PDA

View Full Version : euro vs jap



franks
23-01-07, 03:41 PM
E46 M3 vs R34 GTR

why why why?

kula
23-01-07, 03:58 PM
tuff call....

both are nice.

id rather the GTR i think tho.

dunno why
M3 is a bit pretentious.

hebe
23-01-07, 04:07 PM
M3 cos it's like...pimp :D

Jing
23-01-07, 04:07 PM
its only prententious if you have the normal m3.


CSL on the other hand ..........................

Id take the m3. For the mere fact that its na car and my past experience with turbo cars has told me turbos are the wrong direction for me.

denka
23-01-07, 05:07 PM
Godzilla for me.

Japanese Automobile Icon, plus (as justin woudl say) TGTRCNL!

xero
23-01-07, 05:08 PM
as much as i love the M3... i wouldnt want to own it...

i feel there is much more potenial in the GTR...

Justin Fox
23-01-07, 05:44 PM
Beauty and the Beast?

GT-R is a beast. M3's a very refined, almost elegant machine.

I love both cars. Tough decision!

richy
23-01-07, 06:23 PM
Both.. hehe..

I agree with Justin there, M3 feels more elegant, classy and refined and GTR is a beast with big potential. Drove them both (gf's 34 gtr and her dad's m3), maybe m3 daily and gtr weekend? hehe... tough choice there

proconcept
23-01-07, 07:11 PM
the choice would be easier if it was a CSL. I'd still pick the M3 in the end though, because it is a newer car. stock vs stock, M3. potential wise, i think they are both on par. would love to see one of the top tuned r34 gtr's battle with the top tuned m3 gtr's!

scathing
23-01-07, 07:36 PM
As a daily driver and stock for stock (or "light tune"), the M3. Its just a comfier and classier car.

As a weekender that's allowed to be modified within a reasonable budget, the GT-R. It would probably go faster for less.

The engine in the M3 is about as powerful as it can be without going FI, and from what I've heard its bottom end is designed for RPM and not boost. And I wouldn't feel as bad ripping out the fruit in a GT-R for weight reduction than doing it from an M3.

shonen
23-01-07, 08:46 PM
tuff call....

both are nice.

id rather the GTR i think tho.

dunno why
M3 is a bit pretentious.

Franky listen to Mark :P


oh and.....I TOLD YOU SO :P


Besides M3s could possibly have the worst exhuast note ever, where as you cant go wrong with the sweet sound of an RB26. So to solve your problem, buy an M3 shell and chuck in an RB26 ;)

mrkrooz
23-01-07, 08:52 PM
GTR....No need for words just sit in one :)

Justin Fox
23-01-07, 09:33 PM
Drove them both (gf's 34 gtr and her dad's m3)

Your GF has an R34 GT-R?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

FWOAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kula
23-01-07, 09:41 PM
yeah M3s sound is something you either love or hate, but most of the time i dont like it, esp the E46. I reckon the 36 sounded better.

I reckon id almost like a good nice dakar yellow 3.2 E36 over a 46.
its more of a classic.

both cars have almost unlimited potential.

the M3 GTR is quite possibly the fastest tintop car ever, and will most likely totally demolish ANY GT-R. SuperGT cars included.

here are two clips to make the decision more difficult.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8087007981142017293

or less difficult.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5034695102135473664&q=M3GTR

cus NOTHING turns in like that M3.
but its not really possible to mod like it that, while the mines car is just a few parts away:)

kula
23-01-07, 09:43 PM
the choice would be easier if it was a CSL. I'd still pick the M3 in the end though, because it is a newer car. stock vs stock, M3. potential wise, i think they are both on par. would love to see one of the top tuned r34 gtr's battle with the top tuned m3 gtr's!

newer?
ignore newer.
they will be of a similar price and age.

i also just look at the people that I have met who own them.

I've met, hmm 9-10 R34 GT-R owners, and maybe 1 or 2 have been wankers, so most of them have been great people.

I've met hmm 5-6 M3 owners, and all bar one have been wankers:P

proconcept
23-01-07, 10:10 PM
Why ignore newer. we aren't talking about z-tune's here. m3 e46's started in 2001. r34 gtr's ended in 2002. my point is a valid point.

In much the same way you explain your experience with the owners of the cars, you could correlate the same mindset in the same discussion with honda owner/stereotypes as has been discussed on this forum - to death.

kula
23-01-07, 10:16 PM
if it is to be an M3, it will be an early one, and probably a later model GTR, so they will be of a similar price, and age.

so newer isnt much of an issue.

Babalouie
23-01-07, 10:56 PM
Me personally I'd go the R34. Lots of mods that are easily accessible where I reckon the M3 would have much less modding potential and I'd get bored with it. But the R34 would prolly shit me as a daily driver, so I would recommend a VIP'd Lexus :D

VTECMACHINE
24-01-07, 12:55 AM
M3 for me...

lovesil
24-01-07, 07:49 AM
M3 looks like the typical euro car, which is more "pasta" oriented and GTR34 is as any typical jap car, looks more purposeful built.

If someone's thinking of matching up a highly tuned street M3 & GTR34, the skyline will definitely win. Don't see how any street legal m3 can match a street car like Mine's GTR. And if you are talking about race tuned level, i think a JGTC GTR34 will be hard to match up.

my 2cents anyway

franks
24-01-07, 08:17 AM
the m3's fighting back!!! :)

i was just dreamin' again, i highly doubt id be able to afford either car yet they would be highly desireable to own!!! :)

whilst id have no qualms in putting the the R34 onto a track, id feel reluctant to put the M3 on totally disregarding its racing heritage! i guess its because with the BMW brand comes the stigma of an expensive car and expensive parts...

i'd put them in two brackets, if i could afford one before 30, id get the R34. if i could afford one after 30 then id get the M3 :)

horsepowerfreaks.com have a turbo kit for the E46 M3. thats pretty insane. but having said that in north america and europe the M3 isnt that unaffordable.

the E46 will definately come down in price given the new model is out too. plus you now have the twin turbo 335 variant which is going to make sales interesting for the M3!

EGG80X
24-01-07, 08:43 AM
would you rock up at a director's meeting with a m3 or gtr?

kula
24-01-07, 08:58 AM
cheep E46 M3

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/BMW-E46-M3-2001_W0QQitemZ180077601165QQihZ008QQcategoryZ13534 2QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

franks
24-01-07, 10:02 AM
blardy cheap if it was road registerable (is that even a word?) hahah...

wraith, not a director. just a car nut with alot of dreams! :)

Babalouie
24-01-07, 10:17 AM
would you rock up at a director's meeting with a m3 or gtr?

Actually if you are rocking up to a board meeting with lots of grey haired guys, you will be the corporate alpha male if you rock up in an old Muscle car like a Mustang or 67 Camaro. That gets the old farts drooling :D

lovesil
24-01-07, 10:48 AM
Actually, if you go to a director's meeting, you would like to take a helicopter instead of m3/gtr :P

scathing
24-01-07, 11:01 AM
whilst id have no qualms in putting the the R34 onto a track, id feel reluctant to put the M3 on totally disregarding its racing heritage! i guess its because with the BMW brand comes the stigma of an expensive car and expensive parts...

GT-R parts aren't exactly cheap either. Its not quite a Takumi tax, but the red R just gives the guy operating the price sticker gun the red mist.

Omawari_San
24-01-07, 08:37 PM
Take the GTR, looks alot more aggressiv. M3 is a hairdresser's car.

s_vtec
24-01-07, 08:44 PM
hmm...the gtr, m3 is nice but not my style, doesn't suit me p plater very well lol

Trolls Royce
29-01-07, 01:43 AM
I put my money down for the 34 GTR. While both cars do have unlimited potential, you could say the same about any car with an unlimited budget.

While the M3 might be nice, and is certainly one of the cars I'd love to own, I don't think it would be as fun to own, nor as cheap to own, as an R34 GTR. GTR has a much wider array of off the shelf parts available, at a lower cost, a lower cost of OEM parts.

M3 with a stack of stuff on it would certainly be something cool, but I couldn't see myself doing it unless I was ready to buy something that I didn't want to modify with the exception of brake pads and sticky tyres.

franks
29-01-07, 10:42 AM
M3 with a stack of stuff on it would certainly be something cool, but I couldn't see myself doing it unless I was ready to buy something that I didn't want to modify with the exception of brake pads and sticky tyres.

... yup bingo, i think that's exactly what i'm after!!!

i think im far too old to be mucking around with mods these days! :( i think an evo would be in a similar league too? ie. throw some good rubber and pads on and its close to a racecar hahah!

shonen
29-01-07, 12:08 PM
pffft old...
I beleive Justin and Babs and stan the man and a few others are older than you and still going strong !!

Babs has three kids man !!!

SOOOFFFTTTT

scathing
29-01-07, 12:58 PM
... yup bingo, i think that's exactly what i'm after!!!

i think im far too old to be mucking around with mods these days! :( i think an evo would be in a similar league too? ie. throw some good rubber and pads on and its close to a racecar hahah!

I'm not sure whether Anabolic meant that the car is already bloody fast out of the box, or he just doesn't want to stuff around with a luxury sports car that has a good blend of performance and comfort.

Having had long talks with Dumhed about his boss' various M3s (he had, and sold, a CSL as well), my experience tells me its the latter. Because, stock, its not that quick in the grand scheme of things. Its certainly not a track car.

The brakes are still big single piston calipers, and they'll go off after a while. The thing lugs around so much shit that there's plenty of gains to be had by gutting the interior and taking out the 14 speaker stereo, powered heated seats, sound deadening, etc. And the engine is almost near the edge of what a street-legal NA car will do on pump fuel, so any powertrain mods you look for will not be cheap.

And bearing in mind that a new VE SS will outaccelerate an E46 M3, you're going to want more power than what you've got.


If I wanted to buy a car that was just stupendously quick out of the box with pretty much zero mods, I'd get a 911 GT3 RS. Its weight reduced, caged, etc. I don't know for sure, but its probably running competition pads and fluids.

franks
29-01-07, 06:42 PM
I'm not sure whether Anabolic meant that the car is already bloody fast out of the box, or he just doesn't want to stuff around with a luxury sports car that has a good blend of performance and comfort.

Having had long talks with Dumhed about his boss' various M3s (he had, and sold, a CSL as well), my experience tells me its the latter. Because, stock, its not that quick in the grand scheme of things. Its certainly not a track car.

heh, i was under the assumption of the former :)


The brakes are still big single piston calipers, and they'll go off after a while. The thing lugs around so much shit that there's plenty of gains to be had by gutting the interior and taking out the 14 speaker stereo, powered heated seats, sound deadening, etc. And the engine is almost near the edge of what a street-legal NA car will do on pump fuel, so any powertrain mods you look for will not be cheap.

because it doesnt need big gold brembo 4-pot calipers i guess??? :)

check out the stats between the E46 M3 and EVO8 MR....

Evolution Lancer 8 MR:
0-60 = 4.70 sec.
1/4 Mile = 13.50 sec.
60-0 Braking = 116.00 ft.
80-0 Braking = 204.00 ft.
Slalom = 69.00 mph
Top Speed = 155.00 mph
Curb Weight = MT3285

E46 M3:
0-60 = 4.80 sec.
1/4 Mile = 13.40 sec.
60-0 Braking = 114.00 ft.
80-0 Braking = 196.00 ft.
Slalom = 67.30 mph
Top Speed = 155.00 mph
Curb Weight = MT3415

so yes, taking out all those luxury items out of an M3 will DEFINATELY stand to gain!!!

stats taken from autos.yahoo.com (which is from Road & Track magazine)


And bearing in mind that a new VE SS will outaccelerate an E46 M3, you're going to want more power than what you've got.

but its a commodore....


If I wanted to buy a car that was just stupendously quick out of the box with pretty much zero mods, I'd get a 911 GT3 RS. Its weight reduced, caged, etc. I don't know for sure, but its probably running competition pads and fluids.

yes, awesome. but way out of my price league! :)

scathing
29-01-07, 07:07 PM
because it doesnt need big gold brembo 4-pot calipers i guess?

check out the stats between the E46 M3 and EVO8 MR....

Bear in mind that those are on single stops to supply best figures.

The difference in stopping distance between a Brembo equipped 350Z and the crap ones is about 2 feet from 60mph (http://www.zeckhausen.com/testing_brakes.htm), if you only make one stop. Which means, on the street, when you do your panic stop to avoid running over some stupid pedestrians (http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/archive/index.php/t-60679.html), the Touring is practically as good as the Track. But, on repeated stops, the Brembos don't fade whereas with the cast single piston items distances increase as you go along.

And, having sampled both on my car, I can tell you that the Brembos with stock pads and rotors are head and shoulders above the stock Touring with slotted DBA rotors and Ferodo DS2500 pads. Even on R-Comps with high ambient temperatures on Friday, my Brembos held up. I've had brake fade with the Touring before on street tyres on the same circuit.

So, in the context of a track car, those braking figures you've provided are practically irrelevant. They tell you how well the car stops once. Great if you're drag racing, but meaningless if your course has more than one braking point.

I'll have to ask Dumhed to see whether his boss' M3 has had a brake upgrade. Of course, his is the E36 M3R, which was designed for endurance racing, so it might have already had better brakes than the road-going item.

As for the acceleration numbers, without launch control I'd hazard to say that the Evo's standing start times are more repeatable (until you broke the driveline). Anyone can clutch-dump on WOT time after time, but with the M3 there's plenty of scope to bog the car down or wheelspin it.


but its a commodore....

And Beamers are nothing more than German taxis. Don't forget that the E39 M5 was slower around the Nurburgring than a HSV GTS of the same era.

And what was their test driver's beef with the E39 M5? The brakes started to fade out on the circuit. They were smoking at the end of the first lap, whereas the GTS pedal was rock solid all the way through.

The superbly built and well specc'ed M5 was a much more rounded grand tourer than the clunky, rattly HSV but....we're not talking about street cars. We're talking about track cars. On the street we know what's more important for cred. But, on the track, where would you prefer to be? I know that I'd prefer to be in my proletariat car staring at the snob slowly disappearing from my rear view mirror than sitting in front of that propeller badge staring at the lion's head and helmet.

Of course, the extra ballast from all those dollars sitting in my wallet might make the M5 competitive against the GTS......

franks
29-01-07, 08:59 PM
Bear in mind that those are on single stops to supply best figures.
<snip>


yeah, you're absolutely right here and its a great point you raise, often overlooked, as i have just done!

i'd still like to hear from an M3 owner though on how the stock calipers work on a track with some decent pads? i mean, bmw wouldn't fall short in the braking department with such a car especially with its racing pedigree?

your M5 and HSV knowledge is pretty impressive, but id like to hear more about the M3's suitably on the track?

Gorilla
30-01-07, 12:34 AM
touch call, I couldnt comment as i havent driven any, but im more inclined to go towards RWD...

scathing
30-01-07, 12:35 AM
yeah, you're absolutely right here and its a great point you raise, often overlooked, as i have just done!

Its one thing that Peter Luxon, of APS, loves to tell me. The man is a big Porsche fan, and the biggest reason is because the car just keeps on keeping on. You can take a dead stock Boxster and, in the right hands, it'll keep up with modified WRXs on touge roads.

But whereas the WRXs will have overheated and caused the brakes to smoke at the end of one of those runs, the Boxster will pull up like its just been driven to the shops.

In his opinion, the best way for car magazines to split a good sports car from a bad one is not to run a single (or handful) of flying laps. Run the car for a dozen or more laps, and print a full session breakdown. Your average Japanese car will have given up the ghost after 3-4 laps and lose a lot of time at the end of the session. The Porsche will be far more consistent, and probably faster overall.


i'd still like to hear from an M3 owner though on how the stock calipers work on a track with some decent pads? i mean, bmw wouldn't fall short in the braking department with such a car especially with its racing pedigree?

Might have a chat with Dumhed about it, or ask him to post (he hasn't been on here for a while).


your M5 and HSV knowledge is pretty impressive

Motor Magazine co-sponsored that comparo of the M5 vs E55 vs GTS along with some British magazine (I can only assume it was CAR or EVO, given that they share writers). They had a Nurburgring specialising pro driver drive all three cars, as well as a road loop.

The British magazine gave the award to the M5, since it was a much better daily drivable street car, but Motor (of course) gave the award to the local boy overseas for its ability to outrun two of the most famous super saloons in existance on the very race track they were developed on.

Omawari_San
30-01-07, 03:54 AM
The german Sportscar magazine "Sport Auto" drives every car they have in a bigger test over the "nordschleife".

Thats the times of the M3s(Times are from the course without the GP-Track):
8:35 --- 144.000 km/h -- BMW M3 SMG E36, 321 PS/1515 kg (sport auto 03/97)
8:22 --- 147.749 km/h -- BMW M3 E46, 343 PS/1584 kg (sport auto 12/00)
7:50 --- 157.787 km/h -- BMW E46 M3 CSL, 360 PS/1421 kg (sport auto 08/03)

Other M-Models
8:13 --- 150.426 km/h -- BMW M5 (E60), 507 PS/1844 kg (sport auto 12/04)
8:28 --- 145.984 km/h -- BMW E39 M5, 400PS/1833 kg (sport auto 03/99)
8:09 --- 151.656 km/h -- BMW M6, 507 PS/1761 kg (sport auto 12/05)
8:15 --- 149.818 km/h – BMW Z4 M Roadster, 343 PS/1485 kg,

In comparison (including different sources too, because that magazine only test cars that are availlable in germany):

8:10.75 151.265 km/h -- Subaru Impreza WRX STi Version III sedan (1996)
8:24 --- 147.143 km/h -- Subaru Impreza WRX STi (sport auto 05/04) (German Spec-car with 265 HP and without twinscroll or DCCD)
8:28.93 145.690 km/h -- Subaru Impreza WRX sedan (1992 [Can't be maybe its 1994. I wouldnt take the time too serious then])
8:06.01 152.589 km/h -- Subaru WRX Sti C-spec (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:01.72 153.984 km/h -- Nissan Skyline R33 GT-R, (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:22.38 147.617 km/h -- Nissan Skyline R32 GTR (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:25 --- 146.851 km/h -- Mitsubishi Carisma GT Evo VII (sport auto 11/02) (Lancer Evo was called carisma in version VI and VII. Not sure if VII was detuned to 265 HP in germany)
8:11 --- 151,274 km/h -- Mitsubishi Lancer EVO IX (Best Motoring video 14)
8:14.98 149.824 km/h -- Mitsubishi Carisma Evo VIII GSR MR 8 (Best Motoring video "Carrera Invasion")
8:38 --- 143.166 km/h -- Honda NSX 3.2, 280 PS/1386 kg (sport auto 08/97)
8:37 --- 143.443 km/h -- Subaru Impreza GT Turbo, 218 (German spec MY99 WRX)

Thats enough prove, no space for arguments left :)

I just see that a WRX STi from 1996 is alot faster then the e46 M3 (not the CSL). And if you keep the difference in price and the technoogy gap in the tires in mind.....



Why M3 then?

RyanP
04-02-07, 10:40 AM
Omawari_San: Have you got times for the M5 @ Nordschleife?

scathing
04-02-07, 05:02 PM
Omawari_San: Have you got times for the M5 @ Nordschleife?

He's quoted the times for the V10 car.

The V8 powered one is a 8:30ish car.

Omawari_San
04-02-07, 08:16 PM
Have a typing error above.

The v8 m5 (e39 not e49 like I wrote above) had 8:28 minutes.

Another one I just realized is, that I wrote 1992 behind the time of the WRX. Can't be. I just copied it from the magazines homepage. Maybe its a 1994 then?

Justin Fox
04-02-07, 09:16 PM
PS: Is this the famous Franks which I've seen in photos in a yellow R34 going sideways onto the straight at Wakies years ago?

kula
04-02-07, 10:10 PM
famous? lol.

4agte
04-02-07, 10:38 PM
if i had the money to buy either the cost of modifying them shouldnt be such a huge issue so i thinks the m3 it looks alot nicer espc if you put the csl bodykit onto it plus the motors are pretty tuff

Omawari_San
05-02-07, 09:24 AM
(...) plus the motors are pretty tuff

Wouldn't build on that. They might be nice motors from the performance point of view. Especially the M3 one, but they are very sensitive engines. They need carefull servicing.

German car manufactors lost a lot from their former quality. BMW, Audi and MB aren't that bullet proof anymore.

For example MB has huge problems with rust and electrical issues on the newer cars.

Luc
05-02-07, 03:45 PM
GT-R is Japans National treasure.

bathurst-91
11-02-07, 01:11 PM
yeah M3s sound is something you either love or hate, but most of the time i dont like it, esp the E46. I reckon the 36 sounded better.

I reckon id almost like a good nice dakar yellow 3.2 E36 over a 46.
its more of a classic.

both cars have almost unlimited potential.

the M3 GTR is quite possibly the fastest tintop car ever, and will most likely totally demolish ANY GT-R. SuperGT cars included.

here are two clips to make the decision more difficult.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8087007981142017293

or less difficult.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5034695102135473664&q=M3GTR

cus NOTHING turns in like that M3.
but its not really possible to mod like it that, while the mines car is just a few parts away:)


Demolish any GTR? thats a rediculous statement. It all depends on budget.. allowed mods etc. That M3 GTR vid is old ive watched it many a time as have I the mines gtr vid. You cannot compare the two, One is a private company modding a gtr that is track/street driveable whilst that M3 was built with one purpose in mind "the ring" record with unlimited budget. Id say its obviously quicker.

The only REAL way to settle a dispute like this would be something like this;

mods limited to 'no chassis/rigid panel mods' (eg carbons panels/doors/etc allowed but no replacing roof/solid body panels. Likewise no tubing of chassis). Otherwise everything else goes. Engine is allowed to be stroked to max standard block will take.... max power etc. Everything else unlimited.

A controlled tyre/rim size.

3 GTR's | All to the same spec. 3 Professional drivers.
3 M3's | All to the same spec. 3 Professional drivers.

10 laps of the ring each. 10 laps of tsukuba each. then BMW drivers swap with NISSAN drivers and do it all over again.

Only then you will find which is the 'ultimate' better car.

kula
11-02-07, 02:00 PM
yah true.

as to what has been actually built, and what is driving on tracks at the moment is what you should look at.

people seem to think cars like the mines car and the like are the fastest things out there, and sure comparing it to the M3 GTR is unfair, as its on a much higher level of modification, but that car would own the mines car on i reckon any track. my point was, and i wrote it in my post:

both cars have almost unlimited potential.

4agte
11-02-07, 02:17 PM
Wouldn't build on that. They might be nice motors from the performance point of view. Especially the M3 one, but they are very sensitive engines. They need carefull servicing.

German car manufactors lost a lot from their former quality. BMW, Audi and MB aren't that bullet proof anymore.

For example MB has huge problems with rust and electrical issues on the newer cars.

there are pleanty of examples of supercharged and turbocharged ones on stock internals even the gtr engine needs work to push over what 300 rwkw maybee a tad more.... and what performance engine dosent need careful servicing

Buddy
20-02-07, 06:40 PM
they both have alot of potential.. however the gtr and be upgraded for a lesser price and they are so many parts available for the gtr.

Trolls Royce
20-02-07, 07:17 PM
Its one thing that Peter Luxon, of APS, loves to tell me. The man is a big Porsche fan, and the biggest reason is because the car just keeps on keeping on. You can take a dead stock Boxster and, in the right hands, it'll keep up with modified WRXs on touge roads.

But whereas the WRXs will have overheated and caused the brakes to smoke at the end of one of those runs, the Boxster will pull up like its just been driven to the shops.

In his opinion, the best way for car magazines to split a good sports car from a bad one is not to run a single (or handful) of flying laps. Run the car for a dozen or more laps, and print a full session breakdown. Your average Japanese car will have given up the ghost after 3-4 laps and lose a lot of time at the end of the session. The Porsche will be far more consistent, and probably faster overall.



Might have a chat with Dumhed about it, or ask him to post (he hasn't been on here for a while).



Motor Magazine co-sponsored that comparo of the M5 vs E55 vs GTS along with some British magazine (I can only assume it was CAR or EVO, given that they share writers). They had a Nurburgring specialising pro driver drive all three cars, as well as a road loop.

The British magazine gave the award to the M5, since it was a much better daily drivable street car, but Motor (of course) gave the award to the local boy overseas for its ability to outrun two of the most famous super saloons in existance on the very race track they were developed on.

HAHAHAHAHAH!!! You listen to Peter Luxon!!!

scathing
20-02-07, 09:32 PM
He's a man of strong opinions, but they're not always wrong.

After I rented a very old and very worn Boxster, I found the car to still have a pretty impressive build quality. Everything had wear patterns on it, but it was still impressively rattle-free. My Z came with rattles from the factory, and the mileage I've done on it since has added more. The power was a bit down from the Z, unsurprisingly, but the brakes were still top notch after a lot of abuse from yours truly, and the handling in general was far superior.

I can only imagine what the car would be like had it not had 80,000 rental kilometres on the odo, and it was the S version.