Enzo or CGT Which is better for the track?

CGT. There has been no evidence to say the Enzo is faster on the track other than acceleration numbers.

 

So does that mean that evidence showing the Enzo a superior track car can't be produced (or are we just making a snap judgement here)?

 

In two tests the Carrera GT has produced two lap times that were faster around a "track". One being in Autosport and the other being in Motortrend (it was a figure 8 track). In the Motortrend test the CGT produced better braking, slalom, and skid pad numbers(I can't remember what happened in the Autosport test). All in all, there is still really no evidence to believe the Enzo is faster than the CGT other than acceleration/top speed figures.

I'm not even adding in the entire Walter Rohl backstory which was heavily talked about previously.

 

Mr. Payne, Thanks for the response.

 

There is some talk that the Enzo was tested at the Nuerburgring and was slower than the CGT and also the Pagani Zonda S. But I think it's BS. Anyway it's a bit strange that there isn't any public data about the Ferrari Enzo at the 'ring. It makes you wonder.

 

enzo,would be my choice

 

Honestly, unless you are Schumi you will not notice the difference. Lap time differences are all under a second, 0-60 is .2 or so tenths apart (Enzo's favor) but the CGT nicks it in most other tests (my an even closer margin). It's honestly whichever car you want, and which one you want to pay for.

 

It makes you wonder...but when does Ferrari ever release track times for their cars?

I don't think its quite fair to compare the Nurburgring times of the Enzo to the CGT, don't get me wrong, I think the CGT is faster around most tracks; but that's basically the backyard of the Porsche boys, where they do a good bit of their testing, so you would expect the CGT to be superior on that track. I wonder how the CGT would do at Ferrari's test track?