What car is right for me?

[Zeldman]

How about a 1966 Alfa Romeo 1600 Spider Duetto..??

Can you say, "Mrs. Robinson, you're trying to seduce me, Aren't you?" Comes with an 8 track player and several tapes of Simon and Garfunkel....

 

[wsuffa]

Doesn't Troy have a car for sale? Not a convertible, though.

 

[Matthew]

How about a 1966 Alfa Romeo 1600 Spider Duetto..??

Can you say, "Mrs. Robinson, you're trying to seduce me, Aren't you?" Comes with an 8 track player and several tapes of Simon and Garfunkel....

Sweet, and a guitar will fit in back. Done.

 

[genna]

https://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/732448082/overview/

the good news is that if it has not rusted out by now, it's safe to buy

 

[Matthew]

Someone in my old neighborhood had a Nash Metro. Now and then they'd get it out and drive it around.

 

[denverpilot]

I'd love to have a '77 Fiat Spyder, red with brown interior. You've now inspired a quest!

My folks had a 1980 Fiat Spyder when I was growing up. Ton of fun.

It originally was in some awful fire engine green/yellow color but it needed a paint job in the late 80’s and my stepdad built a paint booth in the garage and did a gorgeous job changing it to a dark gun metal metallic grey with the original black leather interior.

That was a sweet color on that car. Made it look meaner than it was.

 

[denverpilot]

I see they offer the new ones in nearly the same color now. Imagine the older version of the car in this color. Hawwwwt.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

Fiat did a decent job with the mandated sturdier bumpers on the 124 Spider circa '75, but to my eye the little chromies on the earlier car looked so much cleaner. Red w/ black interior is the way to go, soooooo Italian.

When you see the new imposter and the original side by side, you gain a lot of appreciation for the so-tidy original Pininfarina lines. Love the sugar scoop headlight surrounds and the peaks of the rear fenders.

 

[kgruber]

Good way to ruin an economy sports car.

 

[Dav8or]

I don't understand the hate for the new Fiat 124 Spyder and I guess I never will. I think the new one looks fantastic and the old one is OK too. My reservation about the new one is the stupid Fiat engine they put in it. My reservation about the old original is the stupid Fiat everything they put in it.

 

[asicer]

I don't understand the hate for the new Fiat 124 Spyder and I guess I never will. I think the new one looks fantastic and the old one is OK too. My reservation about the new one is the stupid Fiat engine they put in it. My reservation about the old original is the stupid Fiat everything they put in it.

Can't say that I hate the new 124, per se. However, it doesn't add anything over it's donor Miata IMHO. If you're going to choose between a Miata and a Fiata then there's no reason to stray from purity.

As for the original 124, I always thought of it as something you settle on when you can't scrape up a little extra for an Alfa.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

I don't understand the hate for the new Fiat 124 Spyder and I guess I never will. I think the new one looks fantastic and the old one is OK too. My reservation about the new one is the stupid Fiat engine they put in it. My reservation about the old original is the stupid Fiat everything they put in it.

The sequel is rarely as good as the original. (Wrath of Khan is a notable exception!)

For me, just knowing it's based on the Miata kills any allure it might have...and that's not a knock on the Miata at all. This re-body just looks garish compared to the elemental simplicity of the original.

I'd buy a Miata partly for its lightness, and the Fiata has porked up a bit, so that's another strike.

To each his/her own.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

As for the original 124, I always thought of it as something you settle on when you can't scrape up a little extra for an Alfa.

If I get tired of the Mustang, I may have to scrape up a little extra for a second-hand Alfa 4C. I've just got a thing for mid-engine cars (two 914s and an MR2 Spyder so far). Better looking than the Elise/Exige, IMO.

 

[Dav8or]

Can't say that I hate the new 124, per se. However, it doesn't add anything over it's donor Miata IMHO. If you're going to choose between a Miata and a Fiata then there's no reason to stray from purity.

As for the original 124, I always thought of it as something you settle on when you can't scrape up a little extra for an Alfa.

I would stray because I absolutely hate the look of the new Miata and love the look of the 124. The Fiat engine is a bummer though... Neither car has the proper amount of HP for this car, both are weak sauce.

 

[denverpilot]

The Miata got old and fat. Makes me sad. The whole point of the thing was that it was a light sports car that was affordable and convertible.

 

[jsstevens]

I read some reviews of the Miata and the 124 over the weekend. While the 124 Abarth has 9 more HP, it's a really lumpy/bumpy torque curve. So drivability is work. Hmm. Also even thought Car & Driver picked the Miata as a 10 best cars for 17 & 18, they said it has lots of body roll for a sports car.

Anyway, I'm going to go try several of these out in a month or two when I get ready to shop in earnest. I like reading reviews, but I don't fully trust them to tell me how I'll like a car. And I'm looking for the put-a-smile-on-my-face, fun-to-drive which isn't just pure performance. (If it was pure performance, I'd abandon the stick for paddle shifters.)

I do appreciate the suggestions and I learned some stuff (isn't that how all threads on POA work? ). I'll keep watching the thread if anybody has other ideas. And I'll fill it in as I drive stuff.
John

 

[Bill]

I would stray because I absolutely hate the look of the new Miata and love the look of the 124. The Fiat engine is a bummer though... Neither car has the proper amount of HP for this car, both are weak sauce.

Rumors are that Mazda will bump the HP to the mid-180's in '19. That would be an ~20 power increase, and would make the car much more lively.

The Miata got old and fat. Makes me sad. The whole point of the thing was that it was a light sports car that was affordable and convertible.

This latest gen has gotten light again.

 

[Dav8or]

The Miata got old and fat. Makes me sad. The whole point of the thing was that it was a light sports car that was affordable and convertible.

So did the American buyer. They kind of have to size the car to the buyer.

 

[Dav8or]

Rumors are that Mazda will bump the HP to the mid-180's in '19. That would be an ~20 power increase, and would make the car much more lively.

That would help, but I personally think it needs to be about 200-250 hp at least for the Mazda Speed version, or Abarth version. 180 HP base model is good.

 

[Grum.Man]

I would take the Fiat over the Miata. I think it looks much better and the turbo engine probably offers more power increasing potential through tunning that you couldn't get in a NA engine.

 

[charheep]

I would highly recommend test driving a Wrangler. Its not sporty in the traditional put your butt through the seat way, but its a blast to drive. take the top off, the doors off and you are in a good place. I need space right now, or I would be back in a Jeep. They are fun and you are excited for bad weather. If you need to feel like a 16 year old again, I would look at the Rustang and Crapmaro's.

 

[asicer]

I would take the Fiat over the Miata. I think it looks much better and the turbo engine probably offers more power increasing potential through tunning that you couldn't get in a NA engine.

From 1.4l? Don't set your hopes too high...

 

[SoonerAviator]

I would highly recommend test driving a Wrangler. Its not sporty in the traditional put your butt through the seat way, but its a blast to drive. take the top off, the doors off and you are in a good place. I need space right now, or I would be back in a Jeep. They are fun and you are excited for bad weather. If you need to feel like a 16 year old again, I would look at the Rustang and Crapmaro's.

I'll have to disagree on that one. For a DD, the Wrangler is poorly-optioned, premium priced, and a bit of a dog. The steering is heavy, it's not fuel-efficient in the least, and the ride quality is nothing to write home about. I agree that they are a blast to drive on a nice weekend with the doors/top off, or on a trip where even some basic off-road capability is needed. However, I just don't get paying $35K+ for those capabilities to be infrequently used. I'd certainly recommend having an older model to romp around in as a toy though.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

From 1.4l? Don't set your hopes too high...

You can only feed the hamster so much crack...

Although it's not unheard of to have a 1.5-liter turbo race engine make north of 1000 horsepower in qualifying trim. Brabham BT50 is one of my favorite F1 cars of all time.

 

[charheep]

I have only had older (~10 years old models) and the 2 door version with the 6 and manual. I loved them.
i haven't driven an auto or the 4 cylinder ever.

 

[SoCal RV Flyer]

The Miata got old and fat. Makes me sad. The whole point of the thing was that it was a light sports car that was affordable and convertible.

This latest gen has gotten light again.

Yep. Toyota did the same with the MR2. Third-gen car, at 2200 lb. or thereabouts, was lighter than the first-gen despite larger overall dimensions.

 

[bradg33]

I'll have to disagree on that one. For a DD, the Wrangler is poorly-optioned, premium priced, and a bit of a dog. The steering is heavy, it's not fuel-efficient in the least, and the ride quality is nothing to write home about. I agree that they are a blast to drive on a nice weekend with the doors/top off, or on a trip where even some basic off-road capability is needed. However, I just don't get paying $35K+ for those capabilities to be infrequently used. I'd certainly recommend having an older model to romp around in as a toy though.

Have you driven a JK? I've had 4 Wranglers as DDs: a '95 YJ, a 2000 TJ, a 2012 JK (2door) and a '15 JK (2 door). The JK's really are nice to DD; they handle pretty well due to the short wheel base (though there's a lot of body rolls), and I wouldn't call the steering "heavy" at all. The JK really is much more civil than the YJ and TJ. It rides like a truck, sure, but the JK is much better than they used to be. I just sold my '15 JK back in October when I bought my Corvette.

 

[jsstevens]

You can only feed the hamster so much crack...

Although it's not unheard of to have a 1.5-liter turbo race engine make north of 1000 horsepower in qualifying trim. Brabham BT50 is one of my favorite F1 cars of all time.

View attachment 62209

Some of the turbo 1.5 Liter Renaults made both of 1500 horsepower at 15,000 RPM.

The only magic is how much oxygen you can pump through it. Now, the torque "spike", oops, meant "curve" was narrow and they wouldn't last more than a few hundred miles...

 

[SoonerAviator]

Have you driven a JK? I've had 4 Wranglers as DDs: a '95 YJ, a 2000 TJ, a 2012 JK (2door) and a '15 JK (2 door). The JK's really are nice to DD; they handle pretty well due to the short wheel base (though there's a lot of body rolls), and I wouldn't call the steering "heavy" at all. The JK really is much more civil than the YJ and TJ. It rides like a truck, sure, but the JK is much better than they used to be. I just sold my '15 JK back in October when I bought my Corvette.

I've driven a 4-dr '16 and a '17 for about a week each as rentals. Went from Tulsa-DFW and back each time, with plenty of city driving. I understand what the Jeep is capable of, and is notably much more refined than the previous models I've driven. I just can't fathom wanting to have one as a DD, personally. They catch a fair amount of wind on the highway, and that likewise ties into less than stellar fuel mileage. The heavy steering is one of the first things I noticed about it, although maybe that's a characteristic of the 4dr that isn't present on the 2dr models. We use an old 80's 2-dr 4-banger as a lake/boat ramp mule, and it does fine with that duty, albeit a rough 2-mile ride to the boat ramp. They are great off-roading machines though, no one should deny that. It's just that those qualities don't usually translate into great on-road manners.

Photo explanation: I was making fun of a co-worker at a Fort Worth, TX plant who was an avid Jeeper.

 

[denverpilot]

Photo explanation: I was making fun of a co-worker at a Fort Worth, TX plant who was an avid Jeeper.

My best story of that was the guy who moved here from Boston where the snow doesn't melt. He got all saucy about getting into 4-wheeling and bought a Jeep and was like a little kid in a candy store, taking it off-roading and what-not...

The first Denver winter rolls around and he parks it on top of a mountain of snow the parking lot plows made at work. Oooh, look at my awesome Jeep skills... LOL...

We all got a chuckle when he came inside around 5:30 PM asking if anyone had a tow-strap, because the mountain of snow had melted and his Jeep was nice an high-centered where it kept the center of the pile from melting. His black tires got nice and warm and melted perfect indentations into the pile too.

Then we all got to harass him for the lack of 4WD prowess of his Jeep, and ask him if he thought the boss's 20 year old front wheel drive Honda Accord could pull him out from the dry pavement a few feet away, if only the boss had a tow strap...

(One of our manufacturing guys had mercy on him and pulled him out with a Dodge Dakota in 2WD. LOL...)

 

[bradg33]

I've driven a 4-dr '16 and a '17 for about a week each as rentals. Went from Tulsa-DFW and back each time, with plenty of city driving. I understand what the Jeep is capable of, and is notably much more refined than the previous models I've driven. I just can't fathom wanting to have one as a DD, personally. They catch a fair amount of wind on the highway, and that likewise ties into less than stellar fuel mileage. The heavy steering is one of the first things I noticed about it, although maybe that's a characteristic of the 4dr that isn't present on the 2dr models. We use an old 80's 2-dr 4-banger as a lake/boat ramp mule, and it does fine with that duty, albeit a rough 2-mile ride to the boat ramp. They are great off-roading machines though, no one should deny that. It's just that those qualities don't usually translate into great on-road manners.

Photo explanation: I was making fun of a co-worker at a Fort Worth, TX plant who was an avid Jeeper.

Well there's your problem, the 4-door is garbage. #FakeWrangler. I'm a purist; give me 2-door or give me death. My wife had a 4-door for awhile, I hated driving it. Aside from just being wrong, it handles much differently than the 2-door. You can really feel that extra wheelbase, and not in a good way.

 

[SoonerAviator]

My best story of that was the guy who moved here from Boston where the snow doesn't melt. He got all saucy about getting into 4-wheeling and bought a Jeep and was like a little kid in a candy store, taking it off-roading and what-not...

The first Denver winter rolls around and he parks it on top of a mountain of snow the parking lot plows made at work. Oooh, look at my awesome Jeep skills... LOL...

We all got a chuckle when he came inside around 5:30 PM asking if anyone had a tow-strap, because the mountain of snow had melted and his Jeep was nice an high-centered where it kept the center of the pile from melting. His black tires got nice and warm and melted perfect indentations into the pile too.

Then we all got to harass him for the lack of 4WD prowess of his Jeep, and ask him if he thought the boss's 20 year old front wheel drive Honda Accord could pull him out from the dry pavement a few feet away, if only the boss had a tow strap...

(One of our manufacturing guys had mercy on him and pulled him out with a Dodge Dakota in 2WD. LOL...)

Lol, great story, happens to the best of 'em. On the flip side, the most snow/ice that we've ever had in Tulsa since I've been alive (~35 years) was in January 2011. Tulsa area got 20" over a day or two, which effectively shut down just about every business/highway in the area since the plows aren't exactly equipped to deal with more than a foot of snow. In any case, my boss and I had to be at the facility, so he hired his friend with a 4Dr Wrangler as a "taxi service" to pick us up at our homes and take us to/from the office. It was a bit slow-going in some areas where you couldn't make out the road from the fields, but it did the job admirably.

 

[FormerHangie]

I would stray because I absolutely hate the look of the new Miata and love the look of the 124. The Fiat engine is a bummer though... Neither car has the proper amount of HP for this car, both are weak sauce.

That would help, but I personally think it needs to be about 200-250 hp at least for the Mazda Speed version, or Abarth version. 180 HP base model is good.

I would take the Fiat over the Miata. I think it looks much better and the turbo engine probably offers more power increasing potential through tunning that you couldn't get in a NA engine.

I think you are missing the point of the MX-5. It's designed to be light, quick, and balanced, with the emphasis on handling, at a realistic price. It's not a muscle car. If you want to go fast in a straight line, you can get a Mustang or Camaro for similar money. Those also handle well, but are a very different driving experience than an MX-5, or for that matter a BRZ or a Toyota 86. You can put more power under the hood, but then you need more tire and a bigger car, along with heavier duty cooling, stronger suspension components, and bigger brakes. Now you have a Corvette, which is also a fine car to drive, but again, drives differently than an MX-5.

A tuner can come along and put some sort of forced induction system on an MX-5, but the factory won't. The end product wouldn't meet their standards for reliability and durability, and for that matter, balance.

 

[SoonerAviator]

I think you are missing the point of the MX-5. It's designed to be light, quick, and balanced, with the emphasis on handling, at a realistic price. It's not a muscle car. If you want to go fast in a straight line, you can get a Mustang or Camaro for similar money. Those also handle well, but are a very different driving experience than an MX-5, or for that matter a BRZ or a Toyota 86. You can put more power under the hood, but then you need more tire and a bigger car, along with heavier duty cooling, stronger suspension components, and bigger brakes. Now you have a Corvette, which is also a fine car to drive, but again, drives differently than an MX-5.

A tuner can come along and put some sort of forced induction system on an MX-5, but the factory won't. The end product wouldn't meet their standards for reliability and durability, and for that matter, balance.

I always liked the Nissan Z cars in that same respect (although the 300ZX/350Z got piggish in weight). The 240/260/280Z were solid performers with low weight and the inline-6. The 370Z is a pretty good performer though, but not quite MX-5 in handling.

 

[Dav8or]

I think you are missing the point of the MX-5. It's designed to be light, quick, and balanced, with the emphasis on handling, at a realistic price.

That's the problem, as they are, they aren't quick. Maybe quick for 30 years ago. I disagree that adding more HP necessitates more chassis weight. The Pontiac Solstice GXP came with a 2 liter four cylinder turbo that made 260 HP. I doubt very much that the Pontiac engine is significantly heavier than the Mazda, or Fiat engine. I would bet money too the gear box and rear end are more than up to the challenge as they are. No doubt there are people out there modding them right now that can attest to that.

As to price, more HP only costs more in a car because they can get more from the consumer. Mazda and Fiat could easily offer both the economical base car with the "light" engine in and then also offer the performance version with more HP for more money. If they did, nothing would be lost and I can tell you for sure which model everyone would recommend.

Historically, which is more popular and sought after, the Sunbeam Alpine, or Sunbeam Tiger? How about the AC Ace vs. the Shelby Cobra? Americans do like their roadsters to be quick.

 

[SoonerAviator]

Then it's settled: Polaris Slingshot. 173HP, 1,700 lbs curb weight. Trunk big enough for a guitar (if you use the pax seat as a trunk, lol), manual tranny, and convertible.

 

[asicer]

Some of the turbo 1.5 Liter Renaults made both of 1500 horsepower at 15,000 RPM.

The only magic is how much oxygen you can pump through it. Now, the torque "spike", oops, meant "curve" was narrow and they wouldn't last more than a few hundred miles...

And I'm not sure how closely related race gas was to consumer grade pump gas back then.

 

[Timbeck2]

Most impractical vehicle one can own.


May as well get one of these. Nice basket for the guitar.

 

[Bill Watson]

I think you are missing the point of the MX-5. It's designed to be light, quick, and balanced, with the emphasis on handling, at a realistic price. It's not a muscle car. If you want to go fast in a straight line, you can get a Mustang or Camaro for similar money. Those also handle well, but are a very different driving experience than an MX-5, or for that matter a BRZ or a Toyota 86. You can put more power under the hood, but then you need more tire and a bigger car, along with heavier duty cooling, stronger suspension components, and bigger brakes. Now you have a Corvette, which is also a fine car to drive, but again, drives differently than an MX-5.

Okay, I’m not a car guy but I love Miatas. I got a 1st gen for my wife years ago and it became her thing. But I got the point as well. It was nimble and cute and made just the right sounds. Reliable as the rising sun. She spun it on ice and I got her a 2nd gen to replace it. More of the same on all counts. Then I surprised her with a 2017 with the retract top...

Game over!

The 4th gen is a totally different car. It has power in addition to all the other joys and the retractable hard top if great. Just the right amount of shade for southern top down driving.

I like planes and I like her so she gets a hot car and I get to fly her around. What else could be the point of owning a ?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Dav8or]

Then it's settled: Polaris Slingshot. 173HP, 1,700 lbs curb weight. Trunk big enough for a guitar (if you use the pax seat as a trunk, lol), manual tranny, and convertible.

Hmmm... Not so sure about the convertible part. Open cockpit yes. Convertible, no. Bring your rain suit.