I honest believe the complaints about light steering is because those people are, for lack of a better term, clueless. The problem is that as you've stated, it's super light at parking lot speed. So these people evaluating the car, when they start driving, make their first crank of the steering and get an immediate first impression of "this is too light", and then never bothering to re-evaluate this opinion after some driving.

 

+1. Dont understand it either. Maybe just because it is so much more refined on the inside than the Bimmers -- therefore, it cant be a legitimate sports coupe in their minds?

 

I would suggest "GT" means these days a sport coupe you can live with.

and the steering takes on a whole new guise with the Sports Diff and Dynamic steering, I have said before that this is much better than the BMW for road use and I stand by that .

 

They are grand touring cars, especially the S5, because of the comfort of long distance driving + performance. A5 with the 2.0t might not qualify, but the comfort is still there.

 

Because GT means Grand Touring, I believe what determines a grand touring car is that it seats four.

 

Its because we weigh almost 4k pounds. We are too fat to be a sports car.

 

In my opinion a GT car is one that can effortlessly cover vast mileage, whilst at the same time transporting its occupants in luxury and supreme comfort. I think the fact that most GT cars are also powerplants must figure in there somewhere. So out of the 5 range- the S5 is probably the true GT.

 

I don't think any car that weighs 3700 lbs (as my A5 3.2 does) can rightly be called a sports car. Sports cars, in the strict sense of the term, are lightweight and built for tossing around. The A5/S5 is a big, heavy car built for comfortable cruising and comfortable performance. The fact that is has four seats pretty much rules it out in my book, as well.

The problem is that "sports car" has become a watered-down term in recent years. It's a term with positive connotations, so people with high-performance two-door cars want to believe that what they have is a "sports car", even if that's not quite the right term. But wishing it doesn't make it so.

My autocross toy, a Mazda Miata, is a pure sports car in the strictest sense of the term. It may be a gutless wonder, powered by a glorified lawnmower engine...but it's far more "sports car" than my A5.

 

I don't think any car that weighs 3700 lbs (as my A5 3.2 does) can rightly be called a sports car. Sports cars, in the strict sense of the term, are lightweight and built for tossing around. The A5/S5 is a big, heavy car built for comfortable cruising and comfortable performance. The fact that is has four seats pretty much rules it out in my book, as well.

By that standard, Porsche 911 Turbo (~3500 lbs) is not a sports car either. Ditto for cars like M3 and Nissan GTR (both approaching 4000 lbs). Except all of those cars would, of course, destroy your Miata in every situation except for autocross (then again, a moped would be even more suitable for "racing" around cones in a parking lot).

So I'm not sure that a sports car necessarily has to be tiny and super light weight. Weight is a necessary evil if you want to build a safe car and modern technology can compensate for negative side effects of increased weight (within reasonable limits, of course).

 

My S5 is a great car and I love it a lot, but it's the last car I'd ever want to take to an autocross event. It's fast, but it's not unbelievably fast either. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing it in any way, it's a great car for spirited drives through the rolling country side...my definition of a GT car. Sports cars skip out on all the luxuries in favor of a light weight, go fast, performance oriented machine.

 

My S5 is a great car and I love it a lot, but it's the last car I'd ever want to take to an autocross event.

I just came back from an autocross where I ran my S5 and it was a lot of fun (and I came in first in my class). It all depends what your goals are. If you want to be the fastest auto-crosser out there then you're correct - the S5 gets smoked by many much nimbler cars (M3's, EVOs, any Porsche, etc). So no, don't bother with SCCA solo where they throw you in the deep end. What you do is join your local Audi Car Club and do an autocross that puts you against other VAG cars like S5's, S4's, GTIs, and maybe a CQ as well. Going against guys with similar performance cars makes it a lot of fun. And I'm a firm believer that once you get 4 or 5 autocross events under your belt you will be a better driver and be able to handle the S5 a hell of a lot better out on the street and on the track. So go sign up for the next autocross, have fun, and learn something!

 

Wow...did I touch a nerve or something? No, an M3 is not a sports car. It's a supreme performance machine, but "sports car" means something specific, and an M3 doesn't fit the bill. It's not a negative comment, it's a statement of fact. Just as champagne isn't champagne if it's not from France...doesn't mean it can't be a damn fine sparkling wine, though.

And just because a Miata isn't higher-performance in most ways than an M3, that doesn't mean it not a better example of a sports car. Again, you seem to not understand what the term means. Do your research.

And what's with the autocross hate? Maybe you think mowing cones in a parking lot is lame, but I think anything that makes motorsports more accessible to all is a good thing. If you haven't done it, maybe you don't know how fun it is. If you have done it, maybe you're mad a out getting creamed by some street legal go-kart.

 

Nothing wrong with autocross, if that's what you enjoy. I wasn't trying to be insulting...I guess my comment about a moped being most suitable for driving around cones did not come out sounding right. What I was trying to say was that autocross emphasizes low speed agility over all other qualities, which makes it different from other types of motorsport.

I guess you and I have different definitions of a sports car. To me, a sports car is a car that's designed for being fast on a road course (which requires a different set of attributes than being competitive in autocross). If being super light and extremely agile in low speed maneuvers were inalienable attributes of a sports car, then cars like Bugatti Veyron, Ferrari Enzo, Porsche 911 Turbo, Dodge Viper, Corvette ZR-1 etc. would not qualify, while cars like Honda Civic and Mini Cooper would.

 

Here's an article written from one point of view which shows why there will never be a consensus:
http://www.streetdirectory.com/travel_guide/57052/performance_cars/definition_of_a_sports_car.html
His conclusion is too liberal for my tastes, but I'm always willing to explore both sides of an argument. It does exemplify, however, what I meant when I said the definition of a sports car has become "watered down" over the years. It used to mean something very specific, like a Corvette or a Lotus Elan. To me and many others, it still does. Expanding the definition to include sedans of all things means that we have lost a very useful word for a very specific segment of car.

 

how about this:

Sports car: a car designed primarily for performance, comfort secondary consideration

GT: Grand Tourer, a performance vehicle designed with both performance and comfort in mind.

neither category is specifically defined by price.

 

Definition of SPORTS CAR
: a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving

straight from Merriam Webster. No dictionary or anything has anything about weight... what drive train... how much power. i mean seriously you can make anything "a sports car". many people just happen to have different opinions about sports cars, like the guy talking about the miata. some people think the s5 is a sports car which personally i think its not. but again these are all just opinions... not what the true meaning is. in the sense of the term "sports car" a civic SI is a sports car. how many people consider them a sports car?