Whats better? The enzo or porsche carrera GT

no, the enzo actually spent quite little time in the wind tunnel, like 2000 hours. Not that time matter so much, when so much design is done by computer simulation. I have to agree with allan, the Pcars tend to do better on tracks, and when the CGT wasnt yet finalized, but the enzo was, Im guessing they made sure it had an edge, be it a more useable powerband, better roadholding and braking etc. THe only way to know will be a side by side, anything else is stupid.

 

and dont forget the CGT is topless, while the Enzo has TINY windows. Allan, I thought you preferred the enzo? now it seems you are going with the CGT...also, anyone else think its strange that the Porsche not only is the one with the formula car style 10 cylinder, but also much more of an F1 wail?

 

I agree the CGT would beat the Enzo round the Nurburgring, or any windy track. It's better in corners, pulls more Gs. No I haven't driven either, but I believe it to be true. The only track where the Enzo would have an advantage is one which had a straight which allowed it to get to 200mph+

 

I remember a F1 versus car video between a 2000 or 2001 McLaren F1 car and the (then) top of the line big Mercedes around a track where the big merc would take just over 2:00 minutes. At the start the big merc starts out with a professional driver sliding around like he really know what he id soing. Coultard was reading a news paper when the big merc started. When the big merc got to 1/2 way around, the F1 car launches and beats the big merc to the finish by just over 1 second.

If the Enzo is ONLY 30 seconds slower at Fiorano, it is massively faster than the big merc. (no sh$t sherlock) Massively! But that puts the whole F1 versus road car back into perspective. The F1 cars are so (dare I say) stupidly fast, that comparing them to earth bound vehicles is just not a reasonable thinig to do.

 

I love Porsches, but the Enzo just does something else to me. It looks much more exotic and exciting. Even the '98 GT1 Evo was more exciting for me than the CGT. If I had to pick a hyper exotic....GT1,Enzo,F40,McLaren F1 and then CGT.

 

Perhaps have you seen the front of the Enzo?

 

yes..reminds me of a big Boxster.

 

How?

 

i Think the Enzo is a much nicer car all around. And for people to call it ugly well that is there opinion and to each there own but i think its a well desinged car and it looks beatiful.

 

I agree the Enzo is terrific looking. When I first saw it, I thought I hated it...but it was just so NOT what I expected. I think it's very cutting edge and machine like, and will age very well. On the other hand, were I fortunate enough to own one, I think it would take a while to get over the feeling that I looked silly driving it around the neighborhood.

 

I dont have the same downforce numbers as you guys here ..

What i read is that the Enzo produces more downforce than a CGT .

700 kgs at 186 mph for the Enzo
882 lbs for the CGT at 300 kmh

 

hahaha...that's a very funny mix of imperial and metric! how odd.

 

By the way you aer 100% wrong about the carbon brakes. I have em on my GT2 and they are awesome. No fade, light and great bite. Maybe there were some bad sets?

 

Isn't that how we lost the last mars probe?

 

This is like asking which is better, a blonde or a brunette. How can you really go wrong?

 

Tommy, you are so right.

 

I would say that Brunettes perform better.

 

definately but form ive learned asians are the best out fo them all.(just not car wise)

 

Yeah...they're reliable, and some are hot, but they can be so boring!

I'm talking about the cars here....

 

Based upon Sport Auto's recent test of the Carrera GT against the Zonda C-12S, the CGT dosn't quite match the Enzo's numbers. I converted the test results from metric to imperial and them compared them with several magazines' tests of the Ferrari. Roadholding is nearly identical at 1.05g. Slalom speed favored the Enzo (# taken from R&T's test). Brakes were basically identical as well. Where the Enzo really gets an edge is acceleration. The CGT was ~0.5 seconds slower to 124 mph than the Enzo, and the gap widened from there.

 

Taking test results from multiple magazines is a VERY bad way to take test results. Doing this means almost every condition imaginable is different -- most importantly driver and atmospheric conditions.

IMO this makes these comparos null and void. Why would anyone serious about making a comparison match two cars wihout identical conditions? The two most important inputs (driver and conditions) are totally different! How is that a fair comparison for either car?

 

HAHAH nice one

Wasn't it Charlie Sheen?

 

CGT is awesome... I heard the CGT's exaust at the tracks, it humms like a bird. Too too sweet! This was at ButtonWillow Raceway Park. Anyone taking an Enzo to any SoCal tracks sometimes soon? Please let me know... I want to be there to see and hear an Enzo zippin by on a straight away 100mph+ Thanx...
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Sure, just put an Enzo body on it.