whats wrong with the boxster? the new hardtop (cayman s) laps the nurenburgring faster than the c2

-AndyST4+Apr 22, 2005 - 6:46 PM

-darksecret+Apr 22, 2005 - 11:24 AM

-darksecret+Apr 22, 2005 - 3:30 PM

Last time I checked a 'Porche' was something in front of the house that you sat in and drank lemonade. Or pehaps a name a blond would give a silly yapping dog.

A Porsche is a nicely engineered sports car.

Cheaply made? Have you sat in one recently?

I'm currently driving a POS Chevvy. Now *that* is cheaply made.


A Boxster S is probably the finest car of it's class in the world. No exceptions. And I'd have one in a heartbeat.

I'd prefer a GT3 RS however......



-darksecret+Apr 22, 2005 - 11:24 AM

You sir, have no soul.

-boosted_K2+Apr 22, 2005 - 1:14 PM

explain the diablo then
couldn't handle worth it's life
or the viper
or the countach

all of those cars are far less refined than oh let's say a supra with a greddy single turbo t78

-Mike+Apr 22, 2005 - 9:07 PM

Count-hash was a very very fast truck (with horrible visibility and a clutch you need to be a weightlifter to use)

Viper is not a well developed car. It's a dirty great engine in a simple chassis. And no the worse for that.

Diablo handles just fine. It's just that it's a balls out 200mph supercar, so it *will* bite you.

-darksecret+Apr 22, 2005 - 8:03 PM
They are status symbols, so what, they're into exotic/fast cars.

lamborghinis are light as ****, they are made of all composite and carbon fiber shells, their drivetrain is an absolute work of art, using a mid engine AWD design. you really need to open your eyes and see exactly how insane some of these designs and engineering is, everything on the vehicle has a purpose, if it doesnt have a purpose it is not put on a car, you really have no concept of what type of work goes into making these and all types of cars. however explaining this really will make no difference as you are obviously very closed minded in your thinking about many topics discussed.

>> ... First off, Lamborghini since 98 has had direct ties with Audi, having Audi run the company and guide design, meaning Volkswagen is in control of the company... Also, Porsche has ALWAYS been within the VW circle- Ferdinand Porsche originally designed the VW bug for hitler, and afterwards, went on to create sportscars under his own name. Their relationship has always been comunicable. Please tell me what parts from ANY porsche besides the Cayenne SUV are shared with any Volkswagen on todays models? There is a reason why cars like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Maserati, Porsche, and ect. are status symbols and cost they way they do. Its called heritage, and proven performance... I will agree cars like the Corvette, Viper, and GT40 lack a lot of the prestige a true sportcar should have because of the badge, but their performance proves otherwise- they just appeal to a different type of person... It all comes down to passion and the emotions the car gives you to justify driving or owning ANYTHING prestigeous. If you wouldent feel any different about driving a GTO or a Ferarri, id guess that means you buy all generic brand groceries, because, clearly, they both are one in the same...

-boosted_K2+Apr 22, 2005 - 10:55 PM

Erm. No.

Not really.

Modern Lambos are AWD. And not carbon.

Everything prior to that (with the exception of the Diablo VT) was a huge V12 in the middle, RWD and conventional body panels.

A diablo is not a light car. A six litre V12 thumping out well over 500bhp makes short work of the mass though.

An Elise is a light car. A McLaren F1 is a (very) light supercar.

A Diablo is from the planet Rockstar™. And is fabulous. And will cook a 6K clutch if you pull away incorrectly. I still want one.

-boosted_K2+Apr 22, 2005 - 8:55 PM
I'm fully aware (well not fully but very aware) of the amount of engineering that goes into cars, half my friends are in mech eng for automotives, and despite their design a built up japanese car would run circles around a diablo (91-97ish), a friend of a friend has one and unless you've been inside one you can't really speculate about the handling, sure they're rockets but they'd be left in the dust handling wise by a good rwd japanese car, furthermore, lambos are anything but refined, before audi came into the picture they were a joke when it came to refinment, sit inside an old one and you'll know what i mean

-darksecret+Apr 22, 2005 - 12:50 PM

no, its not a cobra engine, its a 5.4l. cobra is 4.6l

5.4l DOHC supercharged, aluminum block.

of course its based on the gt40, but its not the same car, at all. to say so is pure ignorance.

whats this $15k chevelle got in it to make it superior to a ferrari/lambo/prosche

-Mike+Apr 23, 2005 - 12:55 AM

I've driven a mid 90's Diablo. And it's a monster.

A stock Supra/300ZX wouldn't see which way it went.

-Mr_E+Apr 23, 2005 - 8:59 AM

and even if you modded one(supra/300zx) so it could

ITS STILL A DIABLO

-Mr_E+Apr 23, 2005 - 9:59 AM
if you've driven one than you'd know a supra would leave it in the dust handling wise

i'm not saying that a supra is better
i'm jsut saying that the mid90's lambo's are anything but refined

-Mike+Apr 23, 2005 - 12:42 PM


It's a bloody supercar. I don't want refined. If I wanted that, I'd buy a Merc.

I want a V12 Mid Rear Italian supercar to scare the **** out of the driver, go stupidly, stupidly fast, snap knicker elastic at 100 paces and make a noise like God. Shouting.

Diablo does all of this and more. Christ, I'm probably faster down a bit of road in the GT-Four because I know that I can trust it not to kill me. That's not the point.

Driving a Diablo is an event. And that engine. Dear mother of christ that engine.......

>> >> >>

(edit to add the smilie)

This post has been edited by Mr_E: Apr 23, 2005 - 1:57 PM

HAHAH, NICE

-97sccelica+Apr 23, 2005 - 3:14 AM

Sorry my mistake on the 4.6, fact is it's still an existing motor, they did not pull a Carrol Shelby and completely design a new engine. The $15,000 Chevelle has an all-motor 350 pulled from a 1999 NASCAR, got a freshening up and had the restrictor plate pulled. In case you're wondering I know that the motor cost more than the $15,000 in the whole car, that is why we traded a dirt track car for it. See a guy by the name of Alvin Earnhart is my barber and a customer at my business, Alvin's brother is the late Dale Earnhart and if you do some research on Earnhart you'll hear the name Gary Hargett. Well Dale Jr. usually visits Gary and Gary just happens to build and collect different race cars and Gary wanted the dirt track car and we wanted one of those engines he has.

What I can't figure out is the price tags, Lingenfelter can build a 'Vette that can walk all over a Ferrari for half the price.

-Mr_E+Apr 22, 2005 - 8:26 PM

If you look at my later post you'll see I got the spelling figured out, i'm just to lazy to go back and fix the rest. Yes, I was working at a Hyundai dealership and my general manager let me take his Porsche Boxter S out to TGI Fridays for lunch, I didn't like it, maybe it was because it was used, but it didn't feel like a high dollar sports car or a luxury car for that matter, it felt cheap like the leather was going to rip if I moved too quick. I haven't been in a Lambo, I have been in a Maserati, Porsche, older Ferrari, both new and old Viper. Maybe it's me and spending $200,000 on a car from a company that is coming closer to being just another manufacterer or is just a plain manufacterer doesn't make much sense.

Now heritage doesn't mean jack, a lot of manufacterers have a rich heritage look at Toyota today, you see F1 cars but people would laugh if Toyota made a supercar, that wasn't labeled Lexus. Look at the Mazda RX-8, it's got a race car engine nad those don't go for $90,000. Most manufacterers have racing roots, and companies like Cadillac just lost their prestige.

Now to get everybody on track, i'm just ranting on how rich kids treat their cars, I just got carried away on the whole heritage and prestige thing. See it's one thing to be older and have an expensive car, it shows people that you might have earned it. Being 17 years old and driving something like that especially after totaling another new one shows how stupid some parents can be.

-Mr_E+Apr 23, 2005 - 11:52 AM
thats exactly what i've been saying
go back and read previous posts
i was jsut telling tim that despite price tags not all supercars are refined

I fully agree, high dollar cars are lowering in quality (mechanical) while crap cars are raising it, eventually KIA will have a 500HP supercar to run against the rest of the pile.

This post has been edited by darksecret: Apr 23, 2005 - 5:28 PM

-darksecret+Apr 23, 2005 - 5:28 PM

Have you *seen* the amount of engineering that goes into a Zonda. Or a Carrera GT?

-Mr_E+Apr 23, 2005 - 7:03 PM

Yeah, have you seen the amount of engineering that goes into most vehicles. Most of the "engineering" is done on the race track, almost all manufacturers are involved in racing. Do you think the paddle shift was on a Ferrari production car before the race car. They may have been the developers but the fact remains that still doesn't justify a $200,000+ price tag. What about the development of the Renesis and the RX-8 is still a fair priced car. Now take an inline four and produce almost 300HP from it and you got yourself some development. Oh wait Toyota did that already. In the world of V8's seeing a 400HP small block isn't very original in the world of 4's it is. With technology today anyone can have a V-12 producing 500HP+, even a 4 cyclinder with 500HP+ isn't hard to achieve. Now when Ferrari or Lamoborghini decide to make a 1,000HP supercar, manage to make it truely street legal and keep it under 3,000lbs. with 30+mpg, that will be true engineering for todays time. I remember reading an article of a developer for AEM having a 700HP+ (can't remember) Supra that got 31mpg, that came from one guy and it was a couple of years ago, so why can't a group of engineers from Ferrari pull it off?

-darksecret+Apr 23, 2005 - 1:42 PM

so its better in the quarter mile?

dont get me wrong, chevelles are one of my favorite muscle cars, but it still is a boat compaired to any modern day supercar

also, i dont give a rats ass about nascar.

It is a boat but with the rear truck suspension it handles as well as a newer Z28, we got the idea for the rear suspension from a Hot Rod show where they took a Nova and added a rear truck suspension. (for those that do not know what a truck suspension is, it's the suspension used on a Stock Car). Also I don't like NASCAR racing but they actually use good technology (although mostly mechanical) and it is based on driver ability more than the car. This Chevelle was built more for the street than strip, the last Chevelle was an all out drag car that could walk a 4' high wheelie half way down the track but it also had a blown 427 sticking out of the hood.

I know if someone that can afford a $200,000 car won't have to worry about fuel, but why can't these manufacterers quit doing the same s*** over and over again. Carbon composite bodies and sequential shift are yesterday stuff, someone with enough time and a list of formulas can come up with a 600HP V12 supercar, but why not create an electric supercharger that works or true unlimited variable valve timing, what about making a V12 with no less than 700HP in all their production cars, go all out and make a V12 that gets 40mpg, that would be a feat for Lamborghini. It's like Cadillac when they made the V16, it's 16 cylinders it should have made more than 1,000HP, there are regular cars out there that make that much power on 6 cyclinders. I once was a Ferrari fan, but whith the F40 and F50, I seen street ready "race cars" that couldn't handle for jack, i've seen trucks pull corners better than those cars, now i'll give it to the Enzo it's better and also twice the price. The great European engineering legacy died when the Mercedes and BMW lines became very common else where. I will admit that Chevy does make a cheap feeling vehicle, my Sierra felt like sitting in a tupperware container because of the cheap and huge dashboard, but I also paid $5,000 for it, and got a 350ci Vortec V8 that could easily get 19mpg if not more and could still run with a Z28.

most useless thread to ever grace the 6gc boards.

It did get out of hand, didn't it, but as I say in a lot of my responses it just comes down to preference. If you want to spend a big chunk of money on a name go for it, I never said that exotics were bad cars but as far as what you get for the money IMO they aren't worth it, especially when a 17 year old kid gets one after destroying a perfectly good GT-S.

EDIT: If they knock the price back a little this is a good supercar even gets twice the mpg as others of the same speed. This makes for a good Enzo killer.
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...7&page_number=1

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...4&page_number=3

This post has been edited by darksecret: Apr 24, 2005 - 4:37 PM

-darksecret+Apr 24, 2005 - 5:49 PM
i cant see it running with a z28. my dad had one. they go pretty good for a truck, but a z28 should be able to pull away pretty easly. now a bagged out one is a different story, but whatever i dont care.

It wasn't exactly stock and it was a '94 Z28 Auto and I beat him by 3/10ths in an 1/8th mile track. I wish I could find the time slip because I ran a '93 Mustang GT that night and lost by a half second. My goal when I got the truck was to beat the new Silverado SS, then the Lightning. I ran it against my Celica one time, started two car lengths behind, and still completely passed it before the 60' mark. Unfortunatly I didn't get a camera before I sold my truck.