Discussion in '2002 Lamborghini Murciélago' started by Porsche LVR, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. i think the carrera gt would win<!-- Signature -->

  3. Porshit? Funny. Lambgayghini. Funnier. Porsche rules.
  5. "Listen you #$%#ing idiot it doesn't mean bat Murcielago is a semi-famous driver who designed this car so he could race it."

    uhhh..... you're an idiot......
  7. what does the name have to do with it?<!-- Signature -->
  8. i know what i would take!!!

  9. I love both, but with no regret I would pick the Murcielago.
  10. Its no small secret that the huge improvements in the Lambo came curtosy of an AUDI designer. The only problem was that they had to keep the shit V-12 in order to keep the fans of lambo happy. The carrera GT would stomp this Lambo and Ide list stats but there already here.
  11. Cgt is faster but Labmo is more beautiful!
  12. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Ultimate Porsche fan</i>
    <b>Quote from speedeemon


    Engine V12 0 - 60 mph 3.8 seconds
    Horsepower 432.5 kw / 580.0 bhp @ 7500 rpm 0 - 100 mph Not Available
    Transmission 6-Speed Manual Topspeed 330 kph / 205.1 mph
    Weight 1650 kg / 3638 lbs


    Engine 68 degree V10 0 - 60 mph 4.0 seconds
    Horsepower 416.1 kw / 558.0 bhp @ Not Available rpm 0 - 100 mph Not Available
    Transmission 6-Speed Manual Topspeed 330 kph / 205.1 mph
    Weight 1250 kg / 2756 lbs


    read the facts the lambo has 22 more horsepower you dumb ass.

    Hey u think a crumby 22 horsepower will matter if the lambo is an extra freaking 882 lbs. overweight. read the other replys (TylerDruden's will make you piss your pants). less weight equals faster acceleration. Plus, it is made to take corners at speeds that would make your lambo skid off the track and go to where it belongs, the scrapyard. the 4.0 second estimated accelaration rate is not accurate. I have seen a 911 gt2 clock in at 3.6 seconds (Road at Track test), and it is heavier and less powerfull than the carrera gt. if you have anything for a brain, you will realize that the carrera gt will clock in at 3.3 if not better. with its cornering, advanced braking, and nasty acceleration it will make your fighting bull look like a cow! I am stopping myself before i write profanity about you conceded lamborgini freaks. you guys ought to learn something about cars! Murcielago is just a pretty face when compared to the Carrera GT. Damn, the Murcielago doesn't even look like a nice face, it looks like one dumb, and pouting *****. Murcielago means, "Bat". nice name, hmmm? you are willing to fork over a couple hundered thousand for something that is named a bat? that is ridiculous. i have so much more respect for the diablo than this "bat", and neither of them would win against a porsche Carrera GT. Carrera means "race" and it is a race that will leave either a diablo or a murcielaogo (bat, hahaha. what a joke) in the dust.

    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Wow youre not smart are you? First off the Lamborghini has been tested by--guess who--Lamborghini. They set the test speed at 3.6 not 3.8 and it has AWD unlike the Porsches tiny V6 engines with RWD. And whats with the Porshe GT2 3.6? It isnt that fast buddy. Besides you got so many problems going that fast with RWD. Wow youre a dumbshit arent you? You do know that Murcielago does mean bat but thats not what its named after. They are named after Spanish bulls. The bull was named Murcielago. The Murcielago has wings that slip out of the sides like the spoiler on the 911 for traction and aerodinamics. I dont think that a name is very important compaired to what it can do. You must have never seen a Murcielago if you think that it looks ugly. And the Murcielago was tested and hit top speeds of over 220mph. The GT will slide off the road before it hits 60 in 3.3 The GT2 looks better anyways.
  13. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TylerDurden</i>
    <b>Projected price of the Carrera GT: $330 000 US.
    # of units to be built: 1000

    With respect to anyone who thinks the Murc has anything on the Carrera, I ask: What time does the Murcielago log at the Nurburgring? And I answer: ~8:00. The 2002 Porsche 911 GT2 ($180 000 US) logs 7:46.

    911 GT2: Weight: 3175lbs., bhp: 462, 0-60: 3.6sec (Road & Track)
    Carrera GT: Weight: 2756lbs., bhp: 558, 0-60: unknown
    Murcielago: Weight: 3638lbs., bhp: ~580, 0-60: 3.8 sec

    Weight-to-power ratios: 911 GT2: 6.8723 lbs./bhp
    Carrera GT: 4.9391 lbs./bhp
    Murcielago: 6.2724 lbs./bhp

    Those who can't extrapolate the results for themselves can read on:

    The 911 GT2 pulls higher g's in both the skidpad and the slalom than the Murcielago, and runs significantly faster track times, even on a large track like the Nurburgring, where the Lamborghini should have an advantage due to its 4WD and higher output engine. On a short track like Hockenheim or Laguna Seca, the Lamborghini would trail behind pretty badly. This is in spite of the fact that the Murcielago has a higher power-to-weight ratio (note: higher power-to-weight means lower weight-to-power ratio) than the 911 GT2. The Murcielago's power-to-weight ratio isn't even in the Carrera GT's metaphorical ballpark. The Carrera GT will have increased tosional rigidity over the 911 GT2, a lower center of gravity, and a reduced drag coefficient (less than 0.33). All numbers point to the Carrera GT as being the superior car.

    L8R</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    The Murcielago has not been tested at Nurburgring yet. What are you talking about? Porsche has always had very good lap times for the Nurburgring, but in other places they have not performed so well. For instance, the Porsche GT3 has a very good time for the nurburgring, 8 min 3 seconds tested by Sport Auto, and the same magazine tested the Diablo GT at 8 min 4 seconds. But in other tracks, the Porsche GT3 can not keep up with the old, 510 hp Diablo SV or 492 hp Diablo VT (I have seen it). So for comparing Porsche to other cars, you can not only use Porsche's specialty track. But the Murcielago will be tested at the Nurburgring later this year by Sport Auto, and is expected to do plenty under 8 min.
  14. Last I heard, Lamborghini engineers were a little uneasy about claiming the Murcielago could break the eight-minute mark at the Ring. I read in CAR magazine, the first mag to run a complete test of the Murc, that it was supposed to be faster around the Nurburgring than the Murcielago by, and I quote, "...maybe one minute." That would put it close to the magic 8:00 barrier. I had assumed that the Murc was tested at the Ring. My apologies. However, claiming that it will clock "plenty under 8:00" is somewhat of an exaggeration. If the Murc logs a time faster than 7:46 (that of the GT2's), I'll definitely be impressed. However, that still leaves the issue of the Carrera GT to be explored. Having a 98bhp advantage over GT2, and being 419lbs. lighter, there's no telling how well it'll perform on the Ring.

    Second, the reason the Diablo incarnations outperform the GT3 on short tracks is because of the displacement advantage (5.7 - 6.0 liters vs. 3.6). The GT3 RS produces 420 naturally aspirated bhp, but much less torque than, for example, the 996 Turbo. Although the GT3 is significantly lighter than any Diablo, its torque (the Diablo's) helps move that extra mass quite effectively.

    L8R<!-- Signature -->
  15. You say this, "I read in CAR magazine, the first mag to run a complete test of the Murc, that it was supposed to be faster around the Nurburgring than the Murcielago by, and I quote, "...maybe one minute." '

    What is supposed to be faster than the Murcielago by 1 minute?

    Sport Auto magazine driver Horst von Saurma will take the car to Nurburgring later this year, and is expected to be under 8 min., probably 7: 50. If it does not match the time of the GT2 it does not matter. The nurburgring is Porsche's specialty track and they are designed specifically for it. Porsches often have better lap times there than cars that would normally beat them.

  16. To explain more clearly, the 510 hp Diablo SV is much ahead of the Porsche GT3 on most tracks; (see the video "Best Motoring Japanese"). But at the nurburgring, the Porsche GT3 is ahead of even the 523 hp Diablo SV by 6 seconds (8,09 vs. 8,03). This is because the Porsche GT3 is suited to the nurburgring perfectly. It is the same with the GT2, and that is why it performs so well there. Porsches are designed for that track.

    The Diablo GT and Porsche GT2 are equal on most tracks, but on the Nurburgring the Diablo tested 8,04 seconds and the GT2 tested 7,46 seconds. However, I am not sure if the Diablo GT was the long gear ratio or the short gear ratio, and I do not know if the Porsche GT2 was the Clubsport version with "anti-roll bars" or not.

    for me is the MURCIELAGO the best !!!!!!!!!
  18. i'd take the porsche carrera over that italian piece of shit any day. it weighs a whole lot less than the lambo making its power to wieght ratio better, and has better handling, obviously because it's a porsche, better 0-60 and very close top speed compared to the lambo. i'd LOVE to see any lambo even come close to the lap times that this engineering marvel will run at nurburgring. and if porsche were to make this car into a hard top, it would have even better aerodynamics, which would make it even better in all of the above categories. looks are a matter of opinion, in my opinion, the porsche looks much better with it's sleek curves compared to the lambo that looks like a sculpted rock with all of it's ugly angles
  19. PORSCHE ROCKS.....SO DOES LAMBO. I'd pick the lambo coz its here and when ur in italy, it has such a cool racing rivalry with ferrari, but id pick the porsche just coz it a tad bit more reliable, plus it doesn't have a metal shift gate.<!-- Signature -->
  20. the Lambo set laptimes faster than the porsche GT1, GT2 and the GT3, and thatis because of the new center of gravity, whivh is very low and in the center of the car, even though the lambo is faster than those cars i would have to say that the Carrera GT is a pretty awesome car!!! peace<!-- Signature -->
  21. Hey Lamborghini,
    your right that the Porsche and the Lamborghini shouldn't be in the same building. The Lambo should be outside the building in the back next to a garbage can.
  22. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CarreraGtRacer</i>
    <b>Hey Lamborghini,
    your right that the Porsche and the Lamborghini shouldn't be in the same building. The Lambo should be outside the building in the back next to a garbage can.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    first of all, i got nothing against the Carrera GT, id want one, but ur acting just like the dude who said the Z06 is better than GT2. i think theyre two very different cars in terms of soul...Lambos r traditional, they stick with the rituals of Italian auto making, albeit with a hint of technology, porsches in the other hand r modern, engineering marvels, with a hint of classic porsche history. both cars r freaking awesome, but you being a euro car lover should know what quality is. and both cars have them, just in a different way.<!-- Signature -->
  23. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Lamborghini</i>
    <b>Lambo of course</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Well said.<!-- Signature -->
  24. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from -=JeTFiRE=-</i>
    <b>I LIKE BOTH ALOT...BUT THE CARRERA GT IS WELL...NOT AS GOOD LOOKING, I WOULD TAKE THE LAMBO OVER IT.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -
    Porsche not as good looking? Everyone knows the Carrera Gt is alot better looking then the Murcilago. Trust me if think the Carrera Gt is ugly u need some stronger glasses.
  25. Lambo of course

Share This Page