Quote:
Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1
^^ Tiff drives with all aids OFF.
**sigh, where do I start**
It's useless arguing with you, because obviously you prefer the big engine in an "I don't care how much it weighs because I have one thousand torques" kind of car. Should have been obvious... you drive a MkIII.
|
Oye oye oye!!! You'll respect the car that was honorably called the affordable Porsche from 1982 - 1992.
Its clear that Toyota, and other Japanese cars (like the RX-7) were taking their stabs at the Euro Gran Tourer market by making their cars slightly heavier and more 'refined'. That was just the trend in the mid-late 80's on the flagship sports cars. The Supra alone gained 700lbs going from the MKII to the MKIII, but having owned and driven one, it was much more nimble around the corners than people give it credit for.
ANYWAYS....what were we talking about again? Oh yeah, the AMG vs. the LFA.
Look, this easily comes down to age difference. The AMG is more much 'refined' supercar while the LFA is a supercar aimed at racecar characteristics. I've been saying this for awhile now and its one of the reasons I can't bring myself to read much in Car and Driver, Motor Trend, etc. anymore. The magazine reviewers and editors are getting OLD. It shows in their reviews all the time. Of course they're gonna pick the more restrained AMG over the LFA, they're not pumping out the testosterone they were back in their haydays. Besides we all know most of them are so far up BMW's / Mercedes' asses that both car makers could hand them a lump of coal and they'd boast how amazing the texture feels compared to <insert non-german carmaker here>'s bar of gold.
I'd go with the LFA anyday of the week over the AMG. And yes, I'm slightly biased because I'm Toyota guy, but honestly, the LFA is the type of car I like. Its supposed to be a track monster.
@Sub FT86: Actually, Toyota is credited by most for creating Japans first Supercar back in the '60s with the 2000GT.