Make that a 3-4 punch, Shay- the other two were auto insurance legislation and the 70’s oil embargo, which helped drive the problems you’ve mentioned.
Maybe I should put this in with percentages, if you could see what we mean.
We had 46 European cars (46= 100%)
We had 4 American cars (4=100%)
All in all cars in the race
In total 70% of cars DNF’d
due accidents 4%
Due technical problems 64%
European cars DNF’d caused by technical problems 69.5%
American cars DNF’d caused by technical problems 0%
That’s like saying
I rather pay 4 times more from car, that gives me only 30,5% chance to actually see the finishline
Or
I haver this with 1/4 of the price, and finish the race. Maybe not first, but at least I finish it. Unless I’m involved in accident.
And I’ve been trying to look some times on Roadsport B and Roadsport V8 classes, on Ahvenisto track here in Finland Ahveniston moottorirata – Wikipedia
I could find some times for 80’s Camaro, And some times for late 80’s early 90’s Sierra Corworth, Only problems is that I havn’t found any good comparson points. Closest I have so far found is Roadsport class Camaro, And timeattack Cossie. Cossie loses that race even though it’s actually faster car. as the time is with standing start. and Camaros time is from flying lap.
All in all, I haven’t found anything even closely equal cars. to actually compare them As 600hp Sierra, and 270hp Camaro… well other is almost stock, other is pretty close to being completely maxed out. Cant really compare them.
I think the 24 hr race is a inacurrate way to assess a cars performance. Anything can happen and often does. Bear also in mind the vid featured the very old track without the chicanes and porsche curves. Where a car with a larger engine would have an advantage. Most of the other cars were around 3litres and the corvette 4.6. I think over 25 secs a lap quicker speaks for itself when judging performance.
A donkey can probably run all day but everyone wants to see the racehorse.
This post makes no sense. A 24hr race is not an accurate way to assess a car’s performance, but then you say the purpose built race cars are better because they had a faster lap time? Which is it? I’m also not sure why you mention engine displacement. The purpose built race cars (I keep saying that because it’s important) were more than 500lbs lighter, they had better aerodynamics, so they had higher acceleration and top speed as compared to the production Corvette, as well as being quicker through transitions. That a Corvette finished in the top ten is freakishly worthy of respect.
Yes, anything car happen in a 24hr race, but that’s racing, regardless of the duration of the event. Yes a donkey can run all day, but it is a “higher performance” animal if running all day is the prime metric. I really don’t see your point here. Every racing series has rules that the car must conform to. An F1 car is no match against a top fuel drag racer, or a Nextel cup stock car, or a rally car, or even GT class endurance race car in each vehicle’s respective discipline…and vice versa. What people want to “see” has nothing to do with objective performance. Which is the higher performing car, a Ferrari or a Mack Truck? Which would someone rather see?
1 Like
Britain and Germany make the best luxury cars.
Germany makes the best performance cars.
Japan makes the best “bang for your buck” affordable performance cars.
Italy makes the best supercars.
Japan makes the best tuner cars.
USA makes the best trucks.
American cars are underrated though. Cadillacs and Corvettes cars give some of the best bang for the buck and Corvettes have obviously remained a major presence competing well in many major racing circuits in the world. Vipers have competed well in international circuits as well. Then you have quality production “muscle” cars like Chargers, Mustangs, and Camaros.
2 Likes
Once again, what does the word “best” mean? Britain and Germany make the “best” luxury car? What is luxurious about them? What is the context? Does it feel luxurious to ride in a tight handling German luxury car at 70mph for a 1,000 miles in a straight line as compared to a big pillowly riding and utterly quiet Cadillac or Lincoln? How affordable is "affordable? What is the measure of performance for this “affordable” car? Is the FRS, for instance, the ultimate affordable performance car when it can be dusted by a V6 family sedan? What’s so “super” about a “super” car that is as reliable as a jet fighter plane, just as expensive to fix, yet is barely a match for a car one quarter it’s price in objective performance?
It is one thing to have opinions or even to argue your opinion. It is something entirely different to say an absolute using nebulous terms that are never defined. And just to throw in a few more, refinement, panche, prestige, driver’s car, steering feel, character, just to name a few.
1 Like
I guess I should have included an “imo” after each sentence. It’s just my 2 cents.
I was talking about overall and yes there are exceptions to every category imo. Cadillacs and Lincolns are great luxury vehicles but there are more from Britain and Germany imo. The Tundra is a great truck but there are more quality trucks from the USA imo.
btw, I prefer American cars. Ive mostly bought American cars and classic American muscle cars are my favorite fyi fwiw.
No, no, no, you miss my point. The issue isn’t forgetting to add IMO after everything you say, at least not exactly. As HLR Toffo says, this is a discussion. If you have an opinion or state a fact to make a conclusion, it helps to explain why you think or feel that way, otherwise there is nothing really to discuss because no one really has any idea what you’re (this is a general you, not specifically you) talking about.
As example, if I think that luxury equates to ride isolation, quietness, and a large comfortable cabin that is altogether different from high technology, sports sedan handling, and high power.
I’m talking about the conventional meaning of luxury car. Everyone knows what that entails.
You might need to explain in more detail what you mean by luxury because your definition of it seems to be more outside of the box than the conventional definition, which is cool.
You really missed my point. In fact I never actually gave a personal meaning of “luxury car.” I gave two hypothetical definitions of what a luxury car could be. The question isn’t, “what is a luxury car?” The question and issue is that you can’t make an assumption of what a conventional meaning of anything is and assume that “everyone knows” what that entails. As example, if I bought my father a Mercedes S class, widely considered one of if not the best luxury car currently made, he’d hate it. He’d have no care for the technology in it. He’d utterly hate the infotainment system. Nor would he have any care whatsoever for the supposed prestige of the brand. HIS definition of luxury is a large comfortable car that’s easy to use, has high ride isolation, and is quiet. Frankly, that used to be the “conventional” definition of luxury before the rise of the German luxury brands.
To move away from luxury cars, in this discussion, people have been using the term “muscle car” to describe cars in which the conventional definition of muscle car does not apply. Some understand the intent when the term is used, others do not, which causes confusion. You used the term “affordable performance” without describing the threshold of affordable or the definition of performance.
So in short it is not I who needs to explain my definition of whatever (luxury cars are not pertinent to the discussion, which is why I’ve given several possible definitions), it is in fact you who needs to define why X is the best in category Y.
Im not going to write a thesis describing what entails luxury car, supercar, musclecar, truck, etc.
I really don’t care enough to go through the trouble. I didn’t realize stating that Britain makes the best luxury cars overall was such a bold statement.
You did not make a bold statement. You made a statement that has no discernible reason and thus can’t be discussed because it is baseless opinion. It does not take a thesis to elaborate. As example:
"Different countries have different tastes regarding performance cars. Generally speaking, American performance cars are meant to be brutal and very aggressive. The sporting aspect of driving them is “taming the beast” so to speak.
"
That’s three sentences. Everyone knows what I meant, and it’s hardly a “thesis.”
If I wanted to have a discussion, then I would.
However, I don’t care.
I guess I shouldn’t have posted in this thread.
…Then why say anything at all in a FORUM if you didn’t want to discuss it? Mind boggling.
I don’t care to take part in YOUR asinine discussion, my irritating friend.
My original post had nothing to do with you and I suggest you ignore me.
Youre the one who got their panties in a bunch because my OP wasn’t nuanced enough for you. It seems that you are one with the issue that made you single out my post and reply to me. You single out my post even though i’m certainly not the only one who’s post wasn’t nuanced.
I really don’t know what problem you have with me and I don’t care. Hiding behind your computer, sending chicken crap gifs. You must be trying to compensate for something you lack. I’ve never dealt with a troll like you here. Just leave me the heck alone kid.
…But that’s a duck.
1 Like
You take an entire roll of toilet paper to get rid of lol. Goodbye. It’s time to flush the toilet.
Oh well, don’t forget to use the Lysol to get rid of the smell. I like “lemon breeze.”