[TK-421]

Not sure why the Black Series isn't a no-brainer

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Why do you hate free-market capitalism? I'm sure if the R8 were truly overpriced, nobody would buy them and Audi would adjust the price accordingly. Audi sold over 2000 R8's last year (including the very pricy V10), even in a crap economy.

Not everyone in the market of $110k cars is looking only for performance. If they were, they'd all be buying ZR1's. Of which only about 700 were sold last year. Peek inside the cabin of the R8; there's a marked difference in quality and bespoke build compared to the GT3. Some people appreciate that difference, which can be appreciated when the car's not even moving.

I bring up the Ferraris because you said:
"For that money for the V8 you can get a GT3. For the V10, you can get any Ferrari."
The implication here is that for the price you pay for the V10, you can get a Scuderia or 599. Based on what I've seen, that's not true. Not even close.
Price comparisons against Ferrari are next to useless anyway because it can easily be argued that Ferrari prices their cars below true market value. 2-year wait lists of V8 models, Enzos trading for nearly 2x's MSRP, and the 599 GTO selling out in only 1 week point to this. (And if you want to post pictures of spontaneously combusting supercars...)

There are other choices to the Audi, but Ferrari realistically isn't one of them. Even if they were, having all of these choices is a good thing. Not a bad thing. There's nothing stupid about making a personal decision based on what appeals to you. For some people, Ferrari does nothing for them. Even if you had $160k in cash, there's no guarantee you could walk into a Ferrari dealership and walk out with a Scuderia or 599. Very likely, you'd need at least $60k more than that, unless you put your name down months or years in advance; if you're not a previous customer, you're probably SOL.
IMO, Audi should be applauded for wading deep into Porsche territory on their first try and not only knocking BMW's M6 in the nads but offering up a truly worthy 997 competitor where others haven't.

Do you think LFA is overpriced? They are sold out also. There's always going to be people spending large amount of money that is not worth it. Try to ask those people what they see in a LFA that justifies their spending. It's faster than their competitors? No. It looks better than their competitors? No (subjective). It shows more class than other competitors? No.

So you suggesting people who buy the R8 because it's more attractive while it's not moving? I did take a peek at the interior of the R8 : don't see anything too special about it that I would pick that over a GT3. I'm not a interior kinda guy, and that's probably why I bought a M3 and not a S5, with the M3's interior looks identical to a normal 3 series.

Okay you caught me there, my bad for using the word "any". I wanted to say I'd go for any ferrari compared to a V10 R8. The only one exception might be the california. I'll need to think about it if it's california or the V10 R8. Moreover, I was comparing the V10 R8 to F430. Well for now it'll probably be 458 Italia. So for that V10 R8 money, the F430 and 458 Italia will be considered. Since I made the mistake of saying "any", there's no point of including 599 or those in this discussion.

The R8 is a worthy 997 competitor? which one?..You mean price wise or performance wise that they're considered competitors?

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

Do you think LFA is overpriced? They are sold out also. There's always going to be people spending large amount of money that is not worth it. Try to ask those people what they see in a LFA that justifies their spending. It's faster than their competitors? No. It looks better than their competitors? No (subjective). It shows more class than other competitors? No.

So you suggesting people who buy the R8 because it's more attractive while it's not moving? I did take a peek at the interior of the R8 : don't see anything too special about it that I would pick that over a GT3. I'm not a interior kinda guy, and that's probably why I bought a M3 and not a S5, with the M3's interior looks identical to a normal 3 series.

Okay you caught me there, my bad for using the word "any". I wanted to say I'd go for any ferrari compared to a V10 R8. The only one exception might be the california. I'll need to think about it if it's california or the V10 R8. Moreover, I was comparing the V10 R8 to F430. Well for now it'll probably be 458 Italia. So for that V10 R8 money, the F430 and 458 Italia will be considered. Since I made the mistake of saying "any", there's no point of including 599 or those in this discussion.

The R8 is a worthy 997 competitor? which one?..You mean price wise or performance wise that they're considered competitors?

If the LFA is sold out, then obviously it's worth what people are willing to pay for it. Isn't that the entire concept of supply vs demand free market capitalism?
LFA has been described as being built better than anything Italian, sounding better than any Ferrari, any Lambo. While offering Scuderia-levels of involvement. Some people bought it because it's a Lexus. They know the quality, attention to detail, dealer service, etc. that goes with it. Not to mention the thing has been endurance-tested through two 24 Hour Nurburgring races, plus a few more 4-hour enduros on the Nordschleife (it won its class in the last race). How can you put $$$ value on that? You can't. The electronic dampers on the Enzo gave up the ghost after a couple of laps on the Nordschleife in that comparo in 2008.
There are also only 500 LFA's, and some people want that exclusivity. And how can you say the Lexus doesn't look better while admitting that looks is subjective? That's contradictory. For those people who bought the LFA, they either think it's better looking than so-called "competitors", or they already have those competitors in their collection (which again) contradicts your "not worth it" mantra.

I am suggesting that the R8's interior is one reason people prefer it over the GT3. I never said it was the only one. Considering you are sitting in the car a lot more often than you're going for outright lap times, that's important.
Nothing's special about it? Did you notice the gated aluminum shifter and alloy bits all over the cabin? Porsche charges extra for "aluminum-look" painted plastic. Audi provides you the real thing. The leather covering almost everything in the R8 (that you'd have to pay extra for on the GT3)? Did you notice the parts on the GT3 that look exactly the same as on a standard 997, which itself shares plenty of parts from the Boxster? You think the GT3 rides as well as the R8? Just because you're not an interior kind of guy, that doesn't make the R8 overpriced. Clearly it is worth it to thousands of people who voted with their wallets. Why do you think the R8 outsells the ZR1 3:1 despite lower performance specs? Do you honestly believe it's because free market capitalism doesn't work?

You think you can walk into any Ferrari dealership with $160k and buy a 458? Let me ask you: How many new Ferraris have you owned before? I only ask this because the salesman will likely ask you this very question, and how you answer will determine whether you get shown the door.

Price-wise and performance-wise, the R8 competes with the 997 S or 997 C4S. R8 V10 vs Turbo. All models are AWD and are road-focused GT's, not RWD track specials.
Prices in Germany (incl VAT), euros:
R8 - 109k
C4S - 104k
R8 V10 - 144k
997 Turbo - 149k

[Guibo]

And RE: Lexus LFA, you obviously missed my post, so I'll copy & past here:

"Let's forget the price for a minute because you could argue that, at certain levels of the marketplace, people don't even look at the price. They just want something that's rare and special. This car is rare and it's rare and very, very special. I don't want to get bogged down in 'Ooh, it's 6 times more than a GT-R.' That's simplistic. Yes, it's not 6 times the car that the GT-R is. Of course it isn't. Nothing is 6 times the car that the GT-R is. A Veyron certainly isn't 12 times the car that the GT-R is. It's not possible to be that.
We've deliberately avoided any talk of the 2011 Lexus LFA's list price of $375,000 until now, because having spent the day (well, four hours) in this car, the price doesn't strike us as especially relevant. That'll sound absurd to many of you, but this car isn't a normal retail proposition, not even in the abnormal reality of Planet Supercar. Just 500 will be made, some 150 of which will go to the United States and only 70 of which are destined for Europe (18 of them to the U.K.). Perhaps the biggest compliment we can pay this Lexus is to say that it doesn't feel like a bad value.
Chances are, most people will never see one, and you shouldn't underestimate the power of this."
--Chris Harris, Evo Magazine

Shane O'Donoghue, contributor to Yahoo autos, Car Enthusiast, and Performance Car Mag:
"Comparisons to similar performing machines are pointless, as we believe that potential buyers have the means to buy whichever they prefer, regardless of logic or value for money.
...if you can spend £300,000 or so on a supercar it's likely that you may have one of each rather than seeing them as competitors."

5th Gear:
"While those [performance] figures are on a par with many supercars, such as the forthcoming Ferrari 458 Italia and McLaren MP4-12C, the Lexus costs a sizable chunk more and, in effect, competes with the likes of the Pagani Zonda and Ferrari 599 GTB - although in that stratosphere we're not so sure buyers look at things that logically."

Is anything patently false or ludicrous about any of that?
I think what you're doing is projecting your value system against those of the world's thousands of millionaires and billionaires and saying "My value system trumps yours." Ask yourself if "value" is subjective. Ie., whether a person who can only afford a Big Mac once a month might have a different value of "worth" compared to someone who dines on $30 steaks once a week.

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

If the LFA is sold out, then obviously it's worth what people are willing to pay for it. Isn't that the entire concept of supply vs demand free market capitalism?
LFA has been described as being built better than anything Italian, sounding better than any Ferrari, any Lambo. While offering Scuderia-levels of involvement. Some people bought it because it's a Lexus. They know the quality, attention to detail, dealer service, etc. that goes with it. Not to mention the thing has been endurance-tested through two 24 Hour Nurburgring races, plus a few more 4-hour enduros on the Nordschleife (it won its class in the last race). How can you put $$$ value on that? You can't. The electronic dampers on the Enzo gave up the ghost after a couple of laps on the Nordschleife in that comparo in 2008.
There are also only 500 LFA's, and some people want that exclusivity. And how can you say the Lexus doesn't look better while admitting that looks is subjective? That's contradictory. For those people who bought the LFA, they either think it's better looking than so-called "competitors", or they already have those competitors in their collection (which again) contradicts your "not worth it" mantra.

I am suggesting that the R8's interior is one reason people prefer it over the GT3. I never said it was the only one. Considering you are sitting in the car a lot more often than you're going for outright lap times, that's important.
Nothing's special about it? Did you notice the gated aluminum shifter and alloy bits all over the cabin? Porsche charges extra for "aluminum-look" painted plastic. Audi provides you the real thing. The leather covering almost everything in the R8 (that you'd have to pay extra for on the GT3)? Did you notice the parts on the GT3 that look exactly the same as on a standard 997, which itself shares plenty of parts from the Boxster? You think the GT3 rides as well as the R8? Just because you're not an interior kind of guy, that doesn't make the R8 overpriced. Clearly it is worth it to thousands of people who voted with their wallets. Why do you think the R8 outsells the ZR1 3:1 despite lower performance specs? Do you honestly believe it's because free market capitalism doesn't work?

You think you can walk into any Ferrari dealership with $160k and buy a 458? Let me ask you: How many new Ferraris have you owned before? I only ask this because the salesman will likely ask you this very question, and how you answer will determine whether you get shown the door.

Price-wise and performance-wise, the R8 competes with the 997 S or 997 C4S. R8 V10 vs Turbo. All models are AWD and are road-focused GT's, not RWD track specials.
Prices in Germany (incl VAT), euros:
R8 - 109k
C4S - 104k
R8 V10 - 144k
997 Turbo - 149k

I think after this discussion we can conclude the term "better" is subjective, I should have added "IMO" before my statement of R8=Fail, because in my book Performance > Interior and built, especially when I'm spending over 100K on a car that will most likely not be a DD. While there's going to be other people preferring Interior over performance.

I think interior is also subjective. The reason I don't find the R8 interior any special is because I really don't find it special. Leather does not excite me. Plastic does not put a frown on my face. GT3 needed the plastics and simple interior to save weight. They even use a sticker instead of a real badge for the RS models. And again, I should really add IMO before I said the R8 is overpriced, simple because of what you suggested : You can't put a dollar value on cars. You support other features being a more important factor than performance alone. While, I support performance being more important than any other factor. In my book, R8 is still overpriced, and in your book, it's not. I can accept your side, while I hope you can accept mine.

I have not owned any Ferrari and would really like you to educate me on this? Will they really kick you out if you have never owned a Ferrari? What are the possible ways for me to buy a 458 Italia, for example, with no prior ownership of previous Ferraris?

Your prices are different than mine. Considering I'm from Canada, these are my prices

R8 V8: 140K
GT3: 138K
Turbo: 165K
4S: 117K
R8 V10: 173K
GTR: 100K

I think you can see why I'm against the R8. The competition should be between R8 and GT3 here. If it was compared to the 4S, then we might as well compare turbo to R8 V8. We already discussed earlier the different target markets for GT3 and R8, so there's nothing to argue here. GT3 wins in performance, R8 wins in interior subjectively.

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

And RE: Lexus LFA, you obviously missed my post, so I'll copy & past here:

"Let's forget the price for a minute because you could argue that, at certain levels of the marketplace, people don't even look at the price. They just want something that's rare and special. This car is rare and it's rare and very, very special. I don't want to get bogged down in 'Ooh, it's 6 times more than a GT-R.' That's simplistic. Yes, it's not 6 times the car that the GT-R is. Of course it isn't. Nothing is 6 times the car that the GT-R is. A Veyron certainly isn't 12 times the car that the GT-R is. It's not possible to be that.
We've deliberately avoided any talk of the 2011 Lexus LFA's list price of $375,000 until now, because having spent the day (well, four hours) in this car, the price doesn't strike us as especially relevant. That'll sound absurd to many of you, but this car isn't a normal retail proposition, not even in the abnormal reality of Planet Supercar. Just 500 will be made, some 150 of which will go to the United States and only 70 of which are destined for Europe (18 of them to the U.K.). Perhaps the biggest compliment we can pay this Lexus is to say that it doesn't feel like a bad value.
Chances are, most people will never see one, and you shouldn't underestimate the power of this."
--Chris Harris, Evo Magazine

Shane O'Donoghue, contributor to Yahoo autos, Car Enthusiast, and Performance Car Mag:
"Comparisons to similar performing machines are pointless, as we believe that potential buyers have the means to buy whichever they prefer, regardless of logic or value for money.
...if you can spend £300,000 or so on a supercar it's likely that you may have one of each rather than seeing them as competitors."

5th Gear:
"While those [performance] figures are on a par with many supercars, such as the forthcoming Ferrari 458 Italia and McLaren MP4-12C, the Lexus costs a sizable chunk more and, in effect, competes with the likes of the Pagani Zonda and Ferrari 599 GTB - although in that stratosphere we're not so sure buyers look at things that logically."

Is anything patently false or ludicrous about any of that?
I think what you're doing is projecting your value system against those of the world's thousands of millionaires and billionaires and saying "My value system trumps yours." Ask yourself if "value" is subjective. Ie., whether a person who can only afford a Big Mac once a month might have a different value of "worth" compared to someone who dines on $30 steaks once a week.

I may have underestimated the extra cash these billionaires posses. In that case, logic really plays no role in their consideration for purchases. I might be too caught up with my life of working for a living, compared to their life of spending money for a living. I guess i will never understand until I, for one day, become a billionaire.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

I have not owned any Ferrari and would really like you to educate me on this? Will they really kick you out if you have never owned a Ferrari? What are the possible ways for me to buy a 458 Italia, for example, with no prior ownership of previous Ferraris?

Your prices are different than mine. Considering I'm from Canada, these are my prices

R8 V8: 140K
GT3: 138K
Turbo: 165K
4S: 117K
R8 V10: 173K
GTR: 100K

I think you can see why I'm against the R8. The competition should be between R8 and GT3 here. If it was compared to the 4S, then we might as well compare turbo to R8 V8. We already discussed earlier the different target markets for GT3 and R8, so there's nothing to argue here. GT3 wins in performance, R8 wins in interior subjectively.

I'm not sure of all the strings you'd have to pull to get a spot on a Ferrari at MSRP. But just some guesses:
- Buy a pre-owned Ferrari (or two) from an authorized dealer
- Wait until near the end of the production run of a model in high demand (usually the V8's, after 3-4 years) and perhaps buy one near MSRP
- If a customer backs out, the dealer may offer it to the next guy in line, and if you're lucky, your turn may eventually come up. Likelihood of paying MSRP: probably next to zero. Likelihood of paying a $50-100k "market adjustment" on a 458: probably pretty damn high.
- Some people with the means will put down a healthy deposit on the next car's successor (that means waiting until after the 458's production run)
- Ferraris in lower demand, like the regular 599, will be easier to get; but that car is closer to $250k USD, if you're lucky.

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

Your prices are different than mine. Considering I'm from Canada, these are my prices

See, value is subjective. It depends on the context of location. I shudder to think what a Ferrari in Canada costs.
Bear in mind the difference in equipment: The R8 (or V10) has things the Porsches don't. Better quality interior, more bespoke engines, more bespoke bodies (aluminum vs steel), standard magnetic ride suspension in the V10, etc.

If all you value is objective performance, why wouldn't you consider a ZR1 and then call everything else overpriced? A ZR1 would demolish the GT3 in a straight line, and is close enough on a track. I'm sure there have been offerings from GM that would give your E90 a run for its money, no?

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

GT3 wins in performance, R8 wins in interior subjectively.

The R8 could very well win in subjective performance too. Given a winding, bumpy mountain road, a driver could very well be faster in the R8 than in the GT3. The R8 also wins in the sense that there are a lot of 997's out there (lower end models like the Carrera, Carrera 4, etc), whereas there are fewer R8's. It's more special overall, IMO.

[lux.sh]

damn this turned out to be a good debate. keep it civil guys.

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

I'm not sure of all the strings you'd have to pull to get a spot on a Ferrari at MSRP. But just some guesses:
- Buy a pre-owned Ferrari (or two) from an authorized dealer
- Wait until near the end of the production run of a model in high demand (usually the V8's, after 3-4 years) and perhaps buy one near MSRP
- If a customer backs out, the dealer may offer it to the next guy in line, and if you're lucky, your turn may eventually come up. Likelihood of paying MSRP: probably next to zero. Likelihood of paying a $50-100k "market adjustment" on a 458: probably pretty damn high.
- Some people with the means will put down a healthy deposit on the next car's successor (that means waiting until after the 458's production run)
- Ferraris in lower demand, like the regular 599, will be easier to get; but that car is closer to $250k USD, if you're lucky.


See, value is subjective. It depends on the context of location. I shudder to think what a Ferrari in Canada costs.
Bear in mind the difference in equipment: The R8 (or V10) has things the Porsches don't. Better quality interior, more bespoke engines, more bespoke bodies (aluminum vs steel), standard magnetic ride suspension in the V10, etc.

If all you value is objective performance, why wouldn't you consider a ZR1 and then call everything else overpriced? A ZR1 would demolish the GT3 in a straight line, and is close enough on a track. I'm sure there have been offerings from GM that would give your E90 a run for its money, no?


The R8 could very well win in subjective performance too. Given a winding, bumpy mountain road, a driver could very well be faster in the R8 than in the GT3. The R8 also wins in the sense that there are a lot of 997's out there (lower end models like the Carrera, Carrera 4, etc), whereas there are fewer R8's. It's more special overall, IMO.

Hmm...I never really thought it would be that hard to get a Ferrari. I've got a few friends with a Ferrari, mostly F430. I should ask them about it. He didn't really say much about the hardship of getting their Ferrari.

In your perspective, I'm sure you'll pick the R8's interior. More bespoke engine? Isn't the engine the same as the one you find in a Gallardo? I'm guessing the term bespoke here does not mean "one of a kind" or anything along those lines. Also, isn't the GT3 also make up with aluminum body?

Well performance does not translate to pure straight line performances. Just the fact that ZR1 destroys the GT3 in a straight line, but struggles to have a better lap time can say something about the ZR1. Personally, I LOVE the ZR1. It's the cornering ability, handling, whole feeling of the car that's most important in the performance category. There wasn't any cars from GM that I would pick over my m3. They look good on paper, but didn't like how they handled.

I believe the GT3 has faster laptimes in most racetracks. I haven't personally drive the R8 before, but the GT3 is truly amazing in a race track. If you suggest it'll take more of a PRO to drive the GT3, therefore the R8 would be a faster car, then I would have nothing to say. I cannot control the skills of other drivers. But I would like to repeat, GT3 is a very well rounded car.

Well Aren't we comparing GT3 with R8? If you compare normal 997 to a R8, isn't that a little unfair, considering the difference in price? In that sense, we can also say Porsche > Audi, badge wise.

[TK-421]

damn. you two straight up jacked the OP's thread

[ChineseGuy]

Got carried away

but I'm sure Lux.sh has enough feedback from other members

[darkm3]

CLK BS looks amazing and that exhaust note is

[SantaPimp27]

Here ya go:http://classiccars.com/81796.car

Its right at $80K and will out preform everything in the price category. Looks like an exotic but has the maintenance of a ford. Its faster 0-60 than almost any car out there and pulls more g's and has a faster slalom than the Enzo. It also laps as fast as a Porsche cup car running race slicks.

Hell you could even tweak the engine to 600hp fairly easy, but that would just be unfair lol

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

More bespoke engine? Isn't the engine the same as the one you find in a Gallardo? I'm guessing the term bespoke here does not mean "one of a kind" or anything along those lines. Also, isn't the GT3 also make up with aluminum body?

There wasn't any cars from GM that I would pick over my m3. They look good on paper, but didn't like how they handled.

I believe the GT3 has faster laptimes in most racetracks. I haven't personally drive the R8 before, but the GT3 is truly amazing in a race track. If you suggest it'll take more of a PRO to drive the GT3, therefore the R8 would be a faster car, then I would have nothing to say. I cannot control the skills of other drivers. But I would like to repeat, GT3 is a very well rounded car.

Well Aren't we comparing GT3 with R8? If you compare normal 997 to a R8, isn't that a little unfair, considering the difference in price? In that sense, we can also say Porsche > Audi, badge wise.

Yes, the R8 borrows an engine from a Lamborghini. The GT3's engine is less bespoke. It's merely an evolution of the previous GT1-blocked Porsche's before it, and that includes a lot of 996 Turbos, GT3's, GT2's, etc.
No, the GT3 is made from steel. Not aluminum.

So, on-paper performance specs can take a back seat to other considerations...interesting!

Of course the GT3 should be faster on a track. It's been honed for the track to the extent that the R8 wasn't. If a driver spends considerable amount of time on a track, the GT3 is the better choice. For the other 99% of the time, the R8 will be better.

Why is it unfair? Because the Audi exceeds the 997 dynamically while offering a much better interior? Audi targeted the 911/C4S/Turbo as benchmarks. Not the GT3. Here's another reason why the R8 doesn't yet compete in GT3 territory:

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by SantaPimp27

Here ya go:http://classiccars.com/81796.car

Its right at $80K and will out preform everything in the price category. Looks like an exotic but has the maintenance of a ford. Its faster 0-60 than almost any car out there and pulls more g's and has a faster slalom than the Enzo. It also laps as fast as a Porsche cup car running race slicks.

Hell you could even tweak the engine to 600hp fairly easy, but that would just be unfair lol

Looks GREAT. The rear kinda looks like a mustang though, but sexy nonetheless.

Now I want one

[SantaPimp27]

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

Looks GREAT. The rear kinda looks like a mustang though, but sexy nonetheless.

Now I want one

I think if you add a wing it really improves the look of the car. Many dont like wings, but here it not only would improve downforce, it makes the rear perfect lol

And if you buy one new you can just buy the body and put any engine you want into the car. They will also pretty much do whatever you want to the car looks wise. They'll paint it any color or do the interior in any color you want. Pretty cool if you ask me

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

Yes, the R8 borrows an engine from a Lamborghini. The GT3's engine is less bespoke. It's merely an evolution of the previous GT1-blocked Porsche's before it, and that includes a lot of 996 Turbos, GT3's, GT2's, etc.
No, the GT3 is made from steel. Not aluminum.

So, on-paper performance specs can take a back seat to other considerations...interesting!

Of course the GT3 should be faster on a track. It's been honed for the track to the extent that the R8 wasn't. If a driver spends considerable amount of time on a track, the GT3 is the better choice. For the other 99% of the time, the R8 will be better.

Why is it unfair? Because the Audi exceeds the 997 dynamically while offering a much better interior? Audi targeted the 911/C4S/Turbo as benchmarks. Not the GT3. Here's another reason why the R8 doesn't yet compete in GT3 territory:

So how do you define bespoke really? The R8 is bespoke because it's from lambo, and the GT3 engine is not because it's been improved for a longer amount of time?

Yes paper specs aren't as important, but I would still definitely value that more than the interior of a car. My philosophy is quite simple. A car is to be driven. When you drive it it's you and the car. Handling, transmission, power, etc. is crucial to my decision. If I wanted a good looking interior with nice sound systems, I would stay home in my home theater.

Off the track, it's down to the owner's personal preference. Again, for me I'd enjoy the GT3 even in city/hwy driving. For the rest, they might even find the R8 being too harsh, you never know. At least we shouldn't generalize everyone thinking the GT3 is only a track car and 99% would prefer R8. In terms of performance. Off the track we're mostly comparing the 0-60 probably. GT3: 4.1s, R8 4.5s.

It's unfair because of the price difference. If you compare the R8 to 4S, it's 140K compared to 117K, according to my numbers. IF you compare it to a Turbo, it's 165K vs 140K. However, GT3 pricing wise will compare perfectly with R8. 138K vs. 140K. Point is, normal 997 is not even competing with the R8. The price difference is just too enormous. Even if the R8 exceeds it performance wise it's reasonable. But for the GT3, I don't see the R8 having any advantage over that other than assuming the majority will value the interior more.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by ChineseGuy

So how do you define bespoke really? The R8 is bespoke because it's from lambo, and the GT3 engine is not because it's been improved for a longer amount of time?

Yes paper specs aren't as important, but I would still definitely value that more than the interior of a car. My philosophy is quite simple. A car is to be driven. When you drive it it's you and the car. Handling, transmission, power, etc. is crucial to my decision. If I wanted a good looking interior with nice sound systems, I would stay home in my home theater.

Off the track, it's down to the owner's personal preference. Again, for me I'd enjoy the GT3 even in city/hwy driving. For the rest, they might even find the R8 being too harsh, you never know. At least we shouldn't generalize everyone thinking the GT3 is only a track car and 99% would prefer R8. In terms of performance. Off the track we're mostly comparing the 0-60 probably. GT3: 4.1s, R8 4.5s.

It's unfair because of the price difference. If you compare the R8 to 4S, it's 140K compared to 117K, according to my numbers. IF you compare it to a Turbo, it's 165K vs 140K. However, GT3 pricing wise will compare perfectly with R8. 138K vs. 140K. Point is, normal 997 is not even competing with the R8. The price difference is just too enormous. Even if the R8 exceeds it performance wise it's reasonable. But for the GT3, I don't see the R8 having any advantage over that other than assuming the majority will value the interior more.

What I'm getting at is rarity. You can define bespoke in # of models and iterations that have shared it, or by # of units sold. If Porsche only makes a single GT3 engine, but they build 2 million GT3's, how special is that engine? It's been mass-produced well beyond the point where you can say the engines are similarly priced.
The same goes for the body. The R8, being made from aluminum, and drawing from no lower Audi, is considerably more bespoke and exotic in material than the Porsche. So of course it should cost more. Did you expect it to cost less?

See, in the R8, it's not a choice of staying at home or driving. You can get both. If all you want is a track car, then a GT3 is a poor choice. There are way, WAY better bang-for-buck cars out there.

R8 too harsh? I have never seen a test in which an R8 rides worse than a competing Porsche. Reviews say it rides as well as any Audi sedan. If it rides better than street-focused Porsches, it's a safe bet it rides better than more track-oriented cars like the GT3.

Again, that's your perspective of value. That's fine. But it's not the same in other countries.
The price difference is there because the Audi has things that the Carrera 4S doesn't: Better handling, better steering, better composure over bumps, more bespoke interior with higher quality materials, 2 additional cylinders, more exotic alloy space frame. The R8 has the advantage of AWD over the GT3. That makes it more useful over more seasons than the GT3. So all of these things contribute to the R8 being a more expensive (and special) car than the Carreras; it's not like Audi looked at the GT3's price and purpose and said, "Hmm...we'll build a car exactly to compete with the GT3." Do you honestly think that was their thinking?
Probably the most important reason is: People have been willing to pay that extra price for the R8. Simple supply and demand. If you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with free-market capitalism and the concept that something is only worth what people are willing to pay for it. Why do you disagree with this entire economic concept that has sustained world markets (even ostensibly socialist/communist ones) for so long?

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

What I'm getting at is rarity. You can define bespoke in # of models and iterations that have shared it, or by # of units sold. If Porsche only makes a single GT3 engine, but they build 2 million GT3's, how special is that engine? It's been mass-produced well beyond the point where you can say the engines are similarly priced.
The same goes for the body. The R8, being made from aluminum, and drawing from no lower Audi, is considerably more bespoke and exotic in material than the Porsche. So of course it should cost more. Did you expect it to cost less?

See, in the R8, it's not a choice of staying at home or driving. You can get both. If all you want is a track car, then a GT3 is a poor choice. There are way, WAY better bang-for-buck cars out there.

R8 too harsh? I have never seen a test in which an R8 rides worse than a competing Porsche. Reviews say it rides as well as any Audi sedan. If it rides better than street-focused Porsches, it's a safe bet it rides better than more track-oriented cars like the GT3.

Again, that's your perspective of value. That's fine. But it's not the same in other countries.
The price difference is there because the Audi has things that the Carrera 4S doesn't: Better handling, better steering, better composure over bumps, more bespoke interior with higher quality materials, 2 additional cylinders, more exotic alloy space frame. The R8 has the advantage of AWD over the GT3. That makes it more useful over more seasons than the GT3. So all of these things contribute to the R8 being a more expensive (and special) car than the Carreras; it's not like Audi looked at the GT3's price and purpose and said, "Hmm...we'll build a car exactly to compete with the GT3." Do you honestly think that was their thinking?
Probably the most important reason is: People have been willing to pay that extra price for the R8. Simple supply and demand. If you have a problem with that, then you have a problem with free-market capitalism and the concept that something is only worth what people are willing to pay for it. Why do you disagree with this entire economic concept that has sustained world markets (even ostensibly socialist/communist ones) for so long?

Isn't the V10 engine what you find in the Gallardo, S6, S8? The R8 was going to get the RS6 engine instead of the Gallardo, until the twin turbo fried the whole prototype. (see picture in earlier post). Just realized it was the GT3RS with the aluminum. However, the whole chassis is from Gallardo, would that not be special enough?

Other than Zr1 and GTR, what else is the better bang for buck compared to the GT3? Although I love the Zr1, it's like a Z06 on steroids with those power on the wheels. Trying to control all those power around the track is not easy. GTR is a monster around the track, very well balanced, but it lacks refinement. It's not fun, but it's fast.

I'm not saying R8 harsher than GT3, my post was about how there's going to be people saying R8 is also harsh and they would prefer, lets say, a E63 AMG: softer suspension but still very fast (price aside). So there's going to be people wanting softer suspension, people wanting R8's medium suspension, and people wanting the GT3 stiffer suspension. Just because GT3 has track ready suspension doesn't mean the majority would prefer the R8 in areas outside the track.

The price difference is there because it's not even competing with each other. It's like trying to compare the M3 with a 3 series.

There are people preferring RWD>AWD, me being one of them. Why do you even need AWD? Driving a R8 in snow? In rain, I don't see the GT3 having any problems unless you go crazy in corners.

I made my claim of R8 being overpriced well before our discussion and I've already said I should have added the IMO there. If you look at this in my perspective and weigh in the interior factor and all those stuff a little less, you'll see how I think it's overpriced. I purchase a car for the driving experience. I never had a problem with this whole concept. I know these cars will eventually sell, no matter how they perform. Hell, they don't even test drive the car before they buy it. I'm just expressing my view of how GT3 would be a better choice. I just got lazy and didn't add IMO on my statement and you caught me.

[Guibo]

LOL, do you have any idea of how rare those Audi models are? In 2007, Porsche sold about 100 more GT3s than Audi sold S8s. A8 sales are now down almost as low as the R8. And only a very tiny fraction of A8s are S8s.
GT3 RS is not aluminum-bodied.

So what you're saying is that the existence of the ZR1 and GT-R means the GT3 is overpriced. Ok..
Have you driven the GT-R at, say, 7/10ths pace or higher?

E63 vs R8...what exactly are you talking about? You're going off on a completely different tangent. If you want to talk about what most people would want, I can guarantee you it's not even the E63. Think Toyota Camry and you're in the ballpark. The point is, the R8 rides like an Audi sedan, and for most people, that should be plenty comfortable enough. The GT3 is much harsher.

No, the price difference is there because the R8 is a more accomplished, more special, more exotically built car than the 997 C4S. It's not like comparing an M3 with a 3 Series; those cars are built by the same company and BMW have made them different enough to warrant the existence of each. Besides, using your CDN figures, there's a 19.7% difference beteen the R8 vs a C4S. There is a 100% price difference between a base 3-series and a base M3. And the M3 doesn't even have an aluminum spaceframe. Apples vs bananas.

Yes, you could drive the R8 in more inclement weather. Don't you have that in Canada?

Your whole contention for the R8 being overpriced was that the GT3 was faster. That may well be, but that doesn't make the R8 overpriced; if you follow that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then the GT3 is ridiculously overpriced. Just because the R8 is an alternative to a Porsche does not make it overpriced either; it is precisely that, an alternative and one which has beaten Porsche in just about every single head to head comparo. Most of those comparos don't involve the GT3, but instead involve the C4S or Turbo. Ask yourself why that is.
Something is overpriced when people refuse to pay the manufacturer's asking price. If you agree to that concept, then there's nothing to debate.

[ChineseGuy]

Originally Posted by Guibo

LOL, do you have any idea of how rare those Audi models are? In 2007, Porsche sold about 100 more GT3s than Audi sold S8s. A8 sales are now down almost as low as the R8. And only a very tiny fraction of A8s are S8s.
GT3 RS is not aluminum-bodied.

So what you're saying is that the existence of the ZR1 and GT-R means the GT3 is overpriced. Ok..
Have you driven the GT-R at, say, 7/10ths pace or higher?

E63 vs R8...what exactly are you talking about? You're going off on a completely different tangent. If you want to talk about what most people would want, I can guarantee you it's not even the E63. Think Toyota Camry and you're in the ballpark. The point is, the R8 rides like an Audi sedan, and for most people, that should be plenty comfortable enough. The GT3 is much harsher.

No, the price difference is there because the R8 is a more accomplished, more special, more exotically built car than the 997 C4S. It's not like comparing an M3 with a 3 Series; those cars are built by the same company and BMW have made them different enough to warrant the existence of each. Besides, using your CDN figures, there's a 19.7% difference beteen the R8 vs a C4S. There is a 100% price difference between a base 3-series and a base M3. And the M3 doesn't even have an aluminum spaceframe. Apples vs bananas.

Yes, you could drive the R8 in more inclement weather. Don't you have that in Canada?

Your whole contention for the R8 being overpriced was that the GT3 was faster. That may well be, but that doesn't make the R8 overpriced; if you follow that line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then the GT3 is ridiculously overpriced. Just because the R8 is an alternative to a Porsche does not make it overpriced either; it is precisely that, an alternative and one which has beaten Porsche in just about every single head to head comparo. Most of those comparos don't involve the GT3, but instead involve the C4S or Turbo. Ask yourself why that is.
Something is overpriced when people refuse to pay the manufacturer's asking price. If you agree to that concept, then there's nothing to debate.

I would assume when you mean bespoke, it's like Audi making an engine specially for the R8. So after some research it turns out RS4, S6, S8 shares the V8, and Gallardo with the V10. If you still think it's special I have nothing to say. GT3RS has parts of aluminium body panels and aluminum alloy chassis.

I never said the GT3 was the most bang for the buck car. I said I would prefer GT3 over the R8. I would also prefer GT3 over ZR1 and the GTR.

No, I have not driven the GTR at speeds like.

I'm not bringing the E63 in this, I'm trying to say there's going to be people preferring GT3 suspension, people preferring R8 suspension, and people preferring even softer suspension like the E63. Ones who are do not prefer the GT3 category does not immediately fall under the R8 category, since you said 99% would prefer R8 outside the track.

Then why compare C4S to R8 V8 and not Turbo to R8 V8? If the price difference is to be ignored here and say it's due to the extra stuff they put on the R8.

Yes, it snows here in Canada. With the ride height of the R8, you sure you want to drive it in snow? I don't see someone buying a R8 and see the ability to drive it in snow a factor to consider.

I don't get why they compare it to the 4S as I explained before. To me, I see competition being matched with price. I assume I have the 140K at hand, and I decide which car to buy. That's how I compare cars.

I see it as overpriced because I refuse to pay that price. If I added the IMO before my the start of this discussion, maybe it'll make more sense. IMO R8 is overpriced, because I'm not willing to pay for it at that price.

I think we can pretty much conclude this debate, and I'll sum it up.

I support the GT3, and while you support the R8. The R8 to me is overpriced, because I value performance over any other factors, including interior. You believe the difference in price between the R8 is due to the increase in interior design and built material. To me, GT3 is the better car, and to you the R8 is the better car.

I think I summed it up just about right. Agree?

[b0bab0i]

Originally Posted by SantaPimp27

Here ya go:http://classiccars.com/81796.car

Its right at $80K and will out preform everything in the price category. Looks like an exotic but has the maintenance of a ford. Its faster 0-60 than almost any car out there and pulls more g's and has a faster slalom than the Enzo. It also laps as fast as a Porsche cup car running race slicks.

Hell you could even tweak the engine to 600hp fairly easy, but that would just be unfair lol

The Rossion Q1 is basically an updated version of the Noble M400. Rossion company bought the production rights to the M400.