Cybermind

Hey guys,

Just thought you would get a kick out of this one. I apologize if it's already been posted. Now this is what I call perfect control. Gives a new meaning to the phrase; "drive it like you stole it."


PS: For all the FRAM haters, check what's under the hood! The engine didn't explode………..

C5 Pewter Coupe

Fram X (synthetic) filters are damn good.. just don't use their regular filters..

Cybermind

They're now called Fram Ultra in my neck of the woods. I use it in all my cars.

What surprised me about the video is that it's a regular orange can Fram. That's a million-dollar classic Ferrari GTO!

Guibo

Nice to see a superexotic being used like that. As for the Fram orange filters, I've seen them quite often in pictures of 365 GTBs:
http://www.cartype.com/pics/3775/ful...gtb_70_eng.jpg

And even the original GTOs (one sample going for ~$50M in recent auction).
http://static.cargurus.com/images/si...pic-49015.jpeg

Apparently they were an approved (and OEM) fitment for Ferraris of the time (though blue filters can be seen in some cutaway diagrams from the period, and orange ones in others).

Dave68

I'd like to see that Ferrari being chased by a $40,000 EVO....

Guibo

That would impress you, I'm sure. If that is what you got out of this video, then I think you've missed the point.

Cybermind

I was thinking the same thing. I didn't see the relevance of the EVO comment.

apriliacati

Seriously, what is wrong with you, did you do a lot of drugs as a child??

Dave68

Okay, I guess I have to spell things out for all you "think inside the box" guys.

The EVO was found to be the best-handling car (a while back) in the US among the best vehicles priced near the EVO's price or lower. How does this car company that sells fewer than any other in the US, beat so many sporty cars at their own game? How would it do against a $300,000 sports car in a video reminiscent of a Ken Block video?

Is that too much to ask?

Guibo

And...??? So what? That has no relevance to this video.

Mitsubishi sales in the US, 2013: 62,227
Ferrari global sales, 2013: ~7,000

How do you figure that 62k is "fewer than" 7k?

Ferrari's game is to instill exclusivity and sexy lustfulness in its cars, both of which contribute to a brand cachet that Mitsubishi simply cannot match. This exclusivity is evident in the 288 GTO's recent market price of $1.5 million:
http://www.sportscardigest.com/goodi...ction-results/

As for the sexy lustfulness, it's really no contest IMO:


Get back to me when you can find a $40k Evo that sells for $1.5M, and I might concede that Mitsubishi has "beaten Ferrari at its own game." Problem is, a GTO will likely be worth hundreds of millions (if not billions) by the time that happens.

While that 288 GTO was ostensibly designed for Group B racing competition, it's no more suited to off-road rallying than a bog standard Porsche 959. Which is why the actual off-road rallying 959 looks quite different:


There's not much evidence (if any) that Ferrari ever implemented its planned AWD GTO designed for Group B rallying, which was terminated after too many deaths.

That being said, even that 288 GTO in street trim is likely closer to doing what the Evo can do on those roads than the Evo trying to beat the GTO at its own game.

I think most people in a position to buy a GTO and treat it like that (unlike you) probably don't stay awake pondering such things. Obviously, if you can afford such a Ferrari, you can afford such a Mitsubishi (and many multiple of them).
Is there any such video of Ken Block driving a bog standard $40k Evo? If not, ask yourself why not and you might come to this conclusion: Because nobody gives a flying crap. A super rare supercar from the most famous sports car maker on the planet, and valued at over $1M, being driven like that? It's far more interesting, IMO.

This is not bashing of the Evo. I'm sure it's a fine car, for some of the things it was designed to do. Sharing concours space during the Pebble Beach weekend with some of the most beautiful cars in the world, and fetching $1.5M, is not any of those things. By the same token, a 30-year-old RWD Ferrari was never meant to beat a mass-produced (and thus cheaper) AWD 30-year-newer car at its own game, so to compare them on that basis and crow about the "achievement" seems a little bizarre/absurd.

You seem to be coming at this from a bang/buck perspective, apparently impervious to the concept that this is an ultra-rare street car being driven in a way that not even most Evo drivers treat their cars. That you would then label us as "think inside the box guys" is somewhat ironic.

Dave68

The year? Circa 1900
Guibo spots a majestic, but older eagle, soaring through the sky. Sitting across the table is Orville Wright.

Guibo: "Isn't that old bird, simply majestic?"

Orville: "Yes, but I'd like to not only fly like that bird, but faster and with even better views from higher altitudes."

Guibo: "That statement is not only idiotic, but also totally irrelevant to my statement. Eagles have been flying far longer than man has been walking and for a human to actually fly would be simply impossible. Did you know that eagles are among the most valuable birds in North America? Back when native Indians ruled the land, blah blah blah, blah blah..............."

....point made: Just because something is irrelevant in your mind, doesn't mean it is irrelevant to all.

Guibo

Dave, you purposefully took a 30-year-old car and threw it into a bang-for-buck argument that is irrelevant as to why this video is fascinating. That is the irrelevance. If you disagree, then what (do tell!) is the relevance in comparing a 288 GTO to an Evo? Is anyone seriously cross-shopping the two? Does the value of one affect the value of the other?

Not only that, but you have totally missed my point (and question to which you have still provided no good answer): The Evo might very well be faster, but so what?? This is in direct contrast to your imaginary discussion involving me and Orville Wright, in which you (quite ignorantly, I might add) theorize that I think human flight is impossible.

Can a person marvel at the beauty of flight of a bird? Yes! Does he have to make comparisons between the flight of a bird and that of an airplane? No, not necessarily! Not if he doesn't ascribe a Top Trumps mentality to everything he observes in life. One can marvel at the relative precision of a WWII sniper rifle or the killing power of a machine gun from the era, without necessarily needing to draw comparisons with their counterparts from the 21st century.

The example of this video would be sort of like someone taking an old, rare, and extremely valuable ($1.5M!) heirloom rifle from the 1930s down from their wall and using it to kill hundreds of well-armed insurgents in Fallujah. Nobody (except you??) really gives a crap that a modern sniper rifle can do it much better. (Having 30 years of technology AND AWD, we might feel Mitsubishi would be underperforming if their rally-bred machine wasn't faster than a 30-year-old car designed primarily for the smooth, paved roads.) Thanks for your insight, Capt. Obvious!

Guibo

"Think inside the box guys"...says the guy who thinks sports cars should never be allowed to touch snow.

(Same one who claimed that Ferrari outsells Mitsubishi in the US...)

apriliacati

I commend you on your patience, I just seem to get angry.

Dave68

The simple fact that one sentence provokes so much anger says much about the way your mind works....kinda like a psychologist presenting ink blot shapes. The image each shape conveys varies among those who view it. If you think that one image/ one sentence should mean only one thing to all people, you have much to learn.

RedLS6

I saw that video posted on another forum; always nice to see an F-car driven! BTW, you wouldn't need to spend $40,000 to outrun it.....but given my choices, I think I'd rather spend the day driving the Ferrari, than the Evo.



.

apriliacati

I might have much to learn but it wouldn't be from you..

Go back to the last 10 pages of the Porsche thread and read everyone's comments to you. You simply don't get it. Your comments are off the wall. There's a reason why nytmerez and others always abuse you.

Guibo

Whether an ink spot means only one thing to all people is not the issue here. What is the issue is that you yourself cannot even provide any answer to the question of the relevance of your sentence. I've asked you twice now for the relevance, and you haven't answered. Is this not, then, a de facto admission that your statement had zero relevance?
And oh, yeah. Let's stop pretending that there's more than one way to interpret your position that Mitsubishi sells fewer cars in the US than Ferrari, or that I ever said (or implied) that human flight is impossible (or that a 30-year-newer AWD Evo could never be faster), or that Ferrari's "game" is to provide outstanding bang-for-buck value or a terribly fast off-road driving experience in a 30-year-old car designed primarily (and as equipped in the video) for on-road use.

Guibo

Let's try this again without the BS straw man argument of whether it is impossible for humans to fly, and with an eye toward what has actually transpired in this thread.

The year? Circa 2014.
I spot a majestic, but older eagle, soaring through the sky. Sitting across the table is Dave68.

Me: "Isn't that old bird, simply majestic?"

Dave68: "I bet it couldn't take out as many SAM sites as an F-16."

Me: "How is that even relevant to anything I just said?"

Dave68: "Errr...ummmm....ink spots!"

LTC Z06

True story, and the irony is I just randomly found this thread but poor Dave is getting abused again for his inane comments.