MT900 vs. GT2

Discussion in '2005 Mosler MT900 S' started by mpg, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. This is faster and a million times better looking.<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    id take this over the gt2, but most probably get the ls6 or the 2x turbo
     
  3. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    i was looking at these a while ago and i was deciding between a vector m12 or monsler. . . . . . . . . .Hmmm lifeis full of hard choies
    but then the stock market took a crap and the idea was forgotten.
     
  4. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    lol, I would take this. It would be a ton rarer<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    MT900.
     
  6. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    eh statistics are comparable when you consider that the current car has 435 hp and a lot less weight. i would take the gt2 cuz its a german car, and beause it actualy has a radio and a/c and other emminiteis that classify it as a car and not a race car, but the mosler represents a very tempting raw performance car. the mosler is more rare but also more expensive, especialy when you condsider these two cars are so close in performance.

    something is jsut not richt when you build a super car and you put a stock vette engine in it with a nice exhaust system. somewhere in my gut i feel like the mosler should have 500hp at least just because it is a super car, even if it does have so little weight to make up for its hp deficiencey. and to think at one point they sold this car with only 345
     
  7. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    The Mosler MT900S does have a/c, AM/FM/CD, power locks, and power windows.

    The reason for using a stock LS6 is reliability, and ease of maintance. Anyone can work on it, and buy parts at Autozone, or get repairs done at your local GM dealer. A Porsche or Ferrari is much harder to get parts for, and repairs are much more coslty. The car will perform with, or better than those, with a lot less in maintance costs. But, one key feature is EPA certification. The stock Vette engine is already certified, if any changes were done to it, it would have to be recertified, and that is a very costly endeavor.
     
  8. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    I don't think you know what your talking about, I think its more like assuming and don't assume! When did the MT900 not have basic amenities? (what the heck is emminiteis) And by the way Id take the MT900 but it is a hard choice.
     
  9. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    I'd take the GT2.
     
  10. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    Lol,"AutoZone" I think I'll stick with porsche instead of this,regardless of more expensive parts and so forth.I wouldn't want a car that"anyone can work on it"I like having something that takes
    special skills and knowledge to work on like a GT2.And who goes to "AutoZone",lol?
     
  11. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    Well SoRiNxX, you could get basic engine parts at NAPA, or Pep Boys if you prefer <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     
  12. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    GT2.
     
  13. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    GT2.
     
  14. Re: MT900 vs. GT2

    GT2.
     
  15. Re:

    I'd take the GT2 no doubt. The GT2 kicks ass... and I think the Mosler looks like a kit car. It's just got that generic curvy shape; I think they kinda copied that other American supercar, the Saleen S7, which in my opinion looks awesome.
     
  16. Re: Re:

    Ah, but the Mosler MT900 made its debut 3 months BEFORE the Saleen S7, and computer generated images of the Mosler were available on the internet, about a year before the Saleen S7 was ever seen.
     

Share This Page