Not a GT, of course, but what else does it excel in apart from straight line performance? When we do track days here in the Middle East, not exactly the star in the lineup. Again I’m someone who was intrigued by it and wanted to purchase it as my first all-new Ferrari. Just the hassle and user experience made me stop getting one. Would love for the onboard experience, weight loss, and overall ease of use for the technology to improve, especially in our harsh climates in the Middle East. I’m rooting for a home run unless corporate ruins it
You'll have no issue getting the next version. They will pretend like it's a big deal and make you beg to give them $30K.
I was thinking that. I’ve driven ours on track and it was fantastic. GT2 RS is brilliant fun on track, but so is Pista and Speciale, as well as GT3 and GT3 RS. SF90 AF is in their league in terms of fun, but with much more power and very quick times (maybe GT2 RS can match it at Silverstone - I followed an SF90 in our GT2 RS once and the cars were similar pace - 2 RS better in the turns, slower on the straight).
Given that the SF90 Stradale has been clocked several seconds quicker around various track in independent tests (Autocar MIRA: SF90: 1':03''.60 - GT2 RS: 1':07''.80. Anglesey: SF90: 1':09''.90 - GT2 RS: 1':12''.10. Top Gear: SF90: 1':11''.30 - GT2 RS: 1':13''.40), that 's doubtful. I guess you were just the better driver (with the usual caveat of tyres difference).
I would say resoundingly no… but very different cars, opposite ends of the spectrum Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CGT best car for high skills / in the mood - power was addicting like crack cocaine and as dangerous. SF90 all around much more enjoyable / usable.
You are so correct CGT is not for everyone need to know your skills..but addicting as you said …SF90 is a car you can kill yourself but you got to be doing some real stupid stuff If you want something really light and precise try Ruf best all around car I ever owned Image Unavailable, Please Login
I will add that the CGT stimulates the nervous system more than any car I’ve ever driven…in the driver’s seat you become hyper aware of everything, even palms can get sweaty. You feel the V10 at the base of your spine along with the mechanical chatter of the clutch and flywheel. When the revs spool up between each gearshift change, it’s like a crescendo of adrenaline. The clutch is stiff and makes you work, and so are the brakes. It is all analogue and you are working to feel more of the car while being rewarded for all the inputs you put into shift and turns, truly exhilarating and awe inspiring. The SF90S is comfortable, can go light speed in an instant, and the car tech is light years fast, as is the car, yet the car is doing most of the work. Amazingly smooth, easy to drive. Auditory nerves less stimulated for sure. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've only driven a CGT once, for a few hours, it was incredible. Perhaps the greatest performance machine I ever piloted on the road. But, the entire time the car was shouting in my ear: one wrong move, and I'll kill you. I loved it, but could never own it. F40, in terms visceral level, I think its on the same or similar level, but its different. As long as you are a somewhat proficient pilot, the car wants to work with you. It is more enjoyable for me. It is also - to use the term- visceral. To pick a winner here will reveal much about your own preferences. I couldn't say one is objectively the better supercar, except to say which one is better for me. The F40 encourages me to drive it harder and harder. And I love it for that. SF90 performance is much more accessible. But we know the price for that. Thats life. Discussing all these cars- we are a fortunate bunch!
Ok this is where everyone will say I am a fool…I had a CGT for 7 years and traded it for an F40, which I kept for a year and then traded back to a CGT. Why? As a matter of driving experience, as mentioned above, the CGT is the most visceral analogue, hyper neural stimulating experience for me personally. I have tracked quite a few cars, but admittedly have not tracked the CGT yet to experience its full force. The F40 is a very special car, build quality is obviously not up to par compared to the CGT so there is more rattling and such, reminds me of a Lotus on steroids. Clutch very stiff, brakes are not great with no feel. It is a much looser car in terms of handling. Obviously being more than a decade older than the CGT, the F40 won’t drive as well overall, but it has its own character. I just prefer and appreciate the advances of the build of the CGT in terms of its F1/LeMans engine, CF tub/body, suspension, ceramic composite clutch, pushrod suspension, magnesium components, functional, aerodynamic design elements, over 70 patents… Porsche’s pinnacle advanced engineering of its time. There is nothing that drives like it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You are not a fool at all. You just tried a few things and figured out what you liked. Thats what I'd call someone who has taken the time to gain experience. Thats smart. I'd say the F40 is really a car with 1970s and 80s tech, despite having model years that go into the 90s. Despite the space ship looks, it's quite rudimentary- yet- it's so well balanced and fun. The heavy controls are no issue when you are driving with the proper gusto. In traffic, it's a little tiresome, but not terrible. CGT is like a light year ahead in technology, and definitely much more of a literal "race car for the road"- including a racecars not forgiving precision handling.
Sounds like the correct answer is "both". I'm out of space which likely means trading my SLS Black Series for the CGT... the thought of which hurts tbh.
CGT pushed is insanity of senses ... it's hard to find a good clean CGT - for good reason Took me years on RL - finally I listened to some Cali guys and grabbed one at 400k - the good ole days!
