GTs are the best cars around. Discuss.

[Ext User(Marco)]

Here's a debate for a quiet Friday afternoon (assuming you're having
one): Grand Tourers are the best type of cars around.

My case goes like this. Your typical GT is generally a medium to
large sort of a car, so you get plenty of space, has lots of luxury
gear so you can arrive wherever you're going feeling relaxed and
pampered, and has no shortage of power and torque so overtaking is
never a problem. The suspension is usually firmish but not so hard as
to be uncomfortable, looks are usually understated but still sporting,
and all of its performance is generally usable in the real world,
whether that's in the city or on the open road.

They're better than supercars because they're cheaper and more
practical as well as being easier to drive and with a better ride
quality, better than highly-tuned Evo/STI type cars because they're
not as manic to drive, have more luxury gear and the suspension has
more compliance built into it, and they're better than full on luxury
cars because they handle well and don't have a 'crusty old bloke with
money' image.

I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
(so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.

Discuss :)

[Ext User(Oz)]

> I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
> my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
> (so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
> cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
> anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.
>
> Discuss :)
>

Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money

http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/

you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)

Oz

[Ext User(Marco)]

Oz wrote:
>
> Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money
>
> http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/
>
> you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)

Yes, I think the Spec B would fit the criteria nicely :) That's one
for the Japanese camp.

Marco

[Ext User(Dan---)]

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 13:13:49 +1000, Oz PCM code reading says :

>

>>
>>
> Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money
>
> http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/
>
> you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)

If it had the interior space of a Falcodore it would be my pick.
But then again I love my V8's too much as well I guess I cannot kill the
knuckle dragness out of me really.

But yeah a Liberty Spec B or liberty STi or a VE SS-V for me.

The mrs can keep her boring Camry. :-)

--
Regards
Dan

[Ext User(Jason James)]

"Marco" <ignition.vess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177039600.100929.107930@b75g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
>
> Oz wrote:
> >
> > Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money
> >
> > http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/
> >
> > you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)
>
> Yes, I think the Spec B would fit the criteria nicely :) That's one
> for the Japanese camp.

If you're talking about an XW or XY GT,..that's an experience. Totally
different engines, but both cars making at least 300hp (the Clevo a bit
more). No padding every where, just bone-jarring, teeth rattling power in a
car which eclipsed all other four-door sedans in the world, at the
time...whoo, getting excited, time for a chill-pill :-)

Used to watch an XW GT take a turn most nights from my rear view vantage
point at a servo I moonlighted at. He'd nail it in 1st and 2nd. To watch the
car's body twisting as the donk torqued, was a real sight.Then there was the
exhaust growl rising in pitch to a scream,..chill-pill!!
Jason

[Ext User(Marco)]

> If you're talking about an XW or XY GT,..that's an experience.

No, I meant more cars in the general Grand Tourer mould - I wouldn't
have said that the early Falcon GT was really a GT at all given the
complete absence of padding, soundproofing, luxury gear etc as you
touched on :)

Marco

[Ext User(John_H)]

Marco wrote:
>
>I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
>my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
>(so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
>cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
>anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.

Best touring car I've ever owned was a Triumph 2.5 PI (Mk I) bought in
the late 1970's. Production run was 1969 (only 500 cars built IIRC).
The subsequent Mk II had lesser quality components (notably engine
internals and brakes) as well as being heavier. The PI engines were
also dramatically detuned to meet the first emission rules in the
early seventies (ADR 27A IIRC), and discontinued shortly thereafter.

Superior in almost every respect to the HSV I bought new to replace it
in 1990 (5L VN)... with the notable exception of reliabilty and tuning
requirements.

Vastly quieter, considerably more comfortable, comparable or better
open road performance (overtaking ability, etc), better brakes and
similar fuel economy. Also a far more responsive and infinitely
sweeter running engine. The Dunny does have better high speed
stability under some conditions... down to its live rear axle. The
Triumph had better traction at lower speeds (and better ride at all
speeds)... down to its IRS.

Top speed was lower... around 210 for the PI... unknown, but somewhat
higher, for the HSV (but hardly an issue anywhere in Oz). Either
could cruise all day at 170 -180 kph. It also had little trouble
outrunning most of the 'GT cars' of the same era over any sort of
distance (if only because they drove like trucks in comparison).

Who'd need to own a GT car of any description in today's environment?
;-)

--
John H

[Ext User(Noddy)]

"Oz" <me@ozz.com> wrote in message
news:132gbvfsruuf667@corp.supernews.com...

> Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money
>
> http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/
>
> you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)

I'll second that. They're a *fantastic* car, and brilliant fun to drive.

Amongst others I'd list an M3 or M5 Beemer, a V8 Calais or SS (in auto
version of course), and while I haven't driven one yet the Chrysler 300C
looks quite capable for a 4000 pound car with a nice V8 engine.

--
Regards,
Noddy.

[Ext User(Jason James)]

"Marco" <ignition.vess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177044395.591332.289790@b58g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
> > If you're talking about an XW or XY GT,..that's an experience.
>
> No, I meant more cars in the general Grand Tourer mould - I wouldn't
> have said that the early Falcon GT was really a GT at all given the
> complete absence of padding, soundproofing, luxury gear etc as you
> touched on :)

Well, if I was going touring, and petrol money was no consideration,..the
Falcon GT would be nice.

One early "Gran(d) Tourisimo" was a circa '63 Studebaker Hawk? Or just a
Studebaker GT was it?. It had a V8 and was badged in the actual Italian
words. Just some useless info :-)
From an definition POV, a GT is supposed to be comfortable I guess.

Jason

[Ext User(Michael C)]

"Marco" <ignition.vess@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1177038177.384222.163240@n76g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
> Here's a debate for a quiet Friday afternoon (assuming you're having
> one): Grand Tourers are the best type of cars around.
>
> My case goes like this. Your typical GT is generally a medium to
> large sort of a car, so you get plenty of space, has lots of luxury
> gear so you can arrive wherever you're going feeling relaxed and
> pampered, and has no shortage of power and torque so overtaking is
> never a problem. The suspension is usually firmish but not so hard as
> to be uncomfortable, looks are usually understated but still sporting,
> and all of its performance is generally usable in the real world,
> whether that's in the city or on the open road.
>
> They're better than supercars because they're cheaper and more
> practical as well as being easier to drive and with a better ride
> quality, better than highly-tuned Evo/STI type cars because they're
> not as manic to drive, have more luxury gear and the suspension has
> more compliance built into it, and they're better than full on luxury
> cars because they handle well and don't have a 'crusty old bloke with
> money' image.
>
> I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
> my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
> (so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
> cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
> anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.
>
> Discuss :)

Besides an airconditioner what luxury feature is going to pamper you? It's
not like it gives you a massage or anything.
>

[Ext User(Oz)]

"Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:46285e42$0$5749$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> "Marco" <ignition.vess@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1177038177.384222.163240@n76g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
>> Here's a debate for a quiet Friday afternoon (assuming you're having
>> one): Grand Tourers are the best type of cars around.
>>
>> My case goes like this. Your typical GT is generally a medium to
>> large sort of a car, so you get plenty of space, has lots of luxury
>> gear so you can arrive wherever you're going feeling relaxed and
>> pampered, and has no shortage of power and torque so overtaking is
>> never a problem. The suspension is usually firmish but not so hard as
>> to be uncomfortable, looks are usually understated but still sporting,
>> and all of its performance is generally usable in the real world,
>> whether that's in the city or on the open road.
>>
>> They're better than supercars because they're cheaper and more
>> practical as well as being easier to drive and with a better ride
>> quality, better than highly-tuned Evo/STI type cars because they're
>> not as manic to drive, have more luxury gear and the suspension has
>> more compliance built into it, and they're better than full on luxury
>> cars because they handle well and don't have a 'crusty old bloke with
>> money' image.
>>
>> I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
>> my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
>> (so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
>> cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
>> anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.
>>
>> Discuss :)
>
> Besides an airconditioner what luxury feature is going to pamper you? It's
> not like it gives you a massage or anything.
>>
>
>

Obviously you haven't driven a new S class or 7 series then :-)
I know that it is an option on some of them to have heated seats as well as
the ability to massage :-)

Oz

[Ext User(Oz)]

"Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:46286281$0$9772$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> "Oz" <me@ozz.com> wrote in message
> news:132go238of9ke0c@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Besides an airconditioner what luxury feature is going to pamper you?
>>> It's not like it gives you a massage or anything.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Obviously you haven't driven a new S class or 7 series then :-)
>> I know that it is an option on some of them to have heated seats as well
>> as the ability to massage :-)
>
> I have very little interest in luxury cars so you would be correct. Does
> it actually massage or just vibrate?
>
>>
>> Oz
>>
>
>

good question, I will ask a friend who has a 7 series.

Oz

[Ext User(Fraser Johnston)]

"Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:46286281$0$9772$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au ...
> "Oz" <me@ozz.com> wrote in message news:132go238of9ke0c@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Besides an airconditioner what luxury feature is going to pamper you? It's
>>> not like it gives you a massage or anything.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Obviously you haven't driven a new S class or 7 series then :-)
>> I know that it is an option on some of them to have heated seats as well as
>> the ability to massage :-)
>
> I have very little interest in luxury cars so you would be correct. Does it
> actually massage or just vibrate?

The Toyota Celsior imports do that. And they are from the early 90s.

Fraser

[Ext User(Michael C)]

"Oz" <me@ozz.com> wrote in message
news:132go238of9ke0c@corp.supernews.com...
>> Besides an airconditioner what luxury feature is going to pamper you?
>> It's not like it gives you a massage or anything.
>>>
>>
>>
>
> Obviously you haven't driven a new S class or 7 series then :-)
> I know that it is an option on some of them to have heated seats as well
> as the ability to massage :-)

I have very little interest in luxury cars so you would be correct. Does it
actually massage or just vibrate?

>
> Oz
>

[Ext User(Michael C)]

"Fraser Johnston" <fraser@jcis.com.au> wrote in message
news:58r6ciF2hid7cU1@mid.individual.net...
>> I have very little interest in luxury cars so you would be correct. Does
>> it actually massage or just vibrate?
>
> The Toyota Celsior imports do that. And they are from the early 90s.

Vibrate or massage?

>
> Fraser
>

[Ext User(Daryl Walford)]

Marco wrote:
> Here's a debate for a quiet Friday afternoon (assuming you're having
> one): Grand Tourers are the best type of cars around.

I only agree if you do a lot of long distance touring where that type of
car is perfect but as a general purpose runabout IMO they are too big
and too expensive to run.


Daryl

[Ext User(Daryl Walford)]

Oz wrote:
>
>> I'll leave the definition of what a GT actually is up to you, but for
>> my money it includes any of the big local V8s with sports suspension
>> (so arguably including my SS), and a number of the bigger European
>> cars with similar characteristics (M5 for one). I can't think of
>> anything Japanese that fits the bill, but maybe someone else can.
>>
>> Discuss :)
>>
>
> Subaru Liberty 3.0R spec.B for my money
>
> http://www.subaru.com.au/models/liberty/3.0r_spec.b/sedan/overview/
>
> you don't need a V8 for usable power and ease of overtaking :-)

They fit the "GT" criteria very well, the ride is a little firm but the
handling is fantasic.
I driven my mates one for at least a 1500klms on various types of roads
and I have even towed his Lotus 7 on a tandem trailer behind it which it
does with ease so its definitely worth including.


Daryl

[Ext User(John_H)]

John_H wrote:
>
>Who'd need to own a GT car of any description in today's environment?
>;-)

Also forgot to add that the lack of a full sized spare wheel
disqualifies most of them when it comes to long distance cruising in
remote areas... which are the only places where you can still use the
performance to anything like full effect. :)

--
John H

[Ext User(Fraser Johnston)]

"Michael C" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:46286ef5$0$22073$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
> "Fraser Johnston" <fraser@jcis.com.au> wrote in message
> news:58r6ciF2hid7cU1@mid.individual.net...
>>> I have very little interest in luxury cars so you would be correct. Does it
>>> actually massage or just vibrate?
>>
>> The Toyota Celsior imports do that. And they are from the early 90s.
>
> Vibrate or massage?

Massage.

Fraser

[Ext User(Daryl Walford)]

Marco wrote:
>> If you're talking about an XW or XY GT,..that's an experience.
>
> No, I meant more cars in the general Grand Tourer mould - I wouldn't
> have said that the early Falcon GT was really a GT at all given the
> complete absence of padding, soundproofing, luxury gear etc as you
> touched on :)
>

They were considered to be a luxury car in their day and IMO they were a
true GT.
They had no trouble at all cruising at very high speeds all day, during
my one and only trip to Bathurst in 1971 I don't recall seeing the
speedo on my mates XYGT ever getting below 100mph except in towns and
most of the time it was closer to 120mph for most of the trip from Melb.


Daryl