Support NeoGAF

[Miroku]

The thing about the 911 is that it's not about trying to get attention, unless it's a GT3RS. Some people want the driving experience without cellphone camera gawkers harassing at every stoplight.

 

[Stinkles]

Off-topic, but I've never known the different between read and mid engine. Can someone explain in Layman's terms for me?

There are some consequences to drivetrain and torque but effectively it's a question of balance and center of gravity. Engine is the heaviest part of a car, and where you locate it affects how the car will handle, dramatically. Conventional wisdom is that mid-engined is logically the best balance. Rear engine creates a different weight and feel and handling characteristics.

 

[AlphaSnake]

The 911 is the only rear engine car I can think of that's still in production, so yeah... exclusive club.

That's just one of the dumbest excuses to own a car, though..."oh the engine is in the back". Who gives a fuck? That somehow matters in the way you're going to drive the car on city streets? Believe me, unless you are a hardcore track fiend who simply cannot fathom anything but a rear-engined car...fine. But 99.9999999999999999% of people who buy a Porsche don't care about some imaginary "club". It's just silly.

If someone buys a Porsche over a bunch of other cars JUST because it is rear-engined...there is something seriously wrong with that person.

 

[JackEtc]

There are some consequences to drivetrain and torque but effectively it's a question of balance and center of gravity. Engine is the heaviest part of a car, and where you locate it affects how the car will handle, dramatically. Conventional wisdom is that mid-engined is logically the best balance. Rear engine creates a different weight and feel and handling characteristics.

Alright, but what about the names? Aren't both engines in the back? What's the differe-

Mid engine = between driver and rear axle. Rear engine = behind rear axle.

Got it. Thanks.

 

[Miroku]

Almost every mid-engined car has a firewall directly behind the driver and passenger seats, allowing for no back seats. I think the Lotus Evora might be the only mid engined car with a back seat, and its more of a storage platform than a seat really... A Porsche 911 being a rear engined car has back seats, and while they are useless for most adults, you can put your kids back there until they hit early teens.

 

[reilo]

That's just one of the dumbest excuses to own a car, though..."oh the engine is in the back". Who gives a fuck? That somehow matters in the way you're going to drive the car on city streets? Believe me, unless you are a hardcore track fiend who simply cannot fathom anything but a rear-engined car...fine. But 99.9999999999999999% of people who buy a Porsche don't care about some imaginary "club". It's just silly.

If someone buys a Porsche over a bunch of other cars JUST because it is rear-engined...there is something seriously wrong with that person.

I see. You like looking good when you are at a stop light. You don't actually care about performance that much as long as you get enough of it mixed in with your luxury amenities.

No point arguing any of this then since we obviously look for different things in cars.

 

[Stinkles]

I see. You like looking good when you are at a stop light. You don't actually care about performance that much as long as you get enough of it mixed in with your luxury amenities.

No point arguing any of this then since we obviously look for different things in cars.

None of this means shit unless you're at a track. My Honda Fit beats 90% of all cars at the stop light because I am paying attention. But it won't get me laid. A used Ferrari might.

Most of my performance needs come from freeway speed requirements, which is why the mid range torque on my Mazda CX7 is great, because it eats up the difference between 50mph and 80mph like it's french fries. And all of us USE luxury and comfort way more than we USE performance. SO it's a reasonable and ultimately sensible compromise.

And all 911s still look the same.

 

[reilo]

None of this means shit unless you're at a track. My Honda Fit beats 90% of all cars at the stop light because I am paying attention. But it won't get me laid. A used Ferrari might.

Most of my performance needs come from freeway speed requirements, which is why the mid range torque on my Mazda CX7 is great, because it eats up the difference between 50mph and 80mph like it's french fries. And all of us USE luxury and comfort way more than we USE performance. SO it's a reasonable and ultimately sensible compromise.

And all 911s still look the same.

It's totally fine. I just don't like being chastised for having different priorities and wants out of my next car purchase.

I don't need another car. My current car is great. It can be even better if I were to invest another $2,000 into it. That sure beats investing another $50k+, no?

But that's not the point. I want my next car to be a RWD Euro Coupe with a manual in it. I want it to drive like a bat out of hell. It's going to be my weekend car and I might even take it on a track if I feel stupid enough.

So to say that there are "x amount of so many other cars to buy than a 911 S" and then proceed to list a bunch of slower performing and/or more expensive cars and argue it based on subjective ideals like "looks", "luxury", and "feel" misses the point all together.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I see. You like looking good when you are at a stop light. You don't actually care about performance that much as long as you get enough of it mixed in with your luxury amenities.

No point arguing any of this then since we obviously look for different things in cars.

Wtf? Really? That's all you have to say? How does the Porsche being rear-engined make a difference in performance? Do you live on the Nurburgring? You make it seem like a rear-engined car is the be-all and end-all of handling performance (it isn't).

In fact, it is you who just ragged on a car that absolutely DEMOLISHES the Porsche in performance for being "ugly" (it isn't). So now you're claiming I'm vain when I selected four cars you called ugly? If performance is somehow what you're aiming for and looking good isn't, then why axe the GT-R for being ugly? That's extremely hypocritical.

This isn't the first time I get into a tiff with Porsche fans who blindly defend their marquee without any valid points, end up running in circles, calling other cars ugly, then saying the other person only cares about looking good, all the while not realizing they've shot down numerous cars that outperform God's Chariot the Porsche 911.

 

[reilo]

Wtf? Really? That's all you have to say? How does the Porsche being rear-engined make a difference in performance? Do you live on the Nurburgring? You make it seem like a rear-engined car is the be-all and end-all of handling performance (it isn't).

Seriously dude, you need to quit putting words into people's mouths. It's quite annoying and a shitty way to have a decent argument.

In fact, it is you who just ragged on a car that absolutely DEMOLISHES the Porsche in performance for being "ugly" (it isn't). So now you're claiming I'm vain when I selected four cars you called ugly? If performance is somehow what you're aiming for and looking good isn't, then why axe the GT-R for being ugly?

I'd axe the GT-R for something else: not offering it in a manual. And as I pointed up above, I want my next car to be 1) European, 2) Coupe, 3) RWD, 4) manual. Can you see where the GT-R falls short on my list?

Looks: always subjective.

This isn't the first time I get into a tiff with Porsche fans who blindly defend their marquee without any valid points, end up running in circles, calling other cars ugly, then saying the other person only cares about looking good, all the while not realizing they've shot down numerous cars that outperform God's Chariot the Porsche 911.

Quit projecting arguments and opinions that you've had with other people on the internet onto me. I never defended Porsches blindly, I only stated why I would pick one up over the cars you listed. Saying that a 911S is a great performance car with solid reliability for a great price (relatively) is not some sort of "God's Chariot" argument.

Calm down, you get worked up far too much over this.

 

[Pterion]

Thread needs more pictures of fast rides, and less arguing. Let us drool over your baller cars!

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Seriously dude, you need to quit putting words into people's mouths. It's quite annoying and a shitty way to have a decent argument.


I'd axe the GT-R for something else: not offering it in a manual. And as I pointed up above, I want my next car to be 1) European, 2) Coupe, 3) RWD, 4) manual. Can you see where the GT-R falls short on my list?

Looks: always subjective.


Quit projecting arguments and opinions that you've had with other people on the internet onto me. I never defended Porsches blindly, I only stated why I would pick one up over the cars you listed. Saying that a 911S is a great performance car with solid reliability for a great price (relatively) is not some sort of "God's Chariot" argument.

Calm down, you get worked up far too much over this.

You lost me there, how much does a 911 (Carrera S or Turbo S) cost again. Yea Porsche are no where near "Great price", the entire Porsche lineup is badge price. The performance for their cars are top notch but other cars do what they do (Some even x2 to x3 better) for half the cost.

 

[reilo]

You lost me there, how much does a 911 (Carrera S or Turbo S) cost again. Yea Porsche are no where near "Great price", the entire Porsche lineup is badge price. The performance for their cars are top notch but other cars do what they do (Some even x2 to x3 better) for half the cost.

Relative to the class that the Porsches are in, they are cheaper than the competition. Hence, why I said relative.

 

[GTP_Daverytimes]

Relative to the class that the Porsches are in, they are cheaper than the competition. Hence, why I said relative.

If you don't mind me asking what class will Porsche and the 911 (With its countless variations) be in.

 

[ascii42]

You lost me there, how much does a 911 (Carrera S or Turbo S) cost again. Yea Porsche are no where near "Great price", the entire Porsche lineup is badge price. The performance for their cars are top notch but other cars do what they do (Some even x2 to x3 better) for half the cost.

The Corvette is the only car that immediately comes to my mind. What others are you thinking of?

 

[AlphaSnake]

Seriously dude, you need to quit putting words into people's mouths. It's quite annoying and a shitty way to have a decent argument.


I'd axe the GT-R for something else: not offering it in a manual. And as I pointed up above, I want my next car to be 1) European, 2) Coupe, 3) RWD, 4) manual. Can you see where the GT-R falls short on my list?

Looks: always subjective.


Quit projecting arguments and opinions that you've had with other people on the internet onto me. I never defended Porsches blindly, I only stated why I would pick one up over the cars you listed. Saying that a 911S is a great performance car with solid reliability for a great price (relatively) is not some sort of "God's Chariot" argument.

Calm down, you get worked up far too much over this.

I'm not putting any words into your mouth. I said you make it seem so, because of how you're dismissing cars wildly with just about the stupidest reason: "not rear engined". In the grand scheme of things, it's the last thing anyone would care about on the street. You make it seem like a rear-engined car will somehow be more fun or better - you won't even notice the minute differences between all of these superb handling cars when you're on public streets. Oh wait, hold on, your other argument is that it's an exclusive club....So again, it's just that your argument is so...unusual that it's boggling my head. It's simply ridiculous.

Then, you said I didn't care about performance. That I just want to look good. I showed you some holes in your statement. The Caddy out performs a Carrera considerably. So does the Aston. The GT-R destroys it. An AMG would likely too. The M3 is quicker too. Only the Carrera S can close the gap to the Aston and outperform the M3, but the GT-R would crush it, as would the AMG and CTS-V.

And btw, the Aston is Euro, Coupe, RWD, manual, and faster than the Porsche. Oh right, it isn't rear-engined. Silly me.

 

[Stinkles]

It's totally fine. I just don't like being chastised for having different priorities and wants out of my next car purchase.

I don't need another car. My current car is great. It can be even better if I were to invest another $2,000 into it. That sure beats investing another $50k+, no?

But that's not the point. I want my next car to be a RWD Euro Coupe with a manual in it. I want it to drive like a bat out of hell. It's going to be my weekend car and I might even take it on a track if I feel stupid enough.

So to say that there are "x amount of so many other cars to buy than a 911 S" and then proceed to list a bunch of slower performing and/or more expensive cars and argue it based on subjective ideals like "looks", "luxury", and "feel" misses the point all together.

Since my argument is mostly subjective, you're "right" anyway. If you love Porsches, and god knows there are 100s of objective reasons to love them, then you should go right ahead and love the shit out of them. People who are "anti-Porsche" in this thread are mostly complaining about the weary aesthetics. Porsche has shown it can think outside of the box - Carerra GT, even Boxster ably demonstrate that it can look like a Porsche without looking like a 911.

I wish they'd move on because I am bored of how they look, not how they drive, perform, race or feel.

 

[Shogmaster]

Enough blah blah. Time for some new hotness:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-c-x16-concept-revealed-w-video/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uUOqvyLerI&feature=player_embedded

 

[JackEtc]

Enough blah blah. Time for some new hotness:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-c-x16-concept-revealed-w-video/

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/09/14-jaguar-c-x16-prod-press-628.jpg[IMG]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uUOqvyLerI&feature=player_embedded[/url][/QUOTE]
Holy shit, that's beautiful.

 

[Shogmaster]

Holy shit, that's beautiful.

It did give me a boner.

 

[GuessWho]

nicest car ever?

 

[Stinkles]

Enough blah blah. Time for some new hotness:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-c-x16-concept-revealed-w-video/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uUOqvyLerI&feature=player_embedded

 

[AlphaSnake]

Are you making a distinction between rear-mid-engine and rear-engine?


Arguing used prices is a waste of time in my opinion, because you can get anything for "cheap" if you wait long enough... unless the car turns into a classic then you're shit out of lock.

Even then, if we are arguing used prices, the 911 still comes ahead $20k+.

Bro, what the hell is wrong with you? Why can't I use used prices? He's freaking shopping for a used car! And I specifically listed late model cars, nothing about getting something cheap because you can wait long enough.

And nowhere in hell did I say all of those cars are ugly or the Carrera was better looking than all of them. Maybe you should read what I wrote?

Wow. Seriously? I didn't say you said ALL. I said "almost all". Maybe you should get your memory checked?

And since when is the Vantage quicker? It's never has been.

430HP vs 344/385HP? 350TQ vs 288/310TQ

Dude. You're going to argue this too? Simply power to weight the Aston has the advantage. Not to mention torque, and more crucially for high-speeds, displacement - almost a whole liter more with the V8.

You're delusional and in denial.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Didn't expect to come back and see in-fighting. Miroku, I'm going to PM you some questions if you don't mind.

Thread needs more pictures of fast rides, and less arguing. Let us drool over your baller cars!

here's another I'm looking at:

DAT AERO Package. :3

 

[reilo]

I'm not putting any words into your mouth. I said you make it seem so, because of how you're dismissing cars wildly with just about the stupidest reason: "not rear engined". In the grand scheme of things, it's the last thing anyone would care about on the street. You make it seem like a rear-engined car will somehow be more fun or better - you won't even notice the minute differences between all of these superb handling cars when you're on public streets. Oh wait, hold on, your other argument is that it's an exclusive club....So again, it's just that your argument is so...unusual that it's boggling my head. It's simply ridiculous.

Then, you said I didn't care about performance. That I just want to look good. I showed you some holes in your statement. The Caddy out performs a Carrera considerably. So does the Aston. The GT-R destroys it. An AMG would likely too. The M3 is quicker too. Only the Carrera S can close the gap to the Aston and outperform the M3, but the GT-R would crush it, as would the AMG and CTS-V.

And btw, the Aston is Euro, Coupe, RWD, manual, and faster than the Porsche. Oh right, it isn't rear-engined. Silly me.

Why are you so hung up on that "rear engine" comment? The only reason I brought it up is to point out that you cannot buy a rear engine (or rear mid-engine) car for less than $100k unless you go 911. That's it. You took that statement and twisted it to beyond belief; hence putting words in my mouth.

As far as the Aston: what was my comment? I said it was $40k more expensive. Nowhere did I dismiss it because it was not rear engined.

You need to quit assuming and reading between the lines, because right now you are pulling strawmen and red herrings out of your ass to counter points I never made. Argue what I am saying, not what others you have argued witj before have said.

Calm the fuck down and quit being so sensitive. OutworldVoice perfectly understood the points I was making.

 

[reilo]

Bro, what the hell is wrong with you? Why can't I use used prices? He's freaking shopping for a used car! And I specifically listed late model cars, nothing about getting something cheap because you can wait long enough.



Wow. Seriously? I didn't say you said ALL. I said "almost all". Maybe you should get your memory checked?



430HP vs 344/385HP? 350TQ vs 288/310TQ

Dude. You're going to argue this too? Simply power to weight the Aston has the advantage. Not to mention torque, and more crucially for high-speeds, displacement - almost a whole liter more with the V8.

You're delusional and in denial.

I suggest you look up their respective 0-60, quarter mile and track numbers because you are making an ass out of yourself. Every article and comparison I've read between those two gave the edge to the 911S. Especially '06 versus '06 where the 911 was a good 0.8 seconds quicker in the quarter mile.

And if we are going to argue on a price parity level: lol good luck.

 

[AlphaSnake]

Why are you so hung up on that "rear engine" comment? The only reason I brought it up is to point out that you cannot buy a rear engine (or rear mid-engine) car for less than $100k unless you go 911. That's it. You took that statement and twisted it to beyond belief; hence putting words in my mouth.

As far as the Aston: what was my comment? I said it was $40k more expensive. Nowhere did I dismiss it because it was not rear engined.

You need to quit assuming and reading between the lines, because right now you are pulling strawmen and red herrings out of your ass to counter points I never made. Argue what I am saying, not what others you have argued witj before have said.

Calm the fuck down and quit being so sensitive. OutworldVoice perfectly understood the points I was making.

Once again failed to comprehend everything I said.

And once again harped on a price point that makes no sense. $40K? Dude, you have no idea how much an Aston V8 costs used do you?

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ype=b&num_records=25&cardist=8&standard=false

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ds=25&seller_type=b&cardist=24&standard=false

Crazy. Look at that $40K price difference.

Edit: Hell, I've personally seen 2009 Astons with the same mileage for $95K too. How? I've personally helped someone in British Columbia buy one by test driving it here in NYC before he paid for it. Proof? Thread about it on 6speedonline

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Once again failed to comprehend everything I said.

And once again harped on a price point that makes no sense. $40K? Dude, you have no idea how much an Aston V8 costs used do you?

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ype=b&num_records=25&cardist=8&standard=false

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ype=b&num_records=25&cardist=8&standard=false

Crazy. Look at that $40K price difference.

Edit: Hell, I've personally seen 2009 Astons with the same mileage for $95K too. How? I've personally helped someone in British Columbia buy one by test driving it here in NYC before he paid for it. Proof? Thread about it on 6speedonline

for some reason your 2 links go to the same car.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I suggest you look up their respective 0-60, quarter mile and track numbers because you are making an ass out of yourself. Every article and comparison I've read between those two gave the edge to the 911S. Especially '06 versus '06 where the 911 was a good 0.8 seconds quicker in the quarter mile.

And if we are going to argue on a price parity level: lol good luck.

Good job on comparing the old and shitty V8 380HP motor. I give up on you. The guy is looking at fucking 2009 models...we're talking about late model cars, and you come out with 5-6 year models?

I'm officially done with you. I've put a hole in every one of your arguments.

 

[reilo]

Once again failed to comprehend everything I said.

And once again harped on a price point that makes no sense. $40K? Dude, you have no idea how much an Aston V8 costs used do you?

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ype=b&num_records=25&cardist=8&standard=false

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.j...ype=b&num_records=25&cardist=8&standard=false

Crazy. Look at that $40K price difference.

Edit: Hell, I've personally seen 2009 Astons with the same mileage for $95K too. How? I've personally helped someone in British Columbia buy one by test driving it here in NYC before he paid for it. Proof? Thread about it on 6speedonline

All of the local listings for '06+ 911s: $50-$60k+.

I suggest you look up their respective 0-60, quarter mile and track numbers because you are making an ass out of yourself. Every article and comparison I've read between those two gave the edge to the 911S. Especially '06 versus '06 where the 911 was a good 0.8 seconds quicker in the quarter mile.

And if we are going to argue on a price parity level: lol good luck.
Good job on comparing the old and shitty V8 380HP motor. I give up on you. The guy is looking at fucking 2009 models...we're talking about late model cars, and you come out with 5-6 year models?

I'm officially done with you. I've put a hole in every one of your arguments.

Even the 09 911S have an advantage! What idiot planet do you live on? The new 2012s will demolish them even further.

Read the fuck up man, you are sounding completely misinformed. There is a whopping 35HP difference between an 09+ 911Sand the new Vantage. For 2012 that gap is 15HP.


All of the local listings for a V8 Vantage: $75-85k.

Yeah, I certainly don't know what I am talking about.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

I had no idea Aston Martins come down in price like this. I assumed they were out of my target price range, but I guess you really can get just about anything for $65-$70k if you wait long enough.

I just looked some up at cars.com and wow. But what kind of repair/maintenance experience do these come with? I know the 911's are very low maintenance for the class of cars they're in. What about Aston Martin? Are there even enough stats on this to really say?

Whichever I get, I'd be the daily driver.

 

[AlphaSnake]

All of the local listings for '06+ 911s: $50-$60k+.

All of the local listings for a V8 Vantage: $75-85k.

Yeah, I certainly don't know what I am talking about.

You're right. Because the dude is looking at 2006 Carreras. Yup. He never said anything about holding out for a 2009. Naaaaaah. You win, bro.

 

[Zyzyxxz]

Enough blah blah. Time for some new hotness:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-c-x16-concept-revealed-w-video/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uUOqvyLerI&feature=player_embedded

dam, that is a nice successor to the old XK series and looks much better too.

 

[AlphaSnake]

I had no idea Aston Martins come down in price like this.

I just looked some up at cars.com and wow. But what kind of repair/maintenance experience do these come with? I know the 911's are very low maintenance for the class of cars they're in. What about Aston Martin? Are there even enough stats on this to really say?

Whichever I get, I'd be the daily driver.

If you can afford either car, you can afford the maintenance on the Aston. Pre-2007 cars had some issues. 2008+ are clean. The only major concern is the clutch (auto or stick) - it's a $6000 on the Aston ($5500 for Porsche PDK, $4500 for stick). Maintenance intervals cost about the same for both cars. Neither car is unreliable, but both will take you to the dealer a few times.

I know two Vantage owners, 2007 and 2009...both can't complain much at all.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

< $70K

HNNNNNNNNNNG

If you can afford either car, you can afford the maintenance on the Aston. Pre-2007 cars had some issues. 2008+ are clean. The only major concern is the clutch (auto or stick) - it's a $6000 on the Aston ($5500 for Porsche PDK, $4500 for stick). Maintenance intervals cost about the same for both cars. Neither car is unreliable, but both will take you to the dealer a few times.

I know two Vantage owners, 2007 and 2009...both can't complain much at all.

interesting...

 

[reilo]

You're right. Because the dude is looking at 2006 Carreras. Yup. He never said anything about holding out for a 2009. Naaaaaah. You win, bro.

My arguments nor numbers don't change for 09 models, either. The 911S still wins out.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Enough blah blah. Time for some new hotness:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/06/jaguar-c-x16-concept-revealed-w-video/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uUOqvyLerI&feature=player_embedded

Goddamn that's hot.

 

[Miroku]

Feel free to PM me Dreams-Visions.

The Aston is one of the best looking cars on the road, but a softer drive than a Carrera S.

 

[JackEtc]

Just curious, all you guys that own the expensive BMWs and are looking at Porsche's and Astons....what do you all do for a living?

I'm still just a senior in high school and am just about to submit my college applications, I could easily change my desired major if it gets me a job where I can afford an Aston :lol

 

[AlphaSnake]

Porsche Carrera S
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.4 @ 112

Aston V8 Vantage
12.5 sec @ 115 mph

Weight on the rear helps traction...but Aston's trap speed of 3MPH is a considerable difference that shows off its power. It will inevitably walk the Porsche top-end.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

You can say I work with a lot of plastic surgeons and cosmetic surgeons. And they all pay well. Also did okay with some investments. My garage isn't struggling these days, but I've had my fill of buying new cars. I watched the depreciation on one of the more expensive cars and am still sick about it. So enough was enough. I now just pick a number and find something fairly recent in the price range.

The hunt is kinda fun, to be honest.

 

[reilo]

Glad to know that I was right. Thanks.

Also:

1:26.2 - Porsche 911 Carrera S (997) (damp)
1:26.8 - Aston Martin V12 Vantage (Not Shown on TV)[4]
1:27.1 - Aston Martin Vanquish S
1:27.1 - Aston Martin DB9
1:27.2 - Porsche 911 GT3 RS (996) (very wet)
1:27.4 - Aston Martin DBS (wet)
1:28.9 - Porsche 997 Carrera S (very wet)

For some reason they never power lapped the V8 Vantage. Oh well.

You can say I work with a lot of plastic surgeons and cosmetic surgeons. And they all pay well. Also did okay with some investments. My garage isn't struggling these days, but I've had my fill of buying new cars. I watched the depreciation on one of the more expensive cars and am still sick about it. So enough was enough. I now just pick a number and find something fairly recent in the price range.

The hunt is kinda fun, to be honest.

You're so salty over the Bentley, aren't you?

 

[AlphaSnake]

We don't commute our cars on the Top Gear Test Track, reilo. But you were wrong. The Aston is the faster car - it's the trap speed that dictates the winner in real situations. One car is traveling faster than the other. Very simple concept, friend.

Dreams-Visions: Replied to your PM. Gooood luck!! Would love to see you in an, AM.

 

[JackEtc]

Also did okay with some investments.

You can say I work with a lot of plastic surgeons and cosmetic surgeons. And they all pay well.

Ah, gotcha.

I look forward to having a well-enough paying job in the future to where I can get a nice car. I mean, the car I drive now is awesome as far as high school goes, but I've always had a thing for the expensive stuff.

 

[reilo]

We don't commute our cars on the Top Gear Test Track, reilo. But you were wrong. The Aston is the faster car - it's the trap speed that dictates the winner in real situations. One car is traveling faster than the other. Very simple concept, friend.

Haha.

How are you going to argue that the trap speed matters most (when you are doing 100MPH+) and then say that track time does not matter? How often will you be traveling at the speeds where trap speed will matter if not on a track? Come on dude, get your argument straight. You know I am right when it comes to the performance between those two.

The fucking V12 Vantage couldn't beat out a 997 S (damp lap!!).

 

[AlphaSnake]

Haha.

How are you going to argue that the trap speed matters most (when you are doing 100MPH+) and then say that track time does not matter? How often will you be traveling at the speeds where trap speed will matter if not on a track? Come on dude, get your argument straight. You know I am right when it comes to the performance between those two.

The fucking V12 Vantage couldn't beat out a 997 S (damp lap!!).

Trap speed is indicative of a car's power. Line both cars up on a highway, floor it, and watch the car with the faster trap pass it. The actual 1/4 mile time is just a traction match.

So, I suppose because a 600HP Mustang ran a 13.3 at 130MPH vs a 370Z that ran 12.9 at 113MPH...the 370Z is a faster car? The trap speed dictates power. The time is just traction. Put the two cars on a highway roll and the faster trap speed will win. That's simply how the real world works. You've clearly never hit a track or dragged a car. Or have a clue about anything, really...

 

[reilo]

Trap speed is indicative of a car's power. Line both cars up on a highway, floor it, and watch the car with the faster trap pass it. The actual 1/4 mile time is just a traction match.

So, I suppose because a 600HP Mustang ran a 13.3 at 130MPH vs a 370Z that ran 12.9 at 113MPH...the 370Z is a faster car? The trap speed dictates power. The time is just traction. Put the two cars on a highway roll and the faster trap speed will win. That's simply how the real world works. You've clearly never hit a track or dragged a car. Or have a clue about anything, really...

I'm the one talking track times, then you throw out "oh, but it doesn't matter when driving on the highway because you'll never push it that fast", then why the hell are you mentioning trap speeds and which car is faster above 120MPH? Those are the type of numbers you only achieve on the track, and if you are doing that on public road then you are reckless.

If your only argument is that the V8 Vantage is a "better performer in this very isolated instance" and are just ignoring all other tangible real world tests, then you have no argument. You are cherry picking what you want to see based on confirmation bias. Nice try, but ultimately, you are wrong.

 

[h1nch]

Just curious, all you guys that own the expensive BMWs and are looking at Porsche's and Astons....what do you all do for a living?

I'm still just a senior in high school and am just about to submit my college applications, I could easily change my desired major if it gets me a job where I can afford an Aston :lol

I'm a linux systems engineer, went to school for computer science.

I would advise against selecting a major based purely on earning potential. At the same time, don't select a major without having an idea of the job prospects for post-College. Try to find something you truly enjoy that also has high earning-potential (and that you're good at obviously), otherwise you'll be miserable, even with a fancy car.

I make enough to afford a nice car because I love what I do, and as a result I'm awesome at my job. Keep that in mind when making career choices!

 

[enzo_gt]

God damn Dreams-Visions. First the roller and now the Aston, and I hear of a Bentley too?

Baller status. Got a list of cars you own man? If you don't want to post it here, you can PM, I'm genuinely interested in your selection of cars.

 

[reilo]

God damn Dreams-Visions. First the roller and now the Aston, and I hear of a Bentley too?

Baller status. Got a list of cars you own man? If you don't want to post it here, you can PM, I'm genuinely interested in your selection of cars.

I got you covered!

this is also being sent to "ryutaro's mama" so that this conversation can be moved on from.


RR
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1117/oh7v.jpg
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5006/oh6.jpg (yea, I took a picture while driving it)
http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/4914/oh2b.jpg

RR & BMW1
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/8176/oh1.jpg

Hollywood apartment (@ The Palazzo, 2 blocks from The Grove, if you're familiar with the area)
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/3613/oh5.jpg

BMW 2 and part of front of home(not comfortable with crib pics right now, but you can get an idea by the homes in the background. Obviously, we're not in Cleveland [or Kansas] anymore)
http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/3915/oh4.jpg
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/4206/oh3.jpg

BMW 3 (also in the driveway)
http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/2799/oh8r.jpg



I didn't have a lot of pics on my phone that didn't have some sensitive person or something...and since I don't know any of you from Adam. you understand. that should be sufficient, regardless.

I've no interest in lying to people on websites. that's stuff kids do. I'm a grown ass man. I'd send pics of my girlfriend, but that's just waaay to juvenile. you can take my word for that or not. at the end of the day, it shouldn't have been an issue to begin with, but someone decided to pull the card and tell me what I'd never have, when in fact I've earned and have a lot of what I want already. I happily admitted that I'll never have Noah's income. I don't need it to be satisfied.

and you both should be grown enough to admit that the attack on me from the other guy was both unnecessary and childish. not trying to show anyone up...but if you attack me AND pull a card on....and my cards are better than yours...you lose. you don't pout about it. you just learn the lesson and move on.

he lost. and ganging up on me made you both look even more childish.

I would have posted this in the thread, but that side conversation had gone off topic long and far enough.

that being said, respect me and I'll respect you. attack me and you might be biting off more than you can chew.

/conversation