The First (of Many) Dream Garage Threads: Sub 2.0 Liters

[Frisky Dingo]

So since the others have gone fairly well so far, I figured it was time to roll out the Dream Garage Threads. These were always very popular over at MT, and I hope they get a lot of posts and stir up discussion here, too.

 

I'm going to start with a series that will have many installments, but there will be a variety of different themes in the future. The basic rules are largely the same so, this is an easy one to participate in. Here they are-

 

1)You have 5 choices maximum. And preferably minimum. 

 

2)They must be production vehicles.

 

3)Cars from any era and market are allowed.

 

4)These are your ONLY vehicles.

 

For the displacement-specific threads like these, there will be an additional requirement. In this case-

 

5)Your choices must have under 2.0 liters/2,000 cc's of displacement. Gas, hybrid, or diesel is allowed, but it MUST be under 2.0.

 

 

 

 

 

Have fun. And remember, pics are highly encouraged.

[Drew Dowdell]

1. Cadillac ATS 2.0T AWD Coupe - This would probably be my daily

2. Mercedes Benz GLC 4Matic - My partner's daily

3. Ford Explorer 2.0 Ecoboost - I need the biggest interior volume I can find powered by two liters, this is probably it.

4. I'm still rather enamored by the Fiat 124 Changing this one out.  I'd rather have a 2nd gen Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder Turbo

5. CT6

[El Kabong]

1) Alfa 4C coupe

2) last-gen Mazda RX7 turbo (Wankel, baby!)

3) Caddy CT6 2.0T

4) that EB Explorer, for the same reason as Drew

5) Camaro 2.0T droptop

[Frisky Dingo]

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

Edited March 17, 2016 by Frisky Dingo

[Drew Dowdell]

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

 

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

 

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe     

[Frisky Dingo]

 

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

 

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

 

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe     

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

I will clarify this further in future threads.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Frisky Dingo

[Drew Dowdell]

 

 

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

 

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

 

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe     

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

The engines measure 1.991 - 1.999 liters.... just because marketing calls them 2 liters doesn't make them 2 liters.   So, if you're looking to be that precise, you can't measure by liters and must restrict by CC.

[Frisky Dingo]

Holy crap, why can't you just go along with it. You'll be able to pick all of those same cars next time!!

 

 

 

 

Besides, it really upsets the option pool in the lower classes.

Edited March 17, 2016 by Frisky Dingo

[Drew Dowdell]

Holy crap, why can't you just go along with it. You'll be able to pick all of those same cars next time!!

 

 

 

 

Besides, it really upsets the option pool in the lower classes.

 

 

Hi, have we met?  I'm the obscure numbers guy.       I'm just saying we need precision is all, mainly because the marketing departments at the manufacturers love to round up their measurements. I have no problem playing by the rules. 

[oldshurst442]

Good stuff, Frisky!

 

 I will also introduce shortly my "would you rather threads" when I start seeing interesting cars on the roads and I will pair them up for us to discuss!!!

 

I will post my choices tomorrow...Ill let the thought process stir in my head for a while....last time we did this...many things have changed in the automobile world, so I need time to reflect.

Just try to get Sled in here....I always liked his choices...

Edited March 17, 2016 by oldshurst442

[G. David Felt]

 

 

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

 

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

 

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe     

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

I will clarify this further in future threads.

 

 

OK, I want to play but I am totally confused by this now. If the measure of unit is 2.0 liters or 2000CC does that mean it cannot be more or less? Or are you saying it has to be under 2.0 L and under 2000CC?

[Scout]

http://powersports.honda.com/assets/flash/model/gallery/GoldWing_2015_09.jpg

1800cc of fun.

[Scout]

Holy crap, why can't you just go along with it. You'll be able to pick all of those same cars next time!!

Besides, it really upsets the option pool in the lower classes.

Hi, have we met? I'm the obscure numbers guy. I'm just saying we need precision is all, mainly because the marketing departments at the manufacturers love to round up their measurements. I have no problem playing by the rules.

We don't go around calling a 5.7 Chevy anything but a 350. Nor do we call the 5.7 hemi anything but a 345. I believe the concept is simple unless one is being deliberately obtuse or has a form of ocd. Perhaps a form of autism could also be at play. Edited March 17, 2016 by Scout

[Drew Dowdell]

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

I will clarify this further in future threads.

OK, I want to play but I am totally confused by this now. If the measure of unit is 2.0 liters or 2000CC does that mean it cannot be more or less? Or are you saying it has to be under 2.0 L and under 2000CC?

2.0 L is 2000 cc

[Drew Dowdell]

Holy crap, why can't you just go along with it. You'll be able to pick all of those same cars next time!!

Besides, it really upsets the option pool in the lower classes.

Hi, have we met? I'm the obscure numbers guy. I'm just saying we need precision is all, mainly because the marketing departments at the manufacturers love to round up their measurements. I have no problem playing by the rules.

We don't go around calling a 5.7 Chevy anything but a 350. Nor do we call the 5.7 hemi anything but a 345. I believe the concept is simple unless one is being deliberately obtuse or has a form of ocd. Perhaps a form of autism could also be at play.

Well now you're converting metric to imperial too. In the first post, he said under 2.0 liters or 2000 CC... Which are the same thing. Since I knew the GM 2.0 turbo was under 2000 CC, I thought that would count since it's a 2.0 in name only.

I'll make a new list under the clarified rules.

[El Kabong]

Ok... here we go with the new list:

1) Alfa 4C coupe

2) last-gen Mazda RX-7 Turbo (Wankel, baby!)

3) Chevy Malibu 1.4T

4) Morgan 3-Wheeler

5) Chevy Bolt for moving stuff. Yes it's electric, but it would offer the 1.4T if it wasn't.

[El Kabong]

Good stuff, Frisky!

 

 I will also introduce shortly my "would you rather threads" when I start seeing interesting cars on the roads and I will pair them up for us to discuss!!!

 

Someday when It gets slow enough in here I will unleash the ultimate "would you rather" thread. It came from all the way back in the AWCC days. Hilarity will ensue.

[FAPTurbo]

Tesla Model S

Tesla Model X

Tesla Roadster

 

Zero litres. Wubba Lubba Dub Dub Mafaka's!

[Intrepidation]

Don't break an arm jerking yourself off Fap.

 

Tesla Model S

Genovation Corvette GXE

[G. David Felt]

Bummer, well I guess I will have to wait till the size gets bigger as I do not know of any auto's that fit me with engines under 2.0L.

 

H'mmmmmmmmm

[ccap41]

 

 

Guys, guys, guys. UNDER 2.0 liters. No more than 1.9. It's even in bold.

 

 

   

 

The GM 2.0 = 1998 CC

Mitsubishi Eclipse 2.0T = 1998 CC

Ford 2.0 Ecoboost = 1999 CC

Mercedes 2.0T = 1991 CC

 

I know they generally round up when expressing in liters, so I knew my choices were safe     

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

I will clarify this further in future threads.

 

Alright, I'm honestly kind of confused.. are you actually looking for 1.9L and below or 1999cc and below? Like is a Focus ST's "2.0" valid or not? 

[Frisky Dingo]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

I will clarify this further in future threads.

 

Alright, I'm honestly kind of confused.. are you actually looking for 1.9L and below or 1999cc and below? Like is a Focus ST's "2.0" valid or not? 

 

 

Okay, I'll make it easy moving forward. Forget cc's and only go by liters. For this thread, 1.9 and below.

[Frisky Dingo]

Got my list sorted out-

 

Suzuki Samurai- Got to have something for some off-road fun.

 

 

Alfa 4C Spyder- Back road and track fun.

 

 

Fiesta ST- My DD.

 

 

Early 356 Coupe- Sunday cruiser, impossibly gorgeous.

 

 

Audi (B6 Gen) A4 S-Line- Wife's DD.

 

[ccap41]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, but it throws the whole premise of this series. Obviously 99% of 2.0 engines are under 2,000cc, but the limit is intended to encompass both limits. It must be under both units of measurement. Same when we get to 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, etc, etc.

 

 

I will clarify this further in future threads.

 

Alright, I'm honestly kind of confused.. are you actually looking for 1.9L and below or 1999cc and below? Like is a Focus ST's "2.0" valid or not? 

 

 

Okay, I'll make it easy moving forward. Forget cc's and only go by liters. For this thread, 1.9 and below.

 

Okay cool! thanks! You can guarantee there will be a Fiesta ST in there then.. Something larger for more people will be difficult. It'll definitely have to be something overseas and diesel. 

[William Maley]

So I could list out five Ford Fiesta STs in different colors? I'm kidding.

 

I would have about four cars, all of them sold in the U.S.

 

Ford Fiesta ST

Honda Civic EX Turbo (1.5L Turbo)

Volkswagen Golf Sportwagen TSI SE

Kia Optima LX 1.6T

[ccap41]

DANG! While looking up larger vehicles with smaller diesel engines Ford offers a 2.0 diesel in the Edge: 207hp/332tq. That would have been perfect for me! 

 

Time to keep looking... 

Edited March 17, 2016 by ccap41

[Frisky Dingo]

DANG! While looking up larger vehicles with smaller diesel engines Ford offers a 2.0 diesel in the Edge: 207hp/332tq. That would have been perfect for me! 

 

Time to keep looking... 

 

 

That's part of why I like these threads so much! It forces you to look into and learn about cars you never knew existed to fit the roles you like. I just learned of something a little bit ago that I will definitely use in a future thread.

[ccap41]

Audi A4 - 1.4L

 

 

Audi Q3 - 1.4L

 

Mazda RX-7 - 1.3L

 

 

Fiesta ST - 1.6L

 

Can't deny the Alfa 4C, beautiful and simple in the best of ways. I only wish it had a manual transmission.

Alfa 4C - 1.7

 

 

My Honorable Mention will go to the 2017 Escape - 1.5L I actually think it would be a better all around package than the Audi Q3 with more size and power.. but I think the Audi just looks good so screw it. 

 

 

[ccap41]

 

DANG! While looking up larger vehicles with smaller diesel engines Ford offers a 2.0 diesel in the Edge: 207hp/332tq. That would have been perfect for me! 

 

Time to keep looking... 

 

 

That's part of why I like these threads so much! It forces you to look into and learn about cars you never knew existed to fit the roles you like. I just learned of something a little bit ago that I will definitely use in a future thread.

 

I actually think the next one 2.0-2.9 will be the toughest. Almost every vehicle offers something in that range whether its n/a, diesel, turbo...heck doesn't volvo offer a turbo and supercharged setup? 

[Frisky Dingo]

Damn, I totally meant to put the FD3S 7 in my list. I wrote it down last night, and then forgot this morning. Hmm, might need to make some revisions.

[Frisky Dingo]

No more takers on this one?? You guys are lacking in creativity and/or just lazy!!

[ccap41]

My money is on lazy..lol 

 

PS. that gen RX-7 was always my go-to ricer car. I always loved them. Honestly, it really never had anything to do with the engine because I never really knew much about them. I just thought they looked awesome, rwd, and must have been easy to make power with them because all of them are modded and wicked quick. 

Edited March 17, 2016 by ccap41

[balthazar]

Nuttin' interesting to me for a 'dream garage' list under 2.0L.

[Frisky Dingo]

Nuttin' interesting to me for a 'dream garage' list under 2.0L.

 

 

That's literally the whole point.

[ccap41]

 

Nuttin' interesting to me for a 'dream garage' list under 2.0L.

 

 

That's literally the whole point.

 

Yup! That's what makes it fun! At least to me.. I mean I'd never buy a Q3 or A4 with a 1.4 but if I had to make a collage of cars that I'd drive with wee-little engines.. It'd be in that group. Heck, even as gorgeous and simplistic of a car the 4C is I would never consider it because it's just too expensive for what you get, imo. But its still beautiful to me. 

[oldshurst442]

These were  my choices back at MT...

 

http://forums.motortrend.com/70/9688386/the-general-forum/dream-garage-revisited-sub-20-liters/page2.html

 

I see that the Alfa Romeo has quite the following since then...

I will change it up, just to be different.

The funny thing is, I forgot what I had chosen and I was about to post the same cars...but I wont do that....just to have a change.

 

1. And Frisky...you beat me to it...with the SUV...instead of the Buick CUV I originally had, Im gonna go with a Suzuki Sidekick. Ypu have the Samurai...Ill do the Sidekick

1.6 liter or 1.8 liter...whatever I find. Maybe a Chevrolet Tracker...anyway...this:

 

 

2. I always do convertibles with these.

Fiat 124 Spyder...Id do the Miata...but somebody already did that choice over at MT...I like to be different. And since Im not doing the Alfa Romeo 4c...I kinda have to replace the Italian Red Head with another...

1.4 liter Turbo

 

 

3. I need a family car...Ill keep the Ford Fusion. 1.5 liter EB...since the 1.6 that I have is no longer...and the refreshed version.

Screw it...Ill take the Fusion when we do the 2.0-2.9 liter...

Malibu...I guess its a 1.4T...

 

 

4. In today's world...electrics have become very very relevant...Chevrolet Volt...

1.5 liter generator...with ELECTRIC BATTERIES attached to it!!!

 

 

 

5.

Im keeping the Acura ...

Edited March 17, 2016 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

"literally the whole point" to pick vehicles that don't appeal to me & area UNDER 2.0 liters. Gotcha.

 

'60 Fiat Bianchina, 0.5L :

 

'58 Heinkel Kabine 200, 0.2L :

 

'58 Messerschmidt Kabinroller, 0.5L :

 

'35 American Austin, 0.7L :

 

'65 King Midget, 0.5L :

 

[oldshurst442]

Balthy...those are cool choices.

 

Sled, a MT poster would do off the wall choices too, I miss him, but as long as I got you here at Cheers and Gears, Im a happy camper!

[G. David Felt]

"literally the whole point" to pick vehicles that don't appeal to me & area UNDER 2.0 liters. Gotcha.

 

'60 Fiat Bianchina, 0.5L :

 

'58 Heinkel Kabine 200, 0.2L :

 

'58 Messerschmidt Kabinroller, 0.5L :

 

'35 American Austin, 0.7L :

 

'65 King Midget, 0.5L :

 

Very Cool Balthazar, never heard of any of them but they are all cool weird cars.

[ccap41]

Balty, that American Austin is one awesome looking car! 0.7l?!? Whew that thing must have bearly moved lol

[balthazar]

American Austin was TINY : about 120" long & 1040 lbs. 

 

Here's one next to a period Cadillac :

 

 

- - - - - 

I have no actual interest in any of those I chose. Just making Frisky happy.

[Thed]

1) Euro-market 1.5L Miata

2) Fiesta ST

3) Alfa 4C

4) Suzuki Samurai

5) Mk4 GTI 1.8T  

[ccap41]

American Austin was TINY : about 120" long & 1040 lbs. 

 

Here's one next to a period Cadillac :

 

 

- - - - - 

I have no actual interest in any of those I chose. Just making Frisky happy.

Dang, that literally looks like a toy compared to that era Caddy. Still, a very well proportioned vehicle. 

 

I don't have any interest in the ones I chose but if somebody walked up to me and said I will buy you any 5 cars/trucks/suvs BUT they have to be 1.9L and lower these are what you'd choose? That's how I look at it.. just a fantasy land.. But I've always enjoyed the theoretical "what-ifs" with cars. 

1) Euro-market 1.5L Miata

2) Fiesta ST

3) Alfa 4C

4) Suzuki Samurai

5) Mk4 GTI 1.8T  

AHHH Yes! The Miata! That would have been my sporty honorable mention as I would have gotten rid of the 4C for it but I don't think I'd take a convertible over a coupe, but I do like the new Miata quite a bit.

[Drew Dowdell]

1. Alfa 124

2. 2016 Jeep Renegade 25th Ann Edition 4x4 - 1.4T and 6-Speed manual  (actually the superior powertrain choice over the 2.4 + 9-speed)

3. Eagle Talon DL with the 1.8 liter and 5-speed manual

4. 2016 MB C200d - 1.6 liter diesel with 6-speed manual transmission... and I even have a place in Germany to park it.

5. Buick Encore (Done!)

[Frisky Dingo]

I intentionally left the i8 this round because I want to avoid resorting to hybrids on my lists.

[ccap41]

^ I'm looking around to see what this C200d is and is it a 1.6L diesel AMG????

Edited March 18, 2016 by ccap41

[Drew Dowdell]

^ I'm looking around to see what this C200d is and is it a 1.6L diesel AMG????

 

Naturally, because it's a Benz, it's more complicated than that.  The C200d with the manual is a 1.6 liter.  The C200d with an automatic is a 2.0 liter.   The AMG on that wagon is AMG appearance package, but none of the hardware.  The 1.6 diesel is only available on the sedan and wagon, and not the coupe or convertible. 

[NOS2006]

Long time no see, C&G community! Lots of names I don't recognize, some I do... I pop in from time to time to see what's going on, and always enjoy the Week in Review emails (keep it up, Drew!).

 

Anyway, I just had to chime in on this thread. Love this topic considering I've owned my fair share of 2.0L cars in the last decade (although I guess only one of them counts): '06 Cobalt SS/SC, '04 Neon R/T (eventually converted to a 2.4T), '11 Cruze 1.4T (wife's car - oh hey, I'm married now!), and '13 Focus ST (current DD).

 

1. DD:  Fiesta ST3 (1.6T FWD)

2. Family:  Ford Fusion (1.5T FWD)

3. Utility:  '17 Ford Escape (1.5T AWD if available)

4. Fun:  3rd Gen (FD) Mazda RX-7 (1.3L TT RWD)

5. Crazy:  Radical SR3 RSX (1.5L RWD)

 

...do I show a bias?

 

For my last pick, I was actually looking for something more along the lines of the '99 Eclipse GSX (compact turbo AWD fun) but came up with nothing exciting. So I looked into fun conversion options (Aventador-kitted Fiero with AWD and TT conversion, anyone? - meh, base engine is >2.0 so I rejected it). When that failed, I looked into track options. I could've also went with the Lotus Elise Cup R or 250. But I went with a more unique option because... why not?

 

Cheers!

[Drew Dowdell]

sNOSsage!  Welcome back!

 

It's like we're getting the band back together!

 

[smk4565]

The Fiesta ST and Miata are good choices.  I'd probably take one of those for something newer, I like the Renegade too.

 

But game over with this one.