Best Handling Cars

[hip check 0]

Why not aim for something that's a bit practical and affordable.

Something like the MazdaSpeed Protege or the SVT Focus or the Nissan Sentra SER-Spec V or whatever it's called... They are all sportier than the base car, with more power, yet don't lose any of the practical space and usefulness. Heck, even the used WRXs are becoming more affordable.

Sure, none of them are in the same league as a C5 / C6 Corvette or a luxury-sports car like the BMW, but that's the point. The ones I've suggested are practical and affordable. Everything is expensive to fix, some makes are just more expensive.

[ponty 0]

Has anyone mentioned the Jeep Grand Cherokee??? OH my LOL.

Great handling if you have 1 plus feet of snow or lots or rocks.

Only vehicle where you are always steering even to go straight.

[sdcopp 1]

if you're looking for a good entry type car (read not 30K+) you might look for a four door used Acura Integra. There's ton of parts to tune it out if you want, Honda/Acura reliability is legendary, and the four door Integra's (last gen models) are touted as being one of the best handling cars out there. The reason for the four door over the two is the body is a bit stiffer to produce a slightly better ride. Some of the used Civics and Accords out there are pretty good cars if you're at the few grand price range. I had an 89 Accord SE-I that I absolutely loved owning and driving, nothing spectacular of course.

If you have money to blow on the more expensive, newer cars a WRX or EVO or Mazdaspeed 3 are all good choices for overall handling and performance. The new Cobalts can be tuned very nicely as well, as GM sponsered a mildly modified one at a recent time attack event where the Cobalt beat out the rest of the field including a Skyline, RX-7, Evo, WRX, etc. Of course this was the SS model, but hey, to each their own. Plenty of options though if you have the coin.

[kovalchuk71 212]

Kovy - there are a lot of options. You never stated price??? The banter between Z06 vs M3 doesn't really fit in the 'affordable' bracket you had stated (in my world anyways)...

If it were me, I'd buy a Porsche 944 Turbo (951) - very quick, handle great, inexpensive to buy, but you have to be able to wrench on it yourself or it'll cost you a fortune (so will BMW's ect. if they are 20 years old).

Again, if we know the price, then we'll be able to give you a better idea!

Anywhere from 5k to 10k.

[tokes 0]

if you're looking for a good entry type car (read not 30K+) you might look for a four door used Acura Integra. There's ton of parts to tune it out if you want, Honda/Acura reliability is legendary, and the four door Integra's (last gen models) are touted as being one of the best handling cars out there. The reason for the four door over the two is the body is a bit stiffer to produce a slightly better ride. Some of the used Civics and Accords out there are pretty good cars if you're at the few grand price range. I had an 89 Accord SE-I that I absolutely loved owning and driving, nothing spectacular of course.

If you have money to blow on the more expensive, newer cars a WRX or EVO or Mazdaspeed 3 are all good choices for overall handling and performance. The new Cobalts can be tuned very nicely as well, as GM sponsered a mildly modified one at a recent time attack event where the Cobalt beat out the rest of the field including a Skyline, RX-7, Evo, WRX, etc. Of course this was the SS model, but hey, to each their own. Plenty of options though if you have the coin.

If the 4-door tegs were so stiff ITR's would have been based off of them, 'nuff said.

And for that matter, I highly, highly doubt that a MILDLY modified Cobalt beat out all the other cars you listed. Stock for stock they're down over 100 horsepower to a GTR, RX7, or EVO, with RX7's and GTR's being even lighter than a cobalt, not to mention they don't have all the icky understeer associated with FWD.

[sdcopp 1]

if you're looking for a good entry type car (read not 30K+) you might look for a four door used Acura Integra. There's ton of parts to tune it out if you want, Honda/Acura reliability is legendary, and the four door Integra's (last gen models) are touted as being one of the best handling cars out there. The reason for the four door over the two is the body is a bit stiffer to produce a slightly better ride. Some of the used Civics and Accords out there are pretty good cars if you're at the few grand price range. I had an 89 Accord SE-I that I absolutely loved owning and driving, nothing spectacular of course.

If you have money to blow on the more expensive, newer cars a WRX or EVO or Mazdaspeed 3 are all good choices for overall handling and performance. The new Cobalts can be tuned very nicely as well, as GM sponsered a mildly modified one at a recent time attack event where the Cobalt beat out the rest of the field including a Skyline, RX-7, Evo, WRX, etc. Of course this was the SS model, but hey, to each their own. Plenty of options though if you have the coin.

If the 4-door tegs were so stiff ITR's would have been based off of them, 'nuff said.

And for that matter, I highly, highly doubt that a MILDLY modified Cobalt beat out all the other cars you listed. Stock for stock they're down over 100 horsepower to a GTR, RX7, or EVO, with RX7's and GTR's being even lighter than a cobalt, not to mention they don't have all the icky understeer associated with FWD.

Catch the rerun of Redline TV on VS or Speed (can't remember which) The Cobalt won overall for the time attack, and had many stock parts still on the car. Granted it's a car sponsered by GM and was tuned for the time attack specifically, but that's still a huge showing.

btw, I suppose mildly is a very subjective term, it was well modified, but still running many stock parts. The interior had been gutted for rollcage, etc. just like all of the other cars, but much of the componentry was stock.

[kovalchuk71 212]

Hey guys can we get back on topic please?

[sdcopp 1]

Hey guys can we get back on topic please?

5-10K pricerange is a decent field of options. Acura Integra, mid to late 90's is a good option in that range, Honda Civics and Accords mid to late 90's, Toyota Corolla and Camry from mid to late 90's, Pontiac Grand Ams seem to run forever as well. Jeep Cherokee's are in that range and will run forever, but tend to get leaky at all the seals on the 4.0 motors. 2G Eclipse and Talons fit there as well, but I've seen many that need trannies replaced later in their lives (usually 4-7 yrs after being new). Acura Vigor could be a good look as well. Cavalier's usually aren't a worthwhile look.Ford Focus could be a good option as well, though I'd shy away from many of Ford's mid to small cars like the Countours since they are also prone to expensive problems later in life. Not sure if you can find a WRX in that pricerange, but also a good choice.

[BK 0]

5k-10k, you wont see a very nice new car that can handle well. I would say an old Civic Si. I got to drive one around a mountain loop here and it was a lot of fun for a fwd car.

Honestly, I would avoid anything that is fwd. Heres your options imo...

Early 2000's Miata. They aren't that fast, but do well enough around corners. Lots of fun driving with the top down and the sports package comes with some nice stock shocks. Only problem is that most people who buy Miatas expect too much out them and end up beating up the shiftbox.

Rx7. Find one thats in good conditon and you have a nice car. They are a little expensive to keep up, but have good balance and plenty of get-up-and-go.

Early 90's BMW. I say early 90's because the only 2k bmw's you can get are underpowered and heavy. Get an early m3 if you want, but be prepared to pay a hefty fine if you break anything.

WRX. I have seen these cheap lately. I haven't driven one but I have heard really good things.

If money wasn't a thing...

Lancer Evo. VERY nice car. Available in the US (finally). I got to drive one to SLC (about 50 miles). Its small inside, but its a fun car. Plenty of boost (even at high rpm's). It will put you in the back of your chair when you hit the gas @65. No need to downshift with its hefty turbo.

RX8. WOW is all I can say about this car. I was hesitant to drive it because IMO, its ugly as sin but it was a plesent surprise. Its VERY fast off the line and turns with nice feedback to the wheel. This is the first car that didn't have a heavy oversteer or understeer.. it just turns. You see a corner and rip through it.. no need to let off the gas too much either.

and another vote for an s2000.

[sdcopp 1]

WRX. I have seen these cheap lately. I haven't driven one but I have heard really good things.

If you never have to drive in ice and snow they're loads of fun. They are no better than a hockey puck when it does snow though since they have no weight to them. That and when a Fleet and Commercial Sales Manager for a dealership puts the back end of a brand new Silverado through the front half of your car. Oh yeah, good times.

The RX-7 will be a peice if you can get it for 5-10K since a good one will run in the high teens minimum, BMWs are expensive to repair for anything that could go wrong, and the Miata's have the same issue in weather as the CRX, not to mention the same visibility problem.

If I'm not mistaken, he's looking for a first car type, not a project car. Integras, Civics, Accords, Camrys and Vigors will all run forever and be easy maintanence so long as you keep up on the schedule for timing belts, oil changes, etc. Jeeps, Blazers, etc will nickle and dime you to death with minor repairs.

[kovalchuk71 212]

5k-10k, you wont see a very nice new car that can handle well. I would say an old Civic Si. I got to drive one around a mountain loop here and it was a lot of fun for a fwd car.

Honestly, I would avoid anything that is fwd. Heres your options imo...

Early 2000's Miata. They aren't that fast, but do well enough around corners. Lots of fun driving with the top down and the sports package comes with some nice stock shocks. Only problem is that most people who buy Miatas expect too much out them and end up beating up the shiftbox.

Rx7. Find one thats in good conditon and you have a nice car. They are a little expensive to keep up, but have good balance and plenty of get-up-and-go.

Early 90's BMW. I say early 90's because the only 2k bmw's you can get are underpowered and heavy. Get an early m3 if you want, but be prepared to pay a hefty fine if you break anything.

WRX. I have seen these cheap lately. I haven't driven one but I have heard really good things.

If money wasn't a thing...

Lancer Evo. VERY nice car. Available in the US (finally). I got to drive one to SLC (about 50 miles). Its small inside, but its a fun car. Plenty of boost (even at high rpm's). It will put you in the back of your chair when you hit the gas @65. No need to downshift with its hefty turbo.

RX8. WOW is all I can say about this car. I was hesitant to drive it because IMO, its ugly as sin but it was a plesent surprise. Its VERY fast off the line and turns with nice feedback to the wheel. This is the first car that didn't have a heavy oversteer or understeer.. it just turns. You see a corner and rip through it.. no need to let off the gas too much either.

and another vote for an s2000.

BK, I dont need a new car lol,

[Nigel 0]

try to find an acura legend that comes in 6 speed. that car is fuckin' ballin.

but for handling, i swear find a 3rd generation prelude that has 4 wheel steering (fully mechanical).

edit: here's a video for kicks

http://www.grenadebrothas.org/lucifer/4wsaction.avi

[LegoDoom 0]

try to find an acura legend that comes in 6 speed. that car is fuckin' ballin.

I always like the Legend coupe.

[Chadd 916]

Eclipses don't handle that well. I have a friend that had a DSM eclipse that was fast but he couldn't handle nearly as well as my friend with a M3. Both have/had suspension upgrades. Oh and the DSM was like all other DSMs with modded motors, on the lift more than on the road. So my friend with the DSM bought a Z06 corvette and that also can't out handle the M3.

Depends on the model. My mother had an older eclipse that was surprisingly good. Not as good as my V6 Fiero, but better for hauling guitars and girlfriends at the same time. We just got my wife a new car and I ended up with her Cougar C2 and while it is a little on the heavy side, it's a very comfortable ride with ok power. It's not going to win many races but for 5k-8k it's a good option. When I picked up my new amp at the guitar center the other day, two of the guys working there were driving Cougars and liked theirs as well.

WRX. I have seen these cheap lately. I haven't driven one but I have heard really good things.

A buddy of mine sells Subarus and had a great comment about them. Any of them that are available have usually been run pretty hard. Be very careful with them.

[Nigel 0]

try to find an acura legend that comes in 6 speed. that car is fuckin' ballin.

I always like the Legend coupe.

yeah, v6 200hp, not too shabby. the 6 speeds are really rare though.

[Booth 0]

For the corvette vs bmw argument...it isnt one...the m3 dosnt have the wheel base of a z06 vette...it also lacks the power. The corvette would easily out handle the m3. Assuming both were stock.

Even moded...i doubt it...and if you went and moded a vette, then definately not.

I think any argument on the vettes handling wise was stfu when it put in a 7 42 at the ring. If anything the 505hp vette could be accused of not having enough power around that track, because its one of the best handling cars in the world.

Also, a cheap mod on the vette puts it at 488rwhp and that means its faster in a straight line than a ford GT, which is impressive, because the vette kills it in the twistys. That said...there is always the ford gt supercharger argument...

Overall, you cant really compare an m3 to a sports car...especially a high end one like the vette...remember...a corvette z06 handles just as well as a ferrari 430...its a bold claim for anyone to say that an m3 is going anywhere near that, without somehow now becoming not an m3. I consider an m3 a nice "sporty" normal car...I consider the vette a proper sports car...in every sence of the word...the z06 is essentially a track car...

[tokes 0]

For the corvette vs bmw argument...it isnt one...the m3 dosnt have the wheel base of a z06 vette...it also lacks the power. The corvette would easily out handle the m3. Assuming both were stock.

Even moded...i doubt it...and if you went and moded a vette, then definately not.

I think any argument on the vettes handling wise was stfu when it put in a 7 42 at the ring. If anything the 505hp vette could be accused of not having enough power around that track, because its one of the best handling cars in the world.

Also, a cheap mod on the vette puts it at 488rwhp and that means its faster in a straight line than a ford GT, which is impressive, because the vette kills it in the twistys. That said...there is always the ford gt supercharger argument...

Overall, you cant really compare an m3 to a sports car...especially a high end one like the vette...remember...a corvette z06 handles just as well as a ferrari 430...its a bold claim for anyone to say that an m3 is going anywhere near that, without somehow now becoming not an m3. I consider an m3 a nice "sporty" normal car...I consider the vette a proper sports car...in every sence of the word...the z06 is essentially a track car...

In a straight line a Z06 isn't going to be faster than a GT man. A friend of mine owns a GT and it laid down 530 RWHP stock on a dynojet, and 615 to the rear wheels with some very basic mods (pulley, KB snout, tune), they're damned nasty in a straight line. I think if it came down to it I would have to take a GT over a Z06 though, if not only for the fact that a GT is an exotic through and through, where a Z06 can be mistaken for a "normal" C6 Corvette. The GT's have some sick power potential in a straight line though, there are now some twin turbo kits out there for them with people making 800-900 RWHP on stock motors with the stock fuel system and pump gas.

[sdcopp 1]

and lets not forget boys and girls that even though a car might have 25 more HP does not make it faster. Look at the STI vs EVO battle that's been going on. The EVO on paper is less power, but beats the STI in almost every category when they go head to head. Here's some food for thought:

Chevrolet Corvette Z06

Best lap time 1:32.75

Best lap average speed (mph) 73.0

0-60 mph/quarter-mile (sec) 4.1/12.0

Braking 70-0 mph (ft) 149

Cornering l/r (g) 1.10/1.09

Weight (lb) 3147

Distribution f/r (%) 50.9/49.1

Top speed (mph) 198

Ford GT

Best lap time 1:32.45

Best lap average speed (mph) 73.2

0-60 mph/quarter-mile (sec) 3.8/12.2

Braking 70-0 mph (ft) 156

Cornering l/r (g) 1.03/1.01

Weight (lb) 3489

Distribution f/r (%) 43.4/56.6

Top speed (mph) 205

http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/coupe...iper/stats.html

Anyways, back to the topic at hand, I'd also go check through Ebay autos to see what's out there. Oftentimes dealerships will have many mnay cars out there that you can pick up for a decent price and many will have it delivered. My dad bought his C4 from Texas and they trucked it to CO for $500 extra I believe, so might be a possibility to look into and see if you can't find a deal.

[tokes 0]

You're right, more power doesn't always equal the car being faster, but GT's weigh a few hundred pounds more and have Z06's covered by about 70 RWHP. When my friend dynoed his GT it was at a supercar dyno day, and there were two C6 Z06's there and they both dynoed around 465 RWHP.

[Booth 0]

In a straight line a Z06 isn't going to be faster than a GT man. A friend of mine owns a GT and it laid down 530 RWHP stock on a dynojet

They do...would you like a video?

Here is the argument i made, a small exhaust change, gives the z06 488rwhp giving the GT roughly 42 more rwhp to your claim...your claim is interesting, ford themselves claim there to be more loss through the drivetrain of a ford gt...550hp stock to 530 on the ground...id probably argue a bit differently, without sitting down and doing the maths, thats about 4-5% loss on its way to the wheels...i think it would lose a tad more, but its a mute argument. I know its technically not right to allow one car a mod and another car no mod, but the exhaust on the z06 is..."californian".

Anyways, I believe that the z06 would be more aerodynamic, and is 400lbs lighter...evening up the whole power to weight debate...almost...truth is the vette is geared better.

As for the whole "now lets mod the ford gt" argument...

let me just first of all say its supercharged. And when we get into potential power debates...7 litres has more potential power and torque than 5.4 litres...if you went and super charged the vette, not only would the car be lighter, it would put out 100 more hp, if you went and tuned them both up...with an unlimited budget, the vette would produce more power, be lighter, and have much superior handling.

The z06 is a better track car, i doubt anyone will argue that.

I can see the argument for the ford gt in a straight line, but ive also seen the video...i dont tend to put weighting on videos like that, but ive heard from a few sources its legit.

[Vapor 0]

Ford has a history of claiming their cars have less hp than they do (for insurance reasons). At a 1/4 of the price I would go with the z06. With a cam/heads swap and full exaust it can beat the GT just about everywhere. There is always forced induction too. Then you still have money to buy python boots.

[Booth 0]

Ford has a history of claiming their cars have less hp than they do (for insurance reasons). At a 1/4 of the price I would go with the z06. With a cam/heads swap and full exaust it can beat the GT just about everywhere. There is always forced induction too. Then you still have money to buy python boots.

So does chev...interestingly enough, the older chev engines used to have a "wear in" time, where there power peaked.

I think if you were given either car...you would take it though, i definately like the look of the GT, but prefer the practicality of the vette....

[nicksmission14 0]

In a straight line a Z06 isn't going to be faster than a GT man. A friend of mine owns a GT and it laid down 530 RWHP stock on a dynojet

They do...would you like a video?

Here is the argument i made, a small exhaust change, gives the z06 488rwhp giving the GT roughly 42 more rwhp to your claim...your claim is interesting, ford themselves claim there to be more loss through the drivetrain of a ford gt...550hp stock to 530 on the ground...id probably argue a bit differently, without sitting down and doing the maths, thats about 4-5% loss on its way to the wheels...i think it would lose a tad more, but its a mute argument. I know its technically not right to allow one car a mod and another car no mod, but the exhaust on the z06 is..."californian".

Anyways, I believe that the z06 would be more aerodynamic, and is 400lbs lighter...evening up the whole power to weight debate...almost...truth is the vette is geared better.

As for the whole "now lets mod the ford gt" argument...

let me just first of all say its supercharged. And when we get into potential power debates...7 litres has more potential power and torque than 5.4 litres...if you went and super charged the vette, not only would the car be lighter, it would put out 100 more hp, if you went and tuned them both up...with an unlimited budget, the vette would produce more power, be lighter, and have much superior handling.

The z06 is a better track car, i doubt anyone will argue that.

I can see the argument for the ford gt in a straight line, but ive also seen the video...i dont tend to put weighting on videos like that, but ive heard from a few sources its legit.

Your very correct about the potential for the 7.0L 427 to pump out more power then the 5.4 3v, Like they always say there is no replacement for displacement.....However, I have talked to our tech guy over at Procharger one day and he told me they developed a kit that they were going to put on the market but pulled it because they couldn't get the motor to live under low boost levels.

I don't know if you have seen the SCT website recently but they have been working with HP Performance and have a GT making 1300 RWHP on an untouched GT motor. Who knows how long it will last but it is quite an accomplishment for them and it displays the potential for power.

I haven't been at a race track with either one and I don't trust magazine articles. Political BS.

Personally I think, For the money the Z06 is a better car.

Little O/T But the new GT500 is a hell of an impressive car for the money. There's rumblings that KB has that motor at around 900 RWHP through a Twin Screw.

[J-Shera 0]

I find it hard to belive that your going to find a Audi, S2000, lancer, WRX for that price range. Best bet is a mid to early 90s sports car. Because If your buying any of those cars listed for less then 10k, they probably arnt worth buying as they will be bagged to shit and have high, high miles.

[prenny207 1]

oh ya... well my 02 chevy 3500 dually 4x4 is puttin out almost 500hp and close to 700 lbs of torque. and she runs the road like she owns it!!!