| Author | Message | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 568 Registered: 11-2001 |
Some good points and I'm sure the manufacturers have thought this out well on the so called supercars. Yes they are big but the weight stables the car at high speed so it doesn't fly off the ground and can't be built so low like F-1 cars. I like big cars as they ride smooth and look better, imagine a Saleen smushed to the size of a Mustang, it wouldn't look much of a supercar don't you agree? The looks of a car is much important for appeal and you must understand that there is no car that can do it all like F-1 cars don't do autocross or Ferrari's doing slaloms off road so there are such categories of cars and that is where so many people do not understand and that's where the manufacturers mind knows better at that on where they want to stand in the market of cars. Think about it, you can't compare a peanut to a walnut. | ||
| D.K. Whitlock (Por550dean)
New member Username: Por550dean Post Number: 6 Registered: 5-2003 |
I'd have to go with the Enzo on this one. My decision is based on looks alone since I have not driven either car. The Enzo looks more beautifuly and specificly designed, the CLK-GTR looks like a race car with some styling afterthoughts: "oh we need mirrors, lets throw these on the fenders from the parts bin", "door handles, here's a pair, put them here", "we'll cut these triangles here for some styling and extend this tail section a little more above the CLK tail lights." | ||
| Neal (Mercedes_benz)
New member Username: Mercedes_benz Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2003 |
CLK-GTR with out any question. | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 445 Registered: 11-2002 |
Neal, Could point
I also find this crazy. And personally the answer is because they are only thinking of top speed stability and not real world performance. It all comes down to the fact that a supercar, is a show mobile no better than a custom hot rod. Porsche on the other hand build their cars true to the performance calculation: * small frontal area. * small helps the driver choose better lines. * light weight. * Useable power. * Good brakes. * Good grip/traction ... driver can sort out the handling  Lambo and others don't care about many of these as the magazine road test and real use of these cars ... well it just does not come into the equation. Far more important to have all the gadets, and leather interior and ... all adding to the weight. The Enzo has many of these things so right, but I really think Ferrari have lost direction and wasting money making things like the Enzo ... the 333SP was such a good move, and a program like that would achieve so much more for the company than lowering there sights to the simple and inept supercar battle or inefficiencies and no substance. A performance car should be tiny, have enormous power, be designed to be competitive at some series, and have nothing that is not required ... like they were in the 60's. Pete ps: James cannot wait to see it going together!!! | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1289 Registered: 10-2002 |
Pete P4 is being painted. It should begin to go together very soon. Best | ||
| neal (95spiderneal)
Junior Member Username: 95spiderneal Post Number: 140 Registered: 3-2002 |
would still be fun to see an evo/wrx chassis clothed in a sleek open top roadster. why are supercars always so big. enzo, saleen, etc are huge cars and that limits the fun esp on the street. thats why i like mcclaren and pturbos because they are relatively small. ideal road supercar would be 2200lbs with 450 hp mid engine v8 with relatively narrow open top. | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 564 Registered: 11-2001 |
Yes there are are some pretty fast econoboxes coming out and it's just the beginning of what is to become of cars but the way I see it is that the faster they are the faster they get totalled and it help car builders sell more cars. Cars these days were designed to crumple good so the cars become beyond salvageable. For instance the Mits. Evo is a tin can and no matter how fast or how good it handles I don't want to drive a tin can. I can see how some exotics are beaten by rice cars but it seems that the exotics are more heavier from my experiences and the price tag comes with the luxuries. You won't find fine leather in a Evo, WRX, Si and so on and their bumpers are styrofoam and plastic vs. Italian heavy fiberglass with steel reinforcements. Yes some imports are fast but due to weight and extra boost and without that they would merely be just put puts... All in all it's what the car does for you and if you ask me I would say I like a car that looks good and feels good to me, I like a solid built car with all the goodies. Although I have a S2000, a Honda worthy of it's being, I only drive it as a commuter and track use but other than that I'd rather drive my other cars on good days and sometimes it makes me feel cool, I'd have to admit that some cars do wonders for you and sometimes bring certain emotions to come on. I've always loved exotics and nice luxury cars and always will and could never go back and settle for less cause I love what these cars do for me. Ever think of how you want this car or that car? it means you are not satisfied with what you have. I'm actually pretty happy with what I have and don't see another car that's looking any better so far and the speed thing has already gone beyond my needs anyway. Speed kills! he he... for those who don't know, more room for me.... | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 443 Registered: 11-2002 |
James, Agree that the older race cars convert to road cars VERY well, as things have moved on since then. Infact race cars have developed considerably since the 60's and 70's (more the pity to me ). I think from then on they get more and more specialised, or should I say that the aerodynamic requirements lend them to the road use less effectively. I also admire the Enzo and the Bentley Speed 8, but I cannot understand why they put so much effort into making such a high performing road car ... when it really is pointless. I have no problem with them selling road cars like that, if there was a series that it was designed for (like the 288GTO and F50 GT), but just designing it for the sake of it ... I just can't understand. Just like I cannot understand Lambo. I am a very practical person, and just personally would not spend that much money on a compromised car that has no purpose (to me), and function has to come before looks to me. I would never ever want to own a 250GTO if it was a pig to drive, but from what I have read they do everything well. Lets look at the clever aerodynamics on modern race cars. They require really smooth roads to get the best out of them, the Enzo for example will not perform at all well on Sydney's roads because pot holes will disturb the gap from the floor to the road. Thus we have a car that theoretically can corner X fast, designed for the road ... when it can really only perform anywhere near that on a RACE track. Thus was it really designed for the road or not. A BMW M3 is designed for the road, as is a F360 and F550. The Enzo, yep can be driven on the road but I do not think honestly that it was designed for the road, thus why not design a REAL race car that fits in a series so privateers can race them competitively. I just wrongly thought Ferrari designs had more substance than designing a car just to sort of have 'I am the fastest road car' image. I thought they were about being brave enough to front up and take on the opposition. Infact I think the next Maserati Quatroporte 4 door saloon might just be the best road car every built by anybody, because that car will really qualify as a road car and you will be able to use more than 1/8'th of its performance capability on the road. How is the painting of the P4 going? Must be at an interesting time for you, watching it all come together. Now there is a car that to me is superior than the Enzo, nearly half the engine size and similar performance ... oh how safety has ruined our fun Pete ps: Your comment about converting race cars for the road, is the right way round. Ferrari should (for cars like this) make competitive race cars and then convert a few for road use ... not make a strange road car that has no competitive purpose. That personally is why the F40 is so cool (or though there was no race series for it when it first was released, but luckily it fitted in a few years later) as it is a race car, not really a road car. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1288 Registered: 10-2002 |
Pete Some older race cars make pretty good street cars. My Lola is very confortable, stays cool, and still moves quickly enough for someone of my advanced age. I agree a 333 or an R8 would be difficult to convert but,if they ever let one of those Bentley speed 8's go I'm there. That's one beautiful piece of work. The Enzo is also a beautiful piece of work. I've always payed up for beautiful peices of work. Of all the things I've bought those are things that have kept their value... | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 392 Registered: 9-2002 |
Sorry Nicholai, But I just get totaly upside down when I see this amount of price gougeing on anything!! Be it clothes or cars!! It's not that I'm a cheap S.O.B but I know when I'm being taken to the cleaners!! | ||
| Nicholai Hel (Nicholai_hel)
New member Username: Nicholai_hel Post Number: 7 Registered: 5-2003 |
Very interesting thread. you folks are taking some of the rose colered view from my eyes. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 391 Registered: 9-2002 |
PSK I could not agree more. Although Like I said I love Ferrari's I just don't think that they can justify the prices of the cars anymore. Not when there are cars out there like the WRX, EVO, Z06, Viper, hell even that new little Neon!! Oh ya the 350Z also. Ross: were do you live? Because were I live there are no roads that you can even get up to 130mph before you have to either slam on the brakes because the light turns red or you slam on the brakes because some idiot just pulled out in front of you, or you slam on the brakes because your going way to fast for the traffic. If you live in a country with no speed limits fine, but around here it is pointless to have a car that does 200mph and can cruze comfortabley at 100mph. Hell me old Benz can cruze at 100mph all day long probably alot longer than a Ferrari can and all I do is change the oil every so often wether it needs it or not!! Guys please again I love Ferrari but I'm just wonder if it is worth it. I called a couple for Ferrari dealers today trying to source parts for a customers 456. Nobody had the parts in stock!! Do you know what they told me?? They told me the parts were too expensive to keep on the shelf!! Come-on!! A dealer telling me that not even they can afford to keep the ever precious timing belt service parts in stock because their to expensive?? The pats alone are going to cost me in the area of 5,000 dollars!! and that is my cost!! and there is almost zero margine!! Is it worth it?? | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 442 Registered: 11-2002 |
The WRX, Mitzi versus Ferrari debate points to exactly what I was trying to say about the craziness of building a car like the Enzo for the road. In the end who cares which car is faster on the road because ... er, we are not supposed to be using that performance on the road anyway. Not long ago somebody posted on this site bragging about being a professional street racer and we all correctly shot this guy down. Now we are getting all wet and excited about a car that Ferrari built that is not for racing but has rediculous road car performance ... a wee bit contradictory don't you think!!!! Thus I personally think, yep buy an Enzo or Lambo, or whatever if it makes you feel cool, but personally you are missing out on the REAL driving experience that a car like that could give when on the track. Thus IMO the perfect road car Ferrari is probably a 246 or 308 or one of the classic front engined v12 Ferraris as you can enjoy the experience at sane and safe speeds (for all road users). If you want the full performance experience don't waste your money on a road car ... pretending or dreaming that you can have the best of both worlds, BUT buy a track car. Does not have to be a Ferrari, a Lotus Seven gives fantastic performance on the track and real in your face racing experience. For the money an Enzo costs or a Lambo, you could enjoy yourself much more by tracking a 308GTB or any other car and REALLY go fast. If you are rich enough you can get a 333SP, or a F40/F50 (BTW I take back my critizim of the F50 as I did not know that the F50 GT was actually developed for REAL race action ...) and buy a trailer and go racing. In the end the Enzo is impressive (except for the huge engine ... like the McLaren, Colin Chapman would be disappointed. Remember that a Alfa Romeo T33 2 ltr V8 can do around 180 mph, a 3 litre 250 LM can do the same or more, AND NOW we need huge 6 ltr engines) but when you track it seriously like every car you will come off the track thinging, now if I modified this and that it will be that little bit faster ... and eventually you need to remove the road legal crap to get the best out of it. Road cars can not be the ultimate track car!, period! Race cars also suck as road cars, because the spring rates are setup for high speed, etc. and they are just plain uncomfortable. Also I cannot believe that Ferrari named a ROAD car after its founder, when Enzo Ferrari did not give a toss about his road cars. They were made to make money for his racing. Thus they, if they really wanted to use his name, should have atleast used in on a car designed for competition not the poser world. Again Ferrari, instead of wasting your R&D money on poser road cars, save it and get back into sportscar racing. That would have a far bigger sales impact that front cover magazine covers and articles for young boys to get excited over Pete Just my opinion | ||
| RockStar (Remix)
New member Username: Remix Post Number: 18 Registered: 3-2003 |
Tom, just imagine if Mitsu hired some real cutting edge designers for these vehicles and made them really beautiful. If they made the WRX better-looking (by that I mean REALLY better looking) and upped the hp by about 50 now that would be something. I love all Ferraris but it really comes down to the fact there is no reason for a $100,000+ price difference other than they can get away with it. It won't change because there are folks who wouldn't be seen in a Mitsubishi no matter how much better it was. Period. Mod, I usually get an M-class from my dealer when my car is in for service. They seem pretty tight buildwise to me. Like I said, I don't know what people are talking about when it comes to Benzes being of shoddy quality. Maybe it's me - I drive my cars maybe 5 miles a day - 10 on a busy day. REMIX | ||
| Me Myself (Kid_enzoz)
New member Username: Kid_enzoz Post Number: 15 Registered: 4-2003 |
Tom Bakowsky... Those rally wannabes aren't your everyday cars either... I'm not surprised a Japanese 'musclecar' was AWD was a bit faster than the Modena in those tests... Either way, I'm pretty sure even a 360 would be faster if actual track times were recorded. ross koller also makes some good points... While an STi and EVO are VERY fast machines point to point... there is a lot more that makes an exotic an exotic... | ||
| ross koller (Ross)
Intermediate Member Username: Ross Post Number: 1200 Registered: 3-2002 |
....or get a different criteria of evaluation. 0-60 times, 1/4 mile and slalom have been our standards for a while, and so this is what all car manufacturers focus on. for the usa, these may still be 'the' relevant factors of performance. i don't think they cover all the factors i would like in my cars, and this is where ferrari and other high performance manufacturers come into play. how about 0-150mph, cruising comfort at 100mph+ for hours, passing ability from 80-130mph, etc. in europe these are real issues. i don't think these other cars would hold up on these factors. now throw in the other 'feel-good' factors like how fast does it look standing still and does it make your heart race, and performance manufacturers products will still win over econoboxes on steroids. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 390 Registered: 9-2002 |
Oh ya forgot to add you can drive these little cars every day with out worry and you change the timming belt at 90,000km and you get 25mpg and know hassels at the dealers regarding warrenty!! | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 389 Registered: 9-2002 |
O.K folks how bout this then I would really like to hear you justify this: Road and Track June 2003: Subaru Impreza WRX STi 0-60mph 4.9sec 1/4 mile [email protected] cost: 31,000 Braking 60-0 111ft handeling 0.88g 700ft slalom 68.4mph Mitsubishi Lancer EVO 0-60 4.8sec 1/4 mile 13.4 sec cost: 28,987 braking 60-0 108ft handeling .88g 700ft slalom 68.9mph Ferrari 360 0-60 4.3sec 1/4 mile 12.8 cost(coupe)$170,000 braking 60-0 110ft 700ft slalom 67.4mph. So there you have some specs to chew on. A car for 30,000 dollars has the same performance as the Ferrari. It even out handels it through the slalom by almost 2 mph. Thats about 2 car lengths my friends!! Please don't get me wrong but like I said in my last post Are they really worth it? These exotic car companies have really got to start upping there levels of performance because the little cars with 4 cylinder engines and low prices are starting to walk all over these guys. I love Ferrari and I always will,but at some point you have to stand back and look at the big picture. Is it really worth driving around in a car that you paid 300,000 bucks for only to get spanked in the a$$ by a 30,000 dollar car? | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 563 Registered: 11-2001 |
Rockstar, I have an M class- ML55 should be same motor as your CLK55 but with some torque difference, the only thing that went out on the car was the fuel pump but a larger version on the newer models was placed in but other than that no mechanical problems. I have yet to put a penny into any sort of tune ups or fixes as the Benz dealer takes care of me like no other dealer has. I'd have to say that the Enzo or CLK GTR is not for the masses and for expendable income and the majority of us don't have the mentality to understand it till we reach that level, so for now I stay with reality on what I feel is good for me. Use to owning a Ferrari it was a nice experience and will buy another one but now with a 99 Diablo with not one problem unlike I had a few with the Ferrari including oil leaks I had reached the level where I wanted something more exclusive and wanted to feel what it was like to own one so having asked a few people who own them and for those who don't I made my decision and no regrets although there are a few things the Lambo can't do that the Ferrari can and that was being able to toss the car around and slide through corners predictably. I have yet to track the Lambo but I have no intentions to drive the car that way as I bought it for the pleasure of cruising it and for the money I feel there is nothing more exotic to look at. I have a supercharged S2000 for tossing around and to me it was more sense as if I was to wreck it, it is more expendable than a Ferrari or any high dollar car would be, I am not at a disposable income level for now so this to me makes more sense. I'd have to say this and for most of us- I go for the looks first then everything after, I've discussed this before on this matter and I believe that this holds true to the majority of us. I'd just say get the best looking car you can get for the money and spent well you would get the performance that will be equivalent or almost equivalent to its looks, agree? it does for me. Again I'm not looking for the fastest or best handling car in the world as I would never be able to use the car to it's fullest potential unless I plan on wrecking it, the car just need to satisfy me for what I do with it on the road. Now being at a disposable income level and you could get only one but not both which car to take? CLK GTR or Enzo? I know that the CLK GTR is well into over a million and the Enzo is way over it's sticker, this makes it somewhat tougher of a decision as lets just say you can't test drive them and you just have to buy it to find out. This could make it a balls out ego decision or maybe not and lets forget about how weather or not you will be driving it to it's full potential. Which one? | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 113 Registered: 3-2003 |
I am sure those cars belong to a well-known collector--Gerd Petrik. | ||
| RockStar (Remix)
New member Username: Remix Post Number: 16 Registered: 3-2003 |
No major quality issues with my CLK 55. Runs great and never gives me any problems. Maybe the cheaper Benzes - like the M and C class are problem vehicles - I don't know. My only complaint about the CLK is the stereo that comes with the Nav system flat out sucks. But I DID see an F50 and a CLK-GTR racing past me on the highway not too long ago. I did a double take on that one. REMIX | ||
| Vik (Speed_demon_666)
New member Username: Speed_demon_666 Post Number: 17 Registered: 12-2002 |
CLK-GTR....hard core race creature.....Enzo..seems "refined" for the the track in comparison... Enzo is classier in appearance though.. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 111 Registered: 3-2003 |
I had just heard of his achievements in rallying, which is really big in Oman and Dubai. I saw a few superexotics when I visited Dubai--guess they were his...and my friend is currently negotiating to buy his 1000bhp Mercedes Lotec C1000 (the CLK-GTR was developed from this car as well as others). It's in Sausalito at the moment, getting a new clutch. I will get to drive it tomorrow, I think/hope! I was wondering what he has two of, though? Two Enzos? There's a nice long video clip of his CLK-GTR on the web. Helps if you speak Arabic. http://www.nadim.com/ Rgds, Faisal. | ||
| Ansgar Schürmeyer (Taunus)
Junior Member Username: Taunus Post Number: 163 Registered: 6-2002 |
@Faisal look here: http://www.gulfautomart.com/carcollection.html I think the Enzo is on the way. | ||
| Jonas Petersen (Karsten335)
Member Username: Karsten335 Post Number: 364 Registered: 11-2002 |
The Enzo is not build for racing at all. If your saw the Ferrari Special og A/E there where in an interview with Luca, saying that he would not like to see the Enzo on the track. It's an collectors item, made for the streets. | ||
| David Stoeppelwerth (Racerdj)
Junior Member Username: Racerdj Post Number: 152 Registered: 1-2003 |
Definately the Enzo as it is a Ferrari! | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 868 Registered: 10-2001 |
Psk , the F40 did win . It won several Italian GT championships against Porsche Turbos ,Jaguar XJ 220R etc...And it also won a few races in the BPR championship against the Mclaren F1 GTR . So it did win ! | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 441 Registered: 11-2002 |
Hehe, I just realised reading my last post on this subject that I have put the Enzo fair and squarely in the Lambo category. Hmmm, lets think about this. Both the Enzo and the outrageous Lambo's all proclaim to be the fastest, etc. and corner the best and yet they won't race against anybody or were not built for any series. They also both have magazine articles as their only backing of this unproven performance ability ... and the few owners who we may or may not believe. Thus what have Ferrari built?, a car with a lack of substance just like a Lambo!. Oh no please somebody enter one in Le Mans, even if it gets creamed so we can atleast talk about the oficial lap times being okay for a road car. Until this car is proven on the track we Ferrari enthusiasts cannot give Lambo owners a hard time ... damn! Pete | ||
| PSk (Psk)
Member Username: Psk Post Number: 439 Registered: 11-2002 |
Hmmm, As I always expected the Enzo is going to suffer the same fate as the F50. No race history to prove its abilities. The F40 has heaps, and even though it did not win at least it proved itself. I'm with Ernie, what a waste of all that design. Rather have an F550 or F360 than an Enzo because atleast I could race those in a race series. I can think of no series that I could race the Enzo in, without totaly embarrassing myself. As for the McLaren. Hmmm, one unspectacular looking car. My wife could not believe that I was interested in wasting my and her time looking at that bland little car!!!. Take away the performance figures and you would not look twice at a McLaren F1. Now the original M6 based road car, awesome looking. The other thing that I find funny with the McLaren, and this is probably the same for the Enzo, is that what is so cool making a car go fast with a bloody huge 6 litre engine. Where is the technology there!. Anything with 6 or 700 hp is going to be fast. Chuck a 6 litre engine in my people mover and it will be a rocket too!. I think the F360 is far more impressive. 180 something miles/hour and only 3.6 lts and not to shabby in the corners either. I would rather buy a 333SP and race the F**k out of it. I just cannot understand why Ferrari are making supercars like this when it is totally poser territory ... as weak and uncompetitive as the massive and unsophisticated Lamborginis that proclaim these huge top speeds but won't race anybody, again with massive engines!! In the end what the f**k are the companies doing, and why do people want to drive them let alone buy them, when they could buy Schumachers old F1 Ferrari or another real racing Ferrari like a 33Ssp. You won't be able to use the Enzo any more, because every street mile you do is just a waste ... thus why make a street car with that performance level. Do I see a jail with a cell set aside for Enzo owners Confused ... can only be because I can afford one, syndrome. Pete ps: If they are going to race the Enzo as a Maserati, then they are going to have to junk halve the engineering as it has not been designed as a race car and will get creamed no matter what badge is hanging on it. Road cars do not make race cars, and race cars make sh!t road cars. At this level you cannot do both. Thus I would sell my Enzo and wait for the real performance vehicle if they are REALLY going to track something. Again the Enzo is another ego waste of time, and it is ugly IMO too. Ps: I definitely would take the Merc CLK thingy, whatever it is called, because then you can have the ego boost/boast , as this car kicked arse, not just magazine road tests and covers. I like to backup my purchases by substance (the humble Alfa Romeo GTV I own did kick arse for its class when new, and the GTA or GTAm version won just about everything for quite some years ... and I do not have to spend Ferrari/Lambo money for that ego boast feeling, and unlike Alan (nitrous Lambo) I would be very happy to take on anybody on the race track and show how well it goes for its humble engine size). This is why the 250GTO is the most sort after Ferrari, because it is fast, looks good and KICKED arse on the track. Take the last bit away and it would be just another Ferrari. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 3930 Registered: 8-2002 |
Um... The Enzo. i'd take an Enzo over anything... If you put these two cars in front of me and said i could have the CLK GTR and you could guarantee that i'd live to be 50 or that i could have the Enzo, but could only guarantee that i would live to 30, i'd take the Enzo without blinking... | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 562 Registered: 11-2001 |
I've not owned a Benz that ever had any bad quality build but then again they were not low end models either but my experience on the high end Benzes were the best experiences of any car I've owned and I like German quality build over any car maker in the world. Try to find a car that can match the new CL in every aspect and you will not find one, if there is I'd like to know because I haven't found one that matches it in the price range. Now not to compare sports cars with but in terms of luxury sport coupes. The Enzo is new and I've not heard to much history of it on track except on some magazine. As far as I know the CLK GTR is a proven machine but in the reality we would most probably not get our hands on one to see what it's like and probably same goes for the Enzo, but I'd like to find out if one would know of one who has done a comparison between the two instead of giving a pride vote of which is better and I could care less of racing history as it does not apply to road cars which are not built like race cars anyway. I like the concept build of the Enzo but it's still hard to get use to the styling compared to the F50. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 109 Registered: 3-2003 |
This name keeps popping up all the time. He must have one hell of a car collection. What does he own both of? | ||
| Ansgar Schürmeyer (Taunus)
Junior Member Username: Taunus Post Number: 161 Registered: 6-2002 |
I think we have to ask Mohammed Bin Sulayem. He owns or will own both of them. | ||
| Ernie (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 686 Registered: 11-2001 |
But will they keep the same body design. If they don't the first thing they need to ditch is the ugly front nose. The rest of the car is fine, but that nose is aweful. | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1277 Registered: 10-2002 |
Ernie The Enzo will be raced. It's going to race as a Maserati MC. The details are in the process of being worked out with the FIA. It's also going to be sold as a road car for about 400K. Speaking about race cars that I'd like to see on road, put me down for a Bentley Speed 8. | ||
| Ernie (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 684 Registered: 11-2001 |
LOL at least that it there official excuse for chickening out. Mercedes, Porsche, and McLaren all made road going models of their cars. The ones the weren't following the rule, of 50 road going versions, was Nissan and Toyota. To this day they still haven't produced not one road going version of the cars that they ran at Le Mans. Having said that, the F50 GT1 is my favorite Ferrari. It is a shame that it never was raced. It also is a shame that the Enzo will go down the same way. What a waste of design. Ferrari really needs to get back into sports car racing. It would be wonderful to see Ferrari dominating sports cars, the way they have done lately in F1. | ||
| Faisal Khan (Tvrfreak)
Junior Member Username: Tvrfreak Post Number: 96 Registered: 3-2003 |
Ferrari has stated that it decided not to field the F50 GT because it felt the other manufacturers were violating the spirit of the rules ie. the GT series car was supposed to be based on a production roadcar. Usually you take car company's public statements with a grain of salt, but I don't see any "spin" in this. Ferrari's entry would have been the only one that was remotely related to a production car. The others (except McLaren) made the racecar first, then made a limited-edition production run of 20-odd cars for customers. The F50 GT would probably have been destroyed, yes, but it would have been an unfair competition. The McLaren was never that competitive in this series, but it too was based on a roadcar design. | ||
| Ernie (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 682 Registered: 11-2001 |
About the F50 GT1, it was supposed to have raced against the CLK GTR, but Ferrari pulled out of the Sports Car Championship, to focus on Formula 1. The CLK is Proven on the track to be deadly again the best in the world when they had their best had showing. Which is one of the reasons I think Ferrari didn't race the F50 GT1 against the CLK GTR. It would have gotten destroyed, just like the Porsche 911 GT1, and the McLaren F1 GTR did. Who both had dominated before the CLK came on the scene. I like Ferrari's, which is why I own one, but the CLK GTR is one mean mean car. That and do you really think that any Enzo will ever be raced??? I highly doubt it. So until the Enzo can prove itself on the track, to be the absolute monster that the CLK was, it will not compare in my book. | ||
| Michael Green (Michaelg)
New member Username: Michaelg Post Number: 6 Registered: 4-2003 |
Tom,Jeff, Enzo- without a doubt. Listen, Ferraris are always going to cost you more but why would you buy one without anticipating that? I own an tuned Audi RS4 (Lord only knows why they didn't sell this beautie in the US- it would have sold faster than a naked Janet Jackson concert). This car is about the fastest, most powerful car I know on the road, including 360's, 996TT's, and any Lambo's I have met. Handling is awesome too, you WILL NOT lose me on the twisties in virtually any car. Now look at this- This car is a wagon. FIVE door. It is a mind-f..k to see what German automotive experience has done to make this car what it is. BUT: The entire experience of driving my 355s (with highly illegal sports exhaust) is the most pleasurable driving experience I have ever had. BAR NONE. Nothing comes close.. Therefore I will pay more in terms of service to ensure that my F-car gives me that something extra, CLK-Enzo- listen if you're that wedged then you'd probablay be able to buy both. Let's listen to those who have... | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 862 Registered: 10-2001 |
So Tom which cars live up to you expectation today ? Mercedes quality today is shitty , BMW has also a lot of problems . Porsches maybe ? I havent heard anything bad from porsche but their services arent cheap either...And they sure are much more bland/boring than a Ferrari . | ||
| Andrew Menasce (Amenasce)
Member Username: Amenasce Post Number: 861 Registered: 10-2001 |
Enzo for me . I like the CLK GTR but $2 Millions for a Mercedes is too much ..For that price i would get a F50 GT ! Oh yes. | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 420 Registered: 2-2003 |
Enzo. Far better looking of the two, and I'm no big fan of the Enzo's looks. For those interested in some quick quality comparisons: http://www.jdpower.com/cc/auto/jdpa_ratings/FindJdAwards.jsp Sunny | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 559 Registered: 11-2001 |
The reason for asking is I am curious on how the CLK drives compared to the Enzo as I have not an opportunity to do so but the question arises as to which is really a better car as far as performance and quality build for reliability and comfort. I have owned Benzes and never had any major issues and after owning a 01 CL600, now that car is a dream, if you never driven one you won't know what a top build car is like, there is nothing I can think of in this world I would ever prefer over it as it handles great, power is silky smooth, etc. etc. My ML55 is not the greatest in material build as it's made in the U.S. but it handles great for a heavy vehicle and it's got plenty of torque that I really love over any SUV I've driven. Yes it's stubby looking but the inside has pretty good room for how tiny it looks outside. AMG has a reputation for it's pure power and quality build components. I would actually like to see an AMG built car on an Italian designed body and the only thing I can think of that comes close is a Zonda. Yeah I have to admit I don't like the CLK build and that is why I never bought one but the CLK GTR I have never seen one in person as I did with the Enzo. I'm looking for a good answer from one who has driven them both and get an honest opinion on this. Who would know of one who did? I can see how some would say take the Enzo because it's a Ferrari but I have seen quality car builders go downhill on quality build as I work on cars on a daily basis. A good example is like Honda, they got the reputation for reliability but the quality build is terrible on some of their cars esp. the Civic, a pile of disposable tin and plastic. Unfortunately it costs a lot of money to get that right built car. Both the Enzo and CLK GTR does require disposable income and it's hard to have the thought that it both can't be driven as much as you'd think it will in reality. | ||
| Ben Cannon (Artherd)
Member Username: Artherd Post Number: 311 Registered: 6-2002 |
CLK-GTR ran 9.4 at 140 in the 1/4 mile, that's pretty neat Also engine is a stressed member (ala F50) where Enzo's is mounted, more like a normal car. Did I just call an Enzo a 'normal car?' I blame sleep derivation! Of course I'd take the F-car! But I would not mind owning both one fine day Best! Ben. | ||
| Frederick Thomas (Fred)
Member Username: Fred Post Number: 711 Registered: 2-2001 |
The Enzo without question! | ||
| Ken Lee (Kenster888)
New member Username: Kenster888 Post Number: 11 Registered: 4-2003 |
There is a Chinese proverb: Cow's head not fitting the horse's tail. This applies to the CLK rear. I wonder which LA chop shop did the rear. That is one ugly *ss. | ||
| Jeffrey Caspar (Jcaspar1)
Junior Member Username: Jcaspar1 Post Number: 101 Registered: 5-2002 |
Enzo definately. CLK just looks like a MB sedan on a major rice diet. Regarding quality, Mercedes is currently below average in quality compared to other marques sold in the US. I sure hope they they will put a little more attention to quality in the CLK than they do in their poorly built M and C series.... | ||
| Kristoffer Hansson (Maverick)
Junior Member Username: Maverick Post Number: 106 Registered: 3-2001 |
I thought this was a site for ferrarilovers? I�d go for the enzo. Took these pics 3 weeks ago. It looks kinda weird from the rear:  (to the left - mclaren f1 gtr, to the right - p-car GT1) But ofcourse, the enzo looks a bit weird too:  The front of the clk gtr is pretty nice though:  A nice collection of cars - thats for sure. | ||
| neal (95spiderneal)
Junior Member Username: 95spiderneal Post Number: 137 Registered: 3-2002 |
neither!! they are both too ugly for stratospheric $ and im 100% ferrari fan. would have to go to porsche with either 962 converted for street or new carrera gt. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 387 Registered: 9-2002 |
Jack I too am a mechanic. I work on tons of BMW's and I know their faults. M3's with the engines popping in high outside temps, airbag lights comming on every second day, check engine lights comming on for the phantom misfire etc..even M-Benz are starting to get into the crappy build bisness. Maybe they realized that builing a quality long lasting car is not a good idea..dealers suffer in the repair department. I have a 1992 M-Benz 190E 2.6 with 348,000 km and everything is original(except usual wear and tear stuff) Even the A/c has never been opened and it blows ice cold!! I have had to do numerous a/c reapirs to late model BMW's and Benz's. Why? what happened? I also service a fair amount of Ferrari aswell. I just did a quote for 456 timing belts and I felt guilty calling the customer and telling him the price!! I could not beleive it!! I think were all getting taken for a huge ride, I'm even thinking of selling my Ferrari just because of that fact!! | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 782 Registered: 3-2002 |
Tom, you do make some good points. I'll forgive the spelling ;) That's why I use an independent mechanic who knows as much or more than at any dealership. It bothers me too when people over charge simply because they feel they can. A friend told me that the BMW dealer near him charges $80-$100 an hour for labor! My mechanic, ironically enough, told me that the cars he works on most are BMWs, more often than not fixing things that were overlooked by the dealer. | ||
| Jeff (Jeff_m)
Junior Member Username: Jeff_m Post Number: 126 Registered: 9-2002 |
I hear you Tom, and am beginning to feel the same way. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 386 Registered: 9-2002 |
I would run towards the Benz myself!! Although the Enzo is a great looking machine and I love Ferrari's (I own one) I'm starting to realize the the cars are not what they are made out to be. I'm sure I would be thrilled to go for a ride in an Enzo and I'll bet it's really fast, but will it last? Or will it fall apart like all the rest of the Ferrari's from '90 and up? I think we are all just people who have been suckered into to the "Ferrari history" and the exclusive " I have more money than you because I drive a Ferrari" club, we don't want to see the fact that we spend way to much money on junk cars that require more service then any other car out there. How can you justify the obscene prices they charge just to do an oil change? 12 liters of oil? So what!! It should really only cost tops $50 to do an oil change including the filter!! But were told to think that expensive is better!! Just look at some of the posts on this board regarding crappy build quality, and NEW cars being in the shop for a month trying to find numerous problems and then finding out that it's not under warrenty!! Why do we put up with this ••••? Sorry for the rant and pleas forgive the spelling. Tom | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
Member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 780 Registered: 3-2002 |
Mercedes' aren't as bullet proof today as in prior years. To interpret the question of "which would you take?" Are we talking about the two cars sitting there idling, door open, nobody looking? In that case, I can't imagine too many people running towards the Benz. | ||
| Tom Bakowsky (Tbakowsky)
Member Username: Tbakowsky Post Number: 385 Registered: 9-2002 |
CLK GTR hands down. First because it's a Benz!! I'll bet you could drive that thing for 400,000 miles and never have anything major go wrong with it. The Enzo would probbably break with in the first 200 miles requireing $100,000 in parts and $200,00 in labour to repair.(not covered under warrenty of coures). Not to say the Enzo is not a nice car..but is it really worth it? | ||
| Ernie (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 681 Registered: 11-2001 |
In defense of the CLK. The front end on that car was radically changed from the previous car. They really didn't even do any solid aerodynamic testing of it. The only thing that they were able to do was increase the angle of the dive planes, to try and fix the problem. Anyway I would still take the CLK over the Enzo. But as I said it would have to be the model from the year before. Those cars destroyed every maker, in the World Sports Car Championship, the year before. Which included the McLaren F1, and the Porsche 911 GT1. They won every race, accept Le Mans. | ||
| Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Member Username: Ferraristuff Post Number: 460 Registered: 4-2003 |
Bart, >>> "I don't like flying in cars at 200 mph." I do. <<< Buy a Mercedes I would say.... ;-) Make sure you have your pilot license though... http://www.cateredbycolette.com/_chris/chris_files/Flying Mercedes1.mpg (there is a space in the URL which the forum here doesn't pick up so you have to copy the whole line into the adress bar of your browser). Jack | ||
| Bart Boonacker (Sharky666)
Member Username: Sharky666 Post Number: 362 Registered: 9-2002 |
"I don't like flying in cars at 200 mph." I do. Enzo for sure, why ask ? | ||
| Mike Clark (Vipersrt)
Junior Member Username: Vipersrt Post Number: 101 Registered: 10-2002 |
I don't like flying in cars at 200 mph. ENZO!! | ||
| Lee Hamner (Tennlee)
Junior Member Username: Tennlee Post Number: 57 Registered: 2-2002 |
Definately the Enzo. | ||
| KCCK (Kenneth)
Member Username: Kenneth Post Number: 336 Registered: 10-2002 |
ENZO! | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1488 Registered: 1-2002 |
Apples & ashtrays. Enzo, without hesitation or forethought.  | ||
| Ron Thomas (Ronsupercar)
Member Username: Ronsupercar Post Number: 772 Registered: 5-2002 |
This question is a no brainer.. ENZO | ||
| Jens Haller (Jh280774)
Member Username: Jh280774 Post Number: 600 Registered: 9-2001 |
Enzo by far... Did you see the instruments of the CLK GTR? As far as I remember standard ones from a CLK. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh... Con saluti cordialissimi, Jens Haller | ||
| Roel de Fouw (Spawnz)
Junior Member Username: Spawnz Post Number: 181 Registered: 6-2002 |
Enzo. | ||
| izel k. (Ferrarist)
Junior Member Username: Ferrarist Post Number: 222 Registered: 3-2001 |
Enzo surely. Too many reasons... But first of all it's a Ferrari. | ||
| Ernie (Ernie)
Member Username: Ernie Post Number: 679 Registered: 11-2001 |
I would take the CLK GTR. But the older model, cause it don't need to be lifting off at 200 mph. | ||
| Modified348ts (Modman)
Member Username: Modman Post Number: 557 Registered: 11-2001 |
Which would you take? doors open the same way and CLK is faster too. |