German Supercars: MB SL65 AMG Black Series vs. Porsche 911 GT2

[LeonOfTheDead]

I would take the SL65 BS.
just because I don't like this 911 GT2 (I prefer the first 996 GT2), and I would prefer a 997 GT3 RS to the GT2.
the SL65 isn't great or anything, but it's quite exaggerated and it's body kit a la DTM somehow appeals me.
if I had to choose between the two, I would go for the bigger one, just for the sake of it.
otherwise follow Kidty thoughts, perhaps ending to a different car, but still valid arguments.

[NicFromLA]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

I'd sell both these cars and buy myself a ZR1 or F430 both of which I'd say are vastly superior in their function. To either of these. The Ferrari by all accounts is incredible. Oh wait I ruined the thread as we were meant to choose one of the German cars. Ok, I choose the R8 which is vastly superior to either one of these cars in my eyes and hell why not, I'll take the V10 version as well engine amidships (optimal), it's Audi so has nice fittings, more focused than the Black Series which Ferrer has pinned down perfectly, better looking than the GT2 and with engine in one of the two correct positions. Or if you want a fast proper sportscar Porsche, buy the GT3. If you want a fast proper sportscar Benz, buy a Porsche or Ferrari or R8 because Benz sucks ass at making sportscars.

The End.

Kitdy, I don't think I've ever been so in agreement with a post. I just thought that since these are both hyper (theoretically) track day versions of classic German cars they were worth comparing. I love the R8, but it lacks the history of the SL and 911 and there is not yet a track day special version.

[taz_rocks_miami]

Having the money, I would get both.

[Kitdy]

Rocke called the SL65 Black Series a "steroid cruiser".

I think that is fitting.

[clutch-monkey]

neither, but of the two, the GT2. generation not explicitly mentioned, so 993 GT2...

[Guibo]

As much as I dislike the standard facelifted SL, I'm starting to really like the SL65 Black. Looks so outlandishly brutal. Perfect for prowling city streets at night, or strafing out on the open highway.
But I think ultimately I'd rather have the GT2.

[RUF917LH]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

I'd sell both these cars and buy myself a ZR1 or F430 both of which I'd say are vastly superior in their function. To either of these. The Ferrari by all accounts is incredible. Oh wait I ruined the thread as we were meant to choose one of the German cars. Ok, I choose the R8 which is vastly superior to either one of these cars in my eyes and hell why not, I'll take the V10 version as well engine amidships (optimal), it's Audi so has nice fittings, more focused than the Black Series which Ferrer has pinned down perfectly, better looking than the GT2 and with engine in one of the two correct positions. Or if you want a fast proper sportscar Porsche, buy the GT3. If you want a fast proper sportscar Benz, buy a Porsche or Ferrari or R8 because Benz sucks ass at making sportscars.

The End.































And ugly.

The Actual End.

Don't listen to every TV pundit mate! As the 935 and the 911 S/T rally car have demonstrated it is possible to have the engine in the arse and still win. I'd venture to say the the 911 handles better than the R8 in the hands of Hans Stuck or Walter Rohrl. And the R-8 is bloody slow.... The reason the 911 is superior to the R-8 (aside from subjective things like its perfectly cute aesthetics) is the ability to place its snout in the corner and alter its direction at almost any given moment. With the addition of TC the 911 understeers slightly(like the r8). As much as I love Top Gear Jeremy Clarkson has been perpetuating myths about the oversteer. Besides the GT3 won in a track test against it. I've been in both a classic 911 and the old 996 and the handling difference is marked. The 996 has very little body roll and really wants to hurl its snout into the corner. No signs of the rear stepping out as opposed to 911 SC. Concur on the merc stuff though.

[Kitdy]

So culver is out resident big three apologist and RUF917LH you are our resident Porsche apologist.

Sweet.

[Rockefella]

Originally Posted by RUF917LH

Don't listen to every TV pundit mate! As the 935 and the 911 S/T rally car have demonstrated it is possible to have the engine in the arse and still win. I'd venture to say the the 911 handles better than the R8 in the hands of Hans Stuck or Walter Rohrl. And the R-8 is bloody slow.... The reason the 911 is superior to the R-8 (aside from subjective things like its perfectly cute aesthetics) is the ability to place its snout in the corner and alter its direction at almost any given moment. With the addition of TC the 911 understeers slightly(like the r8). As much as I love Top Gear Jeremy Clarkson has been perpetuating myths about the oversteer. Besides the GT3 won in a track test against it. I've been in both a classic 911 and the old 996 and the handling difference is marked. The 996 has very little body roll and really wants to hurl its snout into the corner. No signs of the rear stepping out as opposed to 911 SC. Concur on the merc stuff though.

I don't care how much you care to explain but, Rear-engined < Mid-engined. Power-on oversteer and weight transfer does not mean better lap times.

[Kitdy]

Originally Posted by RUF917LH

Don't listen to every TV pundit mate! As the 935 and the 911 S/T rally car have demonstrated it is possible to have the engine in the arse and still win.

I don't watch Top Gear, I do however know that what Rocke says about engine placement is true.

Originally Posted by RUF917LH

I'd venture to say the the 911 handles better than the R8 in the hands of Hans Stuck or Walter Rohrl.

Based on what?

Originally Posted by RUF917LH

And the R-8 is bloody slow.... The reason the 911 is superior to the R-8 (aside from subjective things like its perfectly cute aesthetics) is the ability to place its snout in the corner and alter its direction at almost any given moment. With the addition of TC the 911 understeers slightly(like the r8).

The R8 is not slow, especially the V10 one I'd imagine. The GT3 is more track focused anyways and also, there's more to cars that what wins on the track.

I personally, think having a car with engine out back is stupid - back when the 911 was introduced, and maybe even more so now. No matter how much you try to alter the chassis and use electronics to neuter the Rear-enginedness of the car, it is still gonna be there.

[RUF917LH]

Originally Posted by Kitdy

I don't watch Top Gear, I do however know that what Rocke says about engine placement is true.



Based on what?



The R8 is not slow, especially the V10 one I'd imagine. The GT3 is more track focused anyways and also, there's more to cars that what wins on the track.

I personally, think having a car with engine out back is stupid - back when the 911 was introduced, and maybe even more so now. No matter how much you try to alter the chassis and use electronics to neuter the Rear-enginedness of the car, it is still gonna be there.

Do not question the Professor... He knows all...
[IMG]www.millennum.de/referate/autonazi/Image2.jpg[/IMG]
And relative to cars in its price range the R8 is slow. The new 997 Carrera S with PDK would kill it.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by Rockefella

I don't care how much you care to explain but, Rear-engined < Mid-engined. Power-on oversteer and weight transfer does not mean better lap times.

This forum uses both sides of the argument to ream on poor Porsche

Some say it's not soulful enough, that the Germans built a car that was unfeeling, and then there's those who think it's rear engined layout isn't the best for lap times? Holy hell enthusiasts are picky little bunch.

Ill take the SL65 because i think its interesting and has enough torque to spin the earth.

[Rockefella]

Not going to quote posts here because it's too tedious to do with my phone.

To ruf: The audi r8 was 1.8 seconds faster than the 997 carrera s at the top gear track. Oh, and the r8's lap was on a damp track. You sure it would kill it?

To Canuck: I was saying that in referance to ruf's post about 911 handling and rear engined not being a hinderance.

Leave the bias at the door; makes discussion and debate pointless.

[RUF917LH]

Originally Posted by Rockefella

I don't care how much you care to explain but, Rear-engined < Mid-engined. Power-on oversteer and weight transfer does not mean better lap times.

n rallying it does. The 914/6 was a miserable rally car and was mid-engined. It lost to the rear engined Renault Alpines. And in the hands of an experienced driver. i.e. Hans Stuck a rear engined car is a formidable machine becuase it allows finer placment of snout throughout the corner. Why did customers purchase the 935 over the BMW CSL? And how did the GT2 equal the new Gallardos lap-time on the top gear circuit?

To ruf: The audi r8 was 1.8 seconds faster than the 997 carrera s at the top gear track. Oh, and the r8's lap was on a damp track. You sure it would kill it?

Not the old 997 In the future I'll avoid bias. Sorry.

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by RUF917LH

n rallying it does. The 914/6 was a miserable rally car and was mid-engined. It lost to the rear engined Renault Alpines.

And then came the Stratos...