Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
best car for a 16 year old guy
- Thread starter acebudad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You wrote all this bs and I am the fanboi here?
Captain obvious himself would've been proud. Seriously, you make him look like an amateur.
Clearly all those exotic sports cars including Lamborghini, Ferrari, Porsche, Maserati and so on are designed by complete morons. They are investing billions of dollars into irs research while they really should've taken a lesson from GM who infamously managed to save $4 per each Corvair by removing the rear sway bar. Look it up, hillbilly boy.
The main reason your mighty Mustang and Camaro have those suspensions is because their manufacturers are cheapskates who would rather choke on lawsuits than spend any extra money on engineering and components. Additional benefits you described are very distant second. And the fact that irs was only installed on the most expensive Mustang and also that the Corvette had it since the 60s is proof right there.
I'm aware of it. Yet they installed irs on new Camaro. Why? You didn't answer.
First of all, all it says is that BMW makes a German version of a Mustang which is a fat pig with a big engine and handles like a car half the price. Nothing new about BMW there, that's been their motto for last decade or so.
Second of all .96g vs .95g is within margin of error. Since these cars are driven by a person it's obvious that no car is a clear winner here, they're roughly the same. If difference was larger - yes but as it is there are too many mitigating factors to pronounce it a pure Mustang win. Also, C/D says .94g for '11 GT which shows once again how it can vary.
Nobody said it's not possible to have good performance with live axle especially considering newer technology. I just said that it's possible to have better performance without it and the fact that almost every sports and exotic car manufacturer around the world uses irs and has for decades should amplify this even to your level.
I've seen footage from earlier Mustangs, 2005 I think. That rear axle was trying to step out of line on every turn and commentators had a sad. It's always better to have each wheel independently sprung during a turn because it lets you apply power and braking much more precisely and gives you superior control. For your pleasure - a wikipedia article confirming the same thing.
Oh, and regarding power - Bugatti Veyron with 1001hp and independent suspension all around begs to differ in the most significant way. It's just CHEAPER to make the car cope with power with solid axle but it's hardly impossible to do it with irs. Again, all super and exotic cars with 500hp+ from factory and irs say so in the most meaningful tone.
If that's the case why did you bring up a video made by Motor Trend - the magazine?
It shows? Shows what? That your stripped out 50/50 weight distribution independent suspension modern tin can can't beat a 3300 lb live axle steel sled on a late 1970's suspension design with the AC blasting and stereo pumping? Hey, you said yourself that your car couldn't hit those numbers. LMAO.
It shows that you can't read well. Which is pretty much consistent with regular Camaro owner stereotype. How's your mullet?
It shows that you can't read well. Which is pretty much consistent with regular Camaro owner stereotype. How's your mullet?
umm i take offense to that because the car i want is a 1986 camaro z28
Don't worry, the guy's not too bright. His first post shows it. Talking to someone like that is like talking to a brick wall.
I mean, look at the way he contradicted himself in two successive paragraphs:
Synchromesh said:
First he talks about how the manufacturers are cheapskates and use live axles and don't want to spend money on engineering, then the very next line he says they installed IRS on Camaros. Then he throws in some completely random and unrelated bogus line about choking on lawsuits? Lol, what a joke. Guy's just severely butthurt that my 3300 lb steel mullet-mobile with a live axle, 16" rims, a live axle, 1980s tires, and a flexible unibody (isn't even a full frame car) outhandles his stripped out, better balanced, "more sophisticated suspension" IRS tin can which he even admitted couldn't hit the numbers of a mullet-mobile and he can't just suck it up and say "Wow, I didn't realize those mullet-mobiles handled that well." Kick your can and go home.
Oh and guess what, "cheap-ass Ford" is putting IRS in all 2014 Mustangs too, not just "the most expensive ones."
LOL, I'm out. Enjoy your flaming plastic Miata. Don't spill your latte on iJohnHenry's flaming Canadian flag, lol.
Last edited:
As long as it's working fine and under or at the budget limit... That'll do. Just know that if you buy a used car under $5,000... Something will break soon regardless of how you puppy it.
And don't drink and drive. I got away with a lot of things when I was 16.
And don't drink and drive. I got away with a lot of things when I was 16.
It's pretty simple Synchro...you doubted that my car could handle like that and asked for a source, I gave you a legitimate one, not some google junk, and you didn't like that. Not good enough for you.
Then you go off about how IRS is so superior to live axles and how it's just UNPOSSIBLE! that a live axle car can handle well and drone on about how great IRS is and how it's in all these other cars and how any manufacturer that doesn't have it is just a "choking on lawsuit cheapass," and I say "Yeah, so what? It IS good and it IS better for handling, but that doesn't mean a live axle car can't be made to handle like you seem to be so set on," and then you go off going LOOK they put IRS in new Camaros! Take that!!
Well no **** it's a better technology, I never said it wasn't. It especially shines on road ruts, which, oddly enough, is where most people who buy a new Camaro or a 2014+ Mustang are going to drive the car--daily, on sub-par public roads full of ruts and potholes. In other words, for a daily driver, IRS is a better technology, because it provides a much smoother ride devoid of axle hop. There's your answer as to why the new Camaros--and the Cobras from nearly 10 years ago from a "cheapass manufacturer who doesn't want to spend the money on engineering"--have and had IRS. I'm sure the answer isn't good enough for you though.
Not once have I sad IRS was bad. What I HAVE said though, is IRS isn't the end-all be-all on the track, and lowly live-axles can be made to handle better than the arbitrarily selected ".85g" you randomly chose as a magical threshold before a car needs "severe mods and wide tires." Then I showed you that a live axle can get a plenty good lateral acceleration number, rivaling that of an IRS system, and you still are butthurt about it and think you've got me cornered about IRS being on new Camaros. It's a better technology, it's obvious it's going to become standard on all RWD cars. But--it doesn't mean that a live axle car can't handle equally or better than an IRS car, and I've shown that. More importantly, that's all I was ever trying to show. And there will be people yanking them out on day 1 for a traditional 9 inch or 12-bolt (you may need to look those up) for serious drag track applications because IRS simply isn't as strong, and that's not debatable. Multiple hinged, moving parts are not and never will be as strong as a one piece counterpart with no moving part. I'm an engineer so spare me the garbage about million dollar Bugattis, because even a million dollar Bugatti would have a stronger live rear given the same amount of development money. This removal of the IRS already happens in both Camaro and Mustang crowds, where IRS came standard.
I think the issue here is that you are so bent that IRS is better in every way and you are completely close-minded to the fact that a live-axle car can handle just as well if not better than an IRS-equipped car, and no matter what someone shows you, you can't just swallow a little pride and admit you were wrong about the lowly 80s mullet-mobiles, and that live axle cars can handle better than you thought.
I mean, really, and I guess this is my point, if you flat-out admitted your modern, "more sophisticated suspension" stripped out, factory race-prepped, light little car with near perfect 50/50 weight balance couldn't hit the numbers of a 1980s unibody Camaro (with a suspension design dating to the 70s), why are you getting so butthurt about the handling prowess of the mighty-mullet mobile and practically creaming yourself over how superior IRS must be? All you could do when I pointed that out was resort to a lowly mullet stereotype and tell me I couldn't read...usually the earmark of someone who has nothing to say in return and realizes he doesn't have much to stand on. I've proven my point, that being that a live axle car can handle equally as well as an IRS car, and I've actually backed it up with data and road tests. That was my sole point all along. But your point, that IRS is the best of the best in all situations, has yet to be made. Just a bunch of rhetorical questions and self-contradictions, and hearsay. You just look like a clown with every post.
But, like you said, you are anti-American so it's obvious no matter what the facts are, you'll avoid them. It's particularly amusing that you don't seem to realize the partnership for building cars that exists between Mazda and Ford. Ever seen a Mazda B2000 truck? It's a Ford truck with a Mazda body and badging, lol. Don't forget--the engine in your car was a joint Ford/Mazda engineering effort, so you've got plenty of the American you so abjectly hate in that car of yours. You'll find FoMoCo stampings on your engine block in that Miata. Not to mention Ford owns 33% of Mazda. So the whole premise of you being anti-American is hilarious in itself. LMAO.
But this argument is just getting stupid. You wanted a number to support the .92g claim, I gave you one, and you couldn't accept it. TS for you then, I guess.
Alright, I'm out for real...my mullet needs a trim.
Then you go off about how IRS is so superior to live axles and how it's just UNPOSSIBLE! that a live axle car can handle well and drone on about how great IRS is and how it's in all these other cars and how any manufacturer that doesn't have it is just a "choking on lawsuit cheapass," and I say "Yeah, so what? It IS good and it IS better for handling, but that doesn't mean a live axle car can't be made to handle like you seem to be so set on," and then you go off going LOOK they put IRS in new Camaros! Take that!!
Well no **** it's a better technology, I never said it wasn't. It especially shines on road ruts, which, oddly enough, is where most people who buy a new Camaro or a 2014+ Mustang are going to drive the car--daily, on sub-par public roads full of ruts and potholes. In other words, for a daily driver, IRS is a better technology, because it provides a much smoother ride devoid of axle hop. There's your answer as to why the new Camaros--and the Cobras from nearly 10 years ago from a "cheapass manufacturer who doesn't want to spend the money on engineering"--have and had IRS. I'm sure the answer isn't good enough for you though.
Not once have I sad IRS was bad. What I HAVE said though, is IRS isn't the end-all be-all on the track, and lowly live-axles can be made to handle better than the arbitrarily selected ".85g" you randomly chose as a magical threshold before a car needs "severe mods and wide tires." Then I showed you that a live axle can get a plenty good lateral acceleration number, rivaling that of an IRS system, and you still are butthurt about it and think you've got me cornered about IRS being on new Camaros. It's a better technology, it's obvious it's going to become standard on all RWD cars. But--it doesn't mean that a live axle car can't handle equally or better than an IRS car, and I've shown that. More importantly, that's all I was ever trying to show. And there will be people yanking them out on day 1 for a traditional 9 inch or 12-bolt (you may need to look those up) for serious drag track applications because IRS simply isn't as strong, and that's not debatable. Multiple hinged, moving parts are not and never will be as strong as a one piece counterpart with no moving part. I'm an engineer so spare me the garbage about million dollar Bugattis, because even a million dollar Bugatti would have a stronger live rear given the same amount of development money. This removal of the IRS already happens in both Camaro and Mustang crowds, where IRS came standard.
I think the issue here is that you are so bent that IRS is better in every way and you are completely close-minded to the fact that a live-axle car can handle just as well if not better than an IRS-equipped car, and no matter what someone shows you, you can't just swallow a little pride and admit you were wrong about the lowly 80s mullet-mobiles, and that live axle cars can handle better than you thought.
I mean, really, and I guess this is my point, if you flat-out admitted your modern, "more sophisticated suspension" stripped out, factory race-prepped, light little car with near perfect 50/50 weight balance couldn't hit the numbers of a 1980s unibody Camaro (with a suspension design dating to the 70s), why are you getting so butthurt about the handling prowess of the mighty-mullet mobile and practically creaming yourself over how superior IRS must be? All you could do when I pointed that out was resort to a lowly mullet stereotype and tell me I couldn't read...usually the earmark of someone who has nothing to say in return and realizes he doesn't have much to stand on. I've proven my point, that being that a live axle car can handle equally as well as an IRS car, and I've actually backed it up with data and road tests. That was my sole point all along. But your point, that IRS is the best of the best in all situations, has yet to be made. Just a bunch of rhetorical questions and self-contradictions, and hearsay. You just look like a clown with every post.
But, like you said, you are anti-American so it's obvious no matter what the facts are, you'll avoid them. It's particularly amusing that you don't seem to realize the partnership for building cars that exists between Mazda and Ford. Ever seen a Mazda B2000 truck? It's a Ford truck with a Mazda body and badging, lol. Don't forget--the engine in your car was a joint Ford/Mazda engineering effort, so you've got plenty of the American you so abjectly hate in that car of yours. You'll find FoMoCo stampings on your engine block in that Miata. Not to mention Ford owns 33% of Mazda. So the whole premise of you being anti-American is hilarious in itself. LMAO.
But this argument is just getting stupid. You wanted a number to support the .92g claim, I gave you one, and you couldn't accept it. TS for you then, I guess.
Alright, I'm out for real...my mullet needs a trim.
Last edited:
Your whole participation in this thread you're trying to prove that live axle is as good or better than irs and only idiots use it. Obviously rally/F1/name-any-serious-motorsport-except-maybe-NASCAR uses irs. But they're all wrong. Because puma1552 knows better than these guys.
But why is that so bad? I mean people drove and still drive on live axles every day and it's ok, they survive. Mustang sold pretty well despite its non-irs. Why change now?
There are cheaper cars than Mustang that have irs. But what you said has got to be the dumbest thing I heard from anybody in a long time. Just reread your own words and you'll see how pathetic your statement is. Talk about butthurt.
Oh, and I'm curious, Mr Engineer, what firm do you work for? Really really curious.What is it with you and swallowing pride? I sense personal issues here. Maybe the keyword is swallowing?
And your mullet-mobile is just that - a mullet-mobile. I can't say I hate Camaros or Mustangs much, they have their place in the world. There are plenty of people who swap the LSx and Ford V8s into Miatas that make monsters out of them. That's all they're good for though.Who said that? Your mighty Camaro pulls .85g according to several online publications. My 1995 R-package pulls .89g according to period publications (can dig up if you need proof). All is fair in the world. What I said Camaro could never do is feel as lightweight. To make you feel better, Camaro was far more expensive than Miata when new if you convert both prices into 2011 dollars.
I feel butthurt again. There are plenty of irs cars that pull OVER 1g on skidpad. Where is the stock live axle car that does that? All your video proves is that (once again for special people) BMW makes crappy cars that cost a lot of money. And (yet again) I'm not surprised in the least. I disliked BMW for a long time and wish them to go bankrupt.
My bias is not anti-American. I love USA as much as the next guy. My bias is anti-crappy-car. And since Americans stubbornly made those for years the two became rather synonymous. As far as Ford is concerned, yes they owned about a third of Mazda at some point. Now they own about 13%. The Miata was not a collaboration with Ford (thank God for that), otherwise it could end up like Mercury Capri. However, Miata's father is actually an American - Bob Hall.
FoMoCo stampings are complete bs. BP series was a Mazda engine to begin with that got used in several Fords, not the other way around. I've done plenty of maintenance on my car and never did I see a Ford stamping on it once. So before you talk out of your ass next time google first.
I'm done feeding the troll now. Enjoy your mullet and don't forget to swallow... pride of course.
Thats not the point. you still offended the OP by throwing in some stupid stereotype about camaro owners.
also, I fail to understand why "it wouldn't be a good student car because it isn't fast".
OP, I'd honestly look into a used civic or corolla. it's simply better in the long run
You people are too much. At the end of the day, you're really not changing anyone's mind. Go get some sunshine.
This has gone way off topic. This is not about camaros, being gay or being the latest model or the oldest.
It's about a 16 year old asking which car is best for him right now. Help by sticking to the subject, if you don't want to help, don't write anything at all.
It's about a 16 year old asking which car is best for him right now. Help by sticking to the subject, if you don't want to help, don't write anything at all.
Yes i did. my apologies.
Are you nuts or did you just roll out of bed this morning and think to yourself "hey, I'm going to make a big fool of myself today"?
Neither.
whats the point of a fast car if you live in a country with speed limits ?? makes no sense to me at all , and with rising fuel costs , i mean usually students are on a budget the runnign cost are important , what the point of a car for $2000 that gets just 10mpg and sits 10month of the year in the garage for repairs
you want something with some sort of street cred
Mercedes-Benz W124 200D these cars are indistructable , they run in Germany as taxi ,@ 200000 miles to be considered as just run in and after they hit 400000 miles maybe deserve a oil change and get sold to africa where they continue to be taxis for another 10 years
plenty of room inside (7 seat option ) and if you fold down the rear seats plenty of room for 2 to sleep in or do a house move and it will always return over 40mpg
or do you want to totally stand out of the crowed and want 4x4
then what about a UNIMOG (made by mercedes too)
certainly brings you where the SUV's never will go, no need to be worried about snow or floods , just keep on driving
you want something with some sort of street cred
Mercedes-Benz W124 200D these cars are indistructable , they run in Germany as taxi ,@ 200000 miles to be considered as just run in and after they hit 400000 miles maybe deserve a oil change and get sold to africa where they continue to be taxis for another 10 years
plenty of room inside (7 seat option ) and if you fold down the rear seats plenty of room for 2 to sleep in or do a house move and it will always return over 40mpg
or do you want to totally stand out of the crowed and want 4x4
then what about a UNIMOG (made by mercedes too)
certainly brings you where the SUV's never will go, no need to be worried about snow or floods , just keep on driving
Last edited:
No offense, but a $2000 20 year old German car is probably hands down the absolute WORST buy someone 16 years old could make.
I wouldn't exactly say a boxy old Mercedes wagon with hubcaps has "street cred". Americans by and large dislike wagons, unlike Europeans/Asians where they are much more popular.
If anything sits in a garage 10 months a year for repairs--expensive ones--it's quirky old German cars. Been there, done that--twice.
No warranty, no German car for me anymore. Great cars when they are new, but when that warranty is up, dump it ASAP.
I wouldn't exactly say a boxy old Mercedes wagon with hubcaps has "street cred". Americans by and large dislike wagons, unlike Europeans/Asians where they are much more popular.
If anything sits in a garage 10 months a year for repairs--expensive ones--it's quirky old German cars. Been there, done that--twice.
No warranty, no German car for me anymore. Great cars when they are new, but when that warranty is up, dump it ASAP.
This is true, with written parental consent if i'm not mistaken.
Good to know here in Europe we only let older people drive a real car, and not 16 year olds.
Driving age depends state to state.
In Virginia, you have to be 16 and 3 months to have your licence.
I got my license when I was 16 and 9 months?
In Virginia, you have to be 16 and 3 months to have your licence.
I got my license when I was 16 and 9 months?
Technically, parental consent isn't required, but you're probably not going to learn how to drive and pass the driving test to get your license without either your parents teaching you how to drive or paying for lessons.
As mentioned, driving (and everything else related to buying/titling/registering cars) is something handled state by state (for some unknown reason, completely pointless to let that be administered by states, it would be so, so, so much easier to just make it a standardized national thing where everyone has the same license etc.).
I know a lot of states are getting tougher on the requirements/restrictions though, once you get your license. When I got my license in my state in 2000 on my 16th birthday, there were no restrictions on it--it was a full license from day 1 and I could go anywhere with anyone anytime. Now it's a big mess of a graduated system where even after you get your license, for the first X months or first year or something you can't drive at night and you can only drive with one person or a parent or something...it's set up now so that I don't believe you get your full license until you're 18.
The only thing I can remember being required were the driving classes to get my permit, which you could start as soon as you were 15 when I was a teenager. Did those, then took a test to get my permit which let me drive with a parent until I was 16, then when I got my license I was free...and boy, what a feeling that was.
I know a lot of states are getting tougher on the requirements/restrictions though, once you get your license. When I got my license in my state in 2000 on my 16th birthday, there were no restrictions on it--it was a full license from day 1 and I could go anywhere with anyone anytime. Now it's a big mess of a graduated system where even after you get your license, for the first X months or first year or something you can't drive at night and you can only drive with one person or a parent or something...it's set up now so that I don't believe you get your full license until you're 18.
The only thing I can remember being required were the driving classes to get my permit, which you could start as soon as you were 15 when I was a teenager. Did those, then took a test to get my permit which let me drive with a parent until I was 16, then when I got my license I was free...and boy, what a feeling that was.