Crown
Board: AMG Mercedes
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
I think you need to recognize, that most of these cars (be it SLR og CGT) are not being bought by people who actually race them on a track, let alone race them on a regular basis.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
I think you need to recognize, that most of these cars (be it SLR og CGT) are not being bought by people who actually race them on a track, let alone race them on a regular basis.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
I think you need to recognize, that most of these cars (be it SLR og CGT) are not being bought by people who actually race them on a track, let alone race them on a regular basis.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
Yes, it's definetely a great posuer car for sure (that is if people can tell it's not just an uglier and bigger SLK) for those who mistakenly think they can buy self esteem. As for comfy off the track, the three reviewers at Automobile disagreed strongly with you. Maybe the one they drove was different from the one you drove.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
I think you need to recognize, that most of these cars (be it SLR og CGT) are not being bought by people who actually race them on a track, let alone race them on a regular basis.
If you want true handling, I believe you get a car more or less dedicated to the track - indifferent to looks, design etc and just focused on handling and power.
The SLR is a rolling sculpture, a symbol of power, wealth and everything Mercedes buyers like...PLUS the magic of the racing circuits - courtesy McLaren.
The SLR is for millionaires who like to drive a comfortable, powerful car which looks unique and sets them apart from the crowd. And I believe they like to casually mention to friends and business associates that McLaren has delivered some of the hardware, as an unambiguous hint towards the cars "theoretical" superior handling.
This car has got "DONT MESS WITH ME" written all over it - and because of it's straight-line acceleration, noone will really get to test this statement in real life.
My point is this: This car wasnt made to ACTUALLY handle better than any other car. On of off the track. It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet.
MB buyers want luxury, a comfortable GT-sporty ride and extravagant design IMO. Porsche buyers are looking for something else.
It's like comparing Led Zeppelin to Mozart and accusing Mozart of not playing a great guitar. It's just off the mark IMHO.
For what it's worth I think the SLR looks absolutely stunning, but I wouldn't buy it even if I could afford it. It might handle just well enough for my needs, but the whole aura of the car ("plus on luxury, minus on handling") is not for me. The car might handle just fine, but the brand, the message I would send with this car just isn't for me...and I believe this is where the real battle for the clients takes place.
Between the ears of potential buyers, and NOT on the racetrack.
Yes, it's definetely a great posuer car for sure (that is if people can tell it's not just an uglier and bigger SLK) for those who mistakenly think they can buy self esteem. As for comfy off the track, the three reviewers at Automobile disagreed strongly with you. Maybe the one they drove was different from the one you drove.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
I never drove the SLR, so I have no clue.
Neither do I know exactly how the test car felt compared to other cars, or if the journalists were biased or not.
And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?
It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad". And you spend a heck of a lot of energy bad-mouthing people who have different taste than you - be it design or ride.
You said: "..they think they can buy self-esteem" ..."great poser-car.." etc
And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?
No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?
(And yes, this said with the deepest of sarcasm)
I'm pretty sure some people think the CGT looks like an overstyled Toyota MR2, and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back, but I'm sure the car is great to drive and fantastic to own, and I know it turns heads.
I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive.
It's both off the mark, bad style and IMHO not in the spirit of this board.
Neither do I know exactly how the test car felt compared to other cars, or if the journalists were biased or not.
And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?
It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad". And you spend a heck of a lot of energy bad-mouthing people who have different taste than you - be it design or ride.
You said: "..they think they can buy self-esteem" ..."great poser-car.." etc
And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?
No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?
(And yes, this said with the deepest of sarcasm)
I'm pretty sure some people think the CGT looks like an overstyled Toyota MR2, and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back, but I'm sure the car is great to drive and fantastic to own, and I know it turns heads.
I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive.
It's both off the mark, bad style and IMHO not in the spirit of this board.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
I never drove the SLR, so I have no clue.
Neither do I know exactly how the test car felt compared to other cars, or if the journalists were biased or not.
And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?
It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad". And you spend a heck of a lot of energy bad-mouthing people who have different taste than you - be it design or ride.
You said: "..they think they can buy self-esteem" ..."great poser-car.." etc
And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?
No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?
(And yes, this said with the deepest of sarcasm)
I'm pretty sure some people think the CGT looks like an overstyled Toyota MR2, and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back, but I'm sure the car is great to drive and fantastic to own, and I know it turns heads.
I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive.
It's both off the mark, bad style and IMHO not in the spirit of this board.
Neither do I know exactly how the test car felt compared to other cars, or if the journalists were biased or not.
And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?
It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad". And you spend a heck of a lot of energy bad-mouthing people who have different taste than you - be it design or ride.
You said: "..they think they can buy self-esteem" ..."great poser-car.." etc
And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?
No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?
(And yes, this said with the deepest of sarcasm)
I'm pretty sure some people think the CGT looks like an overstyled Toyota MR2, and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back, but I'm sure the car is great to drive and fantastic to own, and I know it turns heads.
I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive.
It's both off the mark, bad style and IMHO not in the spirit of this board.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"I never drove the SLR, so I have no clue"
given the factual like tone and word choice in your post, i felt certain you actually had some experience with that about which wrote so definitively and confidentally.
"And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?"
because we are discussing cars on the cars board!!!! if no one cares, why are we here and why are there any posts?
"It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad"."
really? i thought i commented on how people who have actually DRIVEN the car (ie: NOT you) have commented on how poor a GT it is and how poor a track car it is. given it does a poor job at both, i have to conclude it IS a "bad" car unless you can come up with a use other than making someone feel like they have some self esteem when they don't.
"And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
of course i did! the performance of the car along with the fact 90%+ of the people out there think it's the new boxster are the two primary factors that drove me to the car. i crap you not when i tell you i've had several people ask me that uncomfortable question "how much does it cost" and the vast majority of their guesses are $150k or less! i love that because i'm embarrased to be so self centered as to drive around a $500k CAR!
"No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?"
nope, i DETEST being followed around with cameras and video recorders which is way too common in this car. i fully expected the car to garner significantly less attention than the stradale but it's just the opposite. you'll note my driveway and garage is full of gray/silver cars - not red ones!
"and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back"
the CGT looks pretty crapy roofwise when the tops are on. my wife and i both agree the stradale is many times more beautiful than the CGT.
"I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive."
i'm not putting anyone down BECAUSE they prefer a different car. however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves.
"It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet."
frauds should be exposed.
given the factual like tone and word choice in your post, i felt certain you actually had some experience with that about which wrote so definitively and confidentally.
"And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?"
because we are discussing cars on the cars board!!!! if no one cares, why are we here and why are there any posts?
"It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad"."
really? i thought i commented on how people who have actually DRIVEN the car (ie: NOT you) have commented on how poor a GT it is and how poor a track car it is. given it does a poor job at both, i have to conclude it IS a "bad" car unless you can come up with a use other than making someone feel like they have some self esteem when they don't.
"And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
of course i did! the performance of the car along with the fact 90%+ of the people out there think it's the new boxster are the two primary factors that drove me to the car. i crap you not when i tell you i've had several people ask me that uncomfortable question "how much does it cost" and the vast majority of their guesses are $150k or less! i love that because i'm embarrased to be so self centered as to drive around a $500k CAR!
"No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?"
nope, i DETEST being followed around with cameras and video recorders which is way too common in this car. i fully expected the car to garner significantly less attention than the stradale but it's just the opposite. you'll note my driveway and garage is full of gray/silver cars - not red ones!
"and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back"
the CGT looks pretty crapy roofwise when the tops are on. my wife and i both agree the stradale is many times more beautiful than the CGT.
"I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive."
i'm not putting anyone down BECAUSE they prefer a different car. however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves.
"It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet."
frauds should be exposed.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"I never drove the SLR, so I have no clue"
given the factual like tone and word choice in your post, i felt certain you actually had some experience with that about which wrote so definitively and confidentally.
"And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?"
because we are discussing cars on the cars board!!!! if no one cares, why are we here and why are there any posts?
"It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad"."
really? i thought i commented on how people who have actually DRIVEN the car (ie: NOT you) have commented on how poor a GT it is and how poor a track car it is. given it does a poor job at both, i have to conclude it IS a "bad" car unless you can come up with a use other than making someone feel like they have some self esteem when they don't.
"And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
of course i did! the performance of the car along with the fact 90%+ of the people out there think it's the new boxster are the two primary factors that drove me to the car. i crap you not when i tell you i've had several people ask me that uncomfortable question "how much does it cost" and the vast majority of their guesses are $150k or less! i love that because i'm embarrased to be so self centered as to drive around a $500k CAR!
"No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?"
nope, i DETEST being followed around with cameras and video recorders which is way too common in this car. i fully expected the car to garner significantly less attention than the stradale but it's just the opposite. you'll note my driveway and garage is full of gray/silver cars - not red ones!
"and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back"
the CGT looks pretty crapy roofwise when the tops are on. my wife and i both agree the stradale is many times more beautiful than the CGT.
"I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive."
i'm not putting anyone down BECAUSE they prefer a different car. however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves.
"It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet."
frauds should be exposed.
given the factual like tone and word choice in your post, i felt certain you actually had some experience with that about which wrote so definitively and confidentally.
"And the whole point is: Who cares? Why is it important?"
because we are discussing cars on the cars board!!!! if no one cares, why are we here and why are there any posts?
"It seems very important to you that we brand one car as "good" and the other as "bad"."
really? i thought i commented on how people who have actually DRIVEN the car (ie: NOT you) have commented on how poor a GT it is and how poor a track car it is. given it does a poor job at both, i have to conclude it IS a "bad" car unless you can come up with a use other than making someone feel like they have some self esteem when they don't.
"And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
of course i did! the performance of the car along with the fact 90%+ of the people out there think it's the new boxster are the two primary factors that drove me to the car. i crap you not when i tell you i've had several people ask me that uncomfortable question "how much does it cost" and the vast majority of their guesses are $150k or less! i love that because i'm embarrased to be so self centered as to drive around a $500k CAR!
"No interest whatsoever in the status/showoff-effect it has, right?"
nope, i DETEST being followed around with cameras and video recorders which is way too common in this car. i fully expected the car to garner significantly less attention than the stradale but it's just the opposite. you'll note my driveway and garage is full of gray/silver cars - not red ones!
"and personally Im not crazy about the design of the roof/back"
the CGT looks pretty crapy roofwise when the tops are on. my wife and i both agree the stradale is many times more beautiful than the CGT.
"I suggest you stop putting other people down because they dont all prefer the car you drive."
i'm not putting anyone down BECAUSE they prefer a different car. however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves.
"It was made for MB-biased buyers who want to invest $$$ to be able to FEEL that they own the best car on the planet."
frauds should be exposed.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
Ben, have you driven the latest top of the line AMG's by any chance? Like SL65/55?
If you have, then drive an SLR, just for my sake....I really want your opinion...good or bad
i've driven the 55 (though know of many that have been lemoned) and would love to drive the 65 to experience 738 lbs @ 2k RPM but there just aren't a ton of them around here yet. i have a lot more respect for the 65 than the SLR because the former is what it's supposed to and held out to be. i was at a car show last week with my pcar salesman and was telling him about what an animal the 65 was and he was amazed and surprised. i'd like to drive the SLR, but it's highly unlikely i'd be real moved by a heavy automatic car as anything but a crusier. that doesn't mean those aren't great cars for a lot of people, they are just factors which would never make it through my filters which are heavy on driver involvement and communication.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
///AMG Mercedes said:
Ben, have you driven the latest top of the line AMG's by any chance? Like SL65/55?
If you have, then drive an SLR, just for my sake....I really want your opinion...good or bad
i've driven the 55 (though know of many that have been lemoned) and would love to drive the 65 to experience 738 lbs @ 2k RPM but there just aren't a ton of them around here yet. i have a lot more respect for the 65 than the SLR because the former is what it's supposed to and held out to be. i was at a car show last week with my pcar salesman and was telling him about what an animal the 65 was and he was amazed and surprised. i'd like to drive the SLR, but it's highly unlikely i'd be real moved by a heavy automatic car as anything but a crusier. that doesn't mean those aren't great cars for a lot of people, they are just factors which would never make it through my filters which are heavy on driver involvement and communication.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves."
Hipocrisy from the man with the 500,000 $ car IMHO.
If you ask people if you need to spend that kind of money to get a great car experience, I think most people in here would say "no".
Are you a professional racecar driver? If not, youre not even able to get your money's worth in a car like the CGT...simply because you're not able to take it to the limits it was built for.
Hence youre either wasting your money on an overkill car, or (and this is my guess) not inclined to admit that you bought the car because it's cool, expensive and makes you a traffic VIP.
"frauds should be exposed." What the heck are you talking about? Branding is everything in a top-dollar market like the one you find the SLR and CGT in.
People dont buy nuts and bolts for 500,000 $....they buy n experience, history, legacy, adventure...feeling. Call it what you like.
As long as people get that feeling they get exactly what they wanted.
As for your car...if you bought it for the performance alone, why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort? Seems its both a lot more economical and a lot faster too.
But of course...the seats are just that tad too uncomfortable, that you had to spend 5 times the amount on the CGT, right?
IMO thats a load of crap.
You love the look, the feel, the handling, the Porsche brand and the prestige of the CGT. And good for you. It's a cool car.
Other people prefer other cars for other reasons than you.
Who says your standards are the ones that apply to all cars?
I might be totally wrong about your real personality, but you come across as an arrogant know-it-all, thinking that buying a 500K$ car also bought you a license to put other people down.
I dont care if you drive a CGT or a goldplated Rolls, you still have to respect other people's choices and tastes. Even if they suck compared to your way of seeing the world.
And regarding my "I haven driven the SLR" comment, my last post was not exactly a report on the car's performance, was it?
There's a bundle of cars I havent driven, but still have an opinion about. I hope that's ok with you.
Hipocrisy from the man with the 500,000 $ car IMHO.
If you ask people if you need to spend that kind of money to get a great car experience, I think most people in here would say "no".
Are you a professional racecar driver? If not, youre not even able to get your money's worth in a car like the CGT...simply because you're not able to take it to the limits it was built for.
Hence youre either wasting your money on an overkill car, or (and this is my guess) not inclined to admit that you bought the car because it's cool, expensive and makes you a traffic VIP.
"frauds should be exposed." What the heck are you talking about? Branding is everything in a top-dollar market like the one you find the SLR and CGT in.
People dont buy nuts and bolts for 500,000 $....they buy n experience, history, legacy, adventure...feeling. Call it what you like.
As long as people get that feeling they get exactly what they wanted.
As for your car...if you bought it for the performance alone, why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort? Seems its both a lot more economical and a lot faster too.
But of course...the seats are just that tad too uncomfortable, that you had to spend 5 times the amount on the CGT, right?
IMO thats a load of crap.
You love the look, the feel, the handling, the Porsche brand and the prestige of the CGT. And good for you. It's a cool car.
Other people prefer other cars for other reasons than you.
Who says your standards are the ones that apply to all cars?
I might be totally wrong about your real personality, but you come across as an arrogant know-it-all, thinking that buying a 500K$ car also bought you a license to put other people down.
I dont care if you drive a CGT or a goldplated Rolls, you still have to respect other people's choices and tastes. Even if they suck compared to your way of seeing the world.
And regarding my "I haven driven the SLR" comment, my last post was not exactly a report on the car's performance, was it?
There's a bundle of cars I havent driven, but still have an opinion about. I hope that's ok with you.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"however, if they like ANY car because it makes them "feel" like they are projecting a "symbol of power, wealth and being set apart from the crowd", i pity their pathetic, little insecure selves."
Hipocrisy from the man with the 500,000 $ car IMHO.
If you ask people if you need to spend that kind of money to get a great car experience, I think most people in here would say "no".
Are you a professional racecar driver? If not, youre not even able to get your money's worth in a car like the CGT...simply because you're not able to take it to the limits it was built for.
Hence youre either wasting your money on an overkill car, or (and this is my guess) not inclined to admit that you bought the car because it's cool, expensive and makes you a traffic VIP.
"frauds should be exposed." What the heck are you talking about? Branding is everything in a top-dollar market like the one you find the SLR and CGT in.
People dont buy nuts and bolts for 500,000 $....they buy n experience, history, legacy, adventure...feeling. Call it what you like.
As long as people get that feeling they get exactly what they wanted.
As for your car...if you bought it for the performance alone, why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort? Seems its both a lot more economical and a lot faster too.
But of course...the seats are just that tad too uncomfortable, that you had to spend 5 times the amount on the CGT, right?
IMO thats a load of crap.
You love the look, the feel, the handling, the Porsche brand and the prestige of the CGT. And good for you. It's a cool car.
Other people prefer other cars for other reasons than you.
Who says your standards are the ones that apply to all cars?
I might be totally wrong about your real personality, but you come across as an arrogant know-it-all, thinking that buying a 500K$ car also bought you a license to put other people down.
I dont care if you drive a CGT or a goldplated Rolls, you still have to respect other people's choices and tastes. Even if they suck compared to your way of seeing the world.
And regarding my "I haven driven the SLR" comment, my last post was not exactly a report on the car's performance, was it?
There's a bundle of cars I havent driven, but still have an opinion about. I hope that's ok with you.
Hipocrisy from the man with the 500,000 $ car IMHO.
If you ask people if you need to spend that kind of money to get a great car experience, I think most people in here would say "no".
Are you a professional racecar driver? If not, youre not even able to get your money's worth in a car like the CGT...simply because you're not able to take it to the limits it was built for.
Hence youre either wasting your money on an overkill car, or (and this is my guess) not inclined to admit that you bought the car because it's cool, expensive and makes you a traffic VIP.
"frauds should be exposed." What the heck are you talking about? Branding is everything in a top-dollar market like the one you find the SLR and CGT in.
People dont buy nuts and bolts for 500,000 $....they buy n experience, history, legacy, adventure...feeling. Call it what you like.
As long as people get that feeling they get exactly what they wanted.
As for your car...if you bought it for the performance alone, why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort? Seems its both a lot more economical and a lot faster too.
But of course...the seats are just that tad too uncomfortable, that you had to spend 5 times the amount on the CGT, right?
IMO thats a load of crap.
You love the look, the feel, the handling, the Porsche brand and the prestige of the CGT. And good for you. It's a cool car.
Other people prefer other cars for other reasons than you.
Who says your standards are the ones that apply to all cars?
I might be totally wrong about your real personality, but you come across as an arrogant know-it-all, thinking that buying a 500K$ car also bought you a license to put other people down.
I dont care if you drive a CGT or a goldplated Rolls, you still have to respect other people's choices and tastes. Even if they suck compared to your way of seeing the world.
And regarding my "I haven driven the SLR" comment, my last post was not exactly a report on the car's performance, was it?
There's a bundle of cars I havent driven, but still have an opinion about. I hope that's ok with you.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort?"
what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal.
you are entirely wrong about me phil, and there's really not much i can do about that. i just don't care for fake people who attempt to elevate themselves above others through "exclusive" material things to fill holes in their guts about what they really think about themselves. like i said, one of the things i like best about the $500k CGT is that 90%+ of the population think it a $100k to $150k car. luckily $100 to $150k cars in s. california are fairly common which helps reduce somewhat the "stick out" aspect of the CGT.
i've driven a lot of cars phil, and there is a uniqueness in the CGT that i've never experienced before. i used to think the stradale was the pinnacle of a street legal race car, but it seems slow in comparison now (though it feels more go kart like). also, i like the break from "all the time race car" the CGT offers. rather, it really is a dual personality car which is 100% in control of the driver. what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?
fwiw phil, my car has been near it's handling limits on several occassions, and not real far from it's top end!
what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal.
you are entirely wrong about me phil, and there's really not much i can do about that. i just don't care for fake people who attempt to elevate themselves above others through "exclusive" material things to fill holes in their guts about what they really think about themselves. like i said, one of the things i like best about the $500k CGT is that 90%+ of the population think it a $100k to $150k car. luckily $100 to $150k cars in s. california are fairly common which helps reduce somewhat the "stick out" aspect of the CGT.
i've driven a lot of cars phil, and there is a uniqueness in the CGT that i've never experienced before. i used to think the stradale was the pinnacle of a street legal race car, but it seems slow in comparison now (though it feels more go kart like). also, i like the break from "all the time race car" the CGT offers. rather, it really is a dual personality car which is 100% in control of the driver. what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?
fwiw phil, my car has been near it's handling limits on several occassions, and not real far from it's top end!
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"why not save yourself $$$$$ and get a Donkervoort?"
what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal.
you are entirely wrong about me phil, and there's really not much i can do about that. i just don't care for fake people who attempt to elevate themselves above others through "exclusive" material things to fill holes in their guts about what they really think about themselves. like i said, one of the things i like best about the $500k CGT is that 90%+ of the population think it a $100k to $150k car. luckily $100 to $150k cars in s. california are fairly common which helps reduce somewhat the "stick out" aspect of the CGT.
i've driven a lot of cars phil, and there is a uniqueness in the CGT that i've never experienced before. i used to think the stradale was the pinnacle of a street legal race car, but it seems slow in comparison now (though it feels more go kart like). also, i like the break from "all the time race car" the CGT offers. rather, it really is a dual personality car which is 100% in control of the driver. what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?
fwiw phil, my car has been near it's handling limits on several occassions, and not real far from it's top end!
what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal.
you are entirely wrong about me phil, and there's really not much i can do about that. i just don't care for fake people who attempt to elevate themselves above others through "exclusive" material things to fill holes in their guts about what they really think about themselves. like i said, one of the things i like best about the $500k CGT is that 90%+ of the population think it a $100k to $150k car. luckily $100 to $150k cars in s. california are fairly common which helps reduce somewhat the "stick out" aspect of the CGT.
i've driven a lot of cars phil, and there is a uniqueness in the CGT that i've never experienced before. i used to think the stradale was the pinnacle of a street legal race car, but it seems slow in comparison now (though it feels more go kart like). also, i like the break from "all the time race car" the CGT offers. rather, it really is a dual personality car which is 100% in control of the driver. what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?
fwiw phil, my car has been near it's handling limits on several occassions, and not real far from it's top end!
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Im not questioning the fact that you get your money's worth in the CGT. And I should hope so at $500K.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Im not questioning the fact that you get your money's worth in the CGT. And I should hope so at $500K.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic."
phil, i think you are definetely misunderstanding me. the "only" "other reason" for picking a car i considered a buyer to be pathetic is THE one that is trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct. if someone picks a car because they don't want a drivers car and instead wants a comfy "gt", that's cool. however, the three reviewers at Automobile apparently think that is the wrong reason to buy an SLR (the car which is the subject of this thread) since it supposedly sucks as a GT! if not because it's a great GT, then it must be because of it's performance. tiff apparently was far from impressed with the SLR from this aspect. what does that leave besides posing?
"Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed)"
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
"I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)"
perhaps, but again "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?"
"And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car."
you might find this extremely hard to believe, but if toyota did indeed make a supra with the above qualities (a riced up with aftermarket parts, force air induced project car supra with VERY questionable reliability does not qualify), i'd be THRILLED to buy it - especially for considerably less. at times porsche doesn't please me in a lot of ways and it would be wonderful to be able to get the things i seek from a company with a reputation for reliability and great service like toyota/lexus. it's not about the brand for me.
"Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
phil, i think you are definetely misunderstanding me. the "only" "other reason" for picking a car i considered a buyer to be pathetic is THE one that is trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct. if someone picks a car because they don't want a drivers car and instead wants a comfy "gt", that's cool. however, the three reviewers at Automobile apparently think that is the wrong reason to buy an SLR (the car which is the subject of this thread) since it supposedly sucks as a GT! if not because it's a great GT, then it must be because of it's performance. tiff apparently was far from impressed with the SLR from this aspect. what does that leave besides posing?
"Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed)"
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
"I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)"
perhaps, but again "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?"
"And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car."
you might find this extremely hard to believe, but if toyota did indeed make a supra with the above qualities (a riced up with aftermarket parts, force air induced project car supra with VERY questionable reliability does not qualify), i'd be THRILLED to buy it - especially for considerably less. at times porsche doesn't please me in a lot of ways and it would be wonderful to be able to get the things i seek from a company with a reputation for reliability and great service like toyota/lexus. it's not about the brand for me.
"Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
"Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic."
phil, i think you are definetely misunderstanding me. the "only" "other reason" for picking a car i considered a buyer to be pathetic is THE one that is trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct. if someone picks a car because they don't want a drivers car and instead wants a comfy "gt", that's cool. however, the three reviewers at Automobile apparently think that is the wrong reason to buy an SLR (the car which is the subject of this thread) since it supposedly sucks as a GT! if not because it's a great GT, then it must be because of it's performance. tiff apparently was far from impressed with the SLR from this aspect. what does that leave besides posing?
"Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed)"
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
"I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)"
perhaps, but again "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?"
"And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car."
you might find this extremely hard to believe, but if toyota did indeed make a supra with the above qualities (a riced up with aftermarket parts, force air induced project car supra with VERY questionable reliability does not qualify), i'd be THRILLED to buy it - especially for considerably less. at times porsche doesn't please me in a lot of ways and it would be wonderful to be able to get the things i seek from a company with a reputation for reliability and great service like toyota/lexus. it's not about the brand for me.
"Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
phil, i think you are definetely misunderstanding me. the "only" "other reason" for picking a car i considered a buyer to be pathetic is THE one that is trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct. if someone picks a car because they don't want a drivers car and instead wants a comfy "gt", that's cool. however, the three reviewers at Automobile apparently think that is the wrong reason to buy an SLR (the car which is the subject of this thread) since it supposedly sucks as a GT! if not because it's a great GT, then it must be because of it's performance. tiff apparently was far from impressed with the SLR from this aspect. what does that leave besides posing?
"Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed)"
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
"I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)"
perhaps, but again "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?"
"And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car."
you might find this extremely hard to believe, but if toyota did indeed make a supra with the above qualities (a riced up with aftermarket parts, force air induced project car supra with VERY questionable reliability does not qualify), i'd be THRILLED to buy it - especially for considerably less. at times porsche doesn't please me in a lot of ways and it would be wonderful to be able to get the things i seek from a company with a reputation for reliability and great service like toyota/lexus. it's not about the brand for me.
"Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
Im not questioning the fact that you get your money's worth in the CGT. And I should hope so at $500K.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
The Supra will NEVER handle the way the CGT does. Ben bought the car because he wanted THE BEST street-legal sports car currently available and the CGT arguably is just that. The Donkervoort is a lightweight, non-street-legal kit car and cannot be compared to the CGT. Now you may argue that it's all about performance, but then again, why not just buy the 962 and show ol' Donkie some tail lights? The argument was about the SLR however. Ben clearly states that the car is being bought by poseurs to show off. That probably isn't the case with every buyer (Jay Leno for one), but I'm pretty sure it's widespread enough to support Ben's claims. Want proof? Look at how sales went in the US? The SLR couldn't be had for less than 700k, while the CGT was and still IS available new at MSRP. You can even get a factory build slot. Try that with the SLR, more of which were made. A car that DOES handle worse, is LESS comfortable than the CGT and costs more, plus is hyped up beyond belief. Why would you buy such a car if it were not to show off? As far as looks go I'm not too keen on its goofy side profile. As far as the CGT goes, you should really look up some older posts by Ben. He has over the months fired so much flak at the car it's hard to believe that he owns one, so I don't think he's being biased. But the main question is this. What purpose does a 5-speed automatic 1800 kg, uncomfortable car serve? It's a bad GT and not as capable a performer as the CGT. Please note that the CGT has everything the SLR has minus the slushbox. I really had my hopes up for the SLR but it seems that the car just isn't on par with the true big dogs. I'll take a CGT over it any day. Ben, can I get a ride next time I'm in SoCal?
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
Im not questioning the fact that you get your money's worth in the CGT. And I should hope so at $500K.
Neither am I questioning the fact that you think any person who picks a car for other reasons than you do is either retarded or pathetic.
"what do i want with a canvas doored, no top, kit car that probably isn't even US street legal. "
Like I said, the Donkervoort (which to my knowledge IS streetlegal in the US) just kicked the CGT's ass on Nurnburgring by 15 secs, so if it's performance alone and nothing else (like you claimed) being the reason for buying the CGT, you made a very expensive choice.
(the Donkervoort is just an example. I'm sure you can purchase other cars with better performance than the CGT besides the Donkervoort at a much lower price.)
If, however, you want the full sportscar package incl. handling, power, looks, legacy, design etc etc, the CGT is a great choice.
But if you just want performance - and just that, you seriously have to be a moron to pay 500,000 K USD to get it.
Get a Toyota Supra Biturbo and crank it up, or any number of other jap cars.
There is absolutely no need to pay for the Porsche brand to get a 600bhp car.
Any number of cheap cars with a NOS system will get you there.
Im pretty sure you know this. And Im pretty sure you know that cars are so much more than technology...and that branding is a very essential part of selling and buying a car.
Hence we're back to where I started out: People buy cars based on emotions, not numbers.
You like the handling and thrill of the ride, others like the luxury feeling.
You buy a car that you can ACTUALLY TAKE to the tracks, others buy the same car because they like the IDEA OF TAKING IT TO THE TRACK.
Im just saying: If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance, youre either insulting my intelligence or have no clue how to spend money wisely.
The Supra will NEVER handle the way the CGT does. Ben bought the car because he wanted THE BEST street-legal sports car currently available and the CGT arguably is just that. The Donkervoort is a lightweight, non-street-legal kit car and cannot be compared to the CGT. Now you may argue that it's all about performance, but then again, why not just buy the 962 and show ol' Donkie some tail lights? The argument was about the SLR however. Ben clearly states that the car is being bought by poseurs to show off. That probably isn't the case with every buyer (Jay Leno for one), but I'm pretty sure it's widespread enough to support Ben's claims. Want proof? Look at how sales went in the US? The SLR couldn't be had for less than 700k, while the CGT was and still IS available new at MSRP. You can even get a factory build slot. Try that with the SLR, more of which were made. A car that DOES handle worse, is LESS comfortable than the CGT and costs more, plus is hyped up beyond belief. Why would you buy such a car if it were not to show off? As far as looks go I'm not too keen on its goofy side profile. As far as the CGT goes, you should really look up some older posts by Ben. He has over the months fired so much flak at the car it's hard to believe that he owns one, so I don't think he's being biased. But the main question is this. What purpose does a 5-speed automatic 1800 kg, uncomfortable car serve? It's a bad GT and not as capable a performer as the CGT. Please note that the CGT has everything the SLR has minus the slushbox. I really had my hopes up for the SLR but it seems that the car just isn't on par with the true big dogs. I'll take a CGT over it any day. Ben, can I get a ride next time I'm in SoCal?
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Well, well, well... suddenly it's not about the performance anymore.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
Quote:
ben, lj said:
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
Dr. Phil: "...If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Well, well, well... suddenly it's not about the performance anymore.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
Quote:
ben, lj said:
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
Dr. Phil: "...If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
Well, well, well... suddenly it's not about the performance anymore.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
Quote:
ben, lj said:
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
Dr. Phil: "...If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
phil, i give up. i don't care about the money (obviously). but, you win. the CGT is a horrific waste of money and i should have just bought a riced up, modified turbo japenese car to get the same package i bought for $500k. too bad i didn't consult with you prior to my purchase. i'll get in touch with you next time and seek your unique wisdom in advance.
ps. how does all this relate to the SLR? were the CGT, riced up Supras, and Donkeycars just brought in to cover up how weak the pro SLR argument (ie: they are great for insecure people hoping to hide small organs) was because their introduction has done nothing to refute the con SLR argument?
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Quote:
DrPhil said:
Well, well, well... suddenly it's not about the performance anymore.
It's fine you change your mind or didnt express yourself clearly enough - but then its pretty sad we've been having this debate on the wrong premise.
Quote:
ben, lj said:
did i say "performance alone" or did i instead say one of the two "primary" factors was performance?
Dr. Phil: "...If you tell me you ONLY bought the CGT because of performance..."
i never told you that. rather, performance is a primary factor in my decision to buy almost any of the cars we own or have owned.
And heres what you said before:
Dr. Phil: "And of course you bought your CGT just for the handling, right?"
Ben: of course i did!
:::
Sorry, I oversaw the "primary factors" part buried later in the long explanation. That didnt come out very clearly.
If you TRULY want an alternative to the CGT at a fraction of the cost, wwhy not check out our old discussion thread about the record at Nurnburgring being beaten?
People in here listed all kinds of cars that could beat the CGT around the Ring...they just thought it didnt count because they weren't real supercars.
I know Koenig used to build fast cars, RUF makes awesome rides and even Alpina. I had a colleague who had a 620bhp Audi A4 3.0 Quattro with turbo anti-lag. I doubt the CGT would be able to keep up with that...and even if the engine should blow, u can afford changing it around 40 times before you spend the amount of $ the CGT costs.
A chipped + optimized Audi RS4 is also a serious car and I believe a Nissan Skyline can be modded extensively without getting FUBARed.
The "what other US legal, topless, lightweight, RWD, 1.3g+ lateral G pulling, manual shift, 600 hp, high revving NA car is there?" line you keep referring too is a bit convenient.
If it's all about PERFORMANCE, why would you care how you get it, how many HPs it has, if its high revving or what the car looks like?
topgear just had a test where they compared the Murcielago to the Mitsu EVO VIII. Apparently the Lambo couldnt shake the Mitsu around the track.
Kinda sucks to have paid that kinda money on a Lambo, when you cant even shake a Mitsu, eh?
Sorry, the point (again, for the umpteenth time) is of course: Who the hell would prefer driving a Mitsu if they could have a Lambo?
And Ben, my guess is you'd NEVER pick a faster modded jap car over your CGT. Do the math. You can afford blowing up the engine on what...TEN? Supras and still have money left compared to what youve paid for the CGT, so thats not really an argument.
phil, i give up. i don't care about the money (obviously). but, you win. the CGT is a horrific waste of money and i should have just bought a riced up, modified turbo japenese car to get the same package i bought for $500k. too bad i didn't consult with you prior to my purchase. i'll get in touch with you next time and seek your unique wisdom in advance.
ps. how does all this relate to the SLR? were the CGT, riced up Supras, and Donkeycars just brought in to cover up how weak the pro SLR argument (ie: they are great for insecure people hoping to hide small organs) was because their introduction has done nothing to refute the con SLR argument?
Re: SLR Tiff Needell VIDEO Finally!
Oh man, you really are pathetic.
Speaking of hiding small organs. My god
I've spend around 4-5 posts trying to explain to you why some people like the SLR and some prefer other cars, and all we get is your arrogant "i know better" attitude. Did being a lamer come free with the CGT or did you have to buy it as an extra option?
Apparently you're so caught up in your own sad self-coolness of being a CGT owner, that you cant hear anything but your own voice.
"...trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct"
Yeah, I believe you know first hand what youre talking about.
Speaking of hiding small organs. My god
I've spend around 4-5 posts trying to explain to you why some people like the SLR and some prefer other cars, and all we get is your arrogant "i know better" attitude. Did being a lamer come free with the CGT or did you have to buy it as an extra option?
Apparently you're so caught up in your own sad self-coolness of being a CGT owner, that you cant hear anything but your own voice.
"...trying to elevate oneself above others through the expenditure of cash in a futile attempt to make up for what are obviously deep psychological deficiences for which many years of psychotherapy are required to correct"
Yeah, I believe you know first hand what youre talking about.
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
