Should Europe/Japan try making a pony car to compete with the Camaro/Mustang?
No, because those types of cars aren't attractive over here due to the horses & emissions making it seem extremely expensive for what you get.
The people who can afford cars like those here are not the type of people who want a flashy pony, but rather something like a discreet BMW with more luxury that doesn't really stick out
>>14656254
Holy shit, that much for a Stang? They're closer to 30,000$ in NA.
And if you're talking about Europe/Japan making a pony car to compete with the americans on their own land... good luck. There is a reason why very few non-american manufacturers (basically only Toyota and Nissan) try selling pickup trucks on the US market, and they can only dream of achieving the sales numbers that Ford and Chevrolet has
>>14656243
we got hot hatches which kinda fill the same purpose
Europe doesn't care they're too busy driving 100hp hatches
How does the 370z and 435i compare with the Mustang EB/Camaro RS(1LE)?
![99_663534225[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/THfM7Bi.jpg "99_663534225[1].jpg")
>>14656261
Yup, thats what a lot of horses will cost ya
This 2015 F150 Lariet SE with two seats and a 3.5l engine will cost me something like $90 000
>>14656263
Hot hatches aren't cool/noisy/silly/impractical enough.
>>14656263
Thats part of why pony cars don't really work here. Those cars became a thing in the US while the US had an economy with a strength we cannot really comprehend these days, while Europe and Japan economies were relatively small although stable, and as such most people could afford a car although it would have to be a very practical and cheap one. The americans could revel with their large gas-guzzling and completely impractical cars... bastards
Nissan 370Z?
>powerful
>high(ish) displacement
>RWD
>affordable
>beefy
Compete where? Compete for what? The pony cars have no market outside of North America, and in North America no one is going to buy a foreign pony car.
>>14656285
they're cool/noisy
yeah they're still practical but not the best to DD
depand on what you mean by silly
>>14656295
yeah and they both at some point were homologation model for race cars
>>14656343
Are you talking about specific cars or just in general that most cars sold in both places have been homologation models at one point?
The Genesis Coupe already is a competitor for those cars.
>>14656347
i mean pony cars and hot hatches the old one like renault 5 turbo or the peugeot 106 rally
>wanting more pigfat lolcantturn cars
why?
>>14656402
>he still thinks pony cars can't turn
>>14656407
>car is in the middle of a turn
>car isn't moving
>>14656385
Ah, then I see - and agree completely
Our hot hatches/fast small sedans were bred through rally and city races in tight places, while the US ponycars and muscle cars were bred on the large, wide tracks where you could really release all of those horses
>>14656407
>1515 - 1671 kg
And that's the lightest of the three. The Challengers goes up to 2018 kg.
>>14656426
well for their defense they didn't have Groupe B cars that kinda push every one to go insane
burgers don't seems to be much into rally that a shame
>>14656407
>he thinks they can
is it faster than a 90s civic this time?
>>14656449
It is a shame. I'd like to see Jeep prove some of these crossover looking things they're making now aren't shitheaps.
>>14656449
>Group B
>tfw you were too young to ever have experienced it for yourself
>>14656243
No, because we can just import US muscle if we want them, and they're shit for european roads anyway.
We have an equivalent that's suited for the market and the roads, though. We call them 'hot hatches'.
>>14656463
has jeep ever race anything ?
they're good for hardcore offroading if i can say so
i like the new look they have but otherwise meh
>>14656466
yeah eighties/nineties were golden age of race/sports car
every things was crazier back then
>>14656526
>hardcore offroading
>unibody
I drive a jeep and you need to put in twice the cost of the car just to get it acceptable at off roading
>>14656552
erf so what are they good for ? just road ?
depend on what you call off roading my dad used to go off roading with a nissan pathinder and it was ok
i don't know shit about jeep to be honest
>>14656573
The wrangler type ones are just fine, but they're worth twice as much as the cherokees since less people bought them
For light off roading a stock cherokee will work just fine
>>14656243
>tfw no RWD V8 Accord Amer-S Coupe
They made the Euro R (basically TSX) for Europe so why not an American enthusiast Accord? Too bad the only American Accord we get is the TLX
>>14656573
I'm gonna get called a shitlord for sure, but Jeep is basically floating on their name being Jeep. They used to be one of the few cars that could really get you around back in the day, and huge contracts with the military made sure that they were financially safe aswell as that it gave them a reputation for being rugged vehicles
These days they aren't all that much different in terms of capability than a lot of their competitors. They're still capable, but the gap between them and the other cars on this area has been closed.
These days you'll kinda need to heavily modify your vehicle no matter what if you want to keep up on the specialized trails, and no factory-stock vehicle obtainable to regular people would be able to keep up without modification
>>14656552
>jeeps
>unibody
what?
>>14656580
oh yeah i love the wrangler it looks good but yeah they're expensive as fuck
we rented a cherokee once was comfy but otherwise meh never whent offroading with it thought
but it's seems they are more a luxury brand today
>>14656243
What's a V8 coupe from Europe/Japan?
All I know is the SC400
>>14656243
They did once before, it was called the celica
>>14656617
C63 AMG?
>>14656243
Skyline GTSt/GTT were essentially filling that role
370Z is pretty much it right now
>>14656620
Pic for reference
>>14656595
i don't think anyone will disagree
it's a general feeling
agreed mod are needed but a jeep would be cheaper to mod for offroading than a range rover or some modern nissan or toyota
>>14656633
>2,500lbs
>2.2l
Not pigfat enough
>>14656243
Because they make sedans that outperform while not resorting to injection molded plastic interiors to make them cheap enough for trailer trash.
pic related.
>>14656651
>affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image
>affordable, compact, highly styled car with a sporty or performance-oriented image
>>14656445
>1,505-1,700kg
>base model is a 3-cyl(!?)
>doesn't even come with a V8
yuropoors BTFO
More cars that fall into the "pony car" category.
>>14656254
holy shit I feel for you Mighty, that is sad.
You'll have to come to California so you can drive my 240Z and my dad's 500hp, big block powered '70 Chevy C20 pickup. Nothing makes you go full 'Merica like the beast (family nickname for the truck)
Another that falls into the cheap, small performance car category.
Wew lads
>>14656684
Thats the thing; because cars & trucks like those are so rare/unobtainable/unpractical here not that many people have developed a taste for them. If anything they like 60-70's Mustangs, Challengers and similar cars, and those are actually quite obtainable if you're smart enough to import it yourself as the taxes/fees on importing 30+ year old vehicles are way lower
I have more friends who want an Opel Kadett C with a 2.0 turbo, an old Sierra Cosworth or a beaten-to-shit 2.4 diesel HiLux as their workmans pickup/offroad vehicle rather than having a high powered Cobalt, an F250 (most of those types of trucks aren't even legal to drive for most people as the majority are registered as light trucks and need a different license) or similar as they are too expensive both to buy, to insure and to keep fueled
My point is that Japan has, and does, make performance oriented cars that are compact and affordable. And some of them are also made with practicality in mind.
European marques tend to be worth a lot of money, and many probably wouldn't consider putting out a cheap performance car.
>>14656683
Is this a bad thing?
>>14656732
I'm sure the designers of the Supra wouldn't want the car to be considered a Japanese Mustang. It fits the criteria. But Toyota marketed the '94 as a grand touring car. Not a dedicated sports car. But a car that can be fun, comfortable, and practical to a certain degree.
>>14656722
Mind you, this is speaking from a scandinavian perspective. It may be different in other places in Europe, although I'm fairly certain its not all that much different.
We grew up watching Petter Solberg, Martin Schanche, Tommi Mäkinen and all those guys fly around Europes shitty roads in their awesome cars, while the americans grew up watching NASCAR, Drag racing and similar stuff where different cars ruled
>>14656731
>FWD
but why ?
>>14656787
I would want the shit out of this car if it was RWD. Maybe in the future if I'm ever able to afford to have 2 cars I'll have a 7th gen Celica to DD and some RWD shitbox to have fun with.
>>14656787
I don't even know if Toyota knew what to do with the Celica. It went from RWD to AWD to FWD. The Supra came out of the Celica line as well. So you started with a cheap RWD, then the Supra became Toyota's chief sports car.
The Corolla and Celica both were RWD, but the Corolla wasn't really a performance car, outside of a few trims levels.
So the Corolla became a cheap car for everyone, the Celica went to AWD, and the Supra and MR-2 were Toyota's RWD machines, right?
That would have been well and good. A different car in the Celica would have been pretty smart. Separate and distinct from the Corolla and Echo.
But then Toyota goes with FWD for the last generation Celica and also took a huge shit on the styling. It just looks completely unremarkable. I don't understand it.
>>14656832
>But then Toyota goes with FWD
the vast majority of celicas post-'85 are FWD, the last gen just switched from the carina to corolla platforms.
>>14656832
yeah it's like the celica is born from a misunderstanding
>RWD rear engine layout new sport coupé
>some fucker put the body and chassis backward
>nobody want to admit fault
>"yeah i-it was the idea all along eheh a FWD coupé "
>last gen of celica is born
>>14656243
Germans make its rivals all the time, but it's not my fault that you can't afford them.
>>14657731
*their
hell, even Jaguar is back in the game. But I suppose it's too expensive for you.
>implying you would fit in that car
>>14657731
>cant afford a mercedes
more like cant afford to maintain them and aren't stupid enough to waste money on over engineered and overpriced poop
>tfw that could have been the idx
>>14657781
>over engineered
?
no such thing
>overpriced
see my previous post
>>14657731
But... I can.
>>14656597
the renegades are unibody.
>>14658284
They're Fiats with a bodykit, of course they're unibody.
>>14657785
>>14656274
They dont. A 5.0 is 32k. Performance wise a non m BMW and a pig fat z car don't stand a snowballs chance in hell against it.
>>14656453
>Camaro beats Porsche 911
>Civic beats Camaro
The true Godmachine has been in our face the whole time. How could we have been so blind?
>>14656526
Yes? I don't think it was a factory backed team.
>>14656254
>Scandinavia
Yeah, they're ridiculously taxed over there, but not in countries like Germany, Belgium etc. They can still be competetive, because anything in that market segment gets taxed bexause of emissions or fuel consumption. Besides, plenty of people still buy them - the GT350 for example is quite the sales success.
>>14656243
Yes, they should, but they know they'll be fighting for market share in a saturated market, so they won't do it. Companies I'd like to see a ponycar from would be Honda, Mitsubishi and Subaru on one end and Alfa, Peugeot, and maybe VAG's lower brands (Seat, Skoda) on the other.
>>14656297
They do have a market outside of NA, and for example Honda probably could break into the ponycar market - if they didn't halfass it like the Ridgeline.
>>14656749
That's wierd, because Scandinavia has the biggest dragracing scene of all of Yurop. Sweden has quite literally half the dragstrips of Yurop iirc. Not the famous ones like Santa Pod and Hockenheim, but still.
>>14657731
>>14657773
The very point of a pony car is that it's cheap.
>>14656243
>fat, fatter, fattest
>>14656243
I drive a 15 yr old piece of Euro shit (in your opinion) that's a tiny 3.2l I6 that could still rival even modern pony cars.
https://youtu.be/mu1DPeFQbUE
>>14656243
No. They are annoyingly large
>>14656243
>Dutch
>Never seen a camaro or mustang irl
feelsbadman
>>14661457
Pony cars: The inferior driving machine
>>14657785
EEK D:
>>14656671
>highly styled
>>14661418
>pony car
>large
>>14657731
Mercedes biggest market for these cars is the US, Yuropoors are the ones who can barely afford to drive 1 litre shitboxes
>>14661457
I've only once seen a 5th gen Camaro at a car show, two Corvettes in my entire life (both C6), a couple of Mustangs and even a first gen Viper.
Dutchfag here too, from the middle of nowhere up north.
>>14656683
>muh dick
ID on the kit?
>>14661547
>small in America is pig fat everywhere else
their cars are the size of our trucks
>>14661457
>>14661921
how the hell do you guys not notice the disproportionate amound of MURRIKAH here? Everybody and their siter drivers a RAM1500 nowadays, with it's grey license tax loop, C6 Corvettes are reasonably common, as are first gen Vipers. Camaros and Mustangs might be a bit scarcer, but I live in the south where there's quite a few American expats with other ponycars. Someone in my village (population approx 800) even has a V8 Challenger. And that's not even counting the clssics hidden away everywhere.
>>14656243
anything from Japan with an in-line 6 counts
>>14656651
>implying being cheap is a bad thing for a pony car
>missing the entire point of pony cars
Yuropoors everyone
>>14662056
The classics only come out during shows, but I have seen quite a few RAM 1500s around here. Pretty funny actually, the contrast between one of those and something like a base Polo SlowMotion on the same road.
Maybe in the south/west American cars are more common, but the richer areas around here are filled with black Audis/BMWs/Mercs, a bunch of Porsches and a few Jags.
>>14656296
>not as fast as its pony car counterparts.
>runs out of steam past 60
>not 2+2
>not v8
Wanted to give you three strikes but i got a free one for you
>>14658321
A 435i blows the shit out of a 5.0 poontang on a track.
>>14663138
Need citation.
I don't understand the purpose of the term Pony
Why not just call it what it is, shitty muscle?
>>14656714
>>14656731
>FWD
You can get away with calling them performance cars, that's all well and good.
But Pony cars are RWD.
>>14657785
I love this car dammit
>>14663660
Too bad they ditched it for pic related.
>>14657785
>>14663660
>giving ghosn-era nissan credit for ANYTHING good
>>14656243
No. The only reason you get big V8 power for cheap is because they sell like crazy. The only reason they sell like crazy is muh nostalgia.
The only way they can compete is with hot hatches that are based off of mass produced shit boxes. No bespoke sports car will ever touch the pony cars and the retarded weight their names pull.
It's sad I know. I don't want to be tied down to the whims of these murrifat knuckle draggers any more than you do.
>>14663669
Why is it so edgy?
>>14656243
Umm...they aleady did! lmao
---------------------------------
RIP Paul Walker
**Proud Supra Owner**
Supra Club of Houston Member
National Supra Registry #1227748
Car:
1987 Supra Non-Turbo (project not running)
Soon to be 2JZ XXDD
>>14662085
This really depends on which garage you peek in.
Sometimes you find some really nice cars.
>>14662045
That's because Europeans don't need to drive such long distances.
>implying
>>14656277
>two seats
>crew cab
Also the 3.5 is twin turbo.
>>14656671
Dusted a 84 rx with a 99 cherokee sport. Good times.
