Topic: The five best-engineered cars on sale today?

[5 Wheel Drive]

I agree with the addition of the 911.  How about the BMW M3?

[safristi]

Ya'll are using a narrow def'n of engineering NON... ................see wiki-leaks-pedia............

[aaronk]

Too bad you said "on sale today", the Honda S2000 finished production last year, that would have been a good one.

[Mike]

As Mitlov said, the term 'Best Engineered' can be taken in many different ways.  So I have picked five cars based on 5 categories:

Best Practical Engineering - The Honda Fit - For such a small car, it is crazy how much room you get inside.  And although the rear seats may not be the most comfortable, the fold into the floor option allows way more hatch space then that car should have.  Add to that great handling and good fuel economy.

Best 'Unconvential' Engineering - The Chevrolet Corvette - A pushrod Motor, Sideways mounted Leaf Springs, Fibre Glass Body.  This car using 1960's technology can outrun most sports cars (supercars?) today and is reasonably priced to boot.

Best 'We Did it Cause We F'n Can' Engineering - The Mazda RX-8 - Say what you will about the Rotary, but this car is still one of the most fun to drive cars on the planet.  It has perfect balace, a great shape and ridiculous responses.  And unlike a S2000 or Elise, it also seats four and can be used day to day without (too many) issues.

Best Technological Engineering- TIE- Nissan GT-R and Porsche 911 Turbo S - Different spectrums of pricing, but same idea.  Make anyone look like a hero at the track driving these cars.  Is more like driving a video game then a car?  Maybe, but it is one fast video game.

Best Wolf in Sheeps Clothing Technology - Nissan Juke - Styled like an ugly duckling to some, for $20 000 you get torque vectoring AWD and a 1.6L turbo motor putting out 117HP/L.

[vdk]

As Mitlov said, the term 'Best Engineered' can be taken in many different ways.  So I have picked five cars based on 5 categories:

Best Practical Engineering - The Honda Fit - For such a small car, it is crazy how much room you get inside.  And although the rear seats may not be the most comfortable, the fold into the floor option allows way more hatch space then that car should have.  Add to that great handling and good fuel economy.

Best 'Unconvential' Engineering - The Chevrolet Corvette - A pushrod Motor, Sideways mounted Leaf Springs, Fibre Glass Body.  This car using 1960's technology can outrun most sports cars (supercars?) today and is reasonably priced to boot.

Best 'We Did it Cause We F'n Can' Engineering - The Mazda RX-8 - Say what you will about the Rotary, but this car is still one of the most fun to drive cars on the planet.  It has perfect balace, a great shape and ridiculous responses.  And unlike a S2000 or Elise, it also seats four and can be used day to day without (too many) issues.

Best Technological Engineering- TIE- Nissan GT-R and Porsche 911 Turbo S - Different spectrums of pricing, but same idea.  Make anyone look like a hero at the track driving these cars.  Is more like driving a video game then a car?  Maybe, but it is one fast video game.

Best Wolf in Sheeps Clothing Technology - Nissan Juke - Styled like an ugly duckling to some, for $20 000 you get torque vectoring AWD and a 1.6L turbo motor putting out 117HP/L.

I'll follow your lead.

Best Practical Engineering - VW GTI/MazdaSpeed3/Subaru WRX hatchback
Best 'Unconvential' Engineering - Ariel Atom
Best 'We Did it Cause We F'n Can' Engineering - Bugatti Veyron SuperSport
Best Technological Engineering- Ferrari F458
Best Wolf in Sheeps Clothing Technology - CTS-V Wagon

[safristi]

now we are talkin'................

[mmret]

As for the Veyron's high speed.
  IIRC the aero was difficult as well. I think most aircraft, military or commercial take off at far less than 200 mph.
Enough downforce to stop it being an aircraft, but not so much that it destroyed the tires  and, at the same time, an acceptable "look" to the people who'd buy one and drive it.  Not just aero on a flat surface either... one advantage F1 designers have is that they know all the places on all the tracks where there can be an angle of attack change and how big it is and at what speeds. A road car is much more difficult at 200 mph ( or much less for that matter) coming to the top of a slight rise and getting a bit nose up into a breeze and over you go.

I realize its not F1 but knowledge didn't help that CLK DTM!

[tpl]

As for the Veyron's high speed.
  IIRC the aero was difficult as well. I think most aircraft, military or commercial take off at far less than 200 mph.
Enough downforce to stop it being an aircraft, but not so much that it destroyed the tires  and, at the same time, an acceptable "look" to the people who'd buy one and drive it.  Not just aero on a flat surface either... one advantage F1 designers have is that they know all the places on all the tracks where there can be an angle of attack change and how big it is and at what speeds. A road car is much more difficult at 200 mph ( or much less for that matter) coming to the top of a slight rise and getting a bit nose up into a breeze and over you go.

I realize its not F1 but knowledge didn't help that CLK DTM!

There was a Youtube of that wasn't there? 

[mmret]

As for the Veyron's high speed.
  IIRC the aero was difficult as well. I think most aircraft, military or commercial take off at far less than 200 mph.
Enough downforce to stop it being an aircraft, but not so much that it destroyed the tires  and, at the same time, an acceptable "look" to the people who'd buy one and drive it.  Not just aero on a flat surface either... one advantage F1 designers have is that they know all the places on all the tracks where there can be an angle of attack change and how big it is and at what speeds. A road car is much more difficult at 200 mph ( or much less for that matter) coming to the top of a slight rise and getting a bit nose up into a breeze and over you go.

I realize its not F1 but knowledge didn't help that CLK DTM!

There was a Youtube of that wasn't there? 

Indeed there was. I must correct myself and say that it was actually the CLR LMP Car, successor to the CLK-GTR. But you get my drift.

Apparently that car flipped TWICE in the same weekend. The first time it happened they somehow managed to rebuild the car overnight and added more downforce at the front, and called it good. Whoops.

[Zombie]

Solid addition - (most) Porsche vehicles offer an amazing level of performance and frugal fuel consumption, Cayenne not included...but then, it's not a real Porsche.

Now why would you say that? If they can make a SUV and a 5 seat sport sedan then they can make a mid engine car that if given a chance (increse in power) would rival the 911 around the track.

[Mitlov]

Solid addition - (most) Porsche vehicles offer an amazing level of performance and frugal fuel consumption, Cayenne not included...but then, it's not a real Porsche.

Now why would you say that? If they can make a SUV and a 5 seat sport sedan then they can make a mid engine car that if given a chance (increse in power) would rival the 911 around the track.

He said the Cayenne SUV was "not a real Porsche," NOT the Cayman.  I think everyone agrees that the Cayman (mid-engined sports car) is a real Porsche.  The Cayenne, which is an SUV that platform-shares with a VW, is up for debate.  Even though it financially supports the rest of the lineup, I don't really think of it as a "real Porsche."

[Jaeger]

As Mitlov said, the term 'Best Engineered' can be taken in many different ways.  So I have picked five cars based on 5 categories:

Best Practical Engineering - The Honda Fit - For such a small car, it is crazy how much room you get inside.  And although the rear seats may not be the most comfortable, the fold into the floor option allows way more hatch space then that car should have.  Add to that great handling and good fuel economy.

Best 'Unconvential' Engineering - The Chevrolet Corvette - A pushrod Motor, Sideways mounted Leaf Springs, Fibre Glass Body.  This car using 1960's technology can outrun most sports cars (supercars?) today and is reasonably priced to boot.

Best 'We Did it Cause We F'n Can' Engineering - The Mazda RX-8 - Say what you will about the Rotary, but this car is still one of the most fun to drive cars on the planet.  It has perfect balace, a great shape and ridiculous responses.  And unlike a S2000 or Elise, it also seats four and can be used day to day without (too many) issues.

Best Technological Engineering- TIE- Nissan GT-R and Porsche 911 Turbo S - Different spectrums of pricing, but same idea.  Make anyone look like a hero at the track driving these cars.  Is more like driving a video game then a car?  Maybe, but it is one fast video game.

Best Wolf in Sheeps Clothing Technology - Nissan Juke - Styled like an ugly duckling to some, for $20 000 you get torque vectoring AWD and a 1.6L turbo motor putting out 117HP/L.

This makes a bunch more sense to me.

Jaeger

[The Mighty Duck]

Best Practical Engineering - VW GTI/MazdaSpeed3/Subaru WRX hatchback

What's impressive about the engineering in the Speed3? It's really just a Mazda3 with a more powerful engine... and the problems it has with torque steer make me think it's, if anything, rather poorly engineered. The Subaru and GTI are better examples, but are still really just economy cars with powerful engines stuffed in them. That's not to say I don't love all three, but I wouldn't consider any of them the best engineered car in the world... or even the best engineered "practical" car in the world.

He said the Cayenne SUV was "not a real Porsche," NOT the Cayman.  I think everyone agrees that the Cayman (mid-engined sports car) is a real Porsche.  The Cayenne, which is an SUV that platform-shares with a VW, is up for debate.  Even though it financially supports the rest of the lineup, I don't really think of it as a "real Porsche."

What makes a "real Porsche"? By all accounts the Cayanne is as fast as a Porsche needs to be, and handles exceptionally well. I think many people write it off as not a "real Porsche" simply because it's an SUV, but that hardly seems fair, imo...

[kicker]

Not today but soon .
Skyactiv tech from Mazda . Their sheer dedication to shave ounces off everywhere to reduce weight . The next Mazda 2 will have it all . Making their next automatic trans lighter by simply using fewer pieces . You can bet Hyundai will tear that apart to figure how they did it .
http://www.mazda.com/publicity/release/2010/201010/101020a.html

The GTR gets my vote but only because they can make such a very heavy car handle so very very well . It almost defines the laws of physics .

Always liked that 640 hp electric mini for all the tech that went into it .
http://www.worldcarfans.com/10607246585/pml-builds-640hp-electric-mini

Always liked Lotus's glue idea to save weight too .

[vdk]

Best Practical Engineering - VW GTI/MazdaSpeed3/Subaru WRX hatchback

What's impressive about the engineering in the Speed3? It's really just a Mazda3 with a more powerful engine... and the problems it has with torque steer make me think it's, if anything, rather poorly engineered. The Subaru and GTI are better examples, but are still really just economy cars with powerful engines stuffed in them. That's not to say I don't love all three, but I wouldn't consider any of them the best engineered car in the world... or even the best engineered "practical" car in the world.

You're just criticizing others now.. Be productive and give some counter-examples at least.

[neil]

Completely other end of the scale:

[safristi]

   UN-SMART KAR...........TaTa................................. ...the wheels are too BIG...........fer a stroller

[tpl]

Completely other end of the scale:

Not so sure. To make a car that meets a number of the standards that were designed for much bigger vehicles ( before you say it I did NOT say it meets all of them) in such a small package for such a low price does suggest some sophisticated engineering.

[The Mighty Duck]

You're just criticizing others now.. Be productive and give some counter-examples at least.

Criticizing others would be calling you an idiot for choosing the Speed3, which is not what I was doing. I'm asking you to tell me why the Speed3 is an example of the best-engineered practical car in the world. It's a practical car, no argument... but the best engineered? Why?

Counter-examples? I think the Fit is a good one. The magic seats are something really unique and innovative, and make the Fit a very versatile cargo carrier.

If you define best-engineered in terms of performance, then I would agree with the WRX/STI, which deliver exceptional performance without sacrificing utility or breaking the bank.

But I just can't see how the Speed3 is the best engineered practical car in the world.

[neil]

Completely other end of the scale:

Not so sure. To make a car that meets a number of the standards that were designed for much bigger vehicles ( before you say it I did NOT say it meets all of them) in such a small package for such a low price does suggest some sophisticated engineering.

It's a thought provoker.  Sometimes great engineering doesn't involve the fastest, most complex, etc.  But consider to create a new car from scratch, price it the way it is and supposed do it profitably, I'd say that's quite a feat.