01-04-2004, 12:03 AM
|
#16
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,351
|
F40 all the way. When it comes to Porsche Vs. Ferrari, I'd take a Ferrari anytime!
And please, the F40 is one of the best supercars ever built!
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 01:12 AM
|
#17
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hellevoetsluis, the Netherlands
Posts: 781
|
Another difficult choice 
OK, if I have to make a choice it will be Ferrari's F40 :fadein:
__________________
Niets of niemand zegt dat het echt moet
En toch, of juist daarom,wil je het beleven....
Weblog
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 02:29 PM
|
#19
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
|
|
Originally Posted by everso
the 959 used to compete more with the Testarossa didn't it? i don't think it was in the same performance category as the F40...
|
thats what i was thinking...
__________________
Drive it like you stole it.
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 02:33 PM
|
#20
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,337
|
|
Originally Posted by Ivanhoe
|
Originally Posted by everso
the 959 used to compete more with the Testarossa didn't it? i don't think it was in the same performance category as the F40...
|
thats what i was thinking... |
Now way. The TestaRossa does not stand a chance against the 959. Anyway the testarosa was never a fast car...
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 02:36 PM
|
#21
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 3,184
|
Tough choice...the specs are more or less the same. but I'd pick the Ferrari coz that asXXXXX Bill Gates has got a 959 
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 02:54 PM
|
#22
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 650
|
Really I did not know he has a 959, I would taka 959 because they are so much more rare like someone else said earlier I think they only built 280 959's and they built over 1100 F40s...its just more exclusive than the F40
|
|
|
|
|
01-04-2004, 02:59 PM
|
#23
|
|
Guest
|
Beautiful both, powerful both...I don´t know!!!! I like 959 very much:
but i´m in love with F40
My opinion is that tech is obviously better in Porsche but F40 has something in its desing, engine, way of driving...
My choose: F40
|
|
|
|
|
01-06-2004, 10:14 PM
|
#24
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44
|
No question that the 959 is FAR SUPERIOR... the 959 rocks.. and it's AWD made it unstoppable... I'd love to own one
__________________
1987 Mercedes 190E 2.3-16
|
|
|
|
|
01-06-2004, 10:21 PM
|
#25
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
|
|
Originally Posted by SFDMALEX
|
Originally Posted by Ivanhoe
|
Originally Posted by everso
the 959 used to compete more with the Testarossa didn't it? i don't think it was in the same performance category as the F40...
|
thats what i was thinking... |
Now way. The TestaRossa does not stand a chance against the 959. Anyway the testarosa was never a fast car... |
okok that was stupid of me... but f40 vs 959? its just not a fair comparison. wasnt the 959 a rallye car? the f40 is in the gt1 class.... 
__________________
Drive it like you stole it.
|
|
|
|
|
01-07-2004, 11:37 AM
|
#26
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Malaysia and Melbourne
Posts: 322
|
The 959 was the first 200mph car. You gotta give it that. The F40 was a Le Mans car for the road. It had no power windows, no power steering, no abs, not radio, no carpets...damn and you thought the 360 CS was bad. But what you do get for 200,000 pounds in 1989, is a car which might be the last turbo charged ferrari for a very long time. And it still looks magnificent. Just look at it today. I would buy one if it had 'some' creature comforts thrown in. But it doesn't and, if push comes to shove, i'd take the F-50. I like the looks of the F-40, but at least the F-50 doesn't murder you in the wet. 959? 200mph? Pahh...the 911 turbo can do that in its sleep!
__________________
I'd like to thank my sponsors:
 
|
|
|
|
|
01-07-2004, 09:53 PM
|
#27
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 153
|
no it cant....
__________________
Drive it like you stole it.
|
|
|
|
|
01-07-2004, 10:22 PM
|
#28
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,337
|
First of all the 959 is not a 200mph car.
Second of all it is a fair comparison since the 959 was Porsches straight answer to the F40.
And third of all a 911Turbo cant reach 200mph, it can manage 189.
And lastly were do you get your information lol?
|
|
|
|
|
01-08-2004, 09:28 AM
|
#29
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Malaysia and Melbourne
Posts: 322
|
Firstly, I got the information that the 959 is a 200mph from either Evo or Car.
Secondly i do agree with you that the 959 was F40s direct competitor and lastly, you're right the 911turbo can't reach 200mph, but the GT2 can get mighty damn close.
__________________
I'd like to thank my sponsors:
|
|
|
|
|
01-08-2004, 09:57 AM
|
#30
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Israel
Posts: 299
|
|
Originally Posted by adlinyusman
Firstly, I got the information that the 959 is a 200mph from either Evo or Car.
Secondly i do agree with you that the 959 was F40s direct competitor and lastly, you're right the 911turbo can't reach 200mph, but the GT2 can get mighty damn close.
|
according to evo, the 959's top speed is 197 mph, and 196 for the gt2.
197 is a lot, but it's still not 200.
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
