That stupid german wannabe mid-engine piece of shit cant touch the one of a kind genuine italian sports car.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from henrick abbassi</i> <b>That stupid german wannabe mid-engine piece of shit cant touch the one of a kind genuine italian sports car.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Germans make some of the best cars. Let me ask you this. If Italian Cars are better then Germans then why have Audi and Porsche been dominating LeMans? Care to answer? <!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from henrick abbassi</i> <b>That stupid german wannabe mid-engine piece of shit cant touch the one of a kind genuine italian sports car.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Quit shooting your mouth off and using foul language. I've trashed others for it before, and will not hesitate to do so to you.<!-- Signature -->
Here I succeeded to find this test of the Diablo GT that lapped the nurburgring: www.track-challenge.com/comparison1d.asp?car1=1&car2=2 Some of the acceleration results for these cars are slower than normal, and some are faster than normal, so it is best not to use them as reference for acceleration. But the top speed of theDiablo GT was tested at 330 kmh. The short gear ratio Diablo GT can not exceed 320.7 kmh, and the medium ratio can not exceed 325 kmh; this Diablo then must be the long ratio Diablo GT. The long ratio Diablo GT can reach 340 kmh, but this test did not reach that high. But it is for sure not the short or medium gear ratios. So the Diablo GT that laps the nurburgring at 8,04 seconds is the long ratio Diablo GT. SHort and medium gear ratios would be faster. Short and medium gear ratio Diablo GT's have approx the same acceleration as each other: short gear ratio Diablo GT: 1 km standing: 21.0 seconds to speed: 199 mph medium gear ratio Diablo GT 1 km standing: approx. 21.05 or 21.1 seconds top speed: 202 mph they are approx the same. but long ratio Diablo GT is: 1 km standing: approx. 21.3 seconds top speed: 211 mph With long ratio the DIablo GT has approx the same acceleration as '99 Diablo SV. The Sport auto test did not reach 211 mph, but it still exceeded the top speed of short and medium gear ratio Diablo GT, so it is sure the long ratio Diablo GT. So with long gear ratio, the Diablo GT makes 8,04 seconds. But medium ratio is probably 8,02 seconds, and short ratio is probably 8,01 seconds.
Correction! 8,04 seconds is for the Medium gear ratio Diablo GT: I thought the medium gear ratio DIablo GT could not exceed 325 like the VT and 2WD because they have the same gears. But I forgot that the Diablo GT can go to slightly higher rpm than the Old VT and 2WD! This may allow the GT to reach 330 kmh.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i> <b>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. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Sorry, that was a typo. What the engineers were quoted as saying was something to the effect of the Murcielago being "maybe one minute" faster than the regular Diablo. Now, I don't know what time the Diablo logged at the Ring, but the editors at CAR said that assuming this was so, the Murc would run times around 8:00. True, Porsches are partial to the Nurburgring, but that's not to say that the GT2 is not an amazing performer on any other track. Take Laguna Seca, for example. The GT2 was recently tested there, running a lap slightly over 1:20 (I'm reciting these numbers by heart. I only read them once). Most supercars dream of a time like that at Laguna Seca. This is not to take credit away from Lamborghini, but I seriously doubt its ability to lap the GT2 on most tracks, let alone the Carrera GT.<!-- Signature -->
definitely the Murcielago they have the same top speed, but the murcielago first of all looks better and it's italian and Italians make the greatest cars <!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i> <b>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.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> All 911s and for that matter the Gt2 has anti roll bars. What I think you are talking about is a roll cage, the GT2 clubsport has a roll cage. A roll cage adds wieghts, but increases rigidity a little.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TylerDurden</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i> <b>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. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> Sorry, that was a typo. What the engineers were quoted as saying was something to the effect of the Murcielago being "maybe one minute" faster than the regular Diablo. Now, I don't know what time the Diablo logged at the Ring, but the editors at CAR said that assuming this was so, the Murc would run times around 8:00. True, Porsches are partial to the Nurburgring, but that's not to say that the GT2 is not an amazing performer on any other track. Take Laguna Seca, for example. The GT2 was recently tested there, running a lap slightly over 1:20 (I'm reciting these numbers by heart. I only read them once). Most supercars dream of a time like that at Laguna Seca. This is not to take credit away from Lamborghini, but I seriously doubt its ability to lap the GT2 on most tracks, let alone the Carrera GT.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> The old (slowest) 492 hp Diablo 2WD from 1990 laps the nurburgring in 8,14 seconds. All other models are faster. I do not know if any 4WD Diablos have been tested at Nardo. It is "impossible" for the Murcielago to lap the nurburgring 1 mintue faster than any Diablo, and not near 7,14 seconds.Santa Agata factory declarations are very strange!!! Sometimes right, sometimes very understated, sometimes very overstate!! GT2 is good car, and has incredible grip like Ferrari F50. Ferrari F50 and Porsche GT2 have an advantage over cars like Ferrari F40 and Diablo GT because of their superior handeling; but on many tracks, Diablo GT and Ferrari F40 are ahead of GT2 and F50 because of their superior acceleration and speed! F40 and Diablo GT have handeling that can compete, but on tracks like nurburgring they not show their best times. And yes, excuse error, I mean "Anti-roll cage" for Clubsport version of GT2.
the murcielago has more horsepower than the carrera gt(murcielago has 580hp, carrera gt has 558 hp), but the carrera gt is much lighter(murcielago is 1650kg, the carrera gt is 1250kg). the accelaration of the carrera gt is also amazing, porsche has claimed that it can do 0-160kph within 6 seconds. i dunno bout the murcielago's 0-160kph time, but the 0-100kph in 3.8 seconds is also very amazing.<!-- Signature -->
Both cars are awesome. But, the carrera gt is a convertible, so it wouldn't be as stable. The Murcielago is faster, but i'd rather the porsche.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Priviledge of the Speed 7</i> <b>Both cars are awesome. But, the carrera gt is a convertible, so it wouldn't be as stable. The Murcielago is faster, but i'd rather the porsche.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> What do you base that assumption on? There are no concrete numbers outlining the Porsche's performance. Also, to quote another, more knowledgable member on this forum, the Carrera GT's chassis is modeled after an LMP-type race car's chassis. LM race cars have unparalled torsional rigidity, and excellent stability. Being open-topped also lowers the car's center of mass, which allows for higher cornering speeds. L8R <!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from alexly</i> <b>Cgt is faster but Labmo is more beautiful!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Excuse me did I read right? Murcielago more *cough* beautiful? The thing is too squarish. The Carrera Gt is the better looking car between the two.<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CarreraGtRacer</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from alexly</i> <b>Cgt is faster but Labmo is more beautiful!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Excuse me did I read right? Murcielago more *cough* beautiful? The thing is too squarish. The Carrera Gt is the better looking car between the two.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> thats your own opinion.... We dont need to hear it.<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from MR FLY BY</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from CarreraGtRacer</i> <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from alexly</i> <b>Cgt is faster but Labmo is more beautiful!</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Excuse me did I read right? Murcielago more *cough* beautiful? The thing is too squarish. The Carrera Gt is the better looking car between the two.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> thats your own opinion.... We dont need to hear it.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Too bad you are gonna hear my opinions and if you don't like them then too bad. These forums are about opinion and if you don't like to hear mine go do something else.<!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from I Hate RustStangs</i> <b>Carrera GT vs. Murcielago? are you kidding me?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Its funny huh? You'd go with the Carrera Gt too huh? Yeah I understand.<!-- Signature -->
I don't think this comparison is fair, considering you can get 1.75 of these for one C-GT<!-- Signature -->
wassup dai dai its lamborghini murcielago all da way freaking carrera gt can't burn the lamobrghini<!-- Signature -->
i think the 911 GT2 is more of a challege...but if i can choose one car i would choose the murcielago...the 12 cylinders is just music to my ears<!-- Signature -->
What a stupid flame war, just like another thread about the same topic posted by gsolinas. People who said Porsche has no tradition, or soul for that matter, should really take their heads out of their asses, since they don't know what they're talking about. And someone who commented on the Murcielago being a geniune Italian sports car, I can only laugh at that with irony. CarreraGtRacer: would you please stop being a child and let others have their opinions? If they don't like the CarreraGT, fine, which makes the people (like us) who likes it even better. From now on, just leave them alone. Wait 'til the CarreraGT gets out of the factory and into a race track, and we'll see from then on. snyper: don't give me that bullshit of saying that you like both cars as much, when clearly you favored the Lambos. Not only are you patronizing the Porsche fans, you're also an ethical disgrace among the Lamborghinians. It's much more respected if you just stick with one truly, rather than being a hypocrite. You are down there with Jackamo and gsolinas, the few that made a solid impression. I guess the only sensible and knowledgable one here is EliseS2. Why do I believe he knows his stuff? First, he's a Lotus fan, if not, then an Elise fan at least. The Lotus people knows their shit about cars, due to the company's philosophy in a car's design, chassis, weight, aerodynamics, etc. Now all modern F1 and GT-prototypes (and even the Carrera GT, unsure about the Murcielago though) are all monocoque-chassis, and who developed and created the idea of a monocoque chassis? Colin Chapman---founder of Lotus. Who was the first to use wings on their F1 cars to add downforce? Lotus. Who was the first to use groundeffect in F1 to dominate in F1? Lotus. So what's my point? My point is you know who are the ones with knowledge, and who are the ones that are just talking shit. Add to that, after seeing all 10 pages of this thread, most of EliseS2's posts were immediately challenged by Jackamo, who could only back it up with facts and figures, which is not knowledge, but just information. No doubt that Jackamo knows a lot, but please be a little bit more insightful, rather than keep dissing and doubting the CarreraGT's ability, by saying stupid shit like "impossible," while at the same time up-playing Murcielago's ability, without some creditable facts and numbers. Why can't you just give credits where it deserves? The OLD Nurburgring is a very long, gruelling track. It demands handling. It also has long straight, so that even the Murcielago could kill some time at those parts. But if you want to argue that the Murcielago has better handling than not even the CarreraGT, but the 996GT2 alone, then you're just pointing a gun to your head. Keep in mind that the 911 is rear-engine, which DOESN'T help in terms of a car's handling. So it's pretty amazing when Porsche can suspension-tune such a car to be a killer on the track. Plus, the 911 has been developed for over 30 years!! This car was not design by "some guy" and put together by "some engineers." It was first conceived by Butzi Porsche, Ferry Porsche's son. And their engineers---they all helped produced winners on the race track, all the way back from the 1950s. And from all that to the 996GT2 of today, that's really amazing. Even if I'm not a Porsche fan, I will still be amazed, or at least give them credits for what they have achieved. And for those people who says that Porsche can't built sportscars, here's their pedigree: Le Mans 24 Hour Race: 16 outright wins Sebring 12 Hour Race: 17 outright wins Daytona 24 Hour Race: 19 outright wins Whereas Ferrari only has 9 outright LeMans24 wins, all before the 70s. I don't know about Sebring and Daytona for them, but I know they have some wins in those two events too. But for Lamborghini---> none. So my opinion: Lamborghini has got nothing to show for, except for its cars. I'm not saying that their cars are bad, but I'm saying their cars wouldn't be any good either, simply because there's no factory-racing effort to back up the car's performance, or its supposedly "racy" image. It's all purely aesthetic. You don't have to agree, nor do I want any of you to. But if you have a real opinion that fights another's, at least back it up with something concrete, rather than a bunch of numbers, by a bunch of people who just drives expensive cars for a living, type a couple of hundred words about it, then gladly collect $6.99 per issue from you, cashing in to later get their dream cars while you're still drooling over it. This thread (and any other threads like this) should end about now, since it's just depressing, and retarded.<!-- Signature -->
Hey Porsche Fan, You're the dopiest fool on the Lambo luvin planet. If the porsche has recorded 4 seconds 0-100kph, and the Murcielago recorded 3.7, but you claim the porsche got 3.6, then the Murcielago can get even faster than that. It also depends on how you drive, and where the first gear maxs out.