The only thing that I’ve learned from this thread is that someone that claims that a 911 isn’t a sports car while a Boxster is, doesn’t know shit about cars.
Heidi Klum weighs about 135 pounds at 5’9", well within “sports car” parameters. Kate Moss is the equivalent of the ridiculous Lotus 7 (750 pounds).
All I can add is Robert Heinlein’s maxim about the sad little lizard. (“This sad little lizard told me that he was a brontosaurus on his mother’s side. I did not laugh; people who boast of ancestry often have little else to sustain them. Humoring them costs nothing and adds to happiness in a world in which happiness is always in short supply”)
Have fun in your sports cars, guys.
My brother has a '13 Camaro RS with an automatic (it has those paddle shifters so one can drive it like a stick). For the money it’s pretty nice and I definitely think it can be called a sports car.
The factory window sticker on my '09 Mustang GT stated it was a “Sports Car Coupe” and I always considered it a sports car rather than a muscle car.
I also considered my '07 Jaguar convertible a sports car. Last month I traded it in for a '14 Corvette, also a sports car in my opinion. While my Vette is a lot faster than that Jag, I think the GT would have beat it in the quarter.
I owned a Porsche 944 once. I’ve also driven some 911’s and Boxster “S” models. I consider them all a fancy version of a Volkswagen, nothing more. Color me unimpressed.
They’ve built some devastatingly effective sports cars over the years, stuff track-capable right out of the box, only to be met with “it doesn’t a cup holder or heated seats?” Porsche finally hit consistent profits after 50 years in the business when they had an epiphany and realized most of their customers didn’t want sports cars, but BMWs with Porsche badges. They teamed up with VW and made the Cayenne and there was much rejoicing.
I’ve owned four Porsches, and if I own a fifth it will be a nice 944S2 coupe. Wonderful handling, practical cars, regardless of how you feel about Porsches or what makes a sports car, imo. My favorite car, with the BMW Z3 Coupe running a close second.
Stop your bickering, guys! 
I wish I had a sweet little 1963 MGB? In forest green, or eggshell…any color but red. That is my favorite “sports car.” One day I will have one. When I can no longer scooter.
Ahem.
The only proper color for an MGB is British Racing Green.
That’s pretty close to the color our Jag was.
Sure you want a 1963? I like the MGB but my range is chrome bumpers with all-synchro transmission. I’d really rather a Midget (actual sports car and all that) but I’m too tall. i would happily compomise with a Fiat Spider 125 as well…
No, they’re supercars.
The taxonomy of modern cars is interesting; it’s also geographical, as I’ve learned from watching years of Top Gear. We don’t have saloon cars here in North America, nor Estates for that matter. There’s no authoritative body that can define a car for us, and automakers love to blur the lines anyway. But here’s my take.
You can’t define a sports car based on performance, because there’s cars that we all know are sports cars, like the Miata or the Scion FR-S, that would get absolutely trounced around a road course by a V6 Camry. Or you can take the FR-S, lengthen it, add a turbo, a back seat, two rear doors, and now it’s an STi that will also trounce it performance-wise, but is clearly not a sports car.
The good news is that we have lots of labels to choose from.
Muscle/Pony cars (Mustang, Challenger, Camaro, MB C-class AMG (yes, it’s true))
Touring cars (Nissan 370z, BMW M3/4/5/6, Hyundai Genesis Coupe, Mercedes SL)
Roadsters (Honda S2000, Mazda MX-5, BMW Z4 convertible)
Hot Hatches (Mazdaspeed 3, Focus RS, etc)
Supercars (Audi R8, Nissan GT-R, Ferrari 458)
Hypercars (Saleen S7, Bugatti Veyron, anything made by Pagani)
Sport Coupes (335i coupe, Scion TC (ugh), TriPolar’s Celica)
Sport Sedans (too many to list)
Sports Cars (Miata, Corvette, 911 (you dolts))
As you can see, there’s some overlap, but who cares? I think the important thing about a sports car is that it’s completely impractical, so no back seat (or a completely useless one, I’m looking at you Porsche), small trunk, etc. Most roadsters are sports cars, but not all sports cars are convertibles so it doesn’t work the other way.
That’s my 2 cents, at least.
I’ll buy that for a dollar!
Show me a “practical” supercar that isn’t also a sports car. Unless what you mean is that supercar is a sub-category of the sports car moniker.
Clearly, the definition of “sports car” is entirely arbitrary and has nothing to do with weight, features, era or number of doors. You know you’re driving a “sports car” by the seat of your pants. Which is equally arbitrary, I admit.
I don’t think supercars are a subset of sports cars. I guess I should add affordability into the mix; that’s what makes a pony car a pony car, after all – small car, big engine, small price (in the case of the AMG, small price is relative). Once you’re spending north of 50 grand, I have a hard time seeing a car as a toy, which is what a sports car is. But that may just be my plebeian perspective 
I mean, just think about the usefulness of that term – you’re a sports car enthusiast, maybe a college professor with a nice TR6 in the garage, and you’re at a party, and some guy comes up to you and says, “Oh, I have a sports car too!” And you think, “Great, we can chat about tinkering in the garage, windy mountain roads, epic road trips with only a small trunk packed to the gills,” and you say, “What do you have?” “I have a Gallardo Superlegerra.” Ah, you say to yourself, I need to go get some more punch, I heard my wife calling me, and I need to go top up the oil in my Triumph. “I’ll see you around.”
The TR6 owner has nothing in common with the interests of the Superlegerra owner, so why use the same term?
Sure he does: they probably both enjoy driving. The only difference is that the TR6 owner also enjoys breaking down.
Dare I say, I don’t think anyone buys a Lamborghini because it’s a “driver’s car.” They’re flashy status symbols, even compared to other supercars. At least the Germans made them reliable, so they do have that going for them.
That was certainly true once upon a time but it ended with the Murcielago. Lamborghinis now handle comparably to Ferraris.
Yes, but that’s incidental. Their handling is not what moves them out of the dealerships. The same is true for Ferraris, as far as I’m concerned.
You could say that about any supercar, though. Even, say, a 911 Turbo. Sure, they ride and handle well and they’re practical enough to use every day, but really you’re buying the nameplate.
Exactly. That’s why it’s better to call them supercars than sports cars. The 911 Turbo has crossed that line by now. Same for the GT2/GT3. Heck, it’s probably true for the Z06. In an age when a stock Nissan Altima will make most people think they’re in a race car, spending more than, say, $50 grand on a new car in the name of “performance” becomes a bit of a lie. As you say, at that point you’re buying an image and/or a nameplate.
Let’s try to differentiate between car enthusiasts and those who purchase expensive cars simply because they can afford them. And let’s not condemn design & engineering of supercars based on the latter.
I mostly agree with this and feel we’ve entered an age in car development where the lines are becoming extremely blurred.
I just recently sold my 3rd gen RX-7, which is most definitely a sports car. I love cars like the Lotus Elise, which comes in under a ton and remains one of few cars which focused on weight reduction, instead of brute power. However, you now have vehicles which border on, or exceed, two tons, and they just as well corner very well (thanks in part to tire tech). They may not be as tossable as lighter weight cars, but if you’re looking to push anything to 10/10ths, the track would be the place to determine that, and as anyone who knows will state, different courses favor different cars, and as such, mechanical performance meets different goals.
At this moment, modern sports cars are built quite differently than those of the 90s and before. That said, I’d generally agree with less(er) utility, attention to lateral and/or straight-line performance, driver feedback, aesthetically unique, and original features which trickle down, while ignoring attributes like number of doors, seats, gearbox, and a few other items (some of which may even contradict the above, for more casual appeal).
There are certainly some sports cars which are more spartan than others, but those are growing more rare, so a reappropriation of the word is in order. For the love of motoring, we now have hybrid supercars with 900 hp, and handling, while avoiding gas guzzler taxes… Times have changed and the terms really don’t matter when a Model S’ instant torque out-punches you, or a two ton CTS-V gets you on a corner.
Truth be told, a good driver will turn anything into a sports car…believe it.