Well..the SLR is quite the car..and it is more usable then the P-car. Many people who have bought the P-car are very disapointed with it's real life driving abilites. If you look around you will see many have been placed up for sale. The car is a monster on the track and on open roads..but around town and other real life situations it's not up to it. Mostly becuase of the clutch design from what I understand. The SLR is well..a Mercedes Benz, with Mclearen backing..who made the F1. With Gordan Murry at the head of development. This says alot right from the start about the car. Many people want to be accociated with a race team..Like Ferrari. So on that basis alone they will sell all they can make. Oh..and if Jay Leno gushed aboput the car..then it must be good
slr asking for a premium because its new one on block and people pay extra for that. cgt has been on road since last yr.
The MB fan base is wider and deeper than the Pbug base. It seems that MB is a taxi in every part of the world except the USA. Funny.
The CGT is a track car. Porsche is serious in that it builds cars for the track. MB is not. Their cars are fast in a straight line and mindnumbingly dull in terms of driving dynamics. But, they are much more comfortable and suitable for daily driving. The bottom line is that people who bought the CGT for the uses porsche designed it for are much happier than MB owners who bought their car for the right reasons. Someone who wants to look cool and have the bling factor will not be happy with a car made for the track just as a track junkie like myself would not be happy with a car that looks cool, is luxurious and has the bling factor. The discontent with CGT owners is from those who didn't use the car as it was intended to be used.
It could also be that the SLR and CGT perform very similarly (according to Top Gear anyway) and their track time difference was marginal at best and the SLR is nicer and more comfy and has more gizmos and gadgets and cooler doors (hah). It a more buyable vehicle. There are no downsides to it in comparison to the CGT (aside from subject design and brand differences), so it simple has a larger buyer base.
I think the CGT is a marvelous car, and would love to own one, or even get a ride in one. But didn't Porsche actually market the car as a street-friendly, everyday supercar? That was the impression I had from them. Some owners say they are very happy with the car on the street, others not so much. Gary
Good points but on a strictly Demand and Offer POV..I dont understand . And Porsche is serioulsy cooler/more desirable than the MB.
The reason Benzes are used in many countries as taxis and not in the US is because in most countries where they are used the taxi driver owns and operates his own car. Its not like here where the taxi company has a fleet of junk for the drivers to use. Having a nice taxi is important for their biz.
Also, as we all know, the older generation of benz diesels are very durable, something important for a person who drives for his lively hood.
Let's see, Top Gear had what, a 0.9s track time difference? The only reason MB is incapable of building a "track car"...is because it has that little three-pointed star on the hood.
Yes, there was a .9 second difference on a ~44 second track. Move it from a 44 second track to a one minute thirty second track and the difference becomes 1.84 seconds. Or about the same difference as qualifying 12 places behind 1st at the European Grand Prix 2003. And you know, nevermind the difference in weather, track temperature, familiarity with the car, easability of driving the cars *cough* traction control *cough* ABS *cough* Oh and lets not forget that the top gear track isn't the end all be all of track performance for a car.
1. Track numbers do not transpose like that, I assume you know that. Besides, no one ever makes up 1.84 seconds in a GP, right? 2. I was under the impression that they tested the cars on the same day. That's probably wrong. 3. "To ensure control under all situations, the Carrera GT has a four channel anti-lock braking system and anti-spin control (ASC) to prevent excessive wheel spin. Traction control is standard." You can of course switch the TCS off on BOTH cars.
You're right they don't, but the difference in performance is most definitely relevant to the size of the track. Hence the extrapolation that this is what .9 seconds actually means. Of course people have made up 1.84 differences, but very rarely do they make up a 1.84 difference that increases by 1.84 each and every lap around the course. Probably why you see the person who qualifies 12th very rarely finishing in the top three. I'm fairly sure the Benz was tested first and the Porsche several weeks later. Not that I putting my hand on the bible or anything. The Porsche system gives the driver quite a bit more latitude and doesn't reign you in anywhere near as quickly as the benz system, and can be fully turned off. From what I recall the Mercedes system clamps down on you quite faster, doesn't give as much latitude and can't be fully turned off. Either way I stand by the comment that the Porsche will definitely be harder to learn how to drive quickly around a race track. Think about how you've improved in your own car over time. Some cars, even though they may be equal, take much more time and skill to achieve the performance they are capable of. I'll bet that the Carrera GT will consistently be the better track car by a considerable margin when in the hands of someone who has spent time with it. While giving the Stig a day or so of practice in the car and then having him go out and running a lap may give us a good indication of what a car is capable of in capable hands. It wont tell us the real performance the car is capable of, or really even what kind of car it is. The Porsche GT3:RS and the Ferrari Challenge Stradle ran the exact same time on the Top Gear track, but youd hardly say theyre the same.
