Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen wilson
A bit off topic, but I keep hearing comparisons to the Lotus on this site, and how the Boxster should be more "stripped down" and lighter. Why didn't those who want a "race care for the street" but a Lotus to begin with? Is it the cost, and relative rarety of Lotus cars? It seems that it would save effort of trying to strip weight from their cars. I'm not being confrontational, just honestly curious.
|
Porsche built it's name by building little light cars that could outrun the big engined Mercedes, Auto Unions, Ferraris and Maseratis. The German Lotus, if you will. We know they can build small, extremely fun cars that are as tough as bank vaults. They just don't do it and I know it's because of a drive for larger sales numbers and more market share. They're not building sports cars any more and it's dissapointing. Corvettes are lighter than 911s. That's not right.
I'll be buying an Elise when I replace the Boxster, but I'll be loosing the tight, solid structure, the intoxicating engine noises, and the ability to get into a fender bender and NOT total the car. Or maybe I'll get the Alfa instead and just deal with Italian build quality.
Threaded Mode
