Right! Who wants a fight?

[Phatgixer]

1. Mercedes SL55AMG is better than 996 Turbo Tip.

2. BMW M3 is better than Audi RS4.

3. M3 CSL is better than GT3

4. S2000 is better than any TVR.

5. Jaguars are better than Astons.

6. My car is pinker than any of yours.


That should get me a black eye.

Where's Glennda?

 

[Phatgixer]

...Also, Sportsbikes are more fun than Sportscars.

Chamon-yewmuthafcukers!

 

[Glenn Mc]

1. Mercedes SL55AMG is better than 996 Turbo Tip.

2. BMW M3 is better than Audi RS4.

3. M3 CSL is better than GT3

4. S2000 is better than any TVR.

5. Jaguars are better than Astons.


That should get me a black eye.

Where's Glennda?

Erm.......

1.Wrong

2.maybe

3.wrong ( but maybe in that twisted little world of yoursut )

4.maybe

5.in what way ???




G.

 

[Stuart]

1. Mercedes SL55AMG is better than 996 Turbo Tip.
If you use a handbag as part of your daily attire.

2. BMW M3 is better than Audi RS4.
Not in terms of image, but maybe in terms of driving.
When the new M3 arrives, the quite probably.

3. M3 CSL is better than GT3
Boring. For those that have been CSL brain washed, then nothing will convince them otherwise, so I'll just play along. It's cruel to mock to the afflicted, so, whatever you say.

4. S2000 is better than any TVR.
Yes, when the TVR is being fixed, but no when the TVR is running right.

5. Jaguars are better than Astons.
More reliable for sure, and probably better value.
Depends on what you mean by better.

Answers above, inline.

 

[Nords]

1. Mercedes SL55AMG is better than 996 Turbo Tip.

2. BMW M3 is better than Audi RS4.

3. M3 CSL is better than GT3

4. S2000 is better than any TVR.

5. Jaguars are better than Astons.


That should get me a black eye.

Where's Glennda?

Hummmm.....

1. I'd say no.

2. Yes

3. On par with a 996 RS (so better than a 996 GT3) but probably a very close match between the CSL and a 997 GT3.....?

4. The Cerbera or the Sagaris!!! Are you joking Angus?

5. Nope!

6. Yes, as long as it is a gixxer!!!!!!

 

[Glenn Mc]

3. On par with a 996 RS (so better than a 996 GT3) but probably a very close match between the CSL and a 997 GT3.....?

Eh ??????ut

You need some GT3 educating mate

 

[Supercup]

angus, my dear fellow, just tell them that the FACT the 993 Air-cooled Porsche is the best one of the lot, which will bring out all the water coolers

 

[DaveB]

karate black belt for hire if needed


open to offers

 

[Glenn Mc]

karate black belt for hire if needed


open to offers

Hope it's cheaper than your bloody tyres



G.

 

[DaveB]

Hope it's cheaper than your bloody tyres



G.

now im getting grief from"surf Boy":glenn:

 

[Stuart]

just tell them that the 993 Air-cooled Porsche is the best one of the lot

:finger

 

[Nords]

I have never owned a posh beatle so agreed, my comments are only based on my gut feel and listening to many opinions from others. I have been around the Nordschleife in a 964 RS with someone trying to scare me, it was okay but not particularly impressive. He was German though. I used to have a std M3 in Germany and did numerous laps in it as well as hoofing past 966 C2S / C4S on the autobahn until I hit the limiter and they started to claw back and then creep past at 165. I have been in Angus' CSL and he has allowed me to drive it too, what a superb car and I was impressed by it. Once my daughters leave school, I will own one; I just hope there will be a good one left by then! However I do have an open mind and I'm always willing to be educated with a passenger lap etc.

I do like making fun of Duke 996 / 998 boys and I think it carries over to you Porsche boys as you're both easy targets. Now if you were to move that engine to right area in the car, you might not such a hard time!

Hehehehehe.......

PS You just need to hit back by talking about std brakes. That will shut us up, just don't say I told you!

 

[Nords]

karate black belt for hire if needed


open to offers

My green belt in L7A2 7.62mm GPMGs beats your black belt.

 

[Stuart]

Now if you were to move that engine to right area in the car

:finger ut

It's already in the right area.
The weight's where it needs to be for maximum traction.
It leaves the front free for steering.

 

[Nords]

Well 0-30 yes, but above that and with warm, grippy tyres, that doesn't help that much. The CSL has a 'perfect' 50:50 distribution where as the beatle (come on, bite at that or I'll get bored writing it) will actually demonstrate fundelmentally vague steering due to that weight at the back. If what you say is true, why have Porsche become imfamous for massive whale tail spoilers? The aerodynamics must be so bad, you need those tails and the weight of the engine at the back to hold it down....

????????????

 

[Stuart]

Well 0-30 yes, but above that and with warm, grippy tyres, that doesn't help that much. The CSL has a 'perfect' 50:50 distribution where as the beatle (come on, bite at that or I'll get bored writing it) will actually demonstrate fundelmentally vague steering due to that weight at the back. If what you say is true, why have Porsche become imfamous for massive whale tail spoilers? The aerodynamics must be so bad, you need those tails and the weight of the engine at the back to hold it down....

????????????

Vague steering? :finger I think not. One of the finer points of the uber beatle is it's ability to scurry about, changing direction in response to small steering inputs.

Hmmm, whale tails.
In the beginning was the 911. This was before aerodynamics was understood and the shape was not optimised.
Then the 911 2.7 RS hove into view, ducktail added. This removed the rather alarming amount of lift over the rear axle (several hundred kilos I think at Vmax ).
The first turbo had a whale tail for several reasons - to reduce lift, to improve cooling air flow through the engine bay, and a tinsy bit for styling. Now the styling bit was a bonus and not the main reason, but it didn't do any harm.
This spoiler appeared on other less well endowed models.
Other marques just stuck with brick like styling and went for grunt.
Making the car a smoother shape helped with the top speed but caused problems with lift.
The long rear window does not help - if it was vertical, you would have lots more drag but get rid of the lift issue.

Wind forward a bit, and things become a bit sleeker.
The current models manage the airflow carefully. Smooth underbodys, with discrete spoilers that only come into play when needed.

Porsche take the aerodynamics very seriously. Unlike some, like the Audi TT perhaps.
They know that people will drive their cars at top speed, and they make sure they will handle well. There is a big difference between 155 and 190+.
Each variant has a different design of bumper, and front and rear spoiler, all carefully tailored to give appropriate handling at the top speed.
Of course in the UK on the road, this is more engineering than you need.

Playing with the weight transfer is the key trait of the 911.
Applying power out of a corner (at any speed) the weight distribution aids traction.
It is not that easy, it is not as forgiving, although 40 years of evolution have produced a car that is very good, but I cannot see any front engined car beating one out of a corner (with like for like power to weight).

Regardless of what prejudice may say, the handling of the 996 version is quite benign. You can slide them (if you have the room) quite comfortably. Just don't bottle it, and lift. Once you are committed stick with it.

 

[Nords]

An interesting read Stuart, thank you for that!

 

[Stuart]

TBH, I used to be of the opinion that the 911 was a bit backward. I was sold on front engined cars (esp. turbos), but then realised I could afford one and took one for a spin.
You can't really tell from a quick test drive, but if you live with them and drive them everyday, you get to know the behaviour.
The feeling is strange at first, as with mid engined cars, since the front is light and moves around more easily. But stick with it, and you get used to it.
The steering is rather good and the balance, despite the 38/62 for the turbo (IIRC), is pretty good too.
They really are nothing to be scared of, although of course, a certain amount of respect is necessary.

Porsche make sure that there is more downforce at the rear than at the front, since this means the front will slide first (i.e. understeer), which is much safer at 3 digit speeds.
At 180'ish, turbo has slight lift at the front (a few kg) and slight downforce at the back.
I think the GT3 is zero lift at the front and slight downforce at the rear.

Although there are many variants of 911 which look similar, which are designed to appeal to every niche but actually end up confusing the hell out of those not in the know, the more you look the more you find little differences.
The cars are remarkably well thought out.
The problem sometimes comes though when you find bits for your one cost a lot more than bits for another one which looks the same.

 

[Phatgixer]

Erm.......

1.Wrong

2.maybe

3.wrong ( but maybe in that twisted little world of yoursut )

4.maybe

5.in what way ???




G.

Glenn, have another whiskey.

1. AMG is miles nicer. Sounds better, is as quick, if not quicker, is convertible and coupe in one, looks nicer and has engine in the boonet, not the boot.

2. Audis are for plastic, hair-gelled tosspots. Marketed as spoting cars, yet are leaden and uninvolving.

3. You wanna bet? Sit in a standard CSL and a Standard GT3 and see which will go 2.55 round Spa...One is half the price of the other, too.

4. S2000s are fantastic. TVRs smell and feel dangerous at 40mph.

5. In every way except pose value and the last tiny bit of poise and style. Jaguars are more honest and drive with much more grace. Aston Martin? Badge engineering taken to its limit. Crap transmission and rubbish specific output. I ask you, 6 litres of V12 and only 450 bhp...-75bhp/litre. Should be 600horses, but the rest of the car would disintergrate. All style and no substance. Jaguar is cheaper and makes no pretence at exotic.

...and the bike thing, I assume you agree?

 

[Stuart]

Glenn, have another whiskey.

1. AMG is miles nicer. Sounds better, is as quick, if not quicker, is convertible and coupe in one, looks nicer and has engine in the boonet, not the boot.

2. Audis are for plastic, hair-gelled tosspots. Marketed as spoting cars, yet are leaden and uninvolving.

3. You wanna bet? Sit in a standard CSL and a Standard GT3 and see which will go 2.55 round Spa...One is half the price of the other, too.

4. S2000s are fantastic. TVRs smell and feel dangerous at 40mph.

5. In every way except pose value and the last tiny bit of poise and style. Jaguars are more honest and drive with much more grace. Aston Martin? Badge engineering taken to its limit. Crap transmission and rubbish specific output. I ask you, 6 litres of V12 and only 450 bhp...-75bhp/litre. Should be 600horses, but the rest of the car would disintergrate. All style and no substance. Jaguar is cheaper and makes no pretence at exotic.

...and the bike thing, I assume you agree?

I'm going to butt in.
1. Despite all this, you still need a handbag. They are just not manly.
2. Could be true. They are too safe.
3. FFS.
4. I think the cracked gelcoat and dangerous feel are supposed to be part of their charm
You're not really comparing like with like though. I don't think they are in the same segment.
5. I'll give you that.
The main minus point, is that the Jagwaaah XK comes with limited downforce. Seems they couldn't be arsed with the wind tunnel on the new one, or a front spoiler.
AM is for posing though, not for driving.

Oh yeah, finished the bottle of wine, so after a nice cup of oolong, am now on the 55% barrel strength Wild Turkey 1855 Reserve. It's very smooth but a bit strong (of course no ice, water, slice or umbrella is allowed).