GT3 Vs. GT40 Vs. F360 Stradale

I've owned a 77 911 S, 1981 911 SC 1982 911 SC, and have driven the modern variants. I've also owned a 99 Corvette C-5.

If money is no object, the modern 911 (993/996) are built better than the Corvette. If money is an object, the Corvette is a far better buy in the sense of "more bang per buck".

If exotic is what you're after..... Any 355 or 360 Ferrari is way more exotic than either.

I could happily have another 911 Porsche, Z06 Vette or C-6 Vette, but if money were no object, I'd buy the most Ferrari 355 or 360 I could afford. And I'd get the Spyder, not the Stradale.

Reply to
REInvestments
Loading thread data ...

I think that merits the extra expendeture.

This is the key. If one has the money for top of the line Porsche or Ferrari (both purchase and running costs) they build a better quality car. If one wants the most bang for the buck, any C-5 or now C-6 Vette is the answer. This is very cost dependent for most of us. I make a pretty good living, but as much as I would love to own a $100,000 plus F-355 or F360 Ferrari Spyder, I can't and won't give myself permission to pay that kind of money.

For around $40,000, one can now buy a two year old Covette Z06 and have most of the same fun for about 150,000 miles that the high end Porsches and Ferraris give.

That is a SUBSTANTIAL difference. For the difference of $40,000 (Porsche) or $60,000 plus (Ferrari) one can buy a college education for a kid, or a golf course membership to be with friends, and still enjoy driving a fast, fun car.

Just my .02

Reply to
REInvestments

My wife has the 4.6 GT convertible Mustang, and I had the 99 C-5 Vette (lease was up). The Cobra may have independent rear suspension, but the GT does not. There is a substantial difference in the chassis dynamics.

However, if you're just out for a hop and a ride in the sunshine, the live rear axle with the manual stick in the Mustang, can be a great deal of fun. In some ways MORE fun than the more compliant and better suspension and chassis of the newer cars. Back to back rides in a buddy's 02 Ferrari

360 Spyder and the wife's 00 Mustang GT Convertible on the same road gave a greater sense of involvement at 60 mph on the twisties in the Mustang. There's "work" involved in driving the "lesser" car that you can't get out of the Ferrari (Porsche or Corvette) at those speeds.

It becomes something of a "where and at what speed" do you ride comparison, I think.

Reply to
REInvestments

Bang for the buck is somewhat subjective here though. I equate build quality to be part of the "bang". And you get so much more of it with the Porsche, it's easy to see where the money went. If 0-60 is all you want, this argument becomes moot. Going to the used car market or buying into something like Subaru's WRX STi is going to give a lot more performance for your dollar than any Porsche, Ferrari, or Chevy.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

As much as I would love to have an STI, it should never be mentioned in the same breath as Porsche or Ferrari Tonyrama

Reply to
tonyrama

It depends on what else that breath is carrying. If 0-60 is all that matters to you, than an STi represents a much better value than anything currently avaliable from Porsche, Ferrari, BMW, Chevrolet, Audi, or practically anyone else. The Lotus Elise is a better value still, so is a Caterham Super 7 SV with the 200Hp Zetec engine option, or a Westfield with the Hayabusa engine. In the real world, a C5 Z06 or Carrera would probably easily outrun an STi around a paved race track, but knowing that comes from more in-depth analisys than what many buyers are willing to do. 0-60 is what rules buyers minds these days, and it's what often dictates mass perception of bang for the buck, in which case the STi wins out. Because at 0-60 in around 4.2 seconds, it's as quick or quicker than many "exotics". The 2004 Carrera can post 0-60 in 4.4 seconds...will you notice .02? Not a chance, but seeing it on paper helps sell the STi.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

Plus the STi will KILL every other car on this list on an UNPAVED track.

I'd love one, but I think they are identified with people many decades younger than me.

Reply to
REInvestments

I agree 100%. And I like rally, but when I buy a sports car, paved track performance is more important to me than how the car will perform on a gravel road. VWVORTEX and it's counterpart website SUBDRIVEN (dedicated to Subarus) took the WRX STi, Lancer EVO, and Golf R32 to the Tire Rack's testing facilities and ran tests. The Tire Rack's drivers got to do some driving and analisys as well. When all was said and done, the Lancer and STi posted faster

0-60 times, but they all agreed that the R32 had the best suspension for track use. The only thing holding it back were the sub-par tires that VW put on the car, which could be easily replaced, allowing the R32 to post equivalent or faster track times than either of the Japanese cars. The problem is that people don't care if the R32 is a more competant track machine, what they care about are 0-60 times, and that's why Subaru will sell more STi's than VW will R32s.
Reply to
Steve Grauman

Reply to
tecwhiz

K series? That must be one of BMW's motorcycles.

I'm well aware, as was my point. The day I start driving more on gravel than I do on paved roads is the day I might start caring about the STi's off-road performance. Otherwise, I'm sticking to the Porsches.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

My first motorcycle upon re-entry in 95 was a BMW K. Pretty slow, actually. For a motorcycle.

My last motorcycle, sold a few months ago, was a Suzuki GSXR 1000 K3. I frankly never intend to go that fast again, without a steel cage around me. I threw away a Ducati 900 SS CR several years ago, with the high side injuries one might expect. I'm getting too old to spend a lot of time on healing broken bones.

I did my gravel roads on a Triumph Tiger, but I wouldn't mind having a rally car, anyway. Just not practical for anything I'm doing now. Still.....awfully nice cars at a very reasonable price.

Reply to
REInvestments

I've always said straight out that a motorcycle is a much better deal than a car if 0-60 is your main concern. However, safty and comfort issues can come into play, as you commented on in your post. But somthing like a CBR 1100XX or GSXR represents a much better bang for the buck than a car when it comes to pure accleration games.

Neither would I, but it certainly wouldn't be my daily driver. However, there are a small number of great used cars one could get a great deal on for rally use. The Mazda 323GTX and Audi Coupe Quattro GT of the late 1980s are two such examples. Even cars like the 1991 Mitsubishi Galant VR-4, Eclipse GS-X and Isuzu's Impulse RS Turbo could make decent rally cars for comparitively little money if one knew what they were doing and how to source parts.

I guess it depends on what you mean by nice. The STi and EVO offer great straight line and "gravel road" performance combined with unique looks and "racy" interiors without having to spend a fortune. However if I had a choice, VW's R32 would be mine. It's far more comfortable and seemingly of much higher quality (at least when it comes to the quality of interior plastics) than the Japanese cars and represents the best option for paved road exhibitions. Although it will lose in a 0-60 drag race if that's all you care about.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

With all due respect to the VDub, given their awful reliability record (Not talking about the R32 specifically, but the Brand as a whole) I do not subscribe to the idea that they are more of a quality car than the Scooby. The interiors are very nice, but unfortunately, it seems as if this is all she wrote. Mitsubishi on the other hand are not much better than VW in most reliability surveys.

As for an entry level rally car - a 1999-2001 Impreza RS is a real cheap way to get a real nice car - they were never as "exotic" or exciting as the VR-4 or the GTX - but IMHO, they are actually better rally cars than them (as can be seen by the huge amount of PGT wins and championships they have accumalated). FWIW - I personally like them better than the WRX for amateur rally work. The STi on the other hand... (but you can get a used RS in the $10K level, a 1/3 of the price of a new STi).

Ron.

Reply to
Ron Loewy

Would you really care what other people thought, or even worse, what Subaru's marketing department thinks? Tonyrama

Reply to
tonyrama

I don't disagree at all. But as is pointed out here often, the name Porsche stands for something that Subaru does not. To me, Porsches are exotic, maybe only because there are so few up here in the Northeast US, and they're out for so little time. Subaru, OTOH, only holds that kind of aura to the Playstation crowd (which, I probably should add, I could be considered one). Subarus are also a dime a dozen up here, second only behind trucks and SUVs. Tonyrama

Reply to
tonyrama

There's nothing particularly wrong with a Subaru, it just is not and never will be a Porsche. And you're either the type of buyer who cares, or the type who does not.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

My experience as a VW owner and the experiences of the VW owners I know seems to say that VW's reliability is not nearly as bad as what many would make it out to be. I can cite several examples of major problems with Hondas/Acuras and several other Japense brands, but I won't go there. My 2002 GTi has been perfect.

Yea, but performance upgrade parts for the 2.5 are nearly non-existant, and with only 160Hp from an N/A engine, it's not going to be doing many high speed runs.

The GTX and VR-4 can both be made very fast, competant rally cars. It just involves a higher level of suspension upgrade/tuning than the 2.5RS. The tradeoff is that they are much easier to get high power output from.

Reply to
Steve Grauman

Hondas/Acuras and

You experience as a VW owner is what is called in the data analysis industry "anacdotal evidence". It is not worth a lot as scientific evidence (nothing personal, it is just a sample size of 1, and mathematically most forumlas used to numerate real world events via samples use the sample size as an important factor in determining the spread and volatility of the data). Statistically, surveys like the JDPower dependability survey provide a much better look into these issues (they use much bigger sample sizes and use SRS to create the sample datasets).

We all value our personal experience more than someone elses, but scientifically it is often the wrong thing to do.

The minute you get into extensively modifying these cars, they go into the open classes where they are outclassed by modern rally cars like the Evo and the STi. The beauty of the RS (165BHP in stock form) is that it is very competitive in the Production GT group (where the VR4 and GTX in close to stock form are as well) without many modifications. I honestly do not see a reason to buy a $5K GTX and spend $30K+ to get it to be competitive in the open group of the club rally - just start with an Evo, IMHO.

I am a big fan of the GTX (It is a fun vehicle and my old Miata uses the same engine, not turbocharged however), They are, however, rare, expensive to maintain (hard to find parts) and because of rally regulations - a bit outdated. The RS on the other hand is Subaru's gift to the amateur rally driver on a budget. I do not have much experience with the VR4 - there used to be one competitor that ran one in our local club's events - but that's about all I know about them - other than to know that they are rare as well - which usually does not bode well for maintenance and part availability.

Ron.

Reply to
Ron Loewy

Who's talking about that kind of work? I'm talking about a rally suspension/tire upgrade, an intake/exhuast system, a downpipe for the Turbo, and an ECU, maybe with minor brake upgrades on the side. This could easily yield 0ver 200Hp from a car that's lighter and more compact than the 165Hp

2.5RS.

Neither do I. But buiying a GTX for $5 and putting $5k of work into it means a $10k car that'll probably outrun a 2.5 on any course.

It's also got AWD!

Reply to
Steve Grauman

And that will put you in the Open class. See SCCA publication #5668 - Performance Rally Rules.

The $5K changes you talk about might make it faster than a RS (might not either, I have no experience with it - but a stock WRX is in PGT as well, and the RS, despite it's power deficiancy is still competitive in club rally), but it will defintely put you in the open class where you will not be competitive.

Duh.

Ron.

Reply to
Ron Loewy

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.