Quote Originally Posted by Kitdy View Post
It is better to under promise and over deliver than vice-versa. I like their policy.

The manufacturer numbers are kinda bogus anyways. Road tests are more accurate, but as we know, those cars are/were often juiced in anycase (Ferrari, 60s muscle, I presume many more).
That's fair. Who knows, maybe they like testing the cars on a surface with absurd amounts of friction, or they swapped out the tires for Michelin Pilot Super Sports, etc etc.

Underpromise and overdeliver. That's a good policy by any book.

Quote Originally Posted by Ferrer View Post
In my opinion some cars have gotten to fast for its own good. Trying to channel 340 angry bavarian horsepowers through the rear wheels and have fun in a mountain pass and not crash is far too much for my talent level.

I understand that the four wheel drive Merc is far easier to drive fast, but must be far less involving... I'd still consider one to replace the M140i though.

Tis true. The Merc hot hatch costs half as much as the old Porsche Turbo. And that is without taking into account inflation or the fact that VAT rates were lower 15 years ago.
Captura.PNG
The big difference is that the Mercedes looks like ass. Even when placed next to a 996 broken egg era 911.

Quote Originally Posted by Revo View Post
Oh yes, base Carrera is a plenty fast car.

In the attachment is a test results for Carrera 4S, done by German magazine Auto, Motor und Sport. Tested car was fitted with Sport Chrono package and this time it was slower than Porsche's official figure.
Haha, it's all a numbers game.