When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
"Yet again" presupposes that I previously posted in this thread. Perhaps you should review the thread before making such inane posts.
Also, it's very clear you you DO care about the Corvette/328 comparison given your active participation in this thread which started with a direct Corvette/328 comparison.
I meant "yet again", as in another person thats totally missing the point. I do not care about the 328/c4 comparo. I'm laughing at the fools that think a bottom end ferrari is worth comparing to Americas best. I suggest it is you who re-reads.
Originally Posted by Tom400CFI
Both.
It IS an awesome machine. If you ever drove one, you'd "get it"...but you don't.
It also IS Ferrari's cheapest/entry level/bottom-of-the-line model at that time.
What is hard to understand about this? Of course, none of this has anything to do w/the OP.
Thank you
Originally Posted by MavsAK
I'm not hating on Ferrari's (all of them) but the 328... is well junk Best things out of Ferrari in that Era were the F40 and the 512 TR. Their 90s cars were much better (mm F50).
And I'd love to get my hands on a 458 Italia someday (Now THAT is a car I'm not so much a fan of the F430 I don't think it's looks are anywhere in the same league as a 458)
Yes. Yes it is. Which is why this thread is filled with so much humor when trying to compare it to americas finest sports car.
I'm not hating on Ferrari's (all of them) but the 328... is well junk Best things out of Ferrari in that Era were the F40 and the 512 TR. Their 90s cars were much better (mm F50).
That statement is certainly not unique to Ferrari. Is there another car company whose 80's cars were much better than their '90's cars?
Lol about you calling a 328 "junk". I'd like to see you drive one and say that (honestly).
Do you guys no this is a Corvette forum, if you don't like em and prefer the European styles you can always turn your pointy little shoes , pick up your murses and head over to their sites. lol
Don't you all think a Porsche Boxter is just the "ultimate" sports car???!!!!!!!!!!
Interesting debate. (Should subside as soon as all this friggin snow and salt is gone?)
It may come as a surprise to anyone but a ZR-1 driver, but the "casting of dispersions" on Ferrari comes very close to this same kind of "dispersions" ZR-1 (LT5s) get from the "LSx" crowd. Talk about haters!
In fact, as Dave McLellan said, the LT5 stuck its finger in a lot of (GM Powertrain engineer's) eyes. In fact, when you visit GM Powertrain, in the lobby there is one of every motor GM built, but for one very conspicuously missing motor that to this day gives GMs contemporary motors pause - the LT5! And, truth be known, it produces power (under the curve) in much the same way as the DOHC Ferraris do: smooth and continuous beyond the rpm range seldom experienced by "99%" of GM drivers. (And, like driving a Ferrari, you really can't dis one until you've dropped the hammer on one yourself. THEN you'll understand!) But, I digress...
Last edited by Paul Workman; Mar 13, 2014 at 12:52 PM.
Close, you're only about 2 seconds off, and that's not all that much in a quarter mile. Look it up, or just drive one.
A few seconds off? I beg to differ.
Boxster S 0-60 4.5-4.7 seconds
1/4 12.7 @109.7
Not bad for a bottom of the barrel, slowest-Porsche-available, eh? And certainly not bad considering the boxster is built for handling and not straight line (like all of European cars...)
A few seconds off? I beg to differ.
Boxster S 0-60 4.5-4.7 seconds
1/4 12.7 @109.7
Not bad for a bottom of the barrel, slowest-Porsche-available, eh? And certainly not bad considering the boxster is built for handling and not straight line (like all of European cars...)
Well, that isn't bad and it's faster than I recall Boxter's being. However, it's still not going to keep up with these bottom-of-the-model-range cars.... 11.49@118
Well, that isn't bad and it's faster than I recall Boxter's being. However, it's still not going to keep up with these bottom-of-the-model-range cars.... 11.49@118
Again.. comparing americas top car (that and the viper..), to Porsche's lowest car w/ the best motor. Not smart
Back in 92' I almost bought one of these. It had a great price and the mileage was only 17k. I did a little research and was told that these had a weird cam drive gear made out of some kind of composite material or maybe it was belts to reduce gear whine in the interior. They had a habit of wearing out after about 15k miles. When they failed it would skip timing and bend most the valves. I asked the owner if he had his replaced and he gave me one of those "I've been caught" looks and said no. I checked into the price and found out that because it was a mid engine car the engine had to be removed to replace the gear/belts. To remove the engine most of the car had to be taken apart. I can't remember the quoted price but it was beyond anything I would have ever suspected. I ended up buying an 89' six speed C4 instead and I'm really glad I did.
Again.. comparing americas top car (that and the viper..), to Porsche's lowest car w/ the best motor. Not smart
Really. Porsche is part of VAG. Corvette is part of GM. Want to compare VAG's biggest POS w/GM's?
I doubt that the 'Vetter IS "America's top car" anymore anyways. It certainly used to be...it was test bed for technology, but it sure seems like Cadillac is where all the Tech and amenities is going now days. And that is fine. But Porsche>Corvette, is really a comparison of one of VAG's better cars, to one of GM's better cars. Or should it be ?