Drove a new Audi RS 4 Today!!!
21 May 2006, 11:06 PM
#31
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think that is the point he is making - that is what the RS4 is surely?
I'd put up with the poor-average overall manners of a Scooby/Evo to get the performance when I want it as I value that more than overweight German superficial build quality and something like a Scooby/Evo is very easy to live with as standard or if you tune it as long as you keep the exhaust quiet. The tunability is a massive bonus to me.
"The useless toys you speak of actually are the 'little things' that make a car such a nice place to be ie leccy heated seats/auto lights/wipers/premium sound/top sat nav/cruise and much more. Also other quality issues like road/wind noise and just the solid way the wipers sweep at high speeds and the thud of the door."
They just add weight and blunt what should be a good engine's performance. I think they are all a waste of money and weight bar cruise control. You can drive a recent Scooby/Evo all day and not be fatigued from refinement issues IMHO.
I thought the Mondeo steered better than the M3, and the handling was just as good in its own way. It didn't grip or accelerate as much, but in its own way just as impressive a car.
I'd put up with the poor-average overall manners of a Scooby/Evo to get the performance when I want it as I value that more than overweight German superficial build quality and something like a Scooby/Evo is very easy to live with as standard or if you tune it as long as you keep the exhaust quiet. The tunability is a massive bonus to me.
"The useless toys you speak of actually are the 'little things' that make a car such a nice place to be ie leccy heated seats/auto lights/wipers/premium sound/top sat nav/cruise and much more. Also other quality issues like road/wind noise and just the solid way the wipers sweep at high speeds and the thud of the door."
They just add weight and blunt what should be a good engine's performance. I think they are all a waste of money and weight bar cruise control. You can drive a recent Scooby/Evo all day and not be fatigued from refinement issues IMHO.
I thought the Mondeo steered better than the M3, and the handling was just as good in its own way. It didn't grip or accelerate as much, but in its own way just as impressive a car.
Last edited by john banks; 21 May 2006 at 11:08 PM.
22 May 2006, 11:44 AM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by john banks
I can see why Deep wonders about the VFM. FWIW my take is as follows - agree/disagree as you will:
I can only weigh up the value of something like an M3 because it is all I have experience of with this type of car. I don't think these £45-55K (as new with "required options") performance/comfort compromise cars are worth the money to me personally. I suspect a lot of people buying these are giving up around about the value of their take home pay for a whole year on the outright purchase price of this car. We can get excited by residuals that people are predicting, but the only way to protect yourself against these is to be in a deal where this is guaranteed, the contract hire rates are at £850 inc VAT on 3+35 for 10000 miles per yr. If you buy with savings, or an arrangement with a conservative balloon, you are exposed to the real residuals which no one is guaranteeing. I was losing £800 per month (not including the loss of interest/income from the savings I tied up in it) over the time I had the M3, and I bought and sold as well as I could a low mileage car. The first owner was losing about £1.50 per mile simply on depreciation, mine was about £0.90 per mile, which was lighter than others who bought and sold over a similar period.
If these sorts of cars were utterly incredible performers and overall cars it might be worth it. Trouble is, my experience of the M3 revealed a compromised car that is no better than a £10k nearly new Mondeo on the daily grind (I really mean that), and considerably worse than a nearly new £25k Evo at the performance stuff. Image doesn't count to me personally here.
I wanted to try a new RS4 to see what all the fuss was about, but when it is slower around a track than an STI that can be bought for £32k less (never mind the Evo), it is obviously at least as compromised in its own way than less expensive performance cars. Whilst I've not tracked my present car yet having only had it a month - not sure I will also, the track times and magazine reviews do give a nice idea of how a car will perform overall in perhaps a way you can't fully assess with a salesman sitting next to you.
Just my 2p, and obviously the reason I'm not buying one even though I strongly considered it after all the hype.
I can only weigh up the value of something like an M3 because it is all I have experience of with this type of car. I don't think these £45-55K (as new with "required options") performance/comfort compromise cars are worth the money to me personally. I suspect a lot of people buying these are giving up around about the value of their take home pay for a whole year on the outright purchase price of this car. We can get excited by residuals that people are predicting, but the only way to protect yourself against these is to be in a deal where this is guaranteed, the contract hire rates are at £850 inc VAT on 3+35 for 10000 miles per yr. If you buy with savings, or an arrangement with a conservative balloon, you are exposed to the real residuals which no one is guaranteeing. I was losing £800 per month (not including the loss of interest/income from the savings I tied up in it) over the time I had the M3, and I bought and sold as well as I could a low mileage car. The first owner was losing about £1.50 per mile simply on depreciation, mine was about £0.90 per mile, which was lighter than others who bought and sold over a similar period.
If these sorts of cars were utterly incredible performers and overall cars it might be worth it. Trouble is, my experience of the M3 revealed a compromised car that is no better than a £10k nearly new Mondeo on the daily grind (I really mean that), and considerably worse than a nearly new £25k Evo at the performance stuff. Image doesn't count to me personally here.
I wanted to try a new RS4 to see what all the fuss was about, but when it is slower around a track than an STI that can be bought for £32k less (never mind the Evo), it is obviously at least as compromised in its own way than less expensive performance cars. Whilst I've not tracked my present car yet having only had it a month - not sure I will also, the track times and magazine reviews do give a nice idea of how a car will perform overall in perhaps a way you can't fully assess with a salesman sitting next to you.
Just my 2p, and obviously the reason I'm not buying one even though I strongly considered it after all the hype.
martin
22 May 2006, 11:48 AM
#33
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by john banks
cat7, seems then that people are throwing a lot of their disposable income at a car (to get taken seriously by their peers - not peers I'd want BTW) that looks similar to an A4 S-line and doesn't exactly top the performance charts? You wouldn't drive away in it thinking that it was especially good VFM in any way IMHO.
I've seen two RS4s, and about 50 times I've looked at an S-line badged A4 wondering if it was one.
I've seen two RS4s, and about 50 times I've looked at an S-line badged A4 wondering if it was one.
martin
22 May 2006, 11:52 AM
#34
The only thing about the RS4 is the mirrors...they pop off! like the ones on the E36 M3...dono why they designed them like that...however they look superb!
Would you believe the Brake Discs are 15 inches in size...looked funny standing next to a standard BMW with 15" wheels..
Would you believe the Brake Discs are 15 inches in size...looked funny standing next to a standard BMW with 15" wheels..
22 May 2006, 03:53 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Petem95
2500?!! No way! A new-shape A4 is due at the end of next year, so that gives less than 2years production for the current RS4 - and there will be very few on the roads, given the high purchase price.
I'd say more like 1000 tops for the UK.
I'd say more like 1000 tops for the UK.
My estimation is based on the fact that the M3 is still on sale today and audi might do similiar however, BMW did keep selling the coupes whilst the new sedan was out.
Audi Uk gets allocated about 700 RS4's a year I heard, and so it will be around for a minium of two years id reckon, maybe 3. Either way the A5 has to debut before we will see the new A4.
22 May 2006, 08:59 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1998
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite the fact that I own an RS6 (bought when it was a few months old) I can see exactly where John Banks is coming from. Much as I love the car, it's certainly not three times better than a similarly nearly-new subaru. The law of diminishing returns has firmly set in well before the price point of these types of car.
Gary.
Gary.
22 May 2006, 09:24 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GCollier
Despite the fact that I own an RS6 (bought when it was a few months old) I can see exactly where John Banks is coming from. Much as I love the car, it's certainly not three times better than a similarly nearly-new subaru. The law of diminishing returns has firmly set in well before the price point of these types of car.
Gary.
Gary.
But you are spot on there is a law of diminishing returns with cars. car x is not tangibly worth twice cay y because it not twice as big/ powerful/quicker around the ring. Thats always going to be the case with performance cars , otherwise we'd all drive Focus STs
22 May 2006, 09:46 PM
#39
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
If buying new I would only spend £23k on either an Evo or a Scooby. I was about to do this when I found a 340 for a silly price which was too good to refuse. The 340 is a load of useless pish that you don't need - leather seats, sat nav etc and a remap I'd just rewrite anyway, and an exhaust that belongs in the attic as much as the non-FQ one it replaces.
That is perhaps another aspect of German car ownership I don't like - lack of purchase, modification and service options, although my requirements are perhaps a little petrolhead.
That is perhaps another aspect of German car ownership I don't like - lack of purchase, modification and service options, although my requirements are perhaps a little petrolhead.
22 May 2006, 10:02 PM
#40
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If were going to be comparing apples to oranges we have to include manufacturing costs! Each market has a different economy and the germans are in the middle of spiralling manufacturing costs, to the point that the quality might now fall although they are all investing heavily in build quality and reliability. Arguably german is the most expensive market to now build cars and with the weakening dollar they could be in trouble, not even the native germans can afford them hence why in germany everyone hates BMW and MB drivers. Audi's are following suite. And to emphasize this point us brits probably buy more 3 series than the germans even though we pay alot more for them.
22 May 2006, 10:07 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 1998
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deep Singh
Very true Gary, but a new UK STi PPP with some goodies is circa £30k? Thats before you start modding it.New Evo 340s were £33k+? So thats less than twice the price rather than 3 times. Its only fair to compare like with like, not a new Audi with a sencond hand JDM Scoob.
But you are spot on there is a law of diminishing returns with cars. car x is not tangibly worth twice cay y because it not twice as big/ powerful/quicker around the ring. Thats always going to be the case with performance cars , otherwise we'd all drive Focus STs
But you are spot on there is a law of diminishing returns with cars. car x is not tangibly worth twice cay y because it not twice as big/ powerful/quicker around the ring. Thats always going to be the case with performance cars , otherwise we'd all drive Focus STs
Interesting thought on the Focus ST. I still need to test drive one. I think it was Autocar who said it made a better road car than the RS4 in a Top 10 Performance Car test a few months ago, because to utilise the extra performance of the RS4 was only possible by driving irresponsibly.
Gary.
22 May 2006, 11:11 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Throwing myself down a mountain at every opportunity...
Posts: 6,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GCollier
Despite the fact that I own an RS6 (bought when it was a few months old) I can see exactly where John Banks is coming from. Much as I love the car, it's certainly not three times better than a similarly nearly-new subaru. The law of diminishing returns has firmly set in well before the price point of these types of car.
Gary.
Gary.
I think when you reach that kind of price point realistically only the kind of person who can afford to take that kind of depreciation will be interested anyway. Providing the car reaches a certain level of performance / kudos then there will always be enough people with the level of disposable income to make that purchase just to have the latest incarnation of that vehicle, be it an RS6, an M5, and AMG Merc or an F430.
With the new RS4, for me it falls between two stools.
One one level it isn't expensive *enough* for the high net worth brigade to purchase from new (other than as a runaround for the missus) whereas for the middle managers they are having second thoughts and, it appears, cancelling orders left right and centre because there are very real concerns about the depreciation in the first 18 months, and that it just doesn't look or feel special enough despite delivering on the dynamics front.
From my perspective I thought long and hard about a new RS4 Avant, but when I measured it up against a low mile RS6 for 20k less, I don't know how anyone in their right mind can choose the RS4, and I am 100% convinced that I made the right decision.
However, I admit I already have my name on the pre-sell list for the new RS6
23 May 2006, 10:21 AM
#44
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It is a question I'm very happy for you to ask, but I think the answer is not really just me when a couple of far more skilled drivers drove it (who are skilled with RWD) and found the same problems on our B-roads. I've also found it from seeing a 993 bottom out on these roads and landing on its rear bumper, an old RS4 bounces around as well, and also the Mk V Golf GTI which lands awkwardly at the back and feels quite unstable when pushed - however it is the right choice for the wife who is getting one this week. There shouldn't be problems keeping these cars in a straight line... Cars that haven't had problems down these roads are Fords, Subarus or Mitsubishis. Notably the 350Z which weighs nearly the same as the M3 and has 300 PS was far more accomplished down these roads than the M3, so it isn't a powerful RWD thing. We all liked the M3 on the smooth stuff, although it was slow it had enough power to exploit its limited traction. The DSC tends to save you from most of your excesses, but it can only do this if you can keep the tyres on the ground and don't have too much momentum.
23 May 2006, 05:23 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John Banks,
Agree. Its just so funny no to see so many mags praising the M3cs to the high heavens as if its suddenly a car transformed from the regular or CSL versions. Funny how before the spec C trounced the CSL in Evo for exactly the same reasons you speak and now they say the Impreza's days are coming due while the M3CS becomes some sort of legend???? JL
Agree. Its just so funny no to see so many mags praising the M3cs to the high heavens as if its suddenly a car transformed from the regular or CSL versions. Funny how before the spec C trounced the CSL in Evo for exactly the same reasons you speak and now they say the Impreza's days are coming due while the M3CS becomes some sort of legend???? JL
23 May 2006, 07:14 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
It seems that the M3 and 911 are above criticism by motoring journalists. I've seen the opinion stated that if a journalist breaks rank and criticises these cars then it says more about them as a journalist (that they are clueless) than it does the cars, so no one dares? Makes sense, as neither are that amazing, they are wildly over-rated. I made the mistake of buying the first because I couldn't think of anything else that was suitable at the time - rather like choosing from a restaurant menu and ending up with the dish you least dislike. Then I tried an example of the second (996 Turbo) when I realised the M3 was no good for me, that is supposed to be the all weather supercar and it felt nothing like. Losing my "Porsche virginity" 
was completely forgettable and I didn't dream about having one at all like I did my first Scooby, and a used example certainly wasn't worth four times as much as I paid for that new Scooby in 2000.
was completely forgettable and I didn't dream about having one at all like I did my first Scooby, and a used example certainly wasn't worth four times as much as I paid for that new Scooby in 2000.
23 May 2006, 07:23 PM
#47
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the porsche comment supprises me?
Originally Posted by john banks
It seems that the M3 and 911 are above criticism by motoring journalists. I've seen the opinion stated that if a journalist breaks rank and criticises these cars then it says more about them as a journalist (that they are clueless) than it does the cars, so no one dares? Makes sense, as neither are that amazing, they are wildly over-rated. I made the mistake of buying the first because I couldn't think of anything else that was suitable at the time - rather like choosing from a restaurant menu and ending up with the dish you least dislike. Then I tried an example of the second (996 Turbo) when I realised the M3 was no good for me, that is supposed to be the all weather supercar and it felt nothing like. Losing my "Porsche virginity" was completely forgettable and I didn't dream about having one at all like I did my first Scooby, and a used example certainly wasn't worth four times as much as I paid for that new Scooby in 2000.
was completely forgettable and I didn't dream about having one at all like I did my first Scooby, and a used example certainly wasn't worth four times as much as I paid for that new Scooby in 2000.
23 May 2006, 07:54 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John,
What was it that you didn't like about the 996 turbo? Did it become somewhat unpredicable when pushed on rough/wet roads, or that the electronics intervened?
Also its important to note that Chris Harris of Autocar fame (or whatever such a position bestows) once compared the 996 turbo with a Hyndai rally car on gravel suspension settings. The Hyndai absolutely blew the Porsche away in everysingle catagory. Going into timed corners something like 2-3 seconds ahead of the Porsche. Proving really that while a rear-engine placment can work quite well- when truly put up to an optimized front or mid engine car its simply not as capable a drive- even more so for the kind of road driving rally's have. Again this little point missed by just about every journalist, who have no doubt begun to herald the new 997 turbo as the very best car the world has ever seen. I'm sure that old spec Hyndai would outdrive it in almost every handling dynamic there is. ALso I'm sure that any decently uprated Subaru or Mitsubishi group N car would do the same.
I think the main reason the 996/997 is so praised is its great build quality, smallish size, power and steering feel, something most manufacturers simply don't even care to get right.
JL
What was it that you didn't like about the 996 turbo? Did it become somewhat unpredicable when pushed on rough/wet roads, or that the electronics intervened?
Also its important to note that Chris Harris of Autocar fame (or whatever such a position bestows) once compared the 996 turbo with a Hyndai rally car on gravel suspension settings. The Hyndai absolutely blew the Porsche away in everysingle catagory. Going into timed corners something like 2-3 seconds ahead of the Porsche. Proving really that while a rear-engine placment can work quite well- when truly put up to an optimized front or mid engine car its simply not as capable a drive- even more so for the kind of road driving rally's have. Again this little point missed by just about every journalist, who have no doubt begun to herald the new 997 turbo as the very best car the world has ever seen. I'm sure that old spec Hyndai would outdrive it in almost every handling dynamic there is. ALso I'm sure that any decently uprated Subaru or Mitsubishi group N car would do the same.
I think the main reason the 996/997 is so praised is its great build quality, smallish size, power and steering feel, something most manufacturers simply don't even care to get right.
JL
Last edited by jeremy; 23 May 2006 at 08:04 PM.
23 May 2006, 08:19 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
http://bbs.scoobynet.co.uk/showthrea...&highlight=996
I reviewed my test drive here. Steering felt a bit slow to be honest, but now I think I am ruined forever after an Evo. I'm glad/relieved I didn't shell out on a 996 Turbo, I know it is laptimes again, but even a bog stock FQ340 laps 1.45s quicker than a 996TT. And another thing - the Evo actually rattles less than the M3 did until I dynomatted everywhere?
Or maybe I just can't hear the rattles in the Evo LOL.
I certainly am not saying an Evo (or a good recent Scooby they are so similar now) is the total solution as a car, but I can't help picking it/them against anything else that purports to be a daily driver and a performance car. The press seem to think they've had their day, but I just can't move on from them.
I'll switch from marque to marque like a butterfly for the right car, and I'll happily criticise my present car if it is rubbish, so I don't think I'm wearing blinkers.
I reviewed my test drive here. Steering felt a bit slow to be honest, but now I think I am ruined forever after an Evo. I'm glad/relieved I didn't shell out on a 996 Turbo, I know it is laptimes again, but even a bog stock FQ340 laps 1.45s quicker than a 996TT. And another thing - the Evo actually rattles less than the M3 did until I dynomatted everywhere?
Or maybe I just can't hear the rattles in the Evo LOL.I certainly am not saying an Evo (or a good recent Scooby they are so similar now) is the total solution as a car, but I can't help picking it/them against anything else that purports to be a daily driver and a performance car. The press seem to think they've had their day, but I just can't move on from them.
I'll switch from marque to marque like a butterfly for the right car, and I'll happily criticise my present car if it is rubbish, so I don't think I'm wearing blinkers.
23 May 2006, 08:31 PM
#50
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
John,
Interesting reaction to the 996TT! It would be interesting to see how it compares back to back on your roads with your Evo9- I don't just mean handling wise, but in the context of which is more safe to push on- more predicatable and progressive- can't help but think that rear-engine could still make things interesting on limit.
Have you ever tried a modded UrQuattro as by dynalix- very stable- not entertaining but I think would give even a evo 9 a rough time in really nast condtions? Also, have you tried a group N or similarly modified Impreza or Evo- something maybe from Prodive or Roger Clark?
Interesting reaction to the 996TT! It would be interesting to see how it compares back to back on your roads with your Evo9- I don't just mean handling wise, but in the context of which is more safe to push on- more predicatable and progressive- can't help but think that rear-engine could still make things interesting on limit.
Have you ever tried a modded UrQuattro as by dynalix- very stable- not entertaining but I think would give even a evo 9 a rough time in really nast condtions? Also, have you tried a group N or similarly modified Impreza or Evo- something maybe from Prodive or Roger Clark?
23 May 2006, 09:51 PM
#52
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Couldn't agree more about the 996 turbo. I've never been more disappointed. Heavy, badly damped, sounds like a hairdyer, clinical. The track times of this car tell the tale, it pretends to be a supercar but is actually a GT.
Personally I feel the 997S is much much better than a 996tt. Feels lighter, more agile, responsive and almost as fast. But again unless money is no object its not 3 X the car a Scoob/Evo is.
Problem is I drive less and less aggressively the older I get. Its not just how fast I can go around a corner but how it makes me feel the rest of the time. To quote a cliche its ' not how fast but how it goes fast?'
I must admit at my age I would feel a little stupid driving around in an Evo/Scoob. Especially in a pinstripe suit! Also, though looks aren't everything(or so my wife says!) I don't find the Evo shape pleasing from any angle.
Maybe the EvoX will resolve that
Personally I feel the 997S is much much better than a 996tt. Feels lighter, more agile, responsive and almost as fast. But again unless money is no object its not 3 X the car a Scoob/Evo is.
Problem is I drive less and less aggressively the older I get. Its not just how fast I can go around a corner but how it makes me feel the rest of the time. To quote a cliche its ' not how fast but how it goes fast?'
I must admit at my age I would feel a little stupid driving around in an Evo/Scoob. Especially in a pinstripe suit! Also, though looks aren't everything(or so my wife says!) I don't find the Evo shape pleasing from any angle.
Maybe the EvoX will resolve that
23 May 2006, 10:02 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm probably going to hang onto my car until the following reveal themselves
1) EvoX, if they can make it look pleasing to the eye
2) Nissan GTR. If it has 400 BHP (to start with) and turbos with 2 rear useable seats. It also needs to come in £50k or below. I wonder if you can put a deposit down on one yet?
1) EvoX, if they can make it look pleasing to the eye
2) Nissan GTR. If it has 400 BHP (to start with) and turbos with 2 rear useable seats. It also needs to come in £50k or below. I wonder if you can put a deposit down on one yet?
23 May 2006, 10:04 PM
#54
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Maybe if you went to work in blue or green pyjamas you would then look OK in an Evo and you could have a baseball cap just to wear in the car to cover the shame How old are you? I imagine late thirties...
Must admit I feel a bit odd clambering out of an Evo in a suit sometimes, but I am resisting changing the wardrobe to suit the car. The cars do look very silly though. An Audi would look just right.
If Subaru brought the Legacy turbo here that could be an option, but none of the import models start with a spec remotely like what I would like to end up with, and I suspect going to the heavier body would ruin the whole point and you may as well get a German again.
New GTR does sound ace. Hope they don't make it too heavy and the engine is tunable.
How old are you? I imagine late thirties...Must admit I feel a bit odd clambering out of an Evo in a suit sometimes, but I am resisting changing the wardrobe to suit the car. The cars do look very silly though. An Audi would look just right.
If Subaru brought the Legacy turbo here that could be an option, but none of the import models start with a spec remotely like what I would like to end up with, and I suspect going to the heavier body would ruin the whole point and you may as well get a German again.
New GTR does sound ace. Hope they don't make it too heavy and the engine is tunable.
23 May 2006, 10:10 PM
#55
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deep,
I'd say the SKyline, no matter how good it winds up being will ultimately be TOO darn big! Have you seen the pics? The thing is almost the size of a Bentley coupe. And of course the Gt-R will have tires to match- well over 300 size on 19 inch rims. Great for the Autoban but really just too big. The same goes for Toyota's new supercar too big.
My hopes are with Subaru and Mitsubishi- I think they will both stay on the smaller side- though i do worry about wacky size wheel-tire combos on both, probably 19's with 245's- which is a shame. Its quite clear that no one really needs more than 225-17's on a light-small car. JL
I'd say the SKyline, no matter how good it winds up being will ultimately be TOO darn big! Have you seen the pics? The thing is almost the size of a Bentley coupe. And of course the Gt-R will have tires to match- well over 300 size on 19 inch rims. Great for the Autoban but really just too big. The same goes for Toyota's new supercar too big.
My hopes are with Subaru and Mitsubishi- I think they will both stay on the smaller side- though i do worry about wacky size wheel-tire combos on both, probably 19's with 245's- which is a shame. Its quite clear that no one really needs more than 225-17's on a light-small car. JL
24 May 2006, 08:31 AM
#56
Originally Posted by Deep Singh
The track times of this car tell the tale, it pretends to be a supercar but is actually a GT.
R.
24 May 2006, 07:11 PM
#57
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Spec C impreza (just slightly moded) was faster than the turbo. I'm sure an Evo 9 slightly moded- just to give a similar power to weight ratio as the 911, would also be faster. Also there are so many moded cars that can easily break 8 mins at the ring. This tells me that this track is not really about the greatness of a cars dynamics but more, is the suspension preety good, ok lets put semi-slick tires on it and give it 400hp and it will get around there fast. I mean a dodge viper went around in around 8 mins and that car wouldn't keep up with anything on your UK B-roads. I think there must be better tracks out there that better test a cars suspension than the ring, which to me seems more about testing overall top speed- a very good test of race cars however. JL
24 May 2006, 07:38 PM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,582
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ro, I'm not very good at quoting track times but everytime I've seen a time for a tt I've always wondered why it wasn't faster. I may have got it wrong but its times never seem to justify the £100k price tag.
The Top Gear stig time for the tt is really poor, though I can't remember exactly how much it was
The Top Gear stig time for the tt is really poor, though I can't remember exactly how much it was
25 May 2006, 03:29 AM
#60
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Koblenz, Germany
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deep Singh
Mine arrives in 3 weeks time!
I'm having second thoughts though( mainly about the cost) and an independant has agreed to buy it from me at list. Problem is they want to meet me at the Audi dealer when I collect so I won't get to own it for a few days
I'm having second thoughts though( mainly about the cost) and an independant has agreed to buy it from me at list. Problem is they want to meet me at the Audi dealer when I collect so I won't get to own it for a few days
Just go for it! Your a long time dead!