NFSUnlimited.net

steelsnake00 wrote:Hasn't ran the ring. And I can't see it beating the Radical SR4 even when it does, or the high-BHP ultimas. Some of them are running 800+bhp/ton out of the factory, and the Veyron for all it's 1001bhp does have the slight problem of a high kerb weight.

Of course not, because those are more track-biased cars.

Road legal, nonetheless, and production.

S'pose. Ultima's are pretty full-on for a production car.

darknight788 wrote: and to clear some things up the rs4 has been tested 0-60 in 4.8 seconds and a quarter mile at 13.3. while a z51 corvette will go 0-60 in 4.3 seconds and a quarter mile in 12.7 and a z06 will do 0-60 in 3.5 seconds and a quarter mile in 11.5.though a RS6 will do a little better than the z51 corvette with 4.3 seconds 0-60 and 12.6 1/4 mile (C&D)

Our survey says:

Audi RS4 - 224bhp/ton, 13.0 @ 109mph - £50k

Corvette C6 - 272bhp/ton, 12.4 @ 115mph - £60k

Corvette Z06 - 361bhp/ton, 11.7 @ 125mph - £70k

I still know where my money would go.

if the comparison was not done by the exact same driver with the exact same conditions then there really isnt a point. i know the stats i posted were done at different times by different drivers. your times and mine are pretty close a drivers skill and conditions could change them

darknight788 wrote:if the comparison was not done by the exact same driver with the exact same conditions then there really isnt a point. i know the stats i posted were done at different times by different drivers. your times and mine are pretty close a drivers skill and conditions could change them

Not to mention weather conditions, the quality of the track they were timed on, ect ect.
Give me the RS4 anyday. At least it isnt American

give me the corvette anyday atleast it isnt german

Have to agree with steelsnake here (SHOCK! HORROR! ). German cars are built better than American cars. The RS4 may not be fast, but it can still pay the bills at 20k pounds cheaper than a 'Vette.

I'd have any european car over an American one.

darknight788 wrote:if the comparison was not done by the exact same driver with the exact same conditions then there really isnt a point. i know the stats i posted were done at different times by different drivers. your times and mine are pretty close a drivers skill and conditions could change them

I wasnt trying to state you were wrong, in fact quite the opposite. I was actually backing you up on the times. All times found on the internet are theoretical really, if I pulled a time in the dry, and then my friends 700bhp Supra pulled a time in the wet, Id probably win. That doesnt mean my car is faster by any means. The RS4 has consistency due to AWD, neither of the Vettes do.

I still say you cant beat AWD for a street car.

i wasnt saying you were wrong either your times you posted are realistic and believeable, the weather conditions and conditions of the track and the skill of the driver can sway the times. im was just saying that the times were not posted by the same driver on the same day which could have also made a difference, maybe the rs4 could keep up with the z51
as for a awd street car your right nothing will handle better around the tight turns, the audi tt must go around turns like its on rails

@ koenigsegg, if you want the best built cars go buy a honda or toyota or any of those, they last forever, which is suprising since the way some of them get treated

Unfortunately, for the most part they're also dull, uninspired and downright boring to drive.

yer the camry was hailed as a race car with the race inspired v6 when it first came out. but they do last a long time. my parents had a camry for 14 years never had a problem

My mum had a Fiesta XR2 that was almost problem free for 10 years. In contrast my dad had a Mercedes E300 Turbodiesel which was nightmarish. It shows you win some, you loose some as far as reliablitiy is concerned.

...a Honda NSX is dull?

Of course there are exceptions. Explain "for the most part".

I'm thinking he meant Hondas and Toyotas currently in production, though I wouldn't consider the S2000 dull.

Theres also the Civic Type-R...R thats coming out soon, the DC5 'Teg, the S2k as you mentioned. But yeah, Toyota have become dull.

I'll give you DC5 'Teg, early Civic Type R's (I really dislike the current one and the earlier "breadvan" one), NSX, Gen 3/4 Celica, Gen 3 Supra...

The Type-R-R looks set to compete with the Clio Cup car that Renault sell, full cage, sequential box, slicks...should be quite a beast. Youre also missing the MR2 turbo and the MKIV TT from that list. Hate it all you want, the Supra is a masterpiece.

The only things I don't like about Supras are the stock mags, and the stock front bumper. They're pretty damn dull...

If I got an S2000 I'd put the Amuse GT-1 bodykit on it, complete with carbon fibre bonnet, and a C-West spoiler.

Other than those and the NSX, Honda and Toyota are dull.

THAT is why I like Euro cars better, even if they are a heck of a lot more expensive.

meh i would take italian cars over euro cars

Yeah all new Toyotas are boring, but most late model Hondas are very nice to drive in my opinion. I'd certainly take a Honda over any European car in the same price range/category.

darknight788 wrote:meh i would take italian cars over euro cars

Wow... Just wow.

xHaZxMaTx wrote:

darknight788 wrote:meh i would take italian cars over euro cars

Wow... Just wow.

boganbusman wrote:Yeah all new Toyotas are boring, but most late model Hondas are very nice to drive in my opinion. I'd certainly take a Honda over any European car in the same price range/category.

Have you suddenly aged to 78?

Nah man . . . I know they don't exactly set your pants on fire, but Hondas just have a nice sharp and agile feel about them, and the build quality is impressive too. Nothing special about them really, they're just 'pleasant'