I was assessing relative competency of a team of world class automotive engineers vs random guy from the internet who thinks he knows better regarding how to build a super car.

hahaha hey automotive engineers arnt perfect but they sure know a hell lot more about how to build a world class super car than some random guy from the internet any day.

I don't think I even want to see what happens when random guy from the internet tries to design a bridge.

Fanboi.... that was so clever! How does a 3 second differential on a 13 mile course prove anything about sophistication (or lack thereof)? You also 'cleverly' forgot to include the Murci LP640's lap time... man playdoh you were right, there's really no point in arguing.

I may be a fan of Lamborghini, but I'd rather be a fanboi than an e-hater.

^That's because the LP-640 was actually slower. Call me whatever you like, you're still wrong.


edit:
see for yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordsch...test_lap_times

That lap time you are referring to came from a murci equipped with E-gear shifters, which is essentially equivalent to an automatic transmission. The manufacturer's test run of the standard transmission LP640 clocked in at 7:40

I really don't have any desire to continue this argument... I can appreciate Lambos, you don't, fine. We can agree to disagree.

-Murcielago LP640 Suck-tacular Edition For One-Legged Millionares is not exempt.

-Source for manufacturer's test run? Not taking your word for it.

-If your claim is correct, that's a 3-second difference from the 571 horsepower Murcielago. 61 extra ponies translated into three seconds. Clearly this car is working with more power than it can effectively use, hence the original gripe with the AWD.

And for the irony:

Go ahead and love Lambos if you want, I have no problem with that. The point I was trying to make is that you just shouldn't love them (or demand that the rest of us do) because they're ungodly fast, because they aren't.

never mind the hundreds of possible factors that effect track time, not the least of which include different driver and track conditions among zillions of other things. Random internet guy decides that "clearly" the reason is AWD

gotta love random internet guy logic! :)
http://climatesecurity.org/blog/wp-c...revpirates.gif

playdoh, I think I like your logic better. Take your car, bore the engine for a 10% increase in horsepower. Then, if you drop only 3 seconds over 13 miles, blame the track! Then, overuse the word "random," fail at humor, and declare victory.

hahaha, except i didn't blame the track, i simply suggested that there are so many factors involved its hard to pin it down to AWD :)

unlike you, I am not trying to act like I know the reason why? or that I know better in whats best for the car than a team of world class automotive engineers.

The Lambo's are great cars for looks, or stature they might be worth their price, but from any performance aspect, there is nothing they can do that an Evo can't do better. Including a sophisticated AWD system.

Lambo's can attract some hot girls I guess, but an Evo's got enough room to **** them in. /thread.

that pretty much goes for just about most other super cars from ferrari and other makers too.

There are many cars that are all around better than the stEVO lol its just that they are not the best bang for the buck like the stEVO

That Ford GT you pictured has no racing history whats so ever. It's very capable but it's a retro mobile. The original Ford GT40 did have racing heritage.

The Lamborghini pictured is just as legit as the Ford GT. They are not rehashing old cars to cash in off their racing success 50 years ago as in the Ford GT. But, even if I could afford one I would still choose many other cars first. Either way the Lamborghini is a road car first and (Audi design or not) still very capable.

Don't forget the Murciélago R-GT did race and much earlier Lamboghini was an engine supplier for F1.

It's easier to argue your point if you don't take all any of this into consideration:)

Here's the perfect answer to this threat: Stop talking like you own one!!!! You can't afford either GT or Lambo!!!! lol shame shame!!
You guys must have so much free time on your hands!!

i think most of us would agree that lambos are sexy exotic, high-performance cars. that said, i think sql was just pointing out that lambo as a co doesn't have any racing history- which is a legitimate point.

that said, all the bickering is also what prevents this forum from getting boring. :)

exactly, I've got nothing better to do at work... except actually work, I guess...

Yeah, I'll take a Mazda with racing history over a lambo with little racing history any day!:banghead:

Speak for yourself. My last RV cost more than a GT. Spending 300k on a car is idiotic though, unless you've got mad money.

^^^ surrrrrrreeeeeeeee.....

uhhh.... low end class A RV's run in the 100k range. For that, I get a queen sized bed, a kitchen, bathroom, and a house on wheels.

might sound dumb but what car are you talking about mysql?
We have loads of different names here so i'm probably mistaking it!

I'm talking about a slow bus. crafted_soul thinks I work at mcdonalds or something.

Eheh, i got that.
Anyway getting back in topic i'm with you thinking that spending 200.000€ for a car is insane.
Then again, a lamborghini can be beautiful but at that price there are other alternatives with "heritage" that i'd enjoy more driving.
For instance both the gt2 and the gallardo superleggera haven't got a belt distribution and they use a chain and are serviced every 10.000km. An f430 scuderia is serviced every 15000 and has got a belt distribution wich is way more useful since the belt doesn't tend to lose tension like a metal chain.

lol...I never said you worked at Mcdonalds..dude...lol .....But even if you're a director or an exe at some well-known company, that doesn't necessarily mean you have extra money lying around to buy a GT or lambo....
If you did, you wouldn't be here arguing with me or even driving an 8. You would be enjoying your "affordable GT". haha

So when you say your RV is worth more than a GT, thats same as you're saying you can afford a lambo cuz you have a house that is worth $500,000. ... .... ... lol..