Whats better? The enzo or porsche carrera GT

Really. How about AMS's numbers on the same track (Autodromo del Levante in Bari) on the same day:

CGT 53.86
Enzo 54.98
Lambo (Merc) 55.82
SLR 57.45

Truth is either car can beat the other depending on the track. Reality is there would be a substantially larger time difference based on the driver skill of message board bench racers on the same car than from professionals testing both these cars against each other. Who really cares? The cars are very similar in track performance and the Enzo hoses the CGT in acceleration.

 

Ironcially, many CGT owners' biggest gripe is that given it's difficult clutch it's not offered with F1.

 

Both.

 

I prefer to have both....and french vanilla, and caramel sundaes and world class chocolate, and strawberries and cream.



Forza,


Cavallini

 

My vote is for the F40,and Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear also agrees. In the latest TG Enzo test, Clarkson is unequivocal about the fact that he considers the F40 the best supercar of all. I'm possibly a bit biased here, but the Enzo reallly didn't light any longing in me Like the F40 did. I searched for five years to find a reallly good F40. I also stepped up and bought a CGT BTW, which I think is the equal of the Enzo statistically for about $650,000 less.

All the nitpicking in this thread is really meaningless where the cars in question, Enzo and F40 are simply way beyond anything else on offer today. It comes down to very subjective personal preference.

 

Indeed, and are the cars really competitors? Both of them are rare, and relatively easy sold to their own afficionados. I don't think anyone truly in the market for an Enzo, would eventually buy a CGT or vice versa. They would buy both, at best.

I can only applaude both Ferrari and Porsche for doing what they do best and do it so unbelievably well. The Enzo is definatly the ultimate Ferrari to date, and the CGT does the same thing for Porsche. They are both fantastic representatives of their marque.

 

At the end of the day the two cars are extremely well matched and which would beat the other on a track would be down to a) the drivers and b) which track suited a aparticular car more - not the capabilities of the car.

The fact that Porsche manage to come as close as they are to the enzo, at nearly half the price, with a better equipped interior, a removable roof and A MANUAL gearbox make me believe IMO that the CGT is the better car overall.

At the end of the day though its down to personal preference. Performance is basically equal....

 

All of you saying the Porsche is bla bla bla equal of the Enzo for half the price..There will be also 4 times as much CGT as Enzos ..Ferrari could have sold the Enzo for less if they chose to sell 1500 of them..

 

That doesn't alter the fact that if you were not one of the "chosen" the cost of entry into Enzo ownership is over $1 million, and if you want comparable performance the CGT offers it. With regard to the "over abundance" of CGT's I doubt that you will see many on the road and certainly there won't be a situation at the local market where you aren't sure which of the CGT's in the parking lot is yours. 400 or 1500 is not much of a difference in a world where there are 150,000 SL's and even 15,000 Modena's.

 

As much as I love the Enzo and will pick the Enzo over the CGT if given a choice (which is probably driven by mad irrational passion). You have a very very good point.

And I agree with Alexpapas, even with the relatively huge production numbers of the 360 Modena it is still quite a rare sight in most parts.

 

Yes but the Enzo remains a 600 000$ car. It was engineered that way , not as a 1m$ car. And when the fuss is over for the current batch of supercar, im pretty sure the Enzo will have been a better "investment" .

The CGT offers the same performance for 2/3 of the price . But probably not the same residuals..

 

You are exactly correct. Residual value reflects the market and especially supply & demand. There are simply more Porsches, and that is a situation driven by the respective companies - Ferrari limit production to around 4,000 cars per year, Porsche will build as many as they can sell and also actively seek new market segments like SUV's (Cayenne) and small sport cars (Boxter). They have in essence diluted their brand while expanding production. Porsches are a commodity driven by their market. Ferraris are a rarity driven by irrational consumers (Like myself, I admit).

 

I actually applaud Porsche's ability to mass produce, remain independent, and remain a premier atuomotive brand. Perhaps the Cayenne soils the image slightly with die-hard enthusiasts, but it is still a Porsche, through and through. If only it didn't look so awkward in every color but black w/chrome.

I say kudos to Porsche for doing something no other make has been able to do. They've proven that quality and quantity are not mutually exclusive. Bravo Porsche.

Forza,


Cavallini

 

Although the Enzo is a slightly better performer, I believe the Carrera GT offers a better drive, as its traditional 6 speed offers more driver involvement...

 

I think as long as you are going close to your limit the Enzo will involve you enough. The F1 style gearbox does have its uses and when going all out the involvement should still be there. Anything below 85% or so though the manual is certainly more involving.

 

Can we close this thread? =\

 

Something you should be proud of !

 

Having driven an Enzo, a CGT, and a Pagani I find questions like this laughable.

ALL of these cars are much more car than everyone on this board except for Roland could ever wring out.

It's like asking which is better. A Grand Prix weekend in Monoco on a 200 foot yacht or a weekend heli skiing in 3 feet of virgin powder. I've done both and they both have their points.

At this level THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS WHICH ONE YOU WANT TO DRIVE AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT BECAUSE IF YOU ARE LUCKY ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD ONE YOU CAN AFFORD ALL OF THEM. NONE ARE BETTER OR WORSE. THEY ARE DIFFERENT.

 

Neatly summarized, along with the ying and yang symbolized in Post #69!!!!!

Heck, there's folks here that can't handle their 360!

Or 24" new powder!!!!!!!!

 

Point well-taken.



Forza,


Cavallini

 

Very well said napolis... I concur...

 

Well put Napolis!

That should end this thread...

/Peter

 

not that i really want to continue this debate but i was curious if enzo has an official nuremberg lap time cause i read somewhere that cgt got the fast lap time for a production car..so just compare those two, if enzo has a laptime, and if cgt is faster then it probably is cause nuremberg is the best track to test a car's performance...but yea i agree the diff between those 2 cars in terms of track handling will probably be down to the drivers themselves...

 

Thanks Napolis, I just had this week end the chance to drive both cars back to back... New Orleans was some event wasn't it James ????having you behind me wityh the Lola...what a sight..
Both cars are so differents in many aspects. I'm not going over that now, since I just came back from N.O.
I wil just say that I took me very little time to go fast with the CGT and that after a session with the Enzo, I wasn't at speed !!!! That car took way more "work" to go fast. I mean that in a good way because the performances were closer to a race car. Brakes were better in the Enzo, but shifting was a 10+ in CGT. You got to love both like someone said with a blonde or a brunette.I would very happy with either one...I'll have a chance to give a school with the CGT, and we will talk about that later.
BTW, I didn't stall with the CGT!!
Roland
F40LM