who would win?

[Adam]

[QUOTE=TriGem2k]


Adam you’re a funny guy.... I think your calling the wrong guy a newbie... We OWN and I have driven more cars in my 19years of age then you can even think about. A couple of guys on this forum know me a little better.


I do not need to do any research on a topic in which I am quite familiar with...I am just not naive in thinking that the Boxster is FAST.

QUOTE]

Again, you are putting words in my mouth. I never said the boxster was a fast car...... I did say it is as fast or faster than particular mustangs such as the Mach 1. I don't pretend that my car is an 11 sec monster nor have I ever said it was fast. I don't really care how rich your folks are or how many drivers ed courses you have taken......your 19 and you've been here for a few mo. That classifies you as newbie in my book. I guess you are agreeing with me on the whole mustang thing now because I didn't see any rebuttal on that issue.

[Brucelee]

Play nice boys. We are (hopefully) all on the same team here.

Merry Christmas!

[sdkkv]

One of my neighbors in Birmingham had a 2004 Cobra with a "few" modifications. It showed 607hp on the dyno and was a daily driver. The biggest problem with it was it wouldn't / couldn't hook up the power in a consistent manner. It could smoke the tires until the cows came home but it wasn't a whole lot of fun to drive until you got it off the line and got the speed up a little. You can put as much power as you want under the hood but if the suspension isn't ready for it...good luck!

A Metro could have beat that thing in 0 to 100 feet!!!

I personally think one of the reasons so many people like the Boxster is it's consistent and predictable when you apply the gas. It doesn't get twitchy like so many other cars.

when changing my 97 boxster i actually tried a clk 320 as i like the look of it, i think it is one of the pretiest coupe on the road for a while now, unfortunately the interior was not up to scratch more like living room seat and vast space, as for the drive i pushed it in "manual" mode hard and the car decided that it would'nt do any gear change for me anymore and i had to go back in automatic to get going again, i obliviously stayed well away and bought myself my little S instead.
happy motoring

[Dr. Kill]

It is funny to hear Boxster owners talk about beating stock Mustang GTs. As a former owner of several Mustangs, I remember the guys on Mustangworld.com and Stangnet talking about beating Boxsters with ease. It is nice to see that we all love the cars we own.

I think that what several people mentioned above is critical – the driver - especially with the MT cars. I don’t know whether my last GT was faster than my 987 or not, but I can tell you that the 987 is MUCH easier to drive fast. The back end of the Stang is so light and the suspension so poor that a good launch is incredibly difficult. I imagine with me driving, I would get better ¼ mile times in the 987, but maybe somebody with serious talent might pull a better time in the ‘Stang, I don’t know. The other factor here is mods. Yes this is an academic question, but in reality, it is quite common for a street GT to be modded with inexpensive parts that will provide some very serious performance increases. In fact, I didn’t know any enthusiast drivers who did not have at least a couple of things done. I personally went nuts modding my GT until it was complete monster (much faster than my 987 and still only around $25k new including all of the parts).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dr. Kill

It is funny to hear Boxster owners talk about beating stock Mustang GTs. As a former owner of several Mustangs, I remember the guys on Mustangworld.com and Stangnet talking about beating Boxsters with ease. It is nice to see that we all love the cars we own.

I totally agree, the driver is a central variable. The guys on the stang board talking about beating boxsters with ease were probably racing 2.5L's and maybe some 2.7's.. I'm sure most of those guys don't know the difference between a base and an S. The stock and bolt-on Gt's should be able to see the dual outlet muffler as the boxster S is passing them. That's the dead give-away.

[TriGem2k]

Originally Posted by Adam

I totally agree, the driver is a central variable. The guys on the stang board talking about beating boxsters with ease were probably racing 2.5L's and maybe some 2.7's.. I'm sure most of those guys don't know the difference between a base and an S. The stock and bolt-on Gt's should be able to see the dual outlet muffler as the boxster S is passing them. That's the dead give-away.

Heres one for you guys.....I was beaten by a Mustang Mach 1 today twice, once from a dead stop and the other on the freeway...It was a buddy of mine and i just wanted to see how it goes....Yep I had no chance....The Boxster just doesnt have the go in a straight line.

Oh ya then on the way home I was SMOKED by a RX-7 like theres no tomorrow. Took me and the Mach 1

Its all good though, i still take pride in being able to drive left and right.....

[threpwood]

Boxsters excell in handling and that what makes it a fun car. Of course racing in streets or highway isn't recommended because the consequences are too high, but if you bring it to track where curvy roads are a factor, then Boxsters have a higher ground than 300-350 hp cars.

It's just about bringing the right equipment for the job. If we want to go fast straight lines than we all should get 400hp+ Corvette or supercharged Viper etc etc for the same amount of $ or maybe a lot less.

Being a "Porsche" also gives the car an exotic value... I mean would you rather drive an RX-7 or Mustang to a date than drive a Porsche?

[Brucelee]

I just want to point out that the c5 and c6 Corvettes generate over 1 G on the track. They do turn quite nicely.

Putting the Corvettes in the class of say, a Mustang would not be an accurate classification, IMHO.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TriGem2k

Heres one for you guys.....I was beaten by a Mustang Mach 1 today twice, once from a dead stop and the other on the freeway...It was a buddy of mine and i just wanted to see how it goes....Yep I had no chance....The Boxster just doesnt have the go in a straight line.

Oh ya then on the way home I was SMOKED by a RX-7 like theres no tomorrow. Took me and the Mach 1

Its all good though, i still take pride in being able to drive left and right.....

Well, what do you expect Trigem? You have a 2.5L right? It's amazing what injecting an extra 50-80hp can do for a relatively small/light car such as the boxster. I appreciate the fact that you drive a boxster too but you can't trasfer your driving experiences to all boxsters in general. That's like me driving a V6 mustang and then saying "yup them mustangs are pretty slow." Or driving that standard C5 and saying" yup, those Z06's don't handle all that well." I don't know how a Z06 handles because I've never driven one. I doubt you have driven a boxster S or you would've said so by now. Maybe you should try it out first before making blanket statements. I think the S can hold it's own against some pretty formidable cars. For instance, I have a friend who has a stock twin turbo Rx7 and him and I are dead even in a drag race. Actually I happen to have a pic of it on file. This is him and I at an auto-x.
http://media.racingflix.com/awais/pd/2.jpg



Richard, I agree with you, the vette does have a high degree of lateral grip but through my driving experiences with C5's they tend to feel a bit big and clumsy compared to the boxster. It isolates the driver more and the feeback left alot to be desired imo. The driving position didn't give my any confidence either, I didn't like sitting so far back in the car looking past that looong hood. I think it is a good handling car but the boxster is just on a completely different level in my opinion.

[Brucelee]

"Richard, I agree with you, the vette does have a high degree of lateral grip but through my driving experiences with C5's they tend to feel a bit big and clumsy compared to the boxster. It isolates the driver more and the feeback left alot to be desired imo. The driving position didn't give my any confidence either, I didn't like sitting so far back in the car looking past that looong hood. I think it is a good handling car but the boxster is just on a completely different level in my opinion."

They are very different cars in look and feel. I am not saying that the C6 for example is the equiv. of the Boxster in handling quality per se.

What I do believe is true is that:

The C6 handles very well, not in the class that many folks here think it does.

And, with 400 HP on tap, the average driver can make it around most tracks as quickly as a Boxster. In short, the thing handles albiet with more effort than a Box would. The HP makes up for alot.

Moreover, the C6 is surprisingly light, certainly when compared to a 911 Cab for example.

I like both cars immensely, for what they are, and for what they are not.

When I feel the urge for some maxium grunt, I take the C6 out. When I am a bit more mellow, the Box or 911 is the ticket.

Either way, you can't go wrong (IMHO).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Brucelee

The C6 handles very well, not in the class that many folks here think it does.

.

I respect the corvette for what it is....a good all around car at a great price. I haven't had the pleasure of driving a C6 yet so I can't comment and/or give my driving impressions but I bet it is an incredible car. I agree with you on the whole bad rap thing. People have alot of misconceptions about the vette as they do about the boxster on other sites usually because they have never driven them or taken the time to know them. It does not have "leaf springs" anymore. The C5 and C6 have fiberglass mono-springs...they haven't had stacked metal leafs for years. Since these springs lay down instead of nearly straight up like a traditional coil-over setup they lower the cars center of gravity and are a lighter system altogether.

[Brucelee]

Nicely put!

Originally Posted by Adam

I respect the corvette for what it is....a good all around car at a great price. I haven't had the pleasure of driving a C6 yet so I can't comment and/or give my driving impressions but I bet it is an incredible car. I agree with you on the whole bad rap thing. People have alot of misconceptions about the vette as they do about the boxster on other sites usually because they have never driven them or taken the time to know them. It does not have "leaf springs" anymore. The C5 and C6 have fiberglass mono-springs...they haven't had stacked metal leafs for years. Since these springs lay down instead of nearly straight up like a traditional coil-over setup they lower the cars center of gravity and are a lighter system altogether.

[TriGem2k]

Originally Posted by Adam

Well, what do you expect Trigem? You have a 2.5L right? It's amazing what injecting an extra 50-80hp can do for a relatively small/light car such as the boxster. I appreciate the fact that you drive a boxster too but you can't trasfer your driving experiences to all boxsters in general. That's like me driving a V6 mustang and then saying "yup them mustangs are pretty slow." Or driving that standard C5 and saying" yup, those Z06's don't handle all that well." I don't know how a Z06 handles because I've never driven one. I doubt you have driven a boxster S or you would've said so by now. Maybe you should try it out first before making blanket statements. I think the S can hold it's own against some pretty formidable cars. For instance, I have a friend who has a stock twin turbo Rx7 and him and I are dead even in a drag race. Actually I happen to have a pic of it on file. This is him and I at an auto-x.
http://media.racingflix.com/awais/pd/2.jpg



Richard, I agree with you, the vette does have a high degree of lateral grip but through my driving experiences with C5's they tend to feel a bit big and clumsy compared to the boxster. It isolates the driver more and the feeback left alot to be desired imo. The driving position didn't give my any confidence either, I didn't like sitting so far back in the car looking past that looong hood. I think it is a good handling car but the boxster is just on a completely different level in my opinion.

Ya definitly dont have the 2.5L buddy.... Its best to ask and not assume. Thanks. Beside the Boxster is just my toy....

[Ghostrider 310]

And as far as the mustang is concered, lol they blow until you get up to the Mach 1 and Cobra range. Oh and i hope there arent guys here that really think they can take a Mach 1 or Cobra Mustang straight drag....[/QUOTE]

A straight drag isn't much of a measuring stick in overall performance. Passed by a stang on the highway I shadowed for a while, as soon as it got twisty on came his brakelights, I was on throttle. Blew by him at a good clip, he tried to catch me for a few miles but my car's ass was his only view. His car didn't have stability in the top end, handling or brakes. He was soundly spanked, that was with a 20+ year old 944....Alfa Romeo had a good line about it:

It's not how fast you go, it's how you go fast.

[Brucelee]

Those 944s handle very nicely indeed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TriGem2k

Ya definitly dont have the 2.5L buddy.... Its best to ask and not assume. Thanks. Beside the Boxster is just my toy....

Oh, my bad it's a 2001 with 44k miles. Guess I should've checked first. That doesn't change my point.

[threpwood]

Well the posts here are interesting, but I just want to say to at least think twice before we 'race' or 'blow' other cars on the street, highway, etc. Instead of doing racing in the street, we all should do it in the track where it is a lot safer.

Maybe it is good if we go over the consequences from street racing. If we hit others or have accident, we may be:
1. Suspended or loose our license forever.
2. Loose major $$$ (whether we have insurance or not).
3. Charged for reckless driving and/or manslaugher. Jail time and probation.
4. Injured ourselves badly and live crippled for the rest of our lives.
5. Kill others and maybe or our own too.

I admit that I too need a rush adrenaline sometimes but just keep the first priority of racing in the track. Racing in the street will make us look like a true idiot and an inconsiderate prick. Of course, we can do what we want (1st amendment - including being an idiot) only as long as we do not endanger others.

Nuff said

[Brucelee]

Well said, REPWOOD

[mjw930]

I've been biting my tongue (well, my fingers actually) since this thread began but the initial premiss begs the question

WHO CARES!

Sorry for the outburst but this bar/bench racing stuff is really rather juvenile. If you want to see which one's fastest take your desires to the track, all other stats are meaningless.