Top End Supercars v.s. Entry level Supercars

[V8slayer]

I read in a copy of Car last year that the track record at Ferrari's Fiorano test track are as follows:

Schumy's F2001: 55sec
Maserati MC12: 1min 13sec
Enzo: 1min 25sec
360CS: 1min 27sec
360: 1min 30sec

And the new F430 can apparently match the 360CS quite easily.

Now you're paying 117,000 pounds for a relatively comfortable, beautiful to look at exotic supercar in the F430.

You'd be paying over 420,000 pounds for an Enzo. It's only very marginally faster. And I'd dare say a two second a lap difference by someone like Luca Badoer hardly means an average driver will be consistently faster in the Enzo.

So aside from getting a wow while driving the 430 and a WOOOOW when driving an Enzo, you're way more out of pocket, less comfortable, probably less usable and not really faster.

What's the point?

And just out of curiosity, does anyone have stats on the times a 996 turbo or GT2 posted around the N'ring? I know the Carrerra GT did a 7min33.45sec.

[Jimster]

That doesn't really work in the real world, seeing as those whohave an Enzo are pretty much guaranteed to have an F430 in the garrage as well...........

[NISSANSPDR]

Eh but Enzo and F430 is like apples and oranges...one's hot and one's not...one I'd own..one I'd shun away from.

F430 all day anyday...who cares if the Enzo is the fastest...it sure is not the sexiest

http://www.seriouswheels.com/2005/20...d-1024x768.htm

[YogsVR4]

Cars are not puchased for perfomance alone.

[porscheguy9999]

But does the Enzo justify a sligtly faster track time for about 3 times the price of an F430? And a slightly faster time for the F430 against the 360 justify a $40k price hike? When the 360 is the better looking car.

[drunken monkey]

i take it you don't know about the time, costs and work involved in making carbon fibre body parts and the painting process of them.....
or the costs of carbon ceramic brakes.....
or V12 engines.....
or the sheer amount of man hours they put into each car.....

numbers and looks aren't all there is to a car.

[Porsche_Daddy]

Originally Posted by porscheguy9999

But does the Enzo justify a sligtly faster track time for about 3 times the price of an F430? And a slightly faster time for the F430 against the 360 justify a $40k price hike? When the 360 is the better looking car.

Opinions are like assholes. Some people say the enzo is beautiful.

[V8slayer]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

i take it you don't know about the time, costs and work involved in making carbon fibre body parts and the painting process of them.....
or the costs of carbon ceramic brakes.....
or V12 engines.....
or the sheer amount of man hours they put into each car.....

numbers and looks aren't all there is to a car.

Oh yeah, I'm sure no one who bought an Enzo ranked it's looks and performance as the primary motivation for buying one. They were enticed by the man hours put into each car and the cost of individual components. Those were the really important issues.

I don't care about the means. To me, the end is what's important. I don't care if you made a car out of wood and stone. If it looks nice and goes fast I'll buy it. And I'm sure most other people would too.

[porscheguy9999]

Originally Posted by Porsche_Daddy

Opinions are like assholes. Some people say the enzo is beautiful.

I think you got me wrong. I like the Enzo's looks. I was comparing the looks of the 360 to the F430.

[Porsche_Daddy]

I see. My mistake. But, looks are definately a subjective matter.

[NISSANSPDR]

Originally Posted by Porsche_Daddy

But, looks are definately a subjective matter.

Even ugly beeyotches need love too.
















































But not from me...lol.

[crayzayjay]

Originally Posted by V8slayer

And just out of curiosity, does anyone have stats on the times a 996 turbo or GT2 posted around the N'ring? I know the Carrerra GT did a 7min33.45sec.

Porsche Nurburgring times:

Carrera GT - 7.32
GT2 (462bhp) - 7.46
GT3RS - 7.47
GT3 (03) - 7.52
GT3 (99) - 7.56

A couple of others: Pagani Zonda does it in the mid to low 7.40's, Ferrari 360 CS in the mid 7.50's, Gallardo and Murcielago in the low 7.50's.

[drunken monkey]

Originally Posted by V8slayer

Oh yeah, I'm sure no one who bought an Enzo ranked it's looks and performance as the primary motivation for buying one. They were enticed by the man hours put into each car and the cost of individual components. Those were the really important issues.

I don't care about the means. To me, the end is what's important. I don't care if you made a car out of wood and stone. If it looks nice and goes fast I'll buy it. And I'm sure most other people would too.

and this goes right into my list of stupid things i've heard this year.
if the enzo did not have the hugely expensive carbon fibre body or the carbon ceramic brakes or V12 engines or the sheer amount of man hours they put into each car, it wouldn't look, go and stop in the way that it does.

performance and looks don't just come out of thin air you know.
they are the end result of many hours of work, testing, tuning, making, testing, re-testing and on and on and on.

[V8slayer]

First of all, in your last post, you said looks and performance aren't everything. I'm just pointing out that they're the two biggest things when buying a supercar.

Secondly, evidently you don't need all that expensive componentry to get the performance. The F430 does much the same for a lot less. That is the whole point of this thread in case you missed it.

So I don't really care if you think my post was stupid. You can't even back up your arguement with anything that makes sense.

[drunken monkey]

did you say that the f430 does much the same as the enzo?

so if you don't need to have all of that expensive stuff to make a fast car then why hasn't the mclaren F1, arguably the last car made without a budget-limit, been bested by anything made using the same materials/methods, let alone something that's made 'normally'?