Why would someone like muscle cars more than luxury cars?
Jake
I cant understand it.
A stock 2013 porsche carrera gt can go 205.
It has 604 bhp
A 2013 stock Camaro has 426 bhp and goes 184.
And most people like older muscle cars. Someone was looking at a 96 impala. Which goes 145 and has 220 bhp.
So why exactly would you pick either of those cars over the porsche?
Oh and we were talking hypotheticals so money isnt an issue.
Okay so if someone today wants a 60-70s muscle car.
604 bhp vs 140 bhp. Why?
Answer
A stock 2013 Camaro would completely destroy a stock 2013 Carrera GT... mainly because one exists and the other doesn't. So that's point one, there is no such thing as a 2013 Carrera GT. The Carrera GT is an engineering marvel, and a very fast one, but it is not a current production model and hasn't been produced since 2007.
Also, the fact that you seem to think that it's a luxury car would leave me questioning if you've ever seen on up close, let alone been in one or driven one. While it is an excellent build quality and some luxury appointments you would expect in such a high end car, it is by no means anything close to a luxury car.
But leaving those aside, why?
1. You say to ignore money. That's easy to say if you don't have to pay for it. But if you are, then why would you ever want a Carrera GT when you could have an SR-71 or a time machine (since money and reality aren't an issue)? If you can afford a Carrera GT, you will not be making this choice - if you like the Camaro you will get the Porsche and the Chevy; if you cannot afford a Carrera GT, then it's really no choice.
2. A Camaro has a back seat and usable trunk space.
3. The cost to insure and maintain a Camaro is a small fraction of the cost of doing so for the Carrera GT.
4. If you crash the Camaro you can replace it.
5. You'll hardly ever stall the Camaro when driving away from a stoplight (drive a Carrera GT and experience the wonder).
6. Some people like different things... some people would prefer a pickup truck to either of these. That preference is not a right/wrong sort of thing, but just a personal preference. To each their own - if someone els's preference doesn't allign with your own, so what?
7. While a Carrera GT might be one of the most usable ultra-exotics ever made, it is still not exactly usable in the daily driver sense; a Camaro is.
8. The current Camaro is a fun car to drive, if somewhat lacking in the rear suspension. For average to moderately skilled drivers it will likely be funner to drive under most circumstances as it's performance is more readily available; while you may not have to be Walter Rohrl to get most of the Carrera GT, you will still need to be more skilled than most.
So, if you want an expensive, fast, and impractical Porsche, why would you get a Carrera GT when you could get a GT3 Cup?
A stock 2013 Camaro would completely destroy a stock 2013 Carrera GT... mainly because one exists and the other doesn't. So that's point one, there is no such thing as a 2013 Carrera GT. The Carrera GT is an engineering marvel, and a very fast one, but it is not a current production model and hasn't been produced since 2007.
Also, the fact that you seem to think that it's a luxury car would leave me questioning if you've ever seen on up close, let alone been in one or driven one. While it is an excellent build quality and some luxury appointments you would expect in such a high end car, it is by no means anything close to a luxury car.
But leaving those aside, why?
1. You say to ignore money. That's easy to say if you don't have to pay for it. But if you are, then why would you ever want a Carrera GT when you could have an SR-71 or a time machine (since money and reality aren't an issue)? If you can afford a Carrera GT, you will not be making this choice - if you like the Camaro you will get the Porsche and the Chevy; if you cannot afford a Carrera GT, then it's really no choice.
2. A Camaro has a back seat and usable trunk space.
3. The cost to insure and maintain a Camaro is a small fraction of the cost of doing so for the Carrera GT.
4. If you crash the Camaro you can replace it.
5. You'll hardly ever stall the Camaro when driving away from a stoplight (drive a Carrera GT and experience the wonder).
6. Some people like different things... some people would prefer a pickup truck to either of these. That preference is not a right/wrong sort of thing, but just a personal preference. To each their own - if someone els's preference doesn't allign with your own, so what?
7. While a Carrera GT might be one of the most usable ultra-exotics ever made, it is still not exactly usable in the daily driver sense; a Camaro is.
8. The current Camaro is a fun car to drive, if somewhat lacking in the rear suspension. For average to moderately skilled drivers it will likely be funner to drive under most circumstances as it's performance is more readily available; while you may not have to be Walter Rohrl to get most of the Carrera GT, you will still need to be more skilled than most.
So, if you want an expensive, fast, and impractical Porsche, why would you get a Carrera GT when you could get a GT3 Cup?
What type of car is a Porsche overall?
Matt
That sounds like a dumb question. It seems like a luxury-sports car. It costs a lot but I feel like it doesn't have all the features of a Mercedes or BMW, or am I wrong? Its obviously built for performance but isn't it a race car overall? Thanks
Answer
Porsche is everything from the base Boxster to the Cayenne SUV to the Panamera luxury sedan to the monster 620 HP GT2RS (911). In past years Porsche was primarily concerned with handling and, while there were many luxury "features" available, they did take second place to seat-of-your pants driving. That has changed, and new Porsches offer all of the "bells and whistles" that you'll find in a Mercedes.
Both Mercedes and BMW are overweight cars; some of them downright obese for their size. On a track and in tight corners on the road, lighter is better. Because the SLK 55 AMG (5.4 litre V8) is so small (157.9 in. long; many complain about the tight cabin), it is not so bad at 3,289 pounds. The 172.2 in. long Boxster S (3.4 litre flat six) weighs 2.976. Still, 300 pounds (over ten percent more mass) does count against the MB.
To compare apples to apples, let's consider the (only available) 7-speed automatic SLK55 AMG and the 7-speed PDK "automated manual" Boxster S (you can choose a 6-speed manual in the Porsche).
Porsche says the Boxster S does 0 to 60 mph in 4.7 seconds (4.5 with the Sport + package); Mercedes claims 0 to 100 kph (62 mph) in 4.8 seconds. Another site I found says the MB gets to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds. The 415 HP Mercedes is no faster than the 315 HP Porsche. There's that weight thing again. (By the way, Porsche is known for being very conservative in stating their performance numbers.) The Porsche gets 21 & 30 mpg while the MB SLK 55 AMG gets 19 & 28.
Edmunds.com says of the MB:
"Of course, the pinnacle of classic, razor-sharp roadster handling remains the Porsche Boxster, but falling short of that standard isn't something to be ashamed of."
The base price for the MB is $67,500. The Boxster S costs $60,900. The 55 AMG is electronically governed to 155 mph. The Boxster will run to 172 mph.
Porsche is everything from the base Boxster to the Cayenne SUV to the Panamera luxury sedan to the monster 620 HP GT2RS (911). In past years Porsche was primarily concerned with handling and, while there were many luxury "features" available, they did take second place to seat-of-your pants driving. That has changed, and new Porsches offer all of the "bells and whistles" that you'll find in a Mercedes.
Both Mercedes and BMW are overweight cars; some of them downright obese for their size. On a track and in tight corners on the road, lighter is better. Because the SLK 55 AMG (5.4 litre V8) is so small (157.9 in. long; many complain about the tight cabin), it is not so bad at 3,289 pounds. The 172.2 in. long Boxster S (3.4 litre flat six) weighs 2.976. Still, 300 pounds (over ten percent more mass) does count against the MB.
To compare apples to apples, let's consider the (only available) 7-speed automatic SLK55 AMG and the 7-speed PDK "automated manual" Boxster S (you can choose a 6-speed manual in the Porsche).
Porsche says the Boxster S does 0 to 60 mph in 4.7 seconds (4.5 with the Sport + package); Mercedes claims 0 to 100 kph (62 mph) in 4.8 seconds. Another site I found says the MB gets to 60 mph in 4.5 seconds. The 415 HP Mercedes is no faster than the 315 HP Porsche. There's that weight thing again. (By the way, Porsche is known for being very conservative in stating their performance numbers.) The Porsche gets 21 & 30 mpg while the MB SLK 55 AMG gets 19 & 28.
Edmunds.com says of the MB:
"Of course, the pinnacle of classic, razor-sharp roadster handling remains the Porsche Boxster, but falling short of that standard isn't something to be ashamed of."
The base price for the MB is $67,500. The Boxster S costs $60,900. The 55 AMG is electronically governed to 155 mph. The Boxster will run to 172 mph.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
0 comments:
Post a Comment