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?