Test by Autocar

Discussion in '2002 Ferrari Enzo' started by mafalda, Apr 24, 2003.

  1. Re: Test by Autocar

    If you don't like it thats fine, everyone has their opinion. I personally think your crazy, it looks AWESOME. But you think the Bugatti that is comming out is nice? That car looks gross dude. And Ferrari did allow like 10 magazines to come to Italy to test the car, so I don't know how old your information was? Also the "F60" is the Enzo Ferrari, and it beat the McLaren in EVERY test category but top speed by a little. The McLaren has been BEATEN, if you didn't know that you need to read up buddy.
  2. Re: Test by Autocar

    sorry for quoting road & track magazine... i forgot that all of their stats are wrong all the time and everything...
  3. Re: Test by Autocar

    would u please face it that there are cars better out there then the enzo.. the enzo designing or horrible. the speed is better wit the maclaren. the boss mustang is better 0-60 the aerodynamics it loses to koenigsegg. i would take the maclaren or the koenigsegg anyday over this. it is a super car but its over rated

  4. Re: Test by Autocar

    Dude you have no clue. First off the Boss Mustang is a ONE OFF concept car, that does NOTHING but go straight. It is still a pos Mustang. The McLaren ONLY has a slightly higher top speed, and even that is a maybe because incase you didn't know the car Autocar tested was found out to have been a tweaked prototype, NOT a production car! The Koenigsegg, besides being ugly and 80's looking is not a high tech car AT ALL. And the Koenigsegg's aerodynamics aren't even close to the Enzo Ferrari! And they said that themselves! Get your facts correct before you come on here saying all this bs dude.
  5. #30 BMW hater, Nov 30, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  6. Re: Test by Autocar

    and bugatti runs a 2.9 60... says it in the mags straight from europe

  7. Re: Test by Autocar

    You are going by their website, hahahaha thats funny. I go by the facts in the magazines. And bottom line is that it is NOT AS high-tech as the Ferrari PERIOD. They basically all said the Koenigsegg falls short to the Enzo Ferrari overall. The Ferrari is more advanced, and can be driven hard easier. The Koenigsegg is a great car, it is just to much of a "cottage industry" car to compete on ALL LEVELS with the Enzo Ferrari though. And as far as the doors on the Koenigsegg, that looks gay on that car. And Ferrari didn't "copy" Saleens doors, that way to open doors has been used before incase you didn't know.

  8. Re: Test by Autocar

    Okay let me explain this. I have read the same as you, but what you neglect to say is the fact that they only have two prototypes and thats it. Their test driver said "he thinks it might" do about a 2.9 sec 0-60. I doubt it will do that. It is a funny thing to say when they don't even have anyway to prove it!!!! I guess if you read you also heard how it handles so crappy its test driver lost control and almost wrecked one of the only two prototypes they have in California huh? And how its brakes aren't up to par? And how so far most of the people who have seen it say it looks "fat"?
  9. Re: Test by Autocar

    doors havent been used before by ferrari.... the koenigsegg is just better dude get over it... the enzo flat up sux
  10. Re: Test by Autocar

    nope no guess its says in the dupont registry exotic car mag that it goes 0-60 in 2.9 and 0-100 in 6.3.... no guesses or estimates... now the bugatti does cost more and i dont care if it looks fat... its looks nice, for the bad things they have to say about it the only thing they said was dont expect AAA to fix it... nothing about the brakes or the handling... hmm wonder why? and well it costs an ESTIMATE of 1,200,000, and since ur God of an enzo is so great we might as well place the enzo at that price too if its all that u say it is
  11. Re: Test by Autocar

    aaaaaand motor trend just said the carrera GT runs to 60 in 3.2 for basically 230,000 less dollars. and well the HP and torque isnt of the enzo so i could just imagine how bad the enzo would get raped if the GT did have that kind of power

  12. Re: Test by Autocar

    You take English? Learn how to read I never said "by Ferrari". Doors have opened that way before.

  13. Re: Test by Autocar

    Do you have a brain? I don't think so. THOSE ARE ESTIMATES. There isn't even a production car to test! Give me a break with all this bs comming from your knowledgeless mouth. And that Bugatti, IF IT MAKES IT TO PRODUCTION is UGLY and handles shitty and has crappy brakes!

  14. Re: Test by Autocar

    You have to learn to read. I have that Motor Trend issue here. It says ESTIMATED PERFORMANCE!!!! So even it it does that time, it is still SLOWER then the Enzo Ferrari! And the Porsche has way less technology in it, and is a stupid convertible. A "real" supercar is not a convertible.
  15. Re: Test by Autocar

    how do u know... did u drive it... people have different opinions and they arent #$%#in estimated times.. they are proof the times dont say estimated therefore they are what they are... thats what they stand... if it makes it to production the enzo will be a nothingless POS in the dirt

  16. Re: Test by Autocar

    GET YOUR EYES CHECKED, I have the issue right here. It says MT ESTIMATED TIMES. Give me a break, open your eyes and read. Even if the times are accurate it is slower then the Ferrari.
  17. Re: Test by Autocar

    how is 2.9 to 60 slower then the ferrari???

    how is 252MPH slower then the ferrari??? if u love this car so much u know the stats. and u know the bugatti is faster in straight up speed. or u wouldnt be sitting here arguing that its 3.1 60 instead of 3.4... the bugatti beats both so stfu

    and to top it off they arent estimated.. in ur book maybe and maybe i just happen to have a new version so somethings have changed. ever think of that one.. ever think that u were wrong... well get to steppin and get used to the idea

  18. Re: Test by Autocar

    They isn't even one of those ugly ass Buguatti's around to test. ALL OF THE FIGURES ARE ESTIMATES THEN!!!! NO MAGAZINE HAS TESTED ONE!!!! And they probably never will cause that blooted pos of a car has soooo many major problems. And even if it does a 0-60 in 2.9 sec, thats 2 TENTHS quicker then a Enzo Ferrari and it had to add another 341 hp to do it!!!! Thats a joke. And the damn Bugatti is a pig around a race track and has crappy ass brakes, so who cares????
  19. Re: Test by Autocar

    if it is estimated it would say.. because the estimate for the price is 1,200,000 and its on the same page.. the estimated price is on the same page, if they would estimate the price why would they be scared to estimate the time if it was estimated... somethin gi dont understand....

  20. Re: Test by Autocar

    I've read the same stuff, and look at it this way. THERE IS NO PRODUCTION CAR YET, so how can they have real figures? Whatever, I am moving on this is getting old, lets just drop it.
  21. Re: Test by Autocar

  22. Re: Test by Autocar

    holy shit did u see the pic of the day on 12/15???? that thing looks #$%#in amazing... thats the ultimate enzo

  23. Re: Test by Autocar

    I saw that last week on a different message board. That guy does shit like that to all sorts of cars. It is all done in Photoshop, it is not a real car. Thankgod...that thing has to much crap "photoshopped" on it lol.
  24. Re: Test by Autocar

    damn that thing looks nice as hell. i hate using photoshop though
  25. Re: Test by Autocar

    Yea, that was awesome, at first i tohught that it was a celica but i didn't zoom in on it.

Share This Page