no, those are the 'supercar' level on Ferrari. that's my whole point (and Costco's) - Lambo never had that level on their model lineup.

 

When Ferrari says their cars have derived F1 technology as a way to say their cars are superior, that's a marketing gimmick.

But, that's good because you're posting a lot of misinformed thoughts.
That's not how you said it though.

You worded your original post as if to say Lamborghini must be in some sort of "state of affairs" because they aren't in F1. I've asked repeatedly what those "affairs" are then, because outside of Mercedes, none of the Germans, Japanese, or Americans are in F1 at the moment, either.

 

I might be misinformed if Ferrari was not actually doing what they said, putting F1 tech into their cars. But if a company basically puts a detuned F1 motor into their top-level car, how is that a gimmick? Please tell me.

My Lamborghini comment was in the direction of Lambo's classic rivalry with Ferrari. Ferrari does not have this kind of rivalry with any other of the companies you mention.

Therefore, the conclusion is, Ferrari > Lamborghini.

 

Because the 512, 456, Mondial, 348/355 were competing so well against the Diablo.

The F40 was a 471Bhp, TT V8 with a 0-60 of 4 seconds & a top speed of 201. The Diablo was a 490Bhp V12 with a 0-60 of 4.5 & a top speed of 202 w/ a distinct weight disadvantage.

Fast forward to the F50 with a 512Bhp V12, 0-60 of 3.7 & a top speed of 194mph. The SV came with 510Bhp, 0-60 of 3.9 & a top speed of 204mph.

Oh yeah, Lamborghini was never on the level of Ferrari supercars.

 

Because the end result was nothing like a Ferrari derived Formula 1 car.

As much as I love the F50, it was never what Ferrari reported it to be. All the regulations in placed ended up making it anything but a "F1-derived supercar". The Enzo up until now, has been the only thing Ferrari could truly market as a F1-derived supercar because it was one of the first cars to really bring Formula 1 tech. to the streets. Every road Ferrari since then has just been given updated tech. the Enzo debuted.

 

This is not about horsepower and top speed. This is about intents and purposes. The F40 and F50, along with the other supercar level Ferrari's, are road-going race cars. That is the level the Lambos are not at.

 

you're right, the F50 was a letdown.

lol we are not going to get anywhere with this. I love both brands, btw.

 

Now, you're grasping at straws.

Road-going race cars met equally in engineering by companies with no Formula 1 tech. what so ever.

 

think what you want.

your point is as asinine as if I said the Veyron is superior to the McLaren F1 because it has so much more power and top speed.

 

This all coming from the guy who thinks Ferrari is on some whole other level because it's in Formula 1.

The simple fact is that you buy into Ferrari marketing bullshit. F1 is without a doubt, the pinnacle of motorsport technology, but there isn't shit in Ferrari's road cars these days that makes them better because of "F1-derived" tech. The Germans have & always will be at or ahead of Ferrari without needing to report how all their cars are derived from Formula 1.

Hell, at least a Porsche race car starts on the same assembly line as the road car. There's more linkage there than there is from a 458 to a Formula 1 car.

 

face everything we say about these cars are about what we read so thats what I'm basing it off of too.

Ferrari has always been the better drivers car. Lamborghini is known for being a big scary car to drive. Ferrari is much more nimble.

And Lambo has its factory team but Ferrari has F1, which may seem like a gimmick to you but I think it works. Its not only that some tech gets passed down, its the fact that they have resources to use as well.

Do you think the Mclaren F1 would have been so good without Mclaren being a part of F1? I kinda doubt it.

Now I'm not saying that because they're in F1 they're better, but its IMO a general consensus that the rival lambo will be slower around a track. And if its quicker its probably not as fun to drive , again this all comes from what I read.

 

I backed up my statement with facts, facts that I don't think you will ever agree with. And that is OK.

 

no shit. kind of knowledge

 

I think Rick_TLS would disagree with me....

 

What you stand by are not actual facts. What you stand by are statements by Ferrari, a company notoriously well known for holding itself as a superior automaker, despite the fact it needs to cheat & bribe to get there.

 

I said I <strike>like</strike> love both brands, and have respect for both. But they have intrinsically different focus. Ferrari is more about racing and Lambo is more about sports/GT. Not sure why butts are getting hurt because I think Ferrari > Lambo.

 

ok now I'm not really sure what we are talking about.

 

was the F1 really able to be a daily driver?? I didnt know that. Dont you normally wear ear muffs when in the car??

 

that's the GTR version, the mega-race version which was honed along with the F1 from their decades and decades of racing heritage and experience.

 

"Lamborghinis are such good handling cars!!!!!!!"



said no one ever.

 

Where did I say it wasn't?

What I questioned is your assumption is that they're for different people when they have been bought by the same people forever.
Ferrari having a Formula 1 team is not a gimmick. What is a gimmick is saying their road cars have Formula 1-derived technology as a selling point. So what if they do? It clearly doesn't give them any performance advantage over the Germans or Japanese.
From a technical stand point, probably not since it used a lot of F1 technology. As far as to how the car drives, the NSX was to thank. And much of why the F1 is so successful is that reason why, not the Formula 1 expertise in it.
In the past 20 years, yes, that's correct. But, people don't seem to realize that up until the Gallardo, Lamborghini has never really positioned itself as a competitor to match Ferrari on the track; the cars are too big & aren't built to handle track abuse.

 

LOL, there's no butt hurt here. But, this is about the most truthful thing you've posted yet.

I don't care if you think Ferrari are superior. It was the statement made though, that they are because of their Formula 1 linkage & that Lamborghini are in a "state of affairs" because they aren't (would still LOVE to know what state this is).

It's just an ignorant thing to say.

 

It sounds like "state of affairs" hit some kind of button on you. I didn't mean it in any literal or pointed manner. Forget I said it.

 

It didn't hit a button. But, when someone refers to something as you did, it seems to imply something's wrong. All I asked repeatedly was what that was & you refused to elaborate on what you meant.

 

"state of affairs" apparently means something to you that it doesn't mean to me.

I am not implying anything is wrong with Lamborghini. How could I? I love Lambos. All I said was I personally think Ferrari has beaten them, in the race.

Furthermore, when I mentioned F1 presence, it was an answer to this post above it:
my mistake for not quoting it

 

Will y'all bone and get it over with?

 

When's the wedding?

 

For what a company learns in racing to matter, they have to want to apply it to their road cars. Ferraris does and that is largely because they can charge what they need to transfer the technology.

But there is a reason why Honda stopped participating in Formula One after Senna ... The investment they made in the sport would never help them sell more Civic DXs and Odysseys.

 

as srika said, yes it was the (LM) version you were thinking. I know that exact oldschool Top Gear video.... or was it Fifth?

The standard roadgoing car was designed to be daily driven. The frunk is a storage compartment, and there is one on each side of the car behind the doors. Gordon Murray was inspired by how well the NSX managed the compromise between performance and comfort and set out to make the F1 the same way.

 

Not sure where you got that from... I just checked and Honda quit F1 in 2008, citing the worldwide financial crisis as the main reason.

 

For anyone who wants to build the new GT3.
German version
http://cc.porsche.com/icc_euro/ccCal...x1050&vLevel=2

US version
http://cc.porsche.com/icc_pcna/ccCal...x1050&vLevel=2

The German version has a few more options such as another seat, auto dimming, lift system, & from what I've been told, an additional track pack.

 

Engine or the chassis too? I thought they had given up making their own cars well before that. If so, I'll stand corrected.

 

GT3 is SO sexy. I just created a US-Spec version. Came out to about $145k.

 

Awesome LED headlights.

For some reason I'm not ecstatic about the colors. I ended up picking Sapphire Blue Metallic.

 

http://houston.craigslist.org/mcy/3661443704.html

 

That looks like it could be fun

 

all I'm going by is when Honda 100% pulled out from F1. I am not entirely sure on it but I think they quit chassis after the time period you mention and engines in 2008. I do agree Honda's participation in F1 was not going to help them sell Odyssey's. But it could have helped them sell NSX's.

 

There is no doubt about that. Both Senna and Zanardi had influence on the NSX in some way.

But as we all know, Honda never figured out the importance of a halo car.

 

heh. :-/

 

Has anyone on here ever done a dealer trade to get the car they want?
What were your pros and cons?
How do they work?
Will the dealer/salesman screw me in negotiations since they have to find the car?

I am inching ever closer to getting a new car and the one that is highest on my list is a VW Jetta SportWagen TDI w/ sunroof (and maybe nav) with a 6-spd manual transmission. (Or the Jetta TDI w/ premium & nav 6-spd)

None of the dealerships that I've searched between Raleigh and Atlanta have the correct spec and color combination.


NOTE:
I am not ruling out the DSG and I do like it, it's just that it will be hard for me to give up the manual (current car, '06 TSX is a manual).
If the traffic I've hit in the last couple weeks keeps up, I may decide to go automatic.