r34skylynegtr

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Chris N &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Jokes are usually accompanied by or no?</TD></TR></TABLE>

usually yes

GettaluvR

nice car but i'd take the bus then drive american car
never trade R in for american car maybe european but no american

MK Ultra

C6?

Yes, please.

I'd take the C6 over any of those overhyped, strut-havin', eurotrash shitmobiles like Porsches, even if it cost the same. Factor in the price, though, and it's a no-brainer. Corvette hands-down. It's got everything: torque, reasonable weight, excellent suspension and a low CG.

MikeSarr_GSR

This new vette is no joke. It really is a nice ride and meant to be drivin

jeremy.

"it ain't a tight car if it ain't a type r!"

p nut

In a heartbeat.

B00ST2nR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MK Ultra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">C6?

Yes, please.

I'd take the C6 over any of those overhyped, strut-havin', eurotrash shitmobiles like Porsches, even if it cost the same. Factor in the price, though, and it's a no-brainer. Corvette hands-down. It's got everything: torque, reasonable weight, excellent suspension and a low CG. </TD></TR></TABLE>


There's alot more to a car than just performance. In example, the interior, ride quality, how quiet and smooth the ride is, luxury, appearance, value, etc.

Now of course if Performance is your #1 priority in what you look for in a car... then yes, best bang for buck performance would be the Corvette.

But damn.... I'd take a Porsche GT2 or a 911 Turbo over ANY Corvette ANY day of the year. Thas seriously a no brainer. C'mon now.

MikeSarr_GSR

If money wasnt the issue there would be a 360 Stradale Challenge Car in my driveway Its not the BEST, but it certainly is an amazing ride.

My heart though is rooted in reality, personally I would really much rather my economy be able to take my Integra to race-tune and do HPDE about 5 times a year, have a tow vehicle and a daily... keep the Integra street-able... however
the track is where the fun is had. That in and of itself costs alot of cash...
Personally and I am sure others feel this way; those that like to drive hard
like the drive more than looking at the car, or others looking at you. Having
the car assumes the life change...

What would have to change in my life in order to have a 360 Stradale and drive
it like I drive my Integra? Most Ferarri guys arent nearly as cool as us Honda guys either... in fact, most exotic car owners are kinda eccentric... most Corvette guys never even drive hard... and most Honda guys are Ricers for life... I think true enthusiasts are in each group, its a rare and nice thing when its crossed over the makes and people can just have fun for being car nuts in general. Moral of this
story = I dont need the best of anything. I am happy where I am now and happy
for anyone who has "more"

B00ST2nR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MikeSarr_GSR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Moral of this
story = I dont need the best of anything. I am happy where I am now and happy
for anyone who has "more" </TD></TR></TABLE>

You have it all right in your head.

MK Ultra

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by M3tor2nR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">


There's alot more to a car than just performance.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Sure is. Let's see some good examples.

Uh-oh ...

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> In example, the interior ...</TD></TR></TABLE>

C6 has a much better interior than its predecessor. Still not as nice as the more expensive cars, but now it's acceptable. And really, this should be very low on the list of priorities.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">ride quality, how quiet and smooth the ride is ... </TD></TR></TABLE>

Um, these are really the same thing. And anyone looking for LS430 ride quality in a performance vehicle should be shot.

Twice.

In the stomach.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> luxury ...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Luxury is for ******* pansies! Got that? Anyone, and I mean anyone, who thinks performance cars should have anything remotely to do with luxury is a moron. They are two mutually exclusive ends and should never, ever be combined.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> appearance ...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Appearance is subjective, and a really lousy way to choose a performance car.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> value </TD></TR></TABLE>

This is where the Corvette really kicks ***. Well, here and on the track.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Now of course if Performance is your #1 priority in what you look for in a car... then yes, best bang for buck performance would be the Corvette.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes, performance would be my #1 priority in choosing a performance car.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But damn.... I'd take a Porsche GT2 or a 911 Turbo over ANY Corvette ANY day of the year. Thas seriously a no brainer. C'mon now.</TD></TR></TABLE>

IMO, only somebody with no brains would pay $100K + for a car with MacPherson strut suspension.

B00ST2nR

Sure. Let's see.

I agree. They improved alot from its predecessor, but still too much cheap plastic here and there.

Again... There's alot more to a car than just performance. Notice I did not say PERFORMANCE car. I simply said car. So with that being said... Ride quality is still a must when it comes to cars in general. I'd hate to go on long distance trips on a bumpy ***, stiff ride for hours. It'll kill my back. No?

Again. I said cars. Not performance cars. Sure if you want an all out track Race car, its gotta be lightweight and we all know luxury adds alot to that department. But that doesn't mean you can't add a little luxury to race cars. What would you rather have? A gutted car that runs a 1/4 mile in 10's or a fully loaded car that runs a 1/4 mile in 11's?

I don't know about you, but once I'm 35 or older, I'd rather be driving around a slower car, but with much more luxury. Luxury is where its at when it comes to driving on the streets from here to there.

I agree. But why choose an ugly car just for its performance?

Yes. Corvette's do kick ***!!!!

Now thas pretty obvious ain't it? Performance would be #1 when you're choosing a PERFORMANCE car.

Or someone who has $100k to spend on a car.

Redline96LX

New vette can bite me.

MK Ultra

[QUOTE=M3tor2nR]

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">still too much cheap plastic here and there. </TD></TR></TABLE>

I agree with you. It's still not really fitting for a $45,000 car. And the electronic door-latches are a really retarded idea.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Again... There's alot more to a car than just performance. Notice I did not say PERFORMANCE car. I simply said car. So with that being said... Ride quality is still a must when it comes to cars in general. I'd hate to go on long distance trips on a bumpy ***, stiff ride for hours. It'll kill my back. No?</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's all fine and good, but really one must make compromises. If you take long road trips frequently and can only afford one car, it's probably best not to buy a performance car. I don't think plush suspension should ever be available on any car with sporting pretensions. One should have to suffer a bit to own a performance car, just like in the old days. It weeds out the posuers.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Again. I said cars. Not performance cars. Sure if you want an all out track Race car, its gotta be lightweight and we all know luxury adds alot to that department. But that doesn't mean you can't add a little luxury to race cars. What would you rather have? A gutted car that runs a 1/4 mile in 10's or a fully loaded car that runs a 1/4 mile in 11's?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Neither. I'd rather have a car that corners like it's got tires made of glue and changes direction like it's hard-wired to my brain. That's why weight sucks. You can always add power for quicker acceleration, but weight kills nimble responses. And performance-oriented suspension degrades luxury.

I'm a purist, and even though I loathe luxury cars, I believe their luxury should be undiluted, just as a sports car's performance should be undiluted. Trying to combine the two merely degrades both.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't know about you, but once I'm 35 or older, I'd rather be driving around a slower car, but with much more luxury. Luxury is where its at when it comes to driving on the streets from here to there.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I don't know about all-out luxury. When I'm 35, I see myself driving a stock Accord. I'm more about practicality.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But why choose an ugly car just for its performance?</TD></TR></TABLE>

Depends on how ugly it is. If we're talking Mosler ugly, count me out. But I wouldn't choose a performance car based on style.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Or someone who has $100k to spend on a car. </TD></TR></TABLE>

... and doesn't understand how vastly inferior strut suspension is. I wouldn't spend more than $15K on a car with struts, and even then I'd feel a bit cheated. Struts belong on econoboxes.

Then again, I don't think I'd ever spend more than the equivalent of $25K in today's money on a car. It just seems wasteful to me. When you get down to it, it's just transportation. I'd rather spend my money on something that increases in value.

B00ST2nR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MK Ultra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Neither. I'd rather have a car that corners like it's got tires made of glue and changes direction like it's hard-wired to my brain. That's why weight sucks. You can always add power for quicker acceleration, but weight kills nimble responses. And performance-oriented suspension degrades luxury.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Ah~ you know what I meant. Ok... what would you rather drive. A gutted, loud and noisy Race car that goes around a certain track in 45 seconds or a fully loaded car that goes around a track in 46 seconds? is more like it.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MK Ultra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">... and doesn't understand how vastly inferior strut suspension is. I wouldn't spend more than $15K on a car with struts, and even then I'd feel a bit cheated. Struts belong on econoboxes. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Even if the Porsche has the "inferior strut suspension" it sure goes around a track mighty fast. Faster than a Corvette would. I'm sure the engineers at Porsche know what they're doing....

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MK Ultra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Then again, I don't think I'd ever spend more than the equivalent of $25K in today's money on a car. It just seems wasteful to me. When you get down to it, it's just transportation. I'd rather spend my money on something that increases in value. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Aw come on. You gotta enjoy your $$!! You only live once.

But again... if you were making millions, I'm sure that statement above would drastically change. Even if you say it wouldn't... both you and I know it would to a certain extent. And the majority of those who buy $100k+ cars are those who make at least 6 figure digits that have plenty disposable income.

And damn... we're gettin way off topic here. It's suppose to be ITR and Vettes. lol

MK Ultra

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by M3tor2nR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Ah~ you know what I meant. Ok... what would you rather drive. A gutted, loud and noisy Race car that goes around a certain track in 45 seconds or a fully loaded car that goes around a track in 46 seconds? is more like it. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Depends on how each car feels while it's going around the track.

But generally, I'd take the more spartan car because I despise most luxury elements, such as power-adjustable leather seats, sound insulation, navigation systems, etc. I don't even like power windows and door locks. The only luxury item I refuse to go without is A/C. A stereo is nice, but not necessary, and it shouldn't have big amps or more than 4 speakers.

On the other hand, I don't care if the car is loud on the inside, but I don't want it to be too loud on the outside. So a good muffler and a quiet intake are plusses.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Even if the Porsche has the "inferior strut suspension" it sure goes around a track mighty fast. Faster than a Corvette would.</TD></TR></TABLE>

They're pretty close. Both Road & Track and Car and Driver magazines did C6 v. 997 comparisons in their Dec. issues. The C/D article put the C6 against a 997 Carrera at GingerMan Raceway, and the C6 lapped the course ~2 seconds faster than the 997 with lap times in the 1:36 range. The R/T article compared a C6 with a 997 Carrera S at Buttonwillow Raceway, and there the difference was only .5 seconds with lap times in the 2-minute range, but the C6 was still faster.

Now a GT2/3 would lap a bit faster, but keep in mind this is the regular C6 we're talking about, so it's appropriate to compare it to the normal versions of the 911. Since the C6 Z06 has yet to be released, as have GT2/3 versions of the 997, these are going to be about the most practical comparisons of the two, and in both cases the Corvette was quicker.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I'm sure the engineers at Porsche know what they're doing....</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah. They put double wishbones on their racing-derived designs (959, 962, Carrera GT), so even they know struts are inferior. They're screwing 911 buyers and they know it. People still buy them because they don't know any better.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Aw come on. You gotta enjoy your $$!! You only live once.

But again... if you were making millions, I'm sure that statement above would drastically change. Even if you say it wouldn't... both you and I know it would to a certain extent. And the majority of those who buy $100k+ cars are those who make at least 6 figure digits that have plenty disposable income.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I'd have to be making a hell of a lot of disposable income, and even then, I think I'd rather buy and restore a car of historical significance (i.e. D-Type Jag) than blow money on an expensive new car. And even as a millionaire, my daily driver would be an Accord. I'd just get a new one every year instead of waiting three-to-five years.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">And damn... we're gettin way off topic here. It's suppose to be ITR and Vettes. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yeah. If I'm paying for it, I'd take the cheaper one of the two.

B00ST2nR

Well... whatever floats your boat. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I respect it.

I didn't know the C6 was faster than the 997 or the 911 Turbo around a track. Maybe it was just for that particular track? Hmm... the C6 didn't do too well at the Top Gear test track, and it got Third in a drag race against the Elise, NSX and Porsche Cerrera. I would imagine the LS6 doin better... especially in the straight line race.

And damn... you'd still drive an Accord if you had millions?? Lol... i'm SURE you'll get a nicer car if money wasn't an issue. C'mon now. Let's be honest.

MK Ultra

911 Turbo wasn't in either of the comparisons.

The 997 Carrera S is a NA 911 with a 355-hp, 3.8 litre motor, v. the 997 Carrera's 321-hp, 3.6 litre motor. The S does accelerate almost as quickly as a 996 GT3 though.

I haven't seen the Top Gear test, but the slowest 1/4-mile time I've seen for the C6 is 12.9 @ 112.3 mph.

And I'll never need a nicer car than a new Accord.

B00ST2nR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by MK Ultra &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">911 Turbo wasn't in either of the comparisons.

The 997 Carrera S is a NA 911 with a 355-hp, 3.8 litre motor, v. the 997 Carrera's 321-hp, 3.6 litre motor. The S does accelerate almost as quickly as a 996 GT3 though.

I haven't seen the Top Gear test, but the slowest 1/4-mile time I've seen for the C6 is 12.9 @ 112.3 mph.

And I'll never need a nicer car than a new Accord. </TD></TR></TABLE>


Ah ok ok. Got it.

And fa SHO. The new Accords are balla status.