Go Back   Sports Car Forum - MotorWorld.net > Hobbies and Leisure Time > Books, Comics And Magazines > Magazine Scans



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-05-2004, 06:45 PM   #16
FordGTGuy
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: VA, Norfolk.
Posts: 833
Default

Originally Posted by SilviaEvo
Ferrari is better period. haha my prejudice mind agrees with Jeremy Ferrari is a scaled down version of God. but the Lambos are nice but they just cant compare. but obviously the Ford is the best but keep in mind the Ferrari is only a V8 but if you put a V12 against a V12 (Murci) then you have teh Enzo which blows everything away
the ford is only a small block v8, but what kind of block is the ferrari?
__________________
"No poor dumb bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."-Patton WW2
FordGTGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 06:48 PM   #17
SilviaEvo
Regular User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bellevue, Washington
Posts: 3,694
Default

i meant like a Murci but it is Aluminum Block
__________________
SilviaEvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 06:51 PM   #18
SFDMALEX
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,337
Default

You all are a bunch of wankers!

Sammerrao sorry. There is no bloody way the F430 and the Galardo will be neck to neck. The 360CS will beat the Galardo. The F430 is definetly faster then the CS.

Allanlambo- your a wanker and stop talking shit
SFDMALEX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 07:00 PM   #19
HoboPie
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada.
Posts: 385
Default

Originally Posted by allanlambo
Omg, you have lost your mind. Downward slope makes no difference? LOL, then why wouldnt Ferrari let them do the test in the other direction? Ferrari's arent made for tracks like the nurburgring and Hockenheim? LOL Then what tracks are they made for? Only Ferraris track, where they can be tested under the strictest of Ferraris rules, with their test drivers, so that they can get the absolute best numbers which no one else can achieve.

Then you bring up best Motoring? A totally made for entertainment scenario at best, and even then the Ferrari got killed by just about everyone, and you say only 3 seconds behind? LOL

My guess, is that when real tests hit, the 430 will be a 4 second 0-60 car, 0-100 in 9 sec, 1/4 in the low 12's at 118-119 mph. Quick, but not that quick.

As for the Gt, i love lamborghini, and am not a real fan of the Gt, but the Gt cannot be denied its performance crown, as it will not beat, it will DESTROY a 430. Shouldnt even be mentioned in the same breath.
Yes the downhill will make a difference, but if you consider the Enzo times at Fiarano every single time was replicated or beaten by the R&T test except for the 0-60 where it was off by about a tenth.

There is no reason the F430 shouldn't be able to essentially replicate those numbers. There will be variance obviously, for examply Murcs get 0-60 times between 3.5 and 3.9 when tested. If it isn't it isn't, but right now the F430 seems noticably quicker than the Murcielago so even if these are at the extreme maximum end of 430 performance it could still match the Lambo.
__________________
Formerly known as SG Blade.
HoboPie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 07:12 PM   #20
SilviaEvo
Regular User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bellevue, Washington
Posts: 3,694
Default

Ferrari and Gallardo arent neck and neck i am not a wanker i love Ferrari but AllanLambo is a wanker!
__________________
SilviaEvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 07:17 PM   #21
ikon2003
Regular User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,062
Default

I would eagerly jump at any opportunity I had to acquire any of the aformentioned cars. (Sorry guys, just trying to stay non-partisan.) I respect both Lambos and Ferraris, and until I can get myself to make a first hand judgement/comparison (yup, still dreaming...) I"m gonna refrain from taking sides as best i can. Gotta say though, I really like the job Ferrari has done with the 430. Beautiful car.
ikon2003 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 07:56 PM   #22
allanlambo
Regular User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Maui
Posts: 142
Default

Well since i own both a Ferrari and a Lambo, i can tell you there is no comparison. lambo is far far superior. Murcielago is quicker than the 430, no doubt.

That being said, im glad Ferrai is getting back into the game. They have been very dissapointing since the F40.
__________________
05 Mclaren SLR
06 Gallardo SE
98 Diablo SV
02 Murcielago
03 1/2 Lotus TT 500HP
07 Escalade
allanlambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 08:19 PM   #23
HoboPie
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada.
Posts: 385
Default

You know I would take you as the authority on that, but apparently there are one or two other people out there that have a Ferrari and a Lamborghini who disagree with you.

How can you be so sure about the Murc being quicker than the F430. The Murc isn't much quicker than the Gallardo when tested on the same day. If the F430 is quicker than the Gallardo, which by all reports statistical and subjective it is, why couldn't it be quicker or at least as quick as the Murcielago?

You have both a Ferrari and a Lambo which barring Jabba gives you a fairly unique perspective, but it is purely a perspective. Especially considering you don't actually own either a F430 or Murcielago.
__________________
Formerly known as SG Blade.
HoboPie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 08:22 PM   #24
ice
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 112
Default

I cant understand you allanlambo.

Regardless of whether u actually own both of these cars is meaningless, my father drives a BiBi 512, but it doesnt make me an expert on Ferrari's, especially one as new as the F430.

Second, no lambo has existed better then a Ferrari. Some will say the muira, which understeered like a Civic as the gas gauge lowered, and overall was an inferior driving car then its Ferrari compeototr.

Also, Ferrari has been off their game since the F40? In that case, Lambo didnt have a game UNTIL the murc. Since the F40, the 355, 360, 550, 575, F50, Enzo and now the F430 comes out. These cars not only dominated their respective times, but they also remain the most desired cars in the world, bar NONE. Hell afetr SIX YEARS, the 360 has a one year plus waiting list, and in automotive comparisons still WINS!

And what is hard to belieev about the F430 being so quick. AS already mentioned, the "downward slope" advantage means nothign, as magazines have replicated and beaten the times set on those slopes, so that argument has no bearing. Sure, give or take a tenth, but regardless is posts a 7.9 100 mph time, which is only 2 tenths off the slightly more powerful, but heavier Ford GT. The Murc and GAllrdo both outweigh the F430 significantly, and not only that, the torque advantage against the 360 is all but neautralized now in the 4.3 litre F430.

Also, the Gallardo is no drivers car. It understeers at the limit, has AWD which, as any motoring journal has said, dulls the experience and makes it less excitintg. This is why it still is outsold by a SIX YEAR OLD 360 modena, and why the 360 is already a better sports car. By no means am I saying th GAllardo isnt a GREAt car, but it isnt a 360 killer, and it definetely isnt an F430 killer. What is it? Some competition. Driving dynamics straigt line performance, sound and, obviously, heritage, the F430 dominates.

As much as journalists are trying to play up the Ferrari/Lambo war, we all know deep down Ferrari's real competitor is Porsche, as both Enzo and Montezelmo have stated. The Gallardo was already beaten, before the F430 came out. The 360 did that on its own.
ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 08:26 PM   #25
ice
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 112
Default

Oh, and about the Ford Gt. I think it is an amazing machine, incredible speed, value and even looks. BUT, as most who drive it says, including the press, it lacks soul. The engine lacks character, the steering is lifeless compared to those of Ferrari and Porsche, and still doesnt have the passion of those two. Regardless of this though, i think it overall is the strongest threat to the F430, and until we see the new hardcore 997's, it will probably stay that way.
ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2004, 08:35 PM   #26
SilviaEvo
Regular User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bellevue, Washington
Posts: 3,694
Default

to Ice and AllanLambo me and the rest of the JW community would like to ask for pics and a custom pic to back it up!
__________________
SilviaEvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2004, 01:22 AM   #27
allanlambo
Regular User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Maui
Posts: 142
Default

Originally Posted by ice
I cant understand you allanlambo.

Regardless of whether u actually own both of these cars is meaningless, my father drives a BiBi 512, but it doesnt make me an expert on Ferrari's, especially one as new as the F430.

Second, no lambo has existed better then a Ferrari. Some will say the muira, which understeered like a Civic as the gas gauge lowered, and overall was an inferior driving car then its Ferrari compeototr.

Also, Ferrari has been off their game since the F40? In that case, Lambo didnt have a game UNTIL the murc. Since the F40, the 355, 360, 550, 575, F50, Enzo and now the F430 comes out. These cars not only dominated their respective times, but they also remain the most desired cars in the world, bar NONE. Hell afetr SIX YEARS, the 360 has a one year plus waiting list, and in automotive comparisons still WINS!

And what is hard to belieev about the F430 being so quick. AS already mentioned, the "downward slope" advantage means nothign, as magazines have replicated and beaten the times set on those slopes, so that argument has no bearing. Sure, give or take a tenth, but regardless is posts a 7.9 100 mph time, which is only 2 tenths off the slightly more powerful, but heavier Ford GT. The Murc and GAllrdo both outweigh the F430 significantly, and not only that, the torque advantage against the 360 is all but neautralized now in the 4.3 litre F430.

Also, the Gallardo is no drivers car. It understeers at the limit, has AWD which, as any motoring journal has said, dulls the experience and makes it less excitintg. This is why it still is outsold by a SIX YEAR OLD 360 modena, and why the 360 is already a better sports car. By no means am I saying th GAllardo isnt a GREAt car, but it isnt a 360 killer, and it definetely isnt an F430 killer. What is it? Some competition. Driving dynamics straigt line performance, sound and, obviously, heritage, the F430 dominates.

As much as journalists are trying to play up the Ferrari/Lambo war, we all know deep down Ferrari's real competitor is Porsche, as both Enzo and Montezelmo have stated. The Gallardo was already beaten, before the F430 came out. The 360 did that on its own.

Your opinion is obviously swayed by your fathers Ferrari ownership, and that is understandable. But you are kidding yourself. Since Lambo introduced the Muira, they have dominated Ferrari roadcars, barring the 288Gto, F40, F50 and Enzo. The words Daytona, shouldnt even be uttered in the same breath as Muira, The words Boxer and Testarossa, should never be uttered in the same breath as Countach, and the same holds true for the 550/575, along with the Diablo and Murcielago. Did you know the a 1970 Muira, can outaccelerate, out brake, and hold more mph through the skidpad then a TR?e we are on the subject of the TR, its another Ferrari i am very familiar with, having owned both it, and a Countach at the same time. I sold the TR within 6 months. The Countach could run circles around, was built better, and far more reliable.

You are now calculating what the difference a downhill slope makes without even knowing what it is? What about the fact that the straight is not long enough to do a 1/4 mile run? Just try and use reason for a second, a realize that an F40, cannot duplicate those numbers, and has just about the same amount of power as the 430, but weighs substantially less.

The Gallardo is not a 360 killer? Are you kidding? The Gallardo will run circles around the 360, not to mention the 360 CS. Nurburgring and Hockenheim times dont lie. Now, Pirelli has made the same race compound tires used on the 360CS, available for the Gallardo, which will further improve its time. The Gallardo wins every performance comparison also.

The Murcielago is also SIGNIFICANTLY faster than a Gallardo, especially at speeds over 100 mph.

It is true that i dont own a 360 (i hate the look), but i have owned countless Ferraris, and have driven thousands of miles in others, including 360's. INMO, they are not comparable to Lambo in any shape or form. Personally, id take a Porsche GT2 over any current production Ferrari, barring an Enzo.

Ferrari does have Heritage, but that means squat to their roadcars. Alfa Romeo has heritage, they even have cars worht millions of dollars, but myslef personally, would never drive an ALfa. Hell even Honda has racing Heritage, and i could careless.
__________________
05 Mclaren SLR
06 Gallardo SE
98 Diablo SV
02 Murcielago
03 1/2 Lotus TT 500HP
07 Escalade
allanlambo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2004, 03:45 AM   #28
Vansquish
Regular User
 
Vansquish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA/ Bloomington, IN, USA
Posts: 2,624
Default

The Countach could run circles around, was built better, and far more reliable.
That's probably because the guy who started the company made tractors before he made cars.

As for your laptime claims, I've seen numerous 360 v. Gallardo and 360CS v. Gallardo head-to-head tests and in the case of the standard 360 the Gallardo will outrun and outcorner that car with relative ease. The 360CS however more than compensates and is able to turn the tides even though the Gallardo is still
a bit faster in a straight line. As for the F430, Autocar magazine did a head-to-head comparison of the F430 with the Gallardo and gave the F430 a glowing review as well as making it clear in no uncertain terms that it was indeed the faster of the two vehicles thanks mainly to its power-to-weight advantage over the Lambo. I won't argue that the Lambo is a poor vehicle, far be it from the truth, but the Ferrari is the better drivers car and the quicker of the two, end of story.

I'd love to see some pics of your cars too, it's not too often we get to see member's own exotica (except for scale models at any rate)

ice-
Not sure where you're getting your performance numbers, but the 7.9second 0-100mph time is something that the Jaguar XJ220 pulled off, the Ford does it in around 8.8
__________________
me-- "Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't. Sometimes I feel like the moon is made of cheese"

my Hindibonics-speaking Indian roommate--"Dawgs, do you have any idea how much bacteria that would take?"
Vansquish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2004, 03:53 AM   #29
aarhead
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hurlburt Field, Florida
Posts: 30
Default

I loved the countach untill i watched them test drive it on top gear. i kinda wish i didnt see how bad it really is
__________________
"Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk."-Homsar
aarhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2004, 03:54 AM   #30
aarhead
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hurlburt Field, Florida
Posts: 30
Default

I loved the countach untill i watched them test drive it on top gear. i kinda wish i didnt see how bad it really is
__________________
"Don't fake the funk on a nasty dunk."-Homsar
aarhead is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump