Re: slow, lumbering beast! (this thing is horrible)

Discussion in '2002 Lamborghini Murciélago' started by Christianmc, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. The original Countach is from the 70's. No one cares if a brand new WRX can beat a 30 year old Lamborghini. Things have advanced, if you didn't notice.Even then, the 30 year old Countach has it's advantages over the WRX.

    There are no solid facts concerning the performance of the F60 or Veyron, so what you say about them doesn't mean anything. There are no solid performance facts about the Murcielago either (other than factory claims). Acording to the specs on this website, a Veyron would blow away the F60, but obviously you don't care. You just want to bash Lamborghini.

    In any case, it doesn't matter, because none of the cars have been tested by outside sources for performance. You can't say with any certainty how they will compare, so stop making rash claims; Calling the Murcielago slow just shows that you do not know what you are talking about.
  2. I'm so agreeing with you.<!-- Signature -->
  3. excuse me but i have to add my 3 cents here!!!! i will agree that the Ferrari F60 and the Bugatti veryon are incredible cars, however, the Murcielago has a lower center of gravity than the veryon, also the veryon is alot heavier, so i would say that most likely that the veryon would loose to it around the track!!!

    Now on to the F60, it has been reported in Car and Driver, December issue 2001, The Three new Tenors, page 51 that the F60 will be geared for a more modest 205mph!!!!!, however much of a mistake that i think that this is it shows alot of class on Ferraris side, the Lambo is offered with a sport exhaust which increases the top speed to 215mph, and the areodynamic configuration also allows it to be increased by an additional 5-10mph, so though the ferrari F60 would most likely thrash the Murcielago on the track it would come no where near to its top speed!!!

    lol, <IMG SRC="">
  4. Personally, I could really care less about all this debate, based on the 0-60 times being .1 seconds different between the diablo gt and murcielago, I would have to say it would remain in the sub-12's in the 1/4, which is faster than any car in it's price range above or below. When you start talking about special model cars like an F60, which if you didn't realize is a special anniversary car, and is given more power (and cost more) for that sole purpose, then you have gone beyond your ability to judge. If lambo came out with a special anniversary murcielago, do you think anything could keep up? I don't hail to lambo, I stumbled onto this car's page, and this debate, I would never buy one even if I had the money. But I also would never buy a ferrari or anything exotic. Compare this lambo to any current production ferrari, and you will see that it's 1/4 mile times are almost a full second faster and it's top speed has a much higher potential. By the way, has anyone ever driven an exotic sports car? I've been a valet for some time now, and I can say that I'd take a zo6 vette over a 911 turbo, 550 maranello or any benz, jag, bmw or anything else you wanna throw my way. The only car's I haven't driven are a diablo and a 360 modena, but I hope to soon. Don't talk about slow until you get behind the wheel, because you really don't have any idea what you are talking about, and that's a fact. By the way 2002wrx, incase you were referring to bmw in your little quote, it's not spelled "bimmer".
  5. thank god hes gone, what a moron!!!!, i agree with u christianmc, i do think that the lambo would have a chance against the others lol
  6. This car is sex on wheels and blows your pussy 280bhp piece of jap crap away. have you actually looked at the new wrx it looks like a #$%#ing abortion. and as for the F60 i've seen pics and it looks shit. anyone can stick an f1 engine in an ugly ass carbon shell but it takes real skill to make something as beautiful as a diablo or murcielago which can still kick the shit outa most supercars. the only cars i know that can beat this are all limited edition and only 500 or so get made eg. McLaren F1, F50. Try and name any ferrari that stayed in production as long as the diablo or countach that could go 200mph+. and don't start shit about 550 twin turbo cos ferrari dont even make that it Koenig whereas lamborghini actually make a diablo twin turbo.
  7. Mucielago, Diablo GT, Diablo 6.0 beat F50.
    (Murcielago might beat Mclaren)

    I'm not saying anything else on that.

    Oh, and is that Diablo 6.0 VTTT a real car? Did they actually make it? Or is that just a doctored image?
  8. if u dont like the design of this car, fine, but u cant say anything else about it because u havent driven it, ive read 2 reviews in european car magazines and they both say it is 1 amazing car, VERY fast, fantastic handling and a surprisingly good cruiser aswell.

    as for the Bugatti Veyron, its 4 times the price and not out yet
    as for the Ferrari F60, its twice the price and about 3 years away
  9. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from 2002wrx</i>
    <b>ahem. . . . its ALMOST TWO TONS one of the many reasons why lamborghinis are overrated. . . . once the f60 comes out (not to mention the bugatti veyron, even if it does cost about 200k more than this price range. . . ) this thing will be blown out of the water. . . . wake me when lamborghini makes the smart decision and goes back to producing farm equipment, because this things stats are borring me to sleep. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Yeah I know it is amazing that a car thats almost 2 tons and has AWD can go 0-60 in 3.6 Which is more than any other car can say. 2 tons isnt that much for exotic European sports cars. Except for small V6 Porsches.
  11. slow, lumbering beast! (this thing is horrible)

    ahem. . . . its ALMOST TWO TONS one of the many reasons why lamborghinis are overrated. . . . once the f60 comes out (not to mention the bugatti veyron, even if it does cost about 200k more than this price range. . . ) this thing will be blown out of the water. . . . wake me when lamborghini makes the smart decision and goes back to producing farm equipment, because this things stats are borring me to sleep. <!-- Signature -->
  12. You don't know what you are talking about. You don't like lamborghini, but you probably would say the same thing even if you didn't see the stats. If you think it's too slow, you are ignoring the facts. Read my other post titled "For those who think the Murcielago is too slow."
  13. Are you on #$%#ing crack. This is the greatest lamborghini to ever go into production. And slow,my ass. 205mph is not very slow in the least bit. Lets see your little WRX go up against on of these things ass.
  14. OMG, you're moron, the day you have 200k and have this in your garage then you can mock it, until then shush, you have no comprehension how fast this car is. Oh and by the way, the WRX may be a bit quick but its small and uncomfortable inside.
  15. hehe the wrx is bigger than this thing inside. . kinda ironic since this thing wieghs 650 POUNDS MORE lol!

    also.. . not a single one of you defended the remarks i made about the f60 or the veyron being better. . instead you start making fun of the wrx! lol your too afraid to say anything about cars that are better than this thing. . go pick on a car in this things price
    range :p lol

    (oh, and btw. . . the wrx equals the orriginal countache's 0 to 60 mph (100kph) time)

    and, lambolover: no, this isn't the best lamborghini. . the diablo gt is better in almost all areas.<!-- Signature -->
  16. Mate
    your crappy wrx lacks one
    lamborghini have been making the worlds coolest cars since the miura and just look at the crap new wrx hmmmmmm nice lights and just go add some more turbos to your cars thats not cool making them n/a with 580hp is cool.
  17. Wat da #$%# is rong with u 2002wrx!!!!!!! This baby is awesome!
    ! da f60 will prbably be a little better but it also costs more. Da wrx is a #$%#in piece a shit!!!!!!!!!!! I hope someday u get a wrx and get rsn over by a steamroller!!!!!!!!
  18. I like the WRX. It's probably one of the best cars in its class. Nobody compared it to the Murcielago, so I'm not going to trash it. But your comments, 2002 WRX, are not based on any grounds. It's nonsense to say that the Murcielago (which, by the way, has more torque than a Diablo GTR or a Mclaren F1) is a slow lumbering beast. It would be a tight race between a Murcielago, an F60, and a Veyron on dry ground, and the Murcielago would smoke the F60 in the rain; then the Veyron will have a really hard time trying to beat a Murcielago.
  19. hehe thats funny. . . you guys are still taking cracks at a 25000 dollar car. . . thats humorous. . . .

    anyways. . . by slow i was not reffering to top speed. i was reffering to how ungraceful and unprecice it will move itself through corners. lamborghini has lost its touch. . . . wait a minute. . . . what am i talking about? lamborghini never had "its touch" hehe bye guys. . .flame away. . you wont get a response. . im done . . i expected a more civil and mature responce instead of

    "I hope someday u get a wrx and get rsn[run i assume. . ] over by a steamroller!!!!!!!! "

    well, kudos to Christianmc, the only person who handled his/herself maturely. . .and thanks for a good debate. . any of you that hate the wrx are welcome at the wrx forum <!-- Signature -->
  20. Neither was I reffering to top speed. I was thinking specifically about handeling. All three would be very competetive on dry ground, but in the rain the Murcielago has a big advantage (even over the 4WD veyron, because the Murcielag seems to have a much lower center of gravity, improving the control around the corners).
  21. what the fu*k, are you a crazy, or are you crazy. First when I saw this forum I thought I was seeing things, but then I found out that you just hate all lambo's, which means your insane, so your opinion does not matter to me or anyone else (I hope). So get the fu.*ck out of here you moron!<!-- Signature -->
  22. the F60-ENZO
    is .2 sec faster to 100km/h
    its top speed is about 360km/h
    its price is 450,000$ MORE then the Murcielago
    for that price i think the Murcielago is UNBEATABLE
    for the price of an ENZO you can buy 3 Murcielagos
    for the price of a Veyron you can get 5 #$%#ing Murcies
    the Veyron is a piece of shit on a track.
    gets killed by an elise (i assume).
    The Enzo isn't all that great price-wise compared to the mabo<!-- Signature -->
  23. Slow-no
  24. Ok this lambo is soo sooo fast, there is no way your pre-teen ass could handle its power.

    Around the track i'd go with an F60 (and don't argue price, when your thinking of spending 250+k on a car price probably isn't a factor). It is actually designed for it. Its design is based on proven formula 1 technology. When its out for testing i expect it to perform better then anyone's expectations.

    The Murcielago, like the diablo, countach and miura is designed a) to go faster then hell, and b) to look freaking awsome. And thats exactly what this car does. In my opinion lamborghini's have consistantly represended the most beautiful designs in automotive history. Its also more powerful then 95% of the population can handle, 0-60 in 3.7, 0-100 in 8.6 and a top speed of 205mph is insane.

    If your looking for lap times the new Enzo is your car. But if your looking to drive around and have everyone look at you while you try and keep from landing yourself in jail for wreckless driving...then the murcielago is the car for you.
  25. this car kicks ass better then any car you'll evr own. that goes to whoi ever made ths convo

Share This Page