Didn't know C6 Z06 can do 100kph in first gear. Holy crap. Then I guess this can only stay within speed limit in first gear :D

I think I'm better off seated in a library or a quiet place like a vacant conference room in school, instead of walking around concentrating on studying and not pay attention to crazy drivers who are texting on their cellphones.

Well technically not the same exam, just similar in their purpose, in that all of them are used to screen students and pick out the cream of the crop.

Well I did say 1st and 2nd and not 3rd :P Besides I would think that Wild Weasel mentioned burn out would probably result with TC off and gripping for traction with TC on.

what's a wine flute?

Can't say how reliable the LS9 is when it comes to track use, but other than the crappy seats(which can be swapped out for race seats anyway), there's nothing bad about the car at all.

No launch control enabled probably means smokey burnout. Well the thing is with my crappy v6 camry I still cannot use every last ounce of its power. Consider this, my car lumps along at ~2k rpm at 65mph. If I were to bury my foot in the gas pedal I would be at 140mph+ before the engine bounces off the redline limit.…

do what?

Quick. Go to the washroom, don't go doing it in your cube now :D

You can bury your foot in 1st and 2nd gear without exceeding the speed limit me thinks. Mind you i can't even bury my foot in my crappy DD camry without exceeding the speed limit so your concern applies to pretty much every car made since the year 2000, if not earlier :P

I'm not sure about the CC brake being standard. Other high performance cars that go for <100k have thus far had that as an option, 8.5k+. The ZR1 is the only car that comes standard with it, and that car is 111k...

I was going off the listing on edmunds auto since I really cannot remember how much it was back in 1993. BTW it was *shown* as 40k, and I did realize my number being wrong and posted another comment immediately afterwards correcting the number to 40k. Yes I know 40k is wrong but I figured edmunds would be a reliable…

Ha okay I really can't remember how much it was back in 94. I was in middle school so haha. I just have a vague memory of the 94( or is it 95?) being around 48-49k in Canada back then. But that's Canada, so there's that.

Not gonna happen for 40k unfortunately. With bmw 435i going for 46k barebone, they'd be crazy to sell the new supra for 40k, if they go with the mk4's goal of having same/better performance as the M3.

Yes 65k doesn't buy the GTR. I was saying it's nowhere near the price of a GTR, and definitely nowhere near the price of a camaro/mustang GT. I *really* doubt anyone cross-shopped mustang/camaro with the Supra back then, especially considering the pony cars in 1993 were much more straight line cars whereas the supra…

In such a fantasy you'd be too busy to bother wasting time stuck in traffic when you need to be on your way to the next acquisition/investment meeting, and going private jet is the most efficient method and far away from the non power players.

No. As I mentioned in another reply, the supra turbo back then is equivalent to ~65k in 2013 money. It was fighting M3 back then, so it should be fighting M3 now, in performance and in price. Pitting against a GC is especially a disgrace for the supra name. Bleh.

Dammit I mean 40k back then, not 35k.

It went for 35k back in 1993, which translates to.. ta-da 64.5k today. If you could swing for a supra turbo back then, you can swing for one now(theoretically). So if you think 65k is too expensive compared to "only" 40k 21 years ago, you are much better off just buying the toyobaru twins.

Sat in that generation civic SI and wow was it cool to be driven around at high speed. Never knew civic could be so fun to sit in. That was when I was still in grade 8, before my exposure to really fast cars...