NFSUnlimited.net

KammyworldRacerGT4 wrote:OH, you mean sex, right?

xHaZxMaTx wrote:What's all this nonsense about Rolls and Bentleys? You don't buy either to drive - you buy them to be driven in.

You buy a Maybach to be driven in. Bentley and Rolls-Royce are meant for you to drive, and to be driven in (the 4-door models).

Koenigsegg_Rox wrote:@ Andre: What about the Bentley Brooklands?

I don't like it. It's too much, I think - more to the rich-ageing demographics. I don't like the Azure and the Arnage either. I don't know about you, but I never approve the designs of these two cars. I don't mind being ridden in either one (who wouldn't?!), but I'd never buy them over the Continental series.

My camaro will always be my favorite car, until the new camaro is released.

I wish I could ship my Camaro to Korea...

Mclaren SLR Sterling Moss is pretty cool...

xHaZxMaTx wrote:

KammyworldRacerGT4 wrote:OH, you mean sex, right?

Whatever...

I just remembered seeing a black Evo IX around my school last year.

a car i would buy with my own money is an rsx-type s
but any car- probly a v8 vantage
cool, understated styling
fast
not a gas guzzler as far as supercars go
metallic silver, baby!

Hi guys, I left the website for long time but that came up with a advantage
I made researches about cars (Exotic, Muscle, Tuner, Concepts, sports and formula) that is not mentioned in alot of websites, Now you see...

No I don't.

I can't wait to see what you will come out with.. Better not be junk!!

Sharpenor wrote:Hi guys, I left the website for long time but that came up with a advantage
I made researches about cars (Exotic, Muscle, Tuner, Concepts, sports and formula) that is not mentioned in alot of websites, Now you see...

Good. Keep it to yourself and don't bother anyone else with it, because I for one don't want to hear the oppinions of whoever updated Wikipedia last.

Toyota Corolla AE86 N2

Toshiro wrote:No MazdaSpeed MX-5?

Allways!

1st.Nisan 240SX '1992

2nd.Toyota Supra Twin Turbo '1997

3rd.Eunos Roadster '1989

4th.RX-7 Savanna

5th.Mazda 5 '2008

6th.Nike One '2022

7th.Peugeot 206 GTI '2002

8th.Toyota Yaris '2000

9th.Nissan Track runner 350Z '2001

10th.Toyota GT-One

11th.TVR Tamora '2003

12th.Lotus Elise 111R '2004

13th.Honda Beat'1991

14th.Mazda RX-8

I LOVE JAPANESE CARS!

Your favourite car is a watered down, 2.4 litre, dull as dishwater Japanese coupé made boring and sluggish for the American market?

hmmm... my favorite cars are the Ford Mustang Boss (1965) and the Lamborghini Miura.

240sxlover wrote:
1st.Nisan 240SX '1992

Come to Australia! We have the 200SX. It pwns the 240SX.

AWD, tiwn-turbo v6 for 79,090. enough said.

topsy kret1 wrote:AWD, tiwn-turbo v6 for 79,090. enough said.

It's not exactly as appealing as an Aston though.. In which currency?

Not to mention the fact that yes the R35 is a cheap supercar but it's not reeeaaaalllly that brilliant. That and the transmission is a doozy to pay for. The price to pay for turning on launch control? Approximately 20 grand. And that is in USD as well. One guy imported one here to Australia for our Targa Tasmania road rally, and it didn't do as well as expected. I believe it was something along the lines of 36th overall when it was actually one of the most technically advanced and most powerful cars in the rally.

The R35 is a car for the kind of people who would rather be in the engineers seat on Concorde than fly it. Yes, your going to go very, very fast, perhaps faster than just about anything else on the road- it's certainly going to be a lot cheaper than anything else that fast. But it's just not interesting, or involving, or good looking, or well presented. I honestly don't think it's going to detract people from Porsche 911 GT3's and Audi R8's, regardless of which is faster around the Nurburgring. I know I wouldn't be tempted by one.

Koenigsegg_Rox wrote:Not to mention the fact that yes the R35 is a cheap supercar but it's not reeeaaaalllly that brilliant. That and the transmission is a doozy to pay for. The price to pay for turning on launch control? Approximately 20 grand. And that is in USD as well. One guy imported one here to Australia for our Targa Tasmania road rally, and it didn't do as well as expected. I believe it was something along the lines of 36th overall when it was actually one of the most technically advanced and most powerful cars in the rally.

The transmission is fine. Nailing it in launch control with semi slicks puts a tremendous amount of stress on the drivetrain.

...so was the car slow or was it due to the driver's lack of skill?

I don't know any other car that eats transmissions at the rate the R35 is claimed to do under hard use. The 911 Turbo has just as much power and they don't throw their cogs everywhere if you give them some beans.

The Targa Tasmania is frequented by some of the best professional and non-professional racing drivers in the world. It's not an event characterised by "lack of skill". The GTR was miles off the pace of 911 Turbos and even far less powerful GT3s throughout the race. In fact, it was beaten by a 1995 BMW M3.

steelsnake00 wrote:I don't know any other car that eats transmissions at the rate the R35 is claimed to do under hard use. The 911 Turbo has just as much power and they don't throw their cogs everywhere if you give them some beans.

I haven't read much about GT-Rs throwing their cogs around under hard use, unless it was ''abused'' using launch control. As far as I know, the 911 Turbo's launch off the line isn't nearly as aggressive as the GTR's.

I do not own either of these cars, so I shall quit talking about things I merely observe with my eyes.

steelsnake00 wrote:The Targa Tasmania is frequented by some of the best professional and non-professional racing drivers in the world. It's not an event characterised by "lack of skill". The GTR was miles off the pace of 911 Turbos and even far less powerful GT3s throughout the race. In fact, it was beaten by a 1995 BMW M3.

Even if the event isn't characterised by lack of skill, the GTR shouldn't be that much off pace.

The 911 turbo's launch is equally as vicious. Both cars have launch control, the 911 is considerably lighter, but runs wheels a half-inch wider. The 911T will manage 0-60 in 3.2 seconds with the Chrono package and launch control (manual box) and with that package has 510lb ft of torque. The GT-R has equalled the 0-60 time using the double-clutch 'box and LC and has 420lb ft. Both cars have managed a mid-11 quarter mile in independent testing. If anything, the 911 Turbo should have a more vicious launch. Porsche has dispuited the claim that the GT-R is "so much faster" as their independent tests using a standard, road-going GT-R and couldn't manage a time better than 7.40.00, even with some of their best test drivers behind the wheel.

Andre_online wrote:

topsy kret1 wrote:AWD, tiwn-turbo v6 for 79,090. enough said.

It's not exactly as appealing as an Aston though.. In which currency?

in the rather low, quite useless, uncomparable u.s. dollar. i wish i was on the eruo (i apologize for spelling).

if you really want to know......

Nissan GT-R
o 420 hp @ 6,400 rpm
o 0-60 mph: 3.5s (3.3s w/ launch control)
o Top Speed: 193 mph
o 430 lb-ft @ 3,200-5,200
o MSRP $76,840(base) 79,090(premium)

this is from the GT-R website.
http://www.gtrnissan.com/index.en.us.ht ... al_header#


Porsche 911 GT2
o 530 hp @ 6,500 rpm
o 0-60 mph: 3.6 s
o Top Track Speed: 204 mph
o
o MSRP $ 194,000.00

Porsche 911 GT3
o 435 hp @ 7,600 rpm
o 0-60 mph: 4.0 s
o Top Track Speed: 194 mph
o
o MSRP $ 112,200.00

this is from the Porsche website.
http://www.porsche.com/usa/

between the two websites, you can all look at my awesome Nissan and your pay-too-much-sportscar.