What..someone put wood trim in a sports car..NO WAY!?

[Nice1]

Originally Posted by GT3

The new dash being manufactured for the upcoming 135i ///M car:

now that just screams formula 1.

[ManMachine]

Sports car by definition offers only 2 seats. They are meant to be impractical. M3, M5 or M6, good as they are, still aren't sports cars.

[Rye]

Originally Posted by ManMachine

Sports car by definition offers only 2 seats. They are meant to be impractical. M3, M5 or M6, good as they are, still aren't sports cars.

I'd agree. With exception to the McLaren F1 which has 3 seats. :biggrin:

[Dan203]

I had a debate with some people on another forum over this once. I saw about a 50/50 split. Half thought sports cars have to be small two seaters, regardless of performance. The other half thought that a sports car was a car designed with power and performance as the #1 priority. Personally I was in the later camp and I think that the 135i is most definitely a sports car.

Basically my point is... There is no absolute definition of a "sports car" and everyone has their own opinion as to what qualifies as one.

Dan

[BuddhaTB]

Grey Popular wood trim does look pretty good though.

[adc]

Originally Posted by Dan203

Basically my point is... There is no absolute definition of a "sports car" and everyone has their own opinion as to what qualifies as one.

There is no absolute thing, really. But as far as definitions go, if it's defined in a respectable dictionary, then I'll accept that definition - it means it is the consensus reached by a sufficient number of people.

Of course, these are just words. You can make you own definition of anything really, override the generally accepted one. You can call "red" "blue" if you're excentric enough, but the definition of "red" will still remain unchanged.


But for sports cars, it's rather a lot simpler: once you have driven a sports car, you will forever be able to tell the difference. And the 135, however fast, is not. As simple as that.

Here is some further food for thought: according to your own definition, a Charger SRT-8 would be a sports car too.

[raventattoo]

Agreed. No way would I have wood!!!! Mine: Jet Black, Black Leather, Aluminum trim. Wood does not belong in this car...however, I'm happy it is offered, just as I would not want everyone else driving a Jet Black (or me a SGM) Gotta have choices!

[redwood]

Since the 1 is a sports "sedan" style coupe, wood is okay, BUT I don't really care for the brown wood. I liked the gray poplar a lot in person and would have a tough time choosing between that and glacier aluminum if/when I order. If the aluminum was smooth like in the 3, I would probably go with the aluminum. The reason I'm on my 2nd BMW at the moment is because they are quick/great driving machines AND comfortable/somewhat luxurious. Uncomfortable and fast is for high school and college cars imo. I wouldn't want CF trim, because I like some contrast in the interior. The Lexus IS-F interior is crap compared to the M3's because they think all black is "sporty" for some stupid reason. These are also the people that put wood in their steering wheel on most models. Now THAT is the epitome of non-sport.

[spudw]

Originally Posted by ManMachine

Sports car by definition offers only 2 seats. They are meant to be impractical. M3, M5 or M6, good as they are, still aren't sports cars.

Is this written into some sort of automotive constitution? I take issue with narrowing the common definition to two seats. Porsche 911, 928 and 944 all have had 4 seats, as well as the Ferrari Mondial, Audi TT, Mazda RX-8, etc... just to name a few 2+2 sports cars. These are not, as the saying goes, your father's Oldsmobile... :smile:

[tharpa]

wood poplar here, it warms it up.

i'm on an apple computer 40 hours a week. pretty tired of aluminum.

[adc]

Originally Posted by spudwest

Is this written into some sort of automotive constitution?

Take a peek at the online webster's for a general idea.

Ferrari Mondial

As far as I know, that was their GT, not sports car.

Audi TT, Mazda RX-8, etc... just to name a few 2+2 sports cars.

TT??? That's a sports car??? Try a Boxster, a Miata or an Elise, then tell me this again with a straight face... :wink:

[happywalmartcustomer]

Originally Posted by adc

But for sports cars, it's rather a lot simpler: once you have driven a sports car, you will forever be able to tell the difference. And the 135, however fast, is not. As simple as that.

Here is some further food for thought: according to your own definition, a Charger SRT-8 would be a sports car too.

Don't forget the Jeep Grand Cherokee STR8 Sports Car.

0-60 in 4.8 seconds after all.

[Tom K.]

Originally Posted by happywalmartcustomer

Don't forget the Jeep Grand Cherokee STR8 Sports Car.

And how about the '62 Thunderbird with the "Sports Roadster" option?

http://www.dealsonwheels.com/search/...SPORT+ROADSTER

Tom

[Pike]

Originally Posted by Thud

Dead cows belong in a sports car, so why not dead trees too?

Ah, perhaps the most insightful post in this entire thread. And most of you missed it.

"Wood trim = luxury" isn't a fact; it's a shared opinion made up by a bunch of people over time. Just like "dead cow = premium".

For me "clutch pedal = driver's car", but in 10 years there won't be any clutch pedals anymore and only old geezers will say such a thing.

[Dan203]

Originally Posted by adc

Take a peek at the online webster's for a general idea.

Here you go...

a small, high-powered automobile with long, low lines, usually seating two persons.

I understand that most people think of small cars like Miatas, S2000s, etc... when you say sports car. However I think it has a lot less to do with size and a lot more to do with power and handling. To me a car that can go 0-60 in 4.7 seconds AND take a corner at very high speeds, like the 135i, is a lot more sporty then something like a Miata which handles well but is far from quick off the line. (My PT Cruiser GT is faster 0-60 then my wife's Miata and it weighs almost twice as much)

Dan

[Guibo]

As an addendum to Webster's, Car & Driver magazine likes to use this one a lot:
"In case you've forgotten, it was the Brits who gave us the classic definition: 'a two-seater, usually open, which in a pinch can be raced.'"

It is somewhat vague, but at the same time does rule out a lot of cars, and does capture (in my opionion) the spirit of a sports car. A Boxster (or old 914 for that matter) stands to get smoked by a 6-passenger AMG R-Class (claimed 0-60: 4.6 seconds). The R63 might very well outcorner the 914 on skinny tires too. But that doesn't really make the R63 a sports car.

[Russo]

wood is yuk!! ;P

[hellrotm]

Sports Car - This pretty much sums if up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_car

[GT3]

This guy absolutely loves the wood trim in his new 335i coupe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOU8GIRUd_g

[happywalmartcustomer]

Originally Posted by GT3

This guy absolutely loves the wood trim in his new 335i coupe.

He says "videos are too repetitive"

He says "videos are too repetitive"

[GT3]

Originally Posted by happywalmartcustomer

He says "videos are too repetitive"

He says "videos are too repetitive"

Rick's been a life long BMW fan.

[Chop79]

Originally Posted by ManMachine

Sports car by definition offers only 2 seats. They are meant to be impractical. M3, M5 or M6, good as they are, still aren't sports cars.

My truck only offers two seats? Does that mean it's a sports car:biggrin: