus ST had a 2.3L Duratec engine identical to that found in the Mazda 3. The American model received a second generation specific to the North American market in 2008. Gone were the hatchbacks and wagons, this Focus was available solely as a 2 door coupe or 4 door sedan. The only available engine was the 2.0L Duratec. We also never got the first gen Focus RS. We did get the ST170, though here it was called the Focus SVT, which I already suggested in my first round of suggestions