Hey all.

I'm moving to Houston Texas later in the year and still can't decide what car to get. Cars are somewhat cheaper over there, so I'll be able to get something that I wouldn't have the money to get here.

So far top of the list would be an early ie 2000/1 E46 M3. I've always loved them, and I have to admit the prospect of owning one is quite exciting.

The other major player is an early model Boxter S. I love everything about them and they are surprisingly practical, sports car or not, so trying to rationalise on the M3 by virue of greater practicality isn't going to happen. Except that the M3 can carry 4 as opposed to two people.

The only thing is, and I'm not totally sure with the Boxter, I'm still young and want to be able to drift the car whenver I feel like it (and it's safe to do so of course). Every review of an M3 says it was born to slide. The Boxter being mid engined and having lots of grip makes me think it wouldn't be as easily picked up and steered on the throttle. Can anyone with experience with either cars comment on this please?

Other cars that are less expensive I'm considering buying and modding are:
some sort of NIssan like a 240 SX, I'm just not too sure of what made it to the States or not.
A porsche 944 turbo, or 968 sport
An E36 M3 (but I'd heaps rather the E46)

There's probably others that I can't think of or haven't heard of yet, so if anyone has any suggestions, please feel free to offer them here. I'm looking at up to 40 grand.

I'm not sure if turbo cars are as much of a hassle to insure over there as they are here, but being new to the country I'll be on the lowest rating. I'll be 25 by the time I get the car too.

Thanks

Also are there any good driving roads surrounding Houston, or am I heading to flat city?

Well, personally I'd say you can't go wrong with either. A Boxster can most certainly ass-slide as well, not quite as easily as an M3, but it's almost as slidable. The M3 does have the practicality edge, but that's the only other real advantage it offers.

Really neither is a bad choice, they are about the two best cars on sale.

both good options but allow me to sugest another one. Corvette Z06 you can get a mint condition model 01-02ish model for well under 40K. It has significantly more grunt than the germans which should elicite a higher percentage of grins;) and it has a very good track suspension. It circled the Nur bellow 7 minutes and that is quite a feat. The downside is that it will not be as refined as the germans and the cabin is made by rubermaid.

I love both of these cars. The M3 edges it in the engine compartment, and the Boxster has the superior chassis (although the M3 is more tail-happy). They're both excellent sports cars, so if i were to make the decision, it would come down to practicality... do you need the extra 2 seats & boot space?


It circled the Nur bellow 7 minutes
Ahem. Below 8 mins :p

Gotta go for the M3...good all arounder

Yeah, Boxter is a little disappointing in the power area. If I'm going to spend the cash on a porsche, I want it to perform like a porsche. I personally look at Boxters as the "entry level" porsche that people buy if they want the name but don't need the speed. The M3 is what you buy if you really want the performance. Just my opinion.

plus the boxster is ugly as since, but hte boxster isn't too slow. its atleast a low 14 to high 13 car. not too bad. but its just ugly.

The M3 is a beautiful car and a solid performer. I think its the better of the two choices.

Go with the M3. The Boxster is Toyota's rendition of a Porsche, and it didn't turn out very well. The only other car I'd strongly recommend (and it already has been) is the Corvette Z06. It'll definitely be faster than an E46 M3, and cheaper too, but not nearly as luxurious or refined.

However, the M3 and the Corvette were both designed for performance on the track (although the M3 is certainly fun to slide around). If you just want a drift car and nothing more, I'd recommend buying a 95-98 Nissan 240SX or a 93-95 Mazda RX-7 Twin Turbo and tuning them extensively; $40 grand into either one would create a drift monster.

I would definately go with the M3, that car is insane!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go with the M3. More refined then a Z06, more fun then the Boxster, seats four. I love mine. Most fun I've ever had in a car that wasn't a 911.

Ahem. Below 8 mins :p



Crap what is wrong with me, i keep typing it wrong. Yea bellow 8

Thanks for the replies everyone.

I am still leaning towards the M3 actually. You know I had considered the Vette, I love the sound they make with a nice exhaust, but as a driver's car I'm sure it's not up there with the M car. Just the controls and interactions between car and driver is not as precise. Still, gotta love the way it looks, sounds and goes.

Later on I'll scracth my Porsche itch with a 911. So yeah I think the M3 will be the go to begin with.

Just out of interest, what sort of costs would I be looking at to have one on the road?

I'll be 25, no rating coz I'll be in a new country. Living in Houston. Do you purchase personal insurance in the States as opposed to insuring a specific car? Do you have an annual car registration payment like we do in Australia?

Thanks again.

I've got two words for you regarding the 'Vette.

LEAF SPRINGS

I've got two words for you regarding the 'Vette.

LEAF SPRINGS

Big deal, it still goes faster around a track than any car in its price range; the fact that it still uses leaf springs makes it even more humiliating for the competitors.

Heh, V8 Slayer, you want to know something funny? The all-conquering Shelby Cobra rode on an independent leaf spring setup. So did the Triumph GT6 and Spitfire.

The Corvette is not on some archaic buggy sprung solid axle setup, in fact its transverse independent leaf sprung unequal length a-arm suspension, front and rear, is one of the most sophisticated suspensions out there.

And the funny part is that Corvette has been using this setup since 1963!

http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Flats/8941/IRSdrw.gif

Here's what the Vette's rear suspension looked like in 1963.

http://www.bilrevyen.no/aktuelle_modeller/chevrolet/images/Chevrolet_Corvette_C6_rear_suspension_0001_M448.jp g

And here's what it looks like now.

The "it has leaf springs" argument against the Vette's handling is pure bunk. The Corvette is one of the top handling sports cars in the world when you put it out on track, and for the price is an astonishing machine. Couple that to a healthy and blooming aftermarket geared around road racing and you can have one bloody fast Corvette.

Sorrry to throw a spanner into the works here.

I'm pretty well sold on the M3, but from other threads and some suggestions here, some other options look tempting.

I don't live in the States so I don't know too much about the American cars. I know the Vette and Mustang are very tunable cars. Theyr'e also cheaper than the M3.

Hypothetically, what would it take to get one of those two handling and balanced as well as the M3? I know hp wise they're already on par or better, so do they have enough base chassis stiffness to get up to M3 levels with some good quality adjustable spring/damper/swaybar packages? The M3 has a stiffened chassis over the 3 series and was tuned at the Nurburgring, so it has innate handling abilities. My only concern is that they still wouldn't have the same level of pedal feel and feedback for the driver, as well as pedals that are too far apart for easy heel and toeing etc.

Also I wouldn't bother tuning an M3, but an American car I would. I know there's heaps of bolt-ons you can get there. How much money am I looking at to get the zo6 Vette and new Mustang GT to 500hp?

And are they a realistic alternative to the M3 as an all round package?

Thanks:)

Sorrry to throw a spanner into the works here.

I'm pretty well sold on the M3, but from other threads and some suggestions here, some other options look tempting.

I don't live in the States so I don't know too much about the American cars. I know the Vette and Mustang are very tunable cars. Theyr'e also cheaper than the M3.

Hypothetically, what would it take to get one of those two handling and balanced as well as the M3? I know hp wise they're already on par or better, so do they have enough base chassis stiffness to get up to M3 levels with some good quality adjustable spring/damper/swaybar packages? The M3 has a stiffened chassis over the 3 series and was tuned at the Nurburgring, so it has innate handling abilities. My only concern is that they still wouldn't have the same level of pedal feel and feedback for the driver, as well as pedals that are too far apart for easy heel and toeing etc.

Also I wouldn't bother tuning an M3, but an American car I would. I know there's heaps of bolt-ons you can get there. How much money am I looking at to get the zo6 Vette and new Mustang GT to 500hp?

And are they a realistic alternative to the M3 as an all round package?

Thanks:)



well it should take nothing to get Z06 version of the vette to handle better than an M3 because it already should. On the other hand for the mustang it would take quite a bit of work even on the new improved platform.


Powerwise both the mustang and the vette should be easy to mod to some big levels although the vette should be easier since it has 1.1L of displacement advantage. The exception being the 03-04 stang cobras which are very easily upgradable powerwise. So if dragracing is your thing look for a cobra.

However if you would rather fancy road racing or handling in general both the M3 and Vette will be far superior.

For an al around package the Z06 its not the best pick. But if you don't have a family or this is your second car it should work just fine. The stang and the M3 both have the advantage of seating more people albeit in so so comfort since they are both coupe.

Af far as road feel there is only one way to find out which one you like: test drive them.

For all around package in I'd still say the M3 is the best, but a similar car that some like as well or more then the M3 is the newer Audi S4 4.2. Good handling, 4-doors, AWD.

yes the S4 is a nice car, no doubt aabout it, but doesn't have the grin factor of an M3. Too much grip:)

While I'm 90% sure I'm going to step into an M3, I'm curious as to some VERY minor mods I have in mind.

I've been down the modding route before, and don't plan on doing it again. The reason I like the M3 so much is that it appears to be pretty much spot-on right off bat.

I'm going to get one with 18's since they are the better size for spirited driving. Are the stock 18's a good wheel? Is there any advantage in getting another wheel of the same size but which is significantly lighter? (for less unsprung weight).

Brakes: I've heard they are powerful and have good pedal feel, but can fade very easily when driven hard. Has anyone had good experience with a certain brand of brake pads? Also, I've heard that for some reason the 'holes' in the front airdam are actually filled in. and removing the plastic adds much more cooling air to the front brakes and elimnates the problem. Is this true?

I love music, although I'm not a huge fans of bass bins on wheels. I like a good system to have good punch and have good quality sound at high volume from low range base to gigh range sounds. I plan on finding a car with the Harmon Kardon Hifi. Is this an adequete system or will I be looking at an aftermarket job?

I'm leaving the engine stock. I think for a daily driven street car it will have plenty of power. I was thinking of getting a carbon air box though just for a bit more induction roar, as I've heard that it soudns quite nice.
Is there any advantage to upgrading the exhaust? Will it make it really noisy? Are there any meaningful power gains to be had? If so, will it be ad the expense of bottom end torque?
What about ECU upgrades? They all claim to increase power and torque, while reducing fuel consumption. The M3 has a highly developed engine as it is, so how would there be many extra gains to be had by people who did not design the engine? And again, would the gains be offset by poor/rough general running, throttle response, flat spots in the power curve etc.

Are there gains to be had by adjusting the suspension geometry ie for shaper turn in, more under/oversteer etc. I assume if I'm getting a car that's a few years old I may be up for some new springs and dampers anyway. Has anyone had good experience with a certain package from, say Bilstein or anyone else?

Remebering that I don't care one bit about street racing. This car will be driven daily and needs to remain comfortable. I see no point in having a car with such luxuries as an M3, only to have a temperamental beast that rattles your kidneys. They handle well stock I know. I will be driven hard on the right roads, and I enjoy being able to drift the car when approriate, so it needs to remain adjustable and forgiving up to and over the limit. It also needs to remain driveable from idle to redline.

Thanks again for everyone's help so far. I hope this all turns out well:)

Ok GKR, I'm assuming you are looking at an M3 cabriolet since you are comparing it to the boxster s on your list. The M3 cabbie is more of a "boulavard cruiser" than the Porsche. The Boxster S is a true sports car, not a grandtourer like the M3. There is nothing wrong with the M3 by any means and I was considering it but I passed for a few reasons. First off the boxster s grips the road better. Your talking about .88g of grip for the m3 compared to .95g on the box s. The boxster is a stiffer platform due to the fact that it was not designed originally as a coup and then had it's roof cut off like the M3. The M3 cabbie weighs 3,750 lbs according to BMW. The box s weighs approx 2,950 lbs. 800lbs more is uhh, gonna make it feel like alot less razor sharp than the boxster on the track or street. The boxster has better balance and cornering traits due to the mid-engine layout. The M3 cabbie is marginally faster in a straight line due to fact that it is so heavy. It's 300lbs more than the coup. The hp/lb ratios on both cars are very close. If you want to cruise the strip with your pals then get the M3, if you want a real drivers tool then the boxster s is the best choice. Go for a test drive and you'll see what I mean.

Thanks porsche daddy. Actually I wasn't considering the Cab at all. Too soft. I want the coupe, for the reasons u've mentioned.

How would you compare the S to the M3 coupe?

The M3 is a great car. My father has an 00 m5 that and that car is wonderful for what it is. The M3 is a better pick if you want something more practical. I'm 24 yrs old. If I was 34 I probably would've gone for the bmw. You can't go wrong with either one, I would just go with the one that suits you best. Try to test drive a boxster s before you make your decision.

Yep thanks. I will try to drive both. My problem is being 24 also. In Australia, unless you walk in to a dealership with hundred dollar bills sticking out of your ears, you won't even get to sit in the car at my age.

GKR

Is that from experience or do you just think that? I was 24 when I bought my M3 about 2 years ago. I test drove both that and the Boxster. Porsche and BMW were more than nice. I didn't do anything special. Just walk in and ask.

What you should worry about is insurance. Most companies won't insure anyone under 25 for either car. I had to get mine through BMW Australia and they had a $5000 dollar excess. Pretty steep.

Yes from experince. They have insurance for test cars, but not at my age. Are you in the States? I'm in Oz at the moment, but may have more luck when I get to the States.

That's crazy. I live in Brisbane. The dealers couldn't care less how old I was as long as I was willing to shell out the money.

The insurance problem I encountered was when I was ready to take delivery. Not at the test drive stage.

But if you're going to the states, then it doesn't matter. You would never dream of buying those cars here anyway. M3's cost about $150,000 here (about $115,000 U.S.). In the States, it's about $55,000 very well optioned.

In fact, if you can afford a M3 in Aus, you should be looking at a Porsche Turbo in the States.

Yeah the ones I went to were on the gold coast. The thing was that the cars they had there were sold, and they weren't really keen in letting me drive them. Porsche and BMW were the same. I was actually thinking of sharing a lease on one, but now that I'll be in the States sooner than expected, I'll have to wait until I get there to get my car.

I was thinking about hiring a boxter or something for a day and doing it that way. I don't think they hire S versions, and I'm pretty sure no one does M3's, but it's probably the best place to start to get a drive of one.

Big deal, it still goes faster around a track than any car in its price range; the fact that it still uses leaf springs makes it even more humiliating for the competitors.

I've got 2 words for you too f-ing idiot
:grinyes:

The Porsche is light years ahead. For pure driving experiance, its a motoring king. You must drive one.

It is far more focused and honed than the M3, and makes no compramises. As for the 'Vette, don't make me laugh. There are prams that are faster than that pile of plastic, and with suspension modeled on that of the troy horse, handeling that requires standard fit "sick bags" on the dash board, and its vague looks, it needs to retreat with its ancient tail bettween its legs.

The engine is another thing. Its so unefficient, that baby rabbits and small wild flowers die as soon as you start it up, and a small cloud of acid rain forms over the rear of the car.

It has no place in this company.

You don't mince your words do you :lol2:

The engine is another thing. Its so unefficient, that baby rabbits and small wild flowers die as soon as you start it up, and a small cloud of acid rain forms over the rear of the car.

It has no place in this company.


Honestly I sick of this bullshit, If you have no idea what you are talking about please don't post. Especially with that tone. Flaunting ignorance is very inapropriate.


So lets see this horrible inefficiency of yours compared to another state of the art japanese engine (VQ35 from the 350Z):


350Z
Manual transmission 20/26

C6 vette
manual transmission 18/28


so the corvette makes an extra 113 HP and 126 Lb/TQ and manages to get better fuel mileage on the freeway and slightly less in the city compared to a state of the art modern japanese engine.


So you either consider the 350Z engine beyound ineficient of you have no concept of basic thermodynamic laws.

And next time you decide to compare the corvette suspension with that of a horse drawn chariot you might want to post your Nurburing times acheived by your cars and they better beat the Z06s sub 8 min time.

Edit: Oh and before you call me biased consider this. I generally prefer european sport cars over american ones, but I do give credit were credit is due.

the Z06s sub 8 min time.
Congratulations. It may have taken you 6,000 posts, but you finally have that right :lol:

Congratulations. It may have taken you 6,000 posts, but you finally have that right :lol:


I know after moths of grueling practice I finally cracked the secret. :lol:

The vette actually does get better fuel economy over the boxster s thanks in part to it's extremely tall 6th gear. It's definately not what you would call a "close ratio" gearbox. I believe mine gets 18/26mpg city/highway which is still very good for an open roof sports car. I've driven a C5 and it is a nice car for what it is, but it really doesn't feel all that "special." It has good power(the Z06 has chest flattening power) but the handling doesn't inspire agrressive driving compared to the boxster. If someone was considering a boxster I would definately tell them to go for the newer "S" versions with 260hp as older ones are underpowered(particulary the 97-99 2.5L 201hp versions). The new 05 987 boxster S has 280hp and is nearly on par acceleration wise to an automatic c5 thanks to it's smaller size and weight. One more thing that gets my blood pumping is the boxster's flat 6 engine sitting right behind the driver. It has an intake and exhaust note that is purely exotic and European that is a slice of heaven as it climbs torwards it's 7,200 rpm redline. The vette doesn't make nearly as beautiful music IMO. Another impressive exotic feature of the boxster is the speed activated spoiler that raises at 75mph and then lowers agan when speeds go below 50mph. Another side bebefit about the boxster is all the attention it gets from other motorists and pedestrians thanks to it's exotic good looks. The vette gets nary a second glance from other people because it's such a common sight. The Porsche is the car to drive when you want to "arrive."

The gears are longer in the vette because there is no need for shorter ones due to the massive powerband. The viper has even longer gearing.

As far as handling goes, remeber the z06 is far far above the C5 even the C5 with the suspension package.

Also for some of us aparances are not quite as important. Personally I prefer low key cars, hence my preference for collors such as black and gunmettal grey and absolute hate of crome.

But my choice of Z06 is based on the fact that I am mostly interested in club level racing and autox for which a used Z06 (around 30K USD) offers the best posible performance.

There's no question that the the Z06 gives the best bang for your buck performance wise. There are still untitled o4's that can be bought for around 40K now which is simply crazy. I do auto-x and am definately into performance but I like to stand out a bit and the vette simply can't deliver that as well as the boxster S. You are right about the vette having a broad power band, however, it reaches top speed in 5th gear not sixth which is not optimum. GM only gave the it an exorbitnately high 6th gear to make the the highway mpg acceptable. It certainly wouldn't be for performance reasons.

MPG is not a measure of how harmful an engine is, just how expensive it is to run. Co2 emmisions are the measure of engine efficiency.

Now I mentioned nothing about the Nissan 350Z, but seing as how Neutrino plucked that out of the twilight zone, then I shall compare it to the Boxter S.

The Nissan's Co2 emmisions rating stands at 273g/Km. Pretty average for a sports car. The Porsche 3.2 Boxster S stands at a mere 248g/Km.

The corvette: 310g/Km

To put into perspective, how bad that is, I shall make referance to the monstrous Bently Continental GT. It's 6.0 W12, that launches that massive car from 0-62 in just 4.7 Seconds, still manages to deposit only 410g/Km. And that is a big heavy luxury GT. Not a sports car!

Even the 911 Turbo, which is far more capable than any of the cars mentioned manages 304g/Km.

So there are the figures to back up my "bullshit", as you called it.

Thank you very much!

MPG is not a measure of how harmful an engine is, just how expensive it is to run. Co2 emmisions are the measure of engine efficiency.

Now I mentioned nothing about the Nissan 350Z, but seing as how Neutrino plucked that out of the twilight zone, then I shall compare it to the Boxter S.

The Nissan's Co2 emmisions rating stands at 273g/Km. Pretty average for a sports car. The Porsche 3.2 Boxster S stands at a mere 248g/Km.

The corvette: 310g/Km

To put into perspective, how bad that is, I shall make referance to the monstrous Bently Continental GT. It's 6.0 W12, that launches that massive car from 0-62 in just 4.7 Seconds, still manages to deposit only 410g/Km. And that is a big heavy luxury GT. Not a sports car!

Even the 911 Turbo, which is far more capable than any of the cars mentioned manages 304g/Km.

So there are the figures to back up my "bullshit", as you called it.

Thank you very much!


No i called bullshit on your performance and inefficiency claims.

An ineficient engine will produce low power and have high consumption. Well as you can see in the numbers i posted the exact oposite its true ergo your ineficiency claims were fake. The 350Z was provided as a comparison of a well known as respected engine.

Secondly you call the corvette slow:"There are prams that are faster than that pile of plastic". No sure what prams are but its clear the comment is derogatory and it implies a lack of performance from the part of the corvette. Now explain me this, how is a car capable of a 7:56 at the Nurburing and 1.26.8 on the Top Gear test track, considered slow? You must be used to driving F1 cars if those numbers are slow.

Plus can you point out a car from the fleet you claim to own that is fasted than a Z06 or C6 corvette? Several of the cars listed are significantly more expensive and you claim that the corvette lacks performance so lets see the track numbers proving they destroy that slow piece of plastic.


And to finish off, you continue to claim that the Corvette is this horible polutter car when you yourself drive cars that are far worse. Does the word hypocrit mean anything to you?
http://files.automotiveforums.com/gallery/watermark.php?file=/503/13360fuel.jpg

This is straight from the goverment website, and as you can see the vette actually releases slightly less greenhouse gasses than the boxter and far less greenhouse gasses than two of your cars.

So if the vette is so bad that "Its so unefficient, that baby rabbits and small wild flowers die as soon as you start it up, and a small cloud of acid rain forms over the rear of the car" what are your cars?

Stick it to em Neutrino! I'll have to say the only thing thats moving faster than the Vette is the diminishing rate of finally retired's credibility. Its tougher to fool people that actually know what they are talking about. :rolleyes:

Speaking of Top gear/5th Gear they picked the boxster S as their favorite all around sports car. I have the show on tape where Tiff Needell tears up the test track with an 03 box S. Anyone else seen this episode? It's called "our favorite sports car."

Speaking of Top gear/5th Gear they picked the boxster S as their favorite all around sports car. I have the show on tape where Tiff Needell tears up the test track with an 03 box S. Anyone else seen this episode? It's called "our favorite sports car."


I think I remember that show. And don't get me wrong I think the Boxter S is a great car, I just presented the Z06 as an option.

They are quite different cars, the Boxter is better suited for cruising since its more refined and convertible. Its main competitor as I see it is the S2000, and to a far lesser degree the Convertible vette.

The vette is better suited for people like me that prefer a good budget purist racer. Something like a Z06 or a Noble M12. Of course if money would be less of an issue the car of choice would be Stradale or maybe a GT3 Rs if they would offer it withouth those horrid painted wheels.

Btw the funny thing is that the boxter is in theory a better platform than the 911 except is sandbagged by porsche as to not be dirrect competition. Heck RUF is using the boxter as the platform for his custom made supercar.

Btw the funny thing is that the boxter is in theory a better platform than the 911 except is sandbagged by porsche as to not be dirrect competition. Heck RUF is using the boxter as the platform for his custom made supercar.

You are correct. Anybody that knows anything about weight distribution knows that a mid-engine car is superior on a race track. Just look at F1 or pretty much any decent car Ferrari or Lambo made. Even a Porsche rep conceded in a recent boxster article written by M/T that the if the 911 engine was dropped into a boxster the boxster would be the better car. That's why many serious boxster owners that track their car regulary put the 99-2001 296hp 3.4L carrera engine in their boxster. Even better a boxster owner could swap in the 315hp 3.6L, or if they really have the $$$$ they could swap in the new 350hp 3.8L from the carrera S and have a seriously fast auto that turns with the best.

Well, Don Panoz and Jim Hurtibise both proved, front engined is not necessarily inferior for chassis design, just harder to work around.

However, the Boxster is and always has been a very good handling car. I highly look forward to the new mid-engined Porsche coupe based on the Boxster platform.

maybe a GT3 Rs if they would offer it withouth those horrid painted wheels.
Take it back!

As for the Boxster, the only thing that is 'unpure' about it as a sports car imo is the fact that it's a convertible. Which, as Layla's Keeper said, will be remedied by the imminent 'C7S', i.e. a Boxster-based fixed-top coupe, with a 3.4l version of the 997's flat six. :D

A true sports car is a convertible with 2 seats and rwd. ie 356's,

ugh... ok.

the only thing unpure about the Boxster as a drivers' car is the fact that it's a soft-top.

All good?

I'm not denying the capability of the 'vette, but its all line speed. The chevy is useless on UK roads, as it cant handle the corners, it'll break your back if you hit a cats eye, and for the money they charge, it appeals to a market that actually give a toss about the fuel bill (which is considerably more than you yanks pay). I am a petrol head. And whats more, I couldnt care less how efficient my cars are. I will sacrifice anything to get what i want, and that includes bunny rabbits and wild flowers. But my cars will demolish a corvette on a UK B-road.

The RFL alone on a Corvette is shockingly high for its class, and thats before you have put petrol in the damn thing, and got to terms with driving a left hooker and convincing yourself that its a good thing. It demands far to many sacrifices and far to much money to run for it to be any use over here. In fact, I would liken it to a chocolate fire guard.

And that is the reason that nobody buys them! The figures speak for themselves.

ugh... ok.

the only thing unpure about the Boxster as a drivers' car is the fact that it's a soft-top.

All good?

I guess I can accept that. I think the benefits of top down driving out weigh the slight increase in flex and weight. Most well designed convertibles offer more than enough torsinal rigidity and light weight.

I'm not denying the capability of the 'vette, but its all line speed. The chevy is useless on UK roads, as it cant handle the corners, it'll break your back if you hit a cats eye, and for the money they charge, it appeals to a market that actually give a toss about the fuel bill (which is considerably more than you yanks pay). I am a petrol head. And whats more, I couldnt care less how efficient my cars are. I will sacrifice anything to get what i want, and that includes bunny rabbits and wild flowers. But my cars will demolish a corvette on a UK B-road.

The RFL alone on a Corvette is shockingly high for its class, and thats before you have put petrol in the damn thing, and got to terms with driving a left hooker and convincing yourself that its a good thing. It demands far to many sacrifices and far to much money to run for it to be any use over here. In fact, I would liken it to a chocolate fire guard.

And that is the reason that nobody buys them! The figures speak for themselves.


WTF is that?

Now you go again and claim It cannot handle the corners? Can you not read? It does the Nur in 7:56. And in case you are not familiar with it the Nurburing is full of nasty corners and bad surfaces. It also handled the lotus designed test track in 1:26.8.

And it will easily outhandle any of your cars espcially in back roads. And if you think your SL65 or covertible DB9 can outhandle it on back roads you don't know anything about sport cars. The C6 already destroyed the vanquish S on the TG track.

And now you don't care about polution, so what was with that ranting about the vette being a poluter???

And again the vette gets amazing gas mileage especially for its class.

WTF is that?

Now you go again and claim It cannot handle the corners? Can you not read? It does the Nur in 7:56. And in case you are not familiar with it the Nurburing is full of nasty corners and bad surfaces. It also handled the lotus designed test track in 1:26.8.

And it will easily outhandle any of your cars espcially in back roads. And if you think your SL65 or covertible DB9 can outhandle it on back roads you don't know anything about sport cars. The C6 already destroyed the vanquish S on the TG track.

And now you don't care about polution, so what was with that ranting about the vette being a poluter???

And again the vette gets amazing gas mileage especially for its class.

Well if this car is so great, how come you can count one one hand the ammount that there are in the UK. If this car is all you make it out to be, why are they not flooding the shores?!?

That archeic leaf set up would leave that car in a hedge row if I drove it the way I drive my SL!

I took out a Callaway Corvette on a track called Castle Combe that a friend of mine owns that is notorious for its adverse cambers, and tricky esses. I kid you not when I say my life flashed before my eyes. It was as if the stearing was connected to the rear wheels. It couldnt corner without stepping out of line, the noise from the engine was particulaly distressing, and the general feeling of detatched-ness and lack of control were alarming to say the least.

Now that was a 96 model. So when I drove a 99 model (on the road), I expected a little more. Now britain is not exactly renound for its sunny climate, and this day was a little damp, but in no way was it wet or greasy... But where I can power through apexes, and accelorate when leaving an island in my other cars, the vette totaly lacked the capability. It felt like the rear tyres were coated in lard or something. Now I like my cars to act with a little dignaty, and if i'm powersliding, and burning rubber everytime I move the wheel at speed, then I'll look like a bit of a prick. The Boxter is the pinical of responsiveness. It can react faster than the driver which is always a good thing. Its perfect balance, weighty stearing, and power more than make up for the bland looks.
And while I'm no profesional, I do collect some of my Mercedes on the personal collection programme, and have visited the Nur on three occasions on the return trip.

British Roads are not 6 miles wide, as they may be in the states. indeed a 3 lane motorway is about as big as it gets. You also need to realise that UK roads bare no resembalance to a race track. If you belive that to be the case, then you shouldn't posses a driving licence. A bit of fun is only human, but still...

Then specify that you cannot handle it, don't accuse the car of being a poor handler.

Yeah the vette its not a very forgiving car especially compared to something like the Mercedes Sl that in typical mer fassion outfitted it with all the 3 letter stability control systems known to man (as Tiff put it). Most moderns mercs have so many nanies they drive themselves. The vette is far more of a drivers car than the new Sl will ever be, you have to know what you are doing or it will bite your head off. The same is true of most purist sport cars Noble, Mosler, Gt3, Viper GTS etc...

Bottom line is that it has been proven by many pros that the car can handle and it has the numbers to prove it.

finally retired

I know where you're coming from, I'd love to be able to agree with you, but I can't.

I hate American cars. I hate them with a passion. I own and M3, and I wouldn't be caught dead in a 'Vette. But facts are facts. the C6 stock will kill my car stock. As I understand a lot of Brits share my snobbishness (is that a word?) when it comes to American cars but you're taking it too far. A GT3 driven by Walter Rohl will barely keep up with a C6 if it can do 7:56 around the N'ring.

And unfortunately, the cars you have are posers' cars, not cars to set handling standards by. Maybe the SL65 will overtake very well on the motorway, but not much else.

You got to adimit that SL she has looks pretty tight. It has to be the best looking merc I have laid eyes on. Like you said though, it's a sporty luxary cruiser and not a sports car by any means. Nothing wrong with that, but I can't see it outhandling a vette. The thing weighs nearly 4,000 lbs and comes with an automatic only. It's hard to sip latte's and talk on the cell while rowing the gears.

V8Slayer you are correct. I happen to prefer european sport cars too, and I'm downright a hardcore Ferrari tifoso but I'm a firm belived that credit must be given where credit is due.

True the vette has plenty of fauls such as rubbermaid interior and a harsh ride but you have to make some sacrifices to offer perfomance for a good price.

There is one trend of european sports cars that worries me though: automatization and electronic nannies. Speed sensitive steering on the 997, sequential as the only offer on the M5 or the Stradale etc...You have no idea how relieved i was to hear that you can shut all that off in the new F430 and that a proper open H gate manual will be offered on it.

It's hard to sip latte's and talk on the cell while rowing the gears.

LOL this reminds me of a recent San Francisco trip where I passed a guy in an X5 with one hand on a caffe and the other on the phone. Must have been one of those self steering X5s;)

LOL this reminds me of a recent San Francisco trip where I passed a guy in an X5 with one hand on a caffe and the other on the phone. Must have been one of those self steering X5s;)

lol, X5, the ultimate self driving machine...

With regards to the SL vs Vette; I haven't driven either of them but I do read a lot about cars and I hold Evo magazine in very high esteem. They rate the Sl55 as a very good car, and the Vette less so. This is as a driver's car too, not just an all rounder. They feel that the Vette is good up to a point (its performance is of course fantastic), but beyond that it starts to get a bit ragged and it still doesn't have much in the way of feedback through the wheel/pedals/seat etc. This is for the C6 too.

Today I rode in a 996 911 and it just confirmed for me how great a car they are. So solid, so bullet proof. I also laid eyes on a new 997 S last night and my god was it awesome. Looked so nice:) I can't wait for the day when I own a 911.

Until then, I look forward to getting my first real car in the States. If the Boxter S feels anything like the 911, it will be much harder choosing between it and the M3.

Until then, I look forward to getting my first real car in the States. If the Boxter S feels anything like the 911, it will be much harder choosing between it and the M3.


I don't think you will be disappointed with the boxster s. The interior is nearly identical to a 996 except there is no back seat of course. The car shares several other parts with the 996 including the brakes and six speed tranny. In fact from the front seats forward you would be hard pressed to know the difference. What year was the 996?

A GT3 driven by Walter Rohl will barely keep up with a C6 if it can do 7:56 around the N'ring.

Actually the mk1 GT3 became the record holder when it lapped the 'ring in 7.56; when the mk2 GT3 came out, it went another 3 or so seconds quicker. I think i read somewhere the 997 Carrera S laps very close to the new GT3 though. So Porsche is still the Nurburgring daddy ;) :D

As for the C6, i have to admit im not a big fan of the styling. It lacks flair imo. But the Corvette has made substantial leaps in terms of ability over the past two generations which few Brits acknowledge. I don't know if it's as polished as a 911 or Ferrari but then it costs half as much (in the Ferrari's case). The lack of RHD does not make it any less of a car, but is a silly mistake on Chevrolet's part if it wants the UK to take the car seriously. But that is not a valid reason to attack the car's ability.

Ohh dear. It appears someone is deleting my posts. How sad and pathetic.

For the record, I would like to know from Neutrino, Why nobody buys the ‘vette in the UK, despite a large number of importers. Where he decided to pluck a Nissan 350Z from, and why you feel the need to jump to conclusions about my driving capabilities and my experience. You have so far offended me on a personal level, for sharing a valid opinion on a car that I have 1st hand experience with. And yet, all you seem to do is quote journalists, and throw a few lap times around. You have also done a very good job of avoiding the points that I make...

(I have made a record of this post. I suggest that it is not deleted again, because I’ll not have my opinions victimised.)

now excuse me for being totally ignorant but my guess why the corvette doesn't sell here is maybe because of it's lack of history here?

people know the name but don't really know the car.

and since when were sales a god indication of whether or not a car is good or not?
is this a good time to remind everyone that the toyota corolla outsells most other cars in it's sector whilst not being the best?

The main reasons for lack of Corvette sales in Europe.

Eurocentricity...Meaning Europeans stick to euro made vehicles a lot.

Relative cost....A corvette is an expensive vehicle in the US but in Europe the cost becomes prohibitive for many europeans.

Horsepower vs. refinement....Europeans seem more than willing to spend many dollars for smaller and more refined cars that lack relative horsepower to American made models. America seems to use HP as a major measuring stick and overlook the simple interiors of many american makers.

But any way you measure performance..the corvette is a world respected supercar and if I were challenged to a race in either straight line or around the Nurb I would gladly take a Z06 in my corner to defend my honor over almost any car under $80,000 american.

Ohh dear. It appears someone is deleting my posts. How sad and pathetic.

For the record, I would like to know from Neutrino, Why nobody buys the ‘vette in the UK, despite a large number of importers. Where he decided to pluck a Nissan 350Z from, and why you feel the need to jump to conclusions about my driving capabilities and my experience. You have so far offended me on a personal level, for sharing a valid opinion on a car that I have 1st hand experience with. And yet, all you seem to do is quote journalists, and throw a few lap times around. You have also done a very good job of avoiding the points that I make...

(I have made a record of this post. I suggest that it is not deleted again, because I’ll not have my opinions victimised.)


You do realise that due the difference in hours I just woke up and logged in about 10 minutes ago, so quite literally I have no idea what you are talking about. Don't you think that if I would've decided to abuse my powers all your posts could haved been deleted including this one?

So far I have used the power to delete posts very sparingly only in the case of insults or intentions of starting "flame wars" and I have always posted the reason for deletion as a warning.

And if you still don't belive me feel free to contact the site administrators, they have the capability to check the logs and see If i have deleted your post or even if i had been online at that time. So there you have it, if you are convinced I have abused my powers you can prove your acusations and be rid of me. As simple as that.

And as far as the argument goes, you might take a look at your lack of supporters and realise the reason for that. The fact is you made certain claims and I brought verifiable facts to disprove them:

1. You claim the corvette cannot handle and I brought its laps times on both the Ring and the TG test track.

2. You dismissed it as a gross poluter, i posted goverment data not only showing that its not a bad poluting car but also that two of the new cars you claim to own are worse poluters. You did the fastest 180 in opinion I have seen and claimed that you don't care about polution.

first post criticising the corvette
The engine is another thing. Its so unefficient, that baby rabbits and small wild flowers die as soon as you start it up, and a small cloud of acid rain forms over the rear of the car.


post after I posted my EPA data
And whats more, I couldnt care less how efficient my cars are. I will sacrifice anything to get what i want, and that includes bunny rabbits and wild flowers.

:owned:



That was a silly accusation to make, finally_retired. There has not been one single deleted post in this thread :disappoin

.....aren't we still waiting to see pics of his actual cars?

Not selling well in a particular country doesn't mean anything. Is it right for Americans assume TVR's, Lotuses and Nobles all to be absolute crap because Corvettes out sell them by a mile in the States.

Different countries have different tastes in cars and different needs from cars. The fact that you see very few F150's in Paris doesn't change the fact that they're one hell of a truck.

and since when were sales a god indication of whether or not a car is good or not?


Not selling well in a particular country doesn't mean anything. Is it right for Americans assume TVR's, Lotuses and Nobles all to be absolute crap because Corvettes out sell them by a mile in the States.

Different countries have different tastes in cars and different needs from cars. The fact that you see very few F150's in Paris doesn't change the fact that they're one hell of a truck.


that is very true, especially since factors like different legislations and high import taxes often affect how a car is received.

dont mistake a cars handling capabilities with a drivers capabilities... the vette is a fantastice car, the only reason it doesnt sell in europe is because people over there have alot of pride (not a bad thing) and tend to stick to their own cars and the vette has no heritage over there (how many tvr's floatin around the states? doesnt mean theyre not good cause they obviously are...) . thats it thats all. and if i might add one more thing, just cause the vette doesnt drive itself or doesnt have more expensive materials doesnt mean its not as good of a car, some people actually enjoy the art of racing and i could care less about the interior for that price.

well...... to be honest, TVRs are not perfect cars.
the set-up of the suspension have always been a bit suspect (and hit and miss depending on the model), steering a little marshmallowey around the centre, brakes require supreme faith and reliability is still an issue.....

that said, it's more their way of doing things that is commendable.
up to about 5 years ago, nearly ALL of the work on the cars was done in-house. Every little lovely hand machined dial and switch was done by themselves AND they could still sell for around £40-45,000.
admittedly, this was probably the cause for some of the reliability issues (you can't be good at everything...).

the point with TVR was that the car was as good as 100% hand built/crafted but didn't cost anything like a Porsche.
which is why the interior of the corvette is always going to be in question.
if tvr can do it all in-house and still maintain 'cheap' prices for their cars, why can't everyone else do it too?

Actually, have you ever taken a look at TVR's profit margins and total sales numbers? They do just enough business to get by, and luckily with the new ownership they're readying the TS350C, Sagaris, and Tuscan for US sales.

That being said, the Vette is an excellent example of the same thing TVR does. Corvettes share little to nothing with the rest of the Chevrolet line (save for the engine and some switchgear) and are built in their own dedicated factory in Bowling Green. They're assembly line built cars, but there's also a lot more Vettes being built than ever before. Save for 1997 (the C5's introduction) each year of the C5 Vette has had over 30,000 cars sold.

That's the real catch. GM sells 30,000 Vettes a year and if they were to handbuild 30,000 Vettes a year, they'd cost a lot more than 45k.

When will TVR's be available in the States? I'd love to add a T350C or a Tamora to my collection...

TVR hasn't announced formally the year they'll be returning to the US, only that they will return shortly thanks to the new owner's much larger bankroll.

I believe another big part of the decision is waiting to see how well Morgan and Lotus do as they're in the same boat.

y'know, as dumb as it sounds, it never occured to me taht with hand built cars, the more you sell, the more people you need.....
i.e it'll cost more per car.......

damn.
i must have gotten out of the stupid side of the bed today.

i'm not entirely sure i like the direction the design went with the last two cars.....
the tamora was/is a great looking car from all angles but the closed top cars are a bit...... batman....

y'know, as dumb as it sounds, it never occured to me taht with hand built cars, the more you sell, the more people you need.....
i.e it'll cost more per car.......

damn.
i must have gotten out of the stupid side of the bed today.

haha... Indeed, the more you sell, the more workers you need, but the labour cost per vehicle doesnt rise unless you end up selling fewer cars per employee, i.e. hire too many people resulting in lower productivity.


i'm not entirely sure i like the direction the design went with the last two cars.....
the tamora was/is a great looking car from all angles but the closed top cars are a bit...... batman....
I absolutely agree with you there. OTT.

And what about the Sagaris?

In the words of Richard Hammond from Top Gear:"The world first car designed by an axe murderer."

[QUOTE=

That's the real catch. GM sells 30,000 Vettes a year and if they were to handbuild 30,000 Vettes a year, they'd cost a lot more than 45k.[/QUOTE]


This is exactly why the corvette wasn't very attractive to me. The ragtop vette costs the same as my car and they are pumped out in a massed produced fashion. They are simply everywhere and don't stand out from the crowd like some of the European offerings. Porsche sold less than 3,000 boxster S's in the states last year or was it world wide? Any matter, there's alot less of them cruising the streets.

No offence to anyone but I don't see why other people buying a particular car should preclude you from doing so. So what if there's lots of them? If you like a car you should get it.

Life's too short to be trying to please others all the time. You should be spending more time pleasing yourself.

There are plenty of ways to 'stand out', if you must do so, but maybe instead of spending thousands on a car you could spend 10 bucks on a book that will help you build self esteem.

It's very natural to want to stand out. I have no self esteem issues. But I enjoy it when I have something others' don't have. Makes you feel special.

I would never pass up a car I love because there are a lot of them around. But if it happens to be rare, then it's a bonus. Nothing wrong with that.

No offence to anyone but I don't see why other people buying a particular car should preclude you from doing so. So what if there's lots of them? If you like a car you should get it.

Life's too short to be trying to please others all the time. You should be spending more time pleasing yourself.

Maybe what pleases someone is to stand out in the crowd. That's kind of the point of a sports car anyways.

If that's what you like thwn that's fine. It's a (mostly) free world and I believe as long as you're not hurting anyone in the process you should do whatever makes you happy.

If a car makes you more attractive or whatever in some way then that's great. But I choose a car first and foremost for its abilty to entertain on the road. Anything else is a bonus to me, so I'd say that the purpose of a sports car is to engage the driver.

Having said that I won't be turning any chicks away if they find my car turns them on:)

I'm with GKR on this issue. We have to admit that we take other people's opinions into considerations when buying a car, its in out nature to do so as a social creature.


However that being said we really should not make that the primary reason for choosing a specific model. Its important for one should buy what car suits his desires and personality rather than just to impress.

I for one prefer an edgier car with a raw personality dominated by performance. This is why I like cars like the Noble M12 or Mosler Photon. Cars whose function overides form and who comunicate with you rather than isolate and pamper you. I feel they are more honest.


And as far as atracting girls, I wold rather avoid the ones that would go out with you just because you have an expensive car.

And as far as atracting girls, I wold rather avoid the ones that would go out with you just because you have an expensive car.
But they're the most fun! :iceslolan










then again how would i know.. i drive a Golf :lol:

M3 all the way boxer S are slow ass hell. My uncle had an S said it was the biggest waste ever now he has a clk-500 amg or something like that.

If a CLK 500 is a better car than a Boxster S i'll eat my hat.

Well im talking about the old boxer S not the 05 lol.

My bad just looked it up clk 55amg.

My opinion would still stand. The Boxster (both generations) is a honed, involving driving machine. The CLK 55 is a fat lxury coupe that's very adept at demolishing straights.

I know which one i'd rather drive.

what about a clk-amg? :D

Boxers is ok but not enough power.

kid, are you ever going to make an intelligent comment?
the CLK55 IS the AMG car.....

kid, are you ever going to make an intelligent comment?
the CLK55 IS the AMG car.....


/\ Jay see what I mean.

And smart one clk-amg look at ur facts be for you speak! go look at car drivers article on the 612 hp clk-amg strass version (streetversion)

ok.... if it looks like i'm picking on you it is beacuse i kinda am.
i'm not here often but everytime i do come here i see either pointless posts from you OR the continual posting of the same incorrect or simply stupid things.

here, you mentioned a cl amg car.
you were corrected by jay who told you it was the CLK55 (he omitted the AMG because i think he assumed you knew that bit).

were you previously talking about the 612 hp one you're talking about now?
yes? no?
if no, then what bearing does it have on my post and your own previous post?
i mean, Jay wasn't talkng the 612 hp (i'm assuming V12 car) and it isn't the CLK55 that he mentioned so what has it got to do with this?

Just so no one gets the wrong idea about me, I could care less how much of a car there is when I buy it. I'd buy a Corvette Z06 in a heartbeat because it is, in my opinion, the best sports car for that kind of money by far. I was simply presenting a different point of view.

ok.... if it looks like i'm picking on you it is beacuse i kinda am.
i'm not here often but everytime i do come here i see either pointless posts from you OR the continual posting of the same incorrect or simply stupid things.

here, you mentioned a cl amg car.
you were corrected by jay who told you it was the CLK55 (he omitted the AMG because i think he assumed you knew that bit).

were you previously talking about the 612 hp one you're talking about now?
yes? no?
if no, then what bearing does it have on my post and your own previous post?
i mean, Jay wasn't talkng the 612 hp (i'm assuming V12 car) and it isn't the CLK55 that he mentioned so what has it got to do with this?

No first I was talking about the clk-55 amg then the clk-amg formally known as the clk-dtm on the track.

Also I dont keep recklessly posting go look at other forums then you will see. And If im wrong im wrong feel free to correct but when u come off being snippy about then I frankly don't care. Forums are also about helping an not just about attacking people cause there wrong.

ahhhh.... the clk-dtm.
the £200,000 limited production car.
yes i can see how it fits into this comparison now.

anyway.
it's not 612 hp.
the 612 hp is the V12 engine (normally designated 65AMG)

Well back to the compario here ~

Bmw m3 (e46) ~ 343 hp 01 model 0-60 5.1
Porsche 217 hp 01 model 0-60 6.6

it says boxster S at the top

Uh, you don't really know what you are talking about do you Jcsaleen. The 01 boxster S has 250hp and the 03/04 models have 260hp. The new 05 S has 280hp. Those #'s you quoted are for a base boxster. An 03/04 boxster S does 0-60 in 5.3 sec and the 1/4 in 13.7 sec. Not super car performance for sure but definately not what I would call slow. Is the M3 faster? Certainly, but it definately doesn't destroy the boxster s in a straight line. Plus the top speed of a boxster S is 164mph and the M3 is limited to 155mph...not that anyone would be driving that fast anyway short of the autobahn. As far as standing out from the crowd goes, I think this is important but performance and overall balance certainly has just as much influence in my buying decision. Anyone that buys a sports car is trying to project some kind of image whether they are willing to admit it or not. I think my car fits my personality and needs more than a vette.

Uh, you don't really know what you are talking about do you Jcsaleen. The 01 boxster S has 250hp and the 03/04 models have 260hp. The new 05 S has 280hp. Those #'s you quoted are for a base boxster. An 03/04 boxster S does 0-60 in 5.3 sec and the 1/4 in 13.7 sec. Not super car performance for sure but definately not what I would call slow. Is the M3 faster? Certainly, but it definately doesn't destroy the boxster s in a straight line. Plus the top speed of a boxster S is 164mph and the M3 is limited to 155mph...not that anyone would be driving that fast anyway short of the autobahn. As far as standing out from the crowd goes, I think this is important but performance and overall balance certainly has just as much influence in my buying decision. Anyone that buys a sports car is trying to project some kind of image whether they are willing to admit it or not. I think my car fits my personality and needs more than a vette.

Word on that (I feel like a homie using the word...."word" :screwy: ). I think what should be taken into account the most is what you said at the end. At the end of the day, the person who buys the car will buy the one that fits their needs and wants the most. Whether its a Boxster S, M3, Vette, they are all special in to people in their own way. Cheers for you! :cheers:

BTW M3 and Boxster S are both real good cars. If either/or can't satisfy someone, then they either have a severe high speed issue, or worse.....a slow one.

Found it ~ www.maximum-cars.com/Cars/Car.php?carnumber=47

shall i say it again?

it says Boxster S at the top.

Uh, you don't really know what you are talking about do you Jcsaleen. The 01 boxster S has 250hp and the 03/04 models have 260hp. The new 05 S has 280hp. Those #'s you quoted are for a base boxster. An 03/04 boxster S does 0-60 in 5.3 sec and the 1/4 in 13.7 sec. Not super car performance for sure but definately not what I would call slow. Is the M3 faster? Certainly, but it definately doesn't destroy the boxster s in a straight line. Plus the top speed of a boxster S is 164mph and the M3 is limited to 155mph...not that anyone would be driving that fast anyway short of the autobahn. As far as standing out from the crowd goes, I think this is important but performance and overall balance certainly has just as much influence in my buying decision. Anyone that buys a sports car is trying to project some kind of image whether they are willing to admit it or not. I think my car fits my personality and needs more than a vette.

Overall performance? Have you seen the moteg video? The M3 keeps up with the gallardo,nsx-r,ferrari 360 and a porsche Gt3. I'd hardly even put the boxer S in those cars catagories.

Well for the 10 ish (if I'm lucky) days of the year that I go to the track that may be a factor. But the fact that I won't be there to set lap times means it wouldn't count anyway.

I was going to say it seems like an American thing that people are obsessed with acceleration figures and "winning races" against other cars, but it seems to be that way here too.
If it makes you happy then that's fine, really.
The reason I was comparing these two cars was not because I want to go and race 17 year olds and get a hard on if i win, bit because they both offer something to the driver, and reward on different levels.
The Boxter S because of the level of tactility of the steering, brakes, throttle and gearshift, and inherent balance that it has, the sound the boxer 6 makes, the open top (which is great fun at night - driven an MX-5 a few times). and yes- it is quick, at least quick enough for a daily driver.
The M3 because of its engine, the way it looks (subjective), the way it goes when it's heading for the red line, the chassis balance, the fun factor of a tail happy but fairly benign car, the interior (my cars to date have had cloth seats and plastic interiors so some luxury will be sweet).

That's why I choose cars, not because I'm hung like an ant and need to beat people in street races or be able to flaunt high HP figures to make up for inadequecies.

When I drive the car hard there's no one around to show off to anyway, and during the day when there's others in the car or I'm in lots of traffic, it may as well be an ordinary car.

American thing that people are obsessed with acceleration figures and "winning races" against other cars

So true soo many people think accelration is all that matters. If any of you think im picking the bmw just because of the power your sadly mistaken the bmw m3 is an excellent track car. The whole suspention layout is fine tuned.


The reason I was comparing these two cars was not because I want to go and race 17 year olds and get a hard on if i win, bit because they both offer something to the driver, and reward on different levels.

Its very rewarding at the track. Its a great feeling just being out in the open.

I own a 1970 MGB GT. With the high-compression engine option (which my car does have) the little beast pushes 115bhp stock. Even with Weber carb and manifold, ANSA exhaust, shaved head, thinner head gasket, and a Kent cam (which gives me a good 150hp should the planets align just right) I'll gladly admit to the fact that my dear Layla gets walked in straight line duels with the average Caprice.

But not a person alive (save for most short sighted Japanophile import hobbists) would dare call the MGB a poor driver's car. I know a good driving experience, and the wonderful balance afforded by lightweight, well weighted steering, good grip (but not too much good grip) and just that right amount of power to get a car running around the track happily.

Now then, if I do have this understanding, why do I choose Corvette?

It's because, laughable as it was between 1974 to 1990, the Corvette is a world-class driver's machine. No, it's not world-class comfort. Neither is a Caterham, an Elise, a Morgan Aero 8, a Noble M12GTO, or even the most "driver oriented" versions of the M3 and Porsche 911 - M3 CSL and 911GT3, respectively. They're all cars that concentrate on deleting the fluff and producing amazing to drive cars that INVOLVE the driver.

Unbelievably, Corvette does the bloody same thing, just they never dove in on the fluff side after it proved so disastrous in the 70's and 80's. It took the all-mighty ZR-1 to remind Corvette of its roots in performance (roots that go back to offering independent rear suspension and four wheel disc brakes before FERRARI offered them) and competition. It took the C5 to build upon that revival and return Corvette to the world stage in competition and performance, and now with the C6, Corvette stands astride the sports car world as the benchmark for just how much bang for the buck a sports car can offer.

I've driven late model C5's. You sit low in the cockpit, shifter right at hand - a feeling more reminscient of vintage Lotuses - and gazing out over a brief but sculptured hood. The car feels light at the touch, just darting whichever way you point it. Tossing itself gleefully over crests and settling comfortably as the road dives. The tail steps out a hair as you turn in, but announces itself early with just a pinch of roll at the tail before it lets go. The gearchange is solid but not too heavy, though fifth is a little vague, and the car always seems begging for more.

It almost taunts you after corners - as if that little oversteer wiggle was to say "You only took that at 50? C'mon, I've got 55 in here if you got it."

You throw around that "typically American thought" idiocy as if it erases the Corvette from existence. Well, I'll tell you this - Mr. Typical Porsche Owner - I've driven Boxsters and they're NUMB. NUMB. NUMB. NUMB. They've had the heart and soul engineered right out of them so that Sally the Secretary can drive her cute little convertible to the hair-dresser. I don't care how "balanced" you or any other number of water-cooled POSERS claim the Boxster to be (and yes, as someone who conquered a round-nose 930 in the rain, I've earned the right to call water-cooled Porsche drivers posers) it's a numb, soul-less, bean-counter wet dream that's just no fun.

And I still contend whoever decided that the 911 should wear Boxster headlights should be dragged out in the street and shot, right after the guy who ditched air-cooled engines, the guy who made the Turbo AWD, and the guy who made slant-nose available on non-930's.

And I still contend whoever decided that the 911 should wear Boxster headlights should be dragged out in the street and shot, right after the guy who ditched air-cooled engines, the guy who made the Turbo AWD, and the guy who made slant-nose available on non-930's.

I think they were mostly Toyota executives. The Cayenne was their idea too.

Interesting post Layla's Keeper. You sound like you are talking from first hand experience but more importantly that you know what you're talking about.

I like cars that deliver excitement as well as driving prowess. This is why I'd take a TVR Tamora over a Boxter S.

However;

As much as I would really like your opinion to be true, I still see people who have proven ability in reviewing cars opinions to hold more water. I've said before, but Evo magazine (U.K.) has to be the best car magazine for real drivers out there. They like the Corvette for what it is, but certainly don't rate it as the tactile drivers machine you describe. I will of course drive it myself before I go judging your opinions, but I've heard people say how great certain cars are before even though everyone else knows it's a steaming pile of crap to drive.

Also, although water cooled, the 996 GT3 and 997 911's could hardly be called poor imitations. Those that drive them extensively say that are the best ever.

Perhaps a C5 / C6 woth some suspension mods, urathane bushes for the steering, a smaller diameter wheel, a short shift linkage, some race seats and proper set of guages would be a really good driver's car? From what I understand, this would not cost much to do, and could potentially transform the car.