I have been doing a LOT of research waiting for my F-Type to arrive. Many articles and YouTube reviews categorize the F-Type as a "GT". I disagree. Reading the Wiki page on GTs confirmed my opinion...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_tourer

I view the F-Type should be classified as a thoroughbred sports car.

Anyone else have a strong opinion on this?

 

A GT car is a type of Sports car. The F-Type is most definitely a GT car. Can I ask why you disagree and what you would categorize as a GT car? A Porsche 911 base or S is a GT car. A Porsche 911 GT3 is a "thoroughbred" sports car.

 

It’s definitely a GT. Too fat and comfy to be a sports car. Vettes , McLarens, Miatas, S2000s, Sunbeam Tigers, MGs, Sprites are sportscars. F-Type minus 1000 lbs could have been a sports car.

 

I have always considered GT's being more luxurious and comfortable than sport cars and having a 2+2 or at least a storage space back there like the MB SL Class. The XK8 is definitely a GT. F Type I'd call a sports car.

 

What do you consider the new Aston Martin Vantage?

 

All Aston Martin's are GT cars outside of the Valkyrie. Maybe, just maybe, the V12 Vantage would be considered a sports car.

 

The last generation Vantage I'd agree is a GT. The new one is more aggressive with better handling and more power. Thus far there is no V12 as far as I can tell. Not that engine size is what makes a sports car because then Miatas and S2000's wouldn't even be on the radar here.

It weights roughly 400lbs less than an F-Type SVR. That's why I'd say it's a sport car. The DB9 and 11 are another story, those cars are to the new Vantage what the XJS and XK's were to the F-Type.

 

I would have said that a GT is a car that you can drive for 4 hours and get out of without having shattered teeth, a crippled spine, and your **** on fire. I dont necessarily think that "sports car" and "GT" are mutually exclusive terms. Of course, luxury GTs have all sorts of other things to make the 4 hours very pleasant, and by and large those things add weight which then takes away from acceleration and handling, making them less and less sports cars. Outside of the stripped down models (absent carpets, airconditioning etc) which are designed for track use (or for cashed up professionals who fap away about track use), I cant immediately think of an expensive sports car that I wouldnt think was also fitting the GT bill, at least to some extent.

 

My thinking is a GT is a Grand Tourer, a car to quickly cross continents in comfort . A sports car is for a 30 minute blast round the block to get the heart rate up a bit....The F Type fits both bills

 

GT. It's just an F-Type clone.

 

I've called the F-Type a GT in the past. However, I can see why people also call it a sports car.

I do think the definition of a sports car has changed over the years. Way, way, way back in the day, a sports car had to only have 2 seats and be a convertible to even be considered a sports car. Today, I don't believe there is a single definition for a sports car rather that everyone has their own definition. With that, there really isn't a right or wrong, more of just what matters to you.

For me, cars like the Lotus Elise/Exige, Alfa 4C, Miata are types of cars that I consider "sports cars" (handling, performance, light weight, no real focus on comfort, etc). But I do agree that in today's world, people want to be comfortable, fast and have decent handling and that is the definition of a sports car for the masses.

 

Hmmm...ok. Good dialogue! The Wiki article I posted above declares the following qualification for GT cars:

1. The engines "should be able to cope with cruising comfortably at the upper limits on all continental roads without drawbacks or loss of usable power."
2. "Ideally, the GT car should have been devised by its progenitors as a Grand Tourer, with all associated considerations in mind."
3. "It should be able to transport at least two in comfort with their luggage and have room to spare — probably in the form of a two plus two (2+2) seating arrangement."
4. The design, both "inside and out, should be geared toward complete control by the driver."
5. Its "chassis and suspension provide suitable handling and roadholding on all routes" during travels.

So I guess the F-Type qualifies...but maybe not my convertible which has a miserly boot (see 3rd bullet)

 

Mine is a GT in Drive, a sports car in Sport...

 

A swing and a miss.

 

The Wikipedia article posted starts with this:

"A grand tourer (GT) is a car that is designed for high speed and long-distance driving, due to a combination of performance and luxury attributes."

I've always considered it to be more GT than Sports due to weight and luxury.

 

In my mind, GT cars have back seats, even if they are infant sized.

Maserati GranTurismo - GT (It's the name of the car, so that's no stretch)
F-Type - SportsCar

The lines are blurred, obviously, but there isn't even a hint of space behind the seats. Even an MGB has more space behind the seats than the F-Type. As a 2 seat, high performance car, I consider it a sports car. It's not in the same class as a Ferrari, obviously, but it's also not in the same class as the Maserati (or a mustang, for that matter).

Just my personal opinion.

It's funny. According to my father, sports cars don't have tops.

 

In my youth I sawed the roof off of a '73 T-Bird but it was still no sports car

 

...it's somewhere between a GT and sports car.

 

My sentiments exactly.

 

If you want to get a bit specific, one might suggest the base model is more of a GT, and the 8-cylinder is more of an unhinged beast of a super car. But, without my opinion causing any controversy, one might suggest the base model is a more appropriate successor to the E-Type. Just as far as history is concerned. But, regardless of the needling that comes with shades of grey in Internet discussions, I'm doubtful anyone could convince me that this is not a GT.

Edit: my 4000+ and 2000 Mile road trips so GT.