
Originally Posted by
Blitzen
The first paragraph was a retort to you saying that the F40 and F1 were not track cars, and I proved they were, so you saying that they have no relevance to road cars just proves that your first statement was wrong in the first place.
This is true about it not being as fast as it could be, but even the Viper wasn't stock(Racing seat, stripped, and revised suspention are not stock). Until we see the SSC on the "Ring", you previous comment is null and void also.
Maybe should see how an XR4 and XR6 Turbo go against the SSC...
Racing seat, stripped and revised suspension are stock. Its an SRT-10 ACR. The ACR Viper is like a GT3 RS Porsche.
The fact that there are racecars based on the F40 and F1 means nothing. There are racecars based on Falcons and Commodores, what's your point? You proved nothing except that some racecars that look like McLaren F1's beat other racecars that look like Ferrari F40's. The road cars are a completley different kettle of fish.
Also, I only said the McLaren F1 wasn't a track car, and it wasn't. Gordon Murray didn't want it to be. He wanted it to be the ultimate road car. It was to be a daily driver. It makes too many sacrifices to be a true track car in the name of streetability and civility. The barebones F40 on the other hand, doesn't. Even with the major power and acceleration deficit, the F40 was still capable of keeping ahead of the McLaren F1 on most tracks (road car vs road cars, racecars that have nothing in common with them are of no relevance).
Example
Last edited by Pumpe-Düse; 07-01-2009 at 02:30 AM.
2008 Volkswagen Polo 1.9 TDI
Bookmarks