Guess it’s designed to not be loping along in traffic, so viewed that way when it’s really being hustled/pushed as it’s designed to be it’s in its element.

Ford didn’t even enter GT1 back then, when it was “easy” and ball-optional to get two GT1 cars on the road. Guess it was too easy for them huh LOL

And somehow choosing a car that 25+ years newer/handles/looks tons better/ is safer is a bad thing?

10k cheaper? Pass along whatever you’re smoking, because quick google for the GT-S price back was 11k(27k in today’s money):

It’s not a GT1. They raced it in the GTE class, which was the old GT2. This is still more tame than the GT1 of yore.

You said their turbo cars don’t get driven that much. I responded to that, then you completely changed direction stating I brought up turbo 6cyls and that any engine can make that power given strong enough bottom end. Stating the obvious as a rebuttal? Really?

Are you serious about the road condition on PP worse than Baja 1000?

They were making above 500hp in 997 guise, when turbos cost less than now. And the blanket statement about almost guaranteed to never go past 10k miles. You’ve gotta be kidding me. Plenty of turbos on Autotraders right now with 30k or even 50k miles. They’re DDs, not garage queens. Heck even GT3/2s get put on more…

Can’t you switch to the non aggressive throttle/gear mapping, the non-M settings? Besides, this was most likely gone over by the SA when your Dad bought the car. If he didn’t want such an aggressive setup, he would’ve been better served by the plain version. My relative owns a non-Comp F10 M5 and I’ve never heard him…

“People who bitch that this thing doesn’t have a V8 aren’t really Ford’s target market either. “

Of course the new GT is lighter than the GT3 RS. GT3 RS is not made of carbon fiber. Try to compare this to the 918 which also utilizes carbon monoque chassis WITH a larger turbo V8 and with a curb weight some 560 lbs heavier , which is all due to the battery and the motors:

M sport != M coupe, come on now. The former is still in production and not production limited at all, whereas the latter is.

It’ll only tank and not go up. It’s not desirable like the M’s are, and are built crap ton just like any run of the mill 3/5/7. Unless of course you’re keeping it for another 10-15 years, at which point people might not even want to buy a petrol car that’s not a collectible...

And that RS6 is handily spanked by the 911 turbo S and bunch of other cars, and just manages to tie with the lowly 718 cayman S 0-60. Heck even the upcoming GLC63 will likely match it for less money LOL

I’ll take butt-ugly over questionable reliability on everything beside the drivetrain in the Audi, and THAT’s assuming the drivetrain is reliable...

Well if you want legendary Jaaaaaag reliability to suit your masochistic urge, then yeah, tough choice.

I’d rock one too, but I want a whee bit better mpg for my highway cruiser. 20mpg is kinda meh(which is granny driving if we gonna get EPA rating mpg), and with the inevitable tune, nose dives :D

SF, the city with crazy cyclists, tiny-ass spots and the ever vigilent parking maids. I guess at least ppl don’t bump park as much as NYorkers ha.

Completely unrelated. How about actually posting what car your “What car should I buy I’m <insert situation here” client ended up buying? You ask for a ton of advice but never tell us their final decision. I’m not asking for the car’s VIN, just what they bought. As it is, it just seems like you’re soliciting advice…

No. Worst of both world; Less practical and uglier. Bleh.