Reminder that Enzo Ferrari died in a FWD shitbox
Probably had a heart attack from how shit it drove
>>28984646europeans love front wheel drive. they practically nut over it. the only thing that makes them nut harder is an automatic transmission.
>>28984651I'm sorry that you can't import a Ford Ka.Thoughts and prayers.
>>28984651I don't think euros love FWD cars with a heavy V8 in front of the front axle
>>28984657Guess I'll just have to stick to my RWD V8. enjoy your Ford Ka.
>>28984666
>>28984666*Front loaded120hp V8 RWD with a 3 speed automatic that weighs 1800 kilos
>>28984677*that's also faster than european """sports""" cars let alone their front wheel drive shit
>>28984679>Grug big motor! Grug go fast straight line!A gentle curve will take out that fox body and the retarded live axle. It's like trying to run with your shoelaces tied together.
>>28984681not that european cars from that era could turn.
>>28984640I like it, whomst cares muh dynamics it's a comfy daily with cushiony leather seats that makes good noises. The well healed buyers of these probably could also afford a dedicated sports car for the weekends anyways.
>>28984640most people do. the amount of people who die in a RWD shitbox is vastly inflated simply due to the majority of ambulances being rear wheel drive.
>>28984640And?
>>28984685lol, did the Porsche never leave first gear or somethning?
>>28984916928 is a GT car, it doesn't have to turn well
>>28984651meanwhile almost all europeans can drive manual while americans revere it as a special car enthusiast skill
>>28984681>>28984685Convert that mustang to a poor man's 3 link with a panhard bar and it will turn even better than the Camaro. There's nothing Euro cars have to brag about all fucking aluminum everything and weighing more than a loaded suburban
>>28984640It wasn't a Thema 8.32, it was an Alfa Romeo 164 2.0 Twin Spark.He always knew that Alfa Romeo was the superior Italian manufacturer since forever.
>>28985116One of the most based Alfa Romeo ever made, it doesn't matter that it's FWD or on a shared platform, it's just peak Alfa Romeo.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53TLUf8ReV8
>>28984640So what, he was a fucking faggot
>>28985208shut the fuck up bitch
>>28985208>>28985265got a pair of lovebirds here huh
>>28984938>meanwhile almost all europeans can drive manualonly 30% of the cars on european roads are even manuual. I doubt many of them have ever driven one to begin with.
>>2898468591 fucking camaro lollllll the epitome of vehicle dynamics
>>28985287>only 30% of the cars on european roads are even manuual. u r stoopidConfusing new with existing cars.
>>28985337that's not new cars, though.
>>28985342u r stoopid
>>28984640Man I love the thema 8-32Such a ridiculous car that I cant help but love
>>28985345that number is all vehicle registrations, not just new cars. retardo.
>>28985349Post it then, muttoid.
>>28985350https://www.motor1.com/news/770587/manual-transmissions-versus-automatic-numbers/
>>28984651>the only thing that makes them nut harder is an automatic transmissionI think you're getting Europeans mixed up with Americans.
>>28984679>>28984685>>28985105I've watched a lot of 80s Group A racing with E30s going up against higher powered cars, including the Foxbody Mustang, and I can tell you that any gap gained by the Mustang on the straights was immediately caught back up at the end of the straight during braking. The E30 had a reputation as one of the best handling cars of 80s Group A.
>>28984679Lol @ an M3 being slower than a V6 Mustang. >>28985350>muttoid.Muslim invaded hands typed this post
>>28985356I am? Porsche wouldn't be making manuals if they only sold cars in europe.
>>28984679I love foxbodys and hate bmws but the fastest factory foxes did not fucking break 15s quarter times I do not give a fuck what you say.
>>28984681shut up edgar, theyre only dangerous with bald tires.
>>28985355The article is talking about new sales.>Last year, cars with manual transmissions accounted for only 29 percent of registrations in the five major European markets.In bongland alone the majority was manual a couple of years ago.https://www.directlinegroup.co.uk/en/news/brand-news/2022/the-age-of-the-automatic--last-person-to-take-a-manual-driving-t.html>Currently, manual cars still account for 70 per cent of the 31.7 million cars on UK’s roadsAnd going by your argument muttmericans have an even worse percentage. I'm being le epic trolled, right? Not even a mutt is this stupid.
>>28985359that's nice, but we're talking about road cars. not highly modified race cars. the road going E30 was a shitbox and wasn't beating anything.
>>28985371>baby doesn't know about Group A rulesThe E30 road car is a much better handling car than the Foxbody mustang, as proven by its far superior performance in Group A racing.
>>28985364You're a fucking idiot Anon. Factory stock LX 5.0s were knocking down low 14s with a decent driver and optional 3.08s.
>>28985370>The article is talking about new sales.>doesn't say "new" anywhere>just the total number of registrations???>Currently, manual cars still account for 70 per cent of the 31.7 million cars on UK’s roadsokay, what about the rest of europe?>muttmericans have an even worse percentage.yet, they're the only ones keeping your enthusiast cars alive>>28985362 let's not forget europe wants to ban ICE lol.
>>28985372Group A rules allowed for extensive modifications over group N. they weren't road cars.
>>28985380They were unibody cars with suspension that was fundamentally the same as the road going cars, and the semi-trailing IRS of the E30 proved to be far superior to the 4 link Mustang rear end. (to the surprise of no one)
>>28985384so post a road going car actually beating anything.
>>28985376You are without a doubt the dumbest mutt I've had the misfortune of interacting with today, God forbid tomorrow.Also the Italians are based, kudos to them.
>>28985389Beating anything?As in beating it in a race?As in like.... a highly popular racing series or something?
>>28984681Enzo in his own words said that power is the one thing that matters in a car
>>28984938damn, and they're still this bad at driving them?
>>28985407yea, post a road car (of which Group A is not) beating something else in anything.
>>28985420Might be hard to find records of people racing their cars competitively against each other specifically NOT in any of the popular racing series set up for people to competitively race their cars against each other m8e
>>28985438and yet, someone found just that>>28984685 why can't you post something like this?
>>28985411He's talking about race cars. And not at the cost of being able to turn fuckwit bumpkin
>>28985364>but the fastest factory foxes did not fucking break 15s quarter times I do not give a fuck what you say.https://youtu.be/OcUqKFMCNi8?t=422Skip to 7:02 if you're too lazy to copy paste a link.
>>28984679weird lying kike
>>28985634so it's still slower than a foxbody>>28985574 lol
>>28985652same driver same track m3 is fasterif you think a stock fox did 13s you're full of shit
>>28985669>no way! it didn't happen!Cope. I'm still waiting for someone to post a track where a production road going E30 beat a fox body anywhere>>28985442
>>28985634Still slower than a carb'd '85 GT Anon.
>>28985709And then the Camaro destroyed it around the track despite being nearly 2s slower in the quarter.
>>28985716>despite being nearly 2s slower in the quarter.Did you watch the same video? The Camaro was only half a second slower in the 1/4. Also, IROC Zs were some of the best handling American cars of the 80's. Of course it beat a Fox on a roadcourse. The Trans Am without the IROCs wonderbar, uprated springs and shocks, bigger sway bars and more agressive wheel/tire package was only a tenth of a second faster than the Mustang. The 4 link was great for drag racing but it allowed the rear axle to move around under lateral acceleration. Making the car feel less predictable but ultimately not that much less capable Going off they said they used a 2 mile road course version of Pocono and the average speeds.>1:36.7 IROC Zvs>1:37.6 Trans Am >1:37.9 Mustang
got them Eurosissies squealing
>>28984640>>28985116This sure is a weird looking Alfa, what model is it?
>>28985442Wow that's really cool anon but I don't see the E30 or Mustang there.
>>28986051yea, so why is the other tard claiming the E30 would beat the mustang around a track with no evidence?
>>28986075Because we have plenty of evidence of them going head to head in racing retard-kun
>>28986108which is irrelevant for road cars on street tires.
>>28986108>>28986112>hey guys, a dodge stratus beat a 911 GT3 in racing. that means the shitbox dodge stratus street car handles better than the 911
>>28986112ah so you believe that, even though the E30 is clearly superior when they race against each other on the same racing tyres, the road going Mustang came with better tyres than the road going E30 which make up for that difference?
>>28986114>cropped to all shit so we can't see the context of his retarded non-sequitur
>>28986138correct. a race car on racing tires isn't relevant when talking about road cars. unless you believe a dodge stratus handles better than a 911. do you?>>28986142what other context is needed? the racing dodge stratus went faster than the racing 911 GT3. so it handles better, right?
>>28986152Give me the context and I'll point out how retarded your non-sequitur is.You won't because you know it's a retarded non-argument.
>>28986157I don't even know what you're asking for. everything you could want is there. what class both cars raced in, what series they raced in, and their spec, and the year those times were recorded as well as who drove them.you're just looking for reasons to cope because you realize you can post any number of race cars that beat other race cars but the road variant is a slow shitbox so your comparison is profoundly retarded to begin with.
>>28986160>what class both cars raced inlollmao>oh you think two cars racing against each other under the same rules in the same series proves something huh?>well... what about these two cars which DIDN'T race against each other because they WEREN'T under the same rules in the same racing series!!!!Least retarded Mustang handling enthusiast.
>>28986165are you implying the touring class made up of FWD shitboxes was less restrictive than GT3 sports cars? are you implying the FWD shitbox class is faster than GT3?you're doubly retarded if so. pick another cope.
>>28986167I'm implying that the E30 handles better than the Mustang because when they raced each other under the same rules with the same tyres the E30 consistently showed a large advantage in handling retard-kun. You're the one trying to insert non-sequiturs from unrelated cars which didn't race against each other.
>>28986172you're not giving any reasons why the dodge stratus comparison is bad but your bullshit comparison is good. what does "raced against each other" mean? and no, group A cars often didn't have the same rubber at all. not that it would mean shit if they did. there was no factory mustang racing effort from Ford. all racing mustangs were built by completely different people and their performance varied wildly from one another. it's the most retarded comparison you could make.I'm comparing a factory racing dodge stratus against a factory racing 911. both cars built to spec by their respective manufacturers. who gives a shit what tires they were on. do you think 911s exclusively run shit tires? do you think FWD shitboxes run tires that can somehow make up their horsepower and drivetrain layout deficit?you're not actually saying anything. you're just coping. either the dodge stratus handles better than a 911 because race car or it doesn't. and if it doesn't, that would mean your E30 race car comparison means fuck all.now fuck off, retard. stop wasting time and actually say something of merit.
>>28986175>you're not giving any reasons why the dodge stratus comparison is bad but your bullshit comparison is goodYes I am retard-kun, it's very straight forward - your comparison is bad because the cars being compared did not adhere to the same rules.
>>28986177yea, the 911 was in the faster class. and it still lost. so I guess that means the dodge stratus handles better.
>>28986178>the faster class>was slower
>My production car is a slow piece of shit, but I know it's faster because muh race cars>well does that mean my dodge stratus is faster than a 911 because the race car is?>NO! TEHRE'S CONTEXT AND REASON WHY THAT MIGHT'VE HAPPENED YOU CAN'T JUST USE A RACE CAR TO DRAW COMPARISONS BETWEEN PRODUCTION CARSlmao, dumb nigglet backed himself into a corner trying to die on this dumb race car comparison shit. who the fuck decides which PRODUCTION car is faster based on RACE CARS. NO car journalist does this shit precisely because it's retarded, and you're starting to realize that, but you just have to insist on going down this retarded rabbit whole instead of finding a REAL comparison like>>28984685
>>28986180well, we know the 911 makes more power. and we know the dodge stratus isn't allowed any more modifications than a GT3 spec car would have (it's basically a stripped out chrysler cloud car with slicks). so the only other explanation, is that it handles better.
>he's getting btfo he's started replying without linking in hope that I won't see his post and btfo it again
>>28986184>we knowGo on big fella - tell me all of the rules of the two classes so that we may judge if it is a fair comparison.
>>28986188so you're admitting the dodge stratus handles better than a 911? If not, then I don't see how i'm BTFO.
>>28986192tell me what spec the mustang that the E30 "beat" was in, including what tires, weight, horsepower, and all the money spent on it compared to the factory spec E30.
>>28986192>>28986194and then tell me their qualifying time as well.
Where is your God now?
>>28986194They were both under the same rules little buddy
>>28986199and the 911 makes more power than a dodge stratus yet the dodge stratus won. so I guess that means the dodge stratus handles better.
>>28986201>so I guess that means the dodge stratus handles better.(under different rules)
>>28986205>E30 handles better than the mustang*Under different unknown specs built by privateers
>>28986210>*consistently better in a competitive racing environment under the same ruleset
>>28986212>the dodge stratus is faster than the more powerful 911 which is under a faster ruleset
>>28986216>faster ruleset[citation needed]
>>28986219>competitive racing environment>factory cars vs privately built cars[citation needed]
>>28986220The ATCC was a highly competitive racing series and Dick Johnson, the man who built and raced the Mustang, won several championships (just not in the Mustang).Find a new cope.
>>28986224the 911 makes more power than a dodge stratus, and GTU is faster than any FWD racing series. therefore, the 911 raced under a faster ruleset and recorded a slower time because the dodge stratus handles better.pick a new cope.
>>28986226>faster ruleset[Citation needed]
>>28986231>ATCC was a highly competitive racing series>factory cars vs privately built cars[citation needed]
>>28986233Merely a couple of years later Dick Johnson would qualify his Sierra on pole at the ETCC tourist round at Silverstone, ahead of Andy Rouse and all the best Group A drivers of Europe.You are coping again.
>>28985445Aerodynamics are a major part of handling, and he dismissed it as hogwash because "building a proper engine is all that matters" even for the road cars he designed
>>28986246A dodge stratus touring car makes 300 HP.A 911 GT3R makes over 400 HP. Super touring requires that the cars use the street car's suspension.so, the 911 GT3R was slower than a dodge stratus while being in a faster class. so the dodge stratus handles better.
>>28986252>while being in a faster class.[citation needed]
>>28986255>ATCC was a highly competitive racing series>factory cars vs privately built cars
>>28986258also meant to add [citation needed]
>>28986258>re-using the same cope that already got btfoOH NO NO NOHE'S BUCK BROKEN
>>28986261yea, you already got BTFO here>>28986252 the 911 GT3R is in a faster class.You didn't even debunk shit by bringing up what dick johnson did. since we're not talking about the competitiveness of drivers, but cars. and a factory BMW team beating up on a privately built mustang shows a lack of competitiveness.
>>28986262Dick Johnson proved he could build a race a car which is competitive on the global stage of Group A racing by qualifying on pole in the ETCC, you are coping.
>>28986263>>28986263>Dick Johnson proved he could build a race a car which is competitive by losing every single race>he jumped into an actual factory backed car and he started winningso this proves that he couldn't build a race car that was competitive. a single factory team winning against privately built cars is the opposite of competitive. meanwhile, you're ignoring the 911 GT3R having more power than the stratus, and thus, being in a faster class. you've lost this argument long ago already.
>>28986266He built his sierras lmaoBTFO yourself with your own cope inventions
>>28986267The sierra was built by Ford and cosworth. it was a massive engineering undertaking mostly accredited to what they learned from roush (ironically, a mustang building racing team). dick johnson had nothing to do with that car. anything he did was just modifying a Ford factory car. he did not take a vanilla shitbox sierra and turn it into a race car from scratch if that's what you're saying.You seriously have a fundamental lack of understanding of how race cars are built at all.
>>28986268Hilarious that you say that when Dick Johnson specifically went around Andy Rouse, who was building and tuning everyone else's cars, because Andy was trying to jew him.Dick Johnsons car was faster because he built it himself, just like he build his previous ATCC winning Falcon before that. It was only his Mustang in between which was uncompetitive - curious that....
>>28986270so he tuned a factory built and developed ford... as I already suggested. and this factory built ford was competitive with other factory built cars and not his privately built mustang.this retarded nigger still can't connect the dots. he STILL doesn't understand the difference between privately built and factory built cars. he thinks some fucker TUNING a car is the same as building it from scratch.
>>28986276>ummm akshually he didn't press the sheet metal out by hand himself so it doesn't count as a DJR built car even though everyone calls it a DJR built carMustang handling enthusiasts taking cope to levels never seen before
>>28986280he didn't develop the car, so no. It's not a privateer built car. but a modified factory racing car developed by ford and cosworth. It uses a cosworth engine like all the other sierras.also, I notice that you stopped responding to the 911 vs dodge stratus comparison completely. so do you finally accept that the dodge stratus handles better than a 911?
>>28986282>he didn't build it>ok he built it but he didn't develop itOH NO NO NOGOALPOST BROS>so do you finally accept that the dodge stratus handles better than a 911?under a different ruleset, sure.
>>28986284He didn't build it, though. it came from the same factory as all the others, with the same engine. tuning =/= built.>under a different ruleset, sure.with the 911 being under a faster ruleset.
>>28986286I wonder what new cope you're going to invent when you find out Dick Johnson bought his Mustangs from the factory backed Zakspeed... >under a faster ruleset[citation needed]
>>28986298zakspeed wasn't factory backed by ford. they just made their own mustang race car through trial and error.>[citation needed]already explained it to you>>28986252
The Type Four Platform is goated idk what you're talking about
>>28986301Zakspeed was factory backed by Ford you coper, and now in your cope you're going to pretend even the prestigious Zakspeed is not competent enough to build a Mustang properly because it definitely can't be the Mustang just being shit lmao
>>28986306>Zakspeed was factory backed by Ford you coper,no they weren't. Ford was focused on the sierra program. that was where their R&D was going. they put no R&D into a factory racing program for the mustang. if you actually learned what factory backed meant or anything about motorsports for that matter you wouldn't sound so retarded with every reply.
>>28985287>>28985418most europeans get a driver's license in a manual car because if you do it in an automatic, the license you get will only let you drive automatic cars.
>>28986314If even Zakspeed isn't good enough to build a competitive mustang, could it be that the mustang is the problem?
>>28986317>if a privateer isn't good enough is it the car?no, the problem is you not understanding privateer vs factory.but since you're so keen on using race cars to determine which production car handles better. let's use showroom stock. it's as close to racing off the showroom floor production cars as it can get. very little modifications are allowed compared to group A. and the mustang winshttps://zoompics.com/1999momos.htmlooks like the fox body handled better all along.
>>28986324why can't the M3 compete in this entirely showroom stock series of actual equal playing field?
>>28986324>>28986325Oh no no no he's coping by bringing up completely different cars again!
>>28986328just like you did by bringing up group a when talking about production cars?
>>28986331And now he's gone full circle back to the beginning cope
>>28986336>bringing up different cars isn't cope, mentioning that you're bringing up different cars is the copeso you're coping about the fox body handling better?
>>28986338Sure let's do another whole lap btfoing all your different copes again, why not! >>28985384
>>28986340>it's the same car!the car I posted is on the fox platform, therefore it is the same car and the fox body handles better.
>>28986341Is it the same unibody car with the same suspension my little coper?
>>28986342yes.
>>28986343The lies you have to tell yourself to cope with poor mustang handling
>>28986345if it's poor handling, why did it beat the M3>>28986325 lol
>>28986346Because it's not a foxbody and the M3 isn't an E30
>>28986354the M3 It beat is faster than the E30, and it is a fox platform, basically a foxbody with a different body.
>>28986346>>28986355the Group A E30 also isn't a production car. It's a $100,000 race car, yet, it was still brought up.
>>28986355>the M3 It beat is faster than the E30>but it's not faster than the foxbody
>>28986358correct.
>>28986362The mental gymnastics of a Mustang handling enthusiast
>>28986363the mustang won a showroom stock race against an improved in every way M3 despite still being on an ancient platform. sounds like better handling to me.
>>28986365Which Mustang?The one we're talking about or a completely different one?
>>28986367the one that is production. unlike some completely different group A cars.
>>28986370>completely different >>28985384
>>28986372>a fox platform is completely different>>28986341
>>28986373anony-kun isn't 1999 the year that the Cobra started using IRS?
>>28986376does it matter? the 1998 Cobra without IRS also beat the M3 in showroom stock.
>>28986379>posts completely different car with completely different suspension>"see this proves the foxbody handles good"...uhhh isn't that a completely different car with completely different suspension?>"Does it matter?"Average mustang handling enthusiast argument
>>28986383so the Cobra R from 98 still shits on the M3. what other cope do you have left.
>>28986389so why didn't you post that then
>>28986395ok. why don't you post a production E30 that's faster than any mustang, too.https://zoompics.com/1999momos1.htm
>>28986397So why did you post it buddy?Could it be that you're a retard who doesn't know what he's talking about?
>>28986399No, that's people who think an E30 beat a mustang based on what a race car did.
>>28986401So true, the high IQ mustang handling enthusiast will instead compare two completely different cars with completely different suspension to figure whether the E30 or Foxbody handles better
>>28986420better than comparing road cars to completely different race cars.
Same steel unibodyFundamentally the same suspensionCan the Mustang handling enthusiast say the same for his retarded comparisons?(no)
Doesn't sound "fundamentally the same" to me.
>>28984640Context?
>>28986431HOLY SHIT BROS BOTH CARS UPGRADED TO SPHERICAL BALL JOINTS INSTEAD OF BUSHES TO COPE WITH THE STRESSES OF RACING ON HIGH GRIP TYRES WE CAN'T COMPARE THEM ANYMORE
>>28986441I wonder why the Group A E30 is over a minute faster than the Group N one. meanwhile, a IRS mustang has near identical performance to a LRA mustang when racing. there also isn't a 100k price difference, either.
>>28986443>there also isn't a 100k price differenceYeah there's just 20 years of model difference instead LMAOOoOooooOoooo
>>28986445>20 years of model difference between model year 98 and model ear 99???
>>28986446>now he's going to pretend he was always talking about the 98 mustang lol
>>28986453same fox body platform, same suspension. a 98 and 92 last gen mustang are much closer in performance than a group N and group A E30, let alone a production and group A E30.
>>28986456>same """"platform"""" >20 years of model difference
>>28986457>there is 20 years between a 92 last gen fox, and a 98 next gen fox that started in 93???
>>28986460>now he's pretending he was always talking about the 92 mustangWe can all still see the post up there with the 1983 mustang buddy
>>28986466but I brought up both>>28985652
>>28986476Not in our reply chain you didn't
>>28986477the post calling me a lying kike is part of the original reply chain.
>>28986482Go ahead and follow our links up little buddy, that's the neat thing about 4chan - it's all still there.
>>28986485>follow the link to your original post that everyone replied to where you bring up another fox body shortly thereafterokay.>>28984679one>>28985634two>>28985652three
>>28986491Cool story buddy, I replied to your post about the 1983 mustang
>>28986495and I already brought up other fox bodies to compare to the E30 long before you started coping about model years.
>>28986497The lengths mustang handling enthusiasts will go through to avoid defending their original comparison of the 1983 Mustang's handling
>>28986499you literally just conceded that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911... just to stick to your retarded race car comparison. the lengths retards will go to make up non existent performance for their slow production shitbox.
>>28986501>you literally just conceded that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911(under completely different rulesets) The Mustang handling enthusiast cannot help but deflect to completely different cars, which is only natural because it is so hard for him to defend the handling of his original 1983 Mustang.
>>28986504>(under completely different rulesets)already addressed this cope>>28986252>The Mustang handling enthusiast cannot help but deflect to completely different carsyet somehow, far less different than a group A E30 and a production E30. definitely not 100k worth of a difference between an 83 and 92 mustang.
>>28986506>in a faster class[citation needed]You see the cool thing about substituting out the E30 for the racing E30 is that you also substitute out the Mustang for the racing Mustang, which was under the same ruleset, and then you get to see how both chassis performed when optimised for racing and pushed to the limit against each other.Substituting ONLY the Mustang out, for a completely different Mustang made 15 years later, and still comparing it to the E30, is the kinda gymnastics you have to go through as a Mustang handling enthusiast.
>>28986511>[citation needed]you retarded and can't read? 300 is less than 400. >>28986511>You see the cool thing about substituting out the E30 for the racing E30 is that you also substitute out the Mustang for the racing Mustangyou mean a factory built car with over 100k in modifications vs someone's personal modified mustang? that is the opposite of optimized and being pushed to the limit. pic related is a fox body mustang in its most optimized form being pushed to the furthest limit a fox platform ever has. what lap times are there even between these cars btw? I notice you never posted any. you just said you saw them race together. which means nothing.>Substituting ONLY the Mustang out,but I didn't. it beat the E36, which is a newer M3. and is still closer to any of the older mustangs than your Group A car is to the production E30.
>>28986527Ummm anony-kun didn't the E36s you highlighted beat all the 98 Mustangs in your own image?
>>28986533looks like they lost to me>>28986397
>>28986537OH NO NO NONOW HE'S GUNNA PRETEND HE DIDN'T POST THE PIC
>>28986540>he's gonna pretend he didn't concede that a fucking dodge stratus handles better than a 911
>>28986543(under completely different rulesets)
>>28986576>he's using the same debunked cope
>>28985981164, peak Alfa Romeo luxobarge.Enzo Ferrari had a 2.0 Twin Spark.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsSYMAC8FWY
>>28986721>he's going to assert "THE RULESET IS FASTER" again while simultaneously claiming that it's slower
>>28987044it's slower while having more power because the dodge stratus handles better.
>>28984651Obsessed.
>>28987091Damn sounds like the slower ruleset must be the slower ruleset then
>>28987134no, the dodge stratus just handles better. a higher horsepower ruleset is in fact, a faster ruleset.
>>28987141high horsepower =/= faster, as evident by you claiming that it's not faster
>>28987142high horsepower isn't faster if your car handles worse, yes. americans can make use of 150 HP V8s to go faster than 220 HP M3s like this >>28985709 but european cars cannot into handling so their sports cars are worse than our disposable shitboxes.
>>28987149Yes if the faster ruleset allows you tune the car for better handling.The Mustang handling enthusiast cannot compete under the same ruleset.
>>28987151>european cars are so shit they need to be "tuned" to handle better than a dodge stratus in a vehicle class that must retain all production car suspension componentslmao.>the mustang handling characteristics cannot compete under the same rulesetyou mean showroom stock where mustangs beat M3s? or all out factory race cars vs factory race cars where the mustang SR is still faster here than any factory racing M3>>28986527.
>>28987152>in a vehicle class that must retain all production car suspension componentsGo on anon! Tell us more about the two rulesets so that we may judge if it's a fair comparison!(you won't)
>>28984640>th-the 3-series s-sucks ok???That must be why its won multiple IMSA, STW, JTCC, DTM, BTCC, and FIA-GT championships and the fox body has.. impressed the local tweaker girl. Lmao! Americans everyone!
>>28987155I just did. they make less horsepower than the GT3 911R, and they are front wheel drive with production car suspension components.
>>28987164a mustang has won the 84 hour nurburgring endurance race. no BMW ever has.
>>28987165>production car suspension components.Wait a minute... are sure they didn't run those SPHERICAL BEARINGS you were kvetching about a few posts ago?
>>28987169I don't know. they didn't cost 100k nor is there a minute lap time difference between them and another lower class racing version of the same car so i'm gonna guess not.
>>28987167Are you stupid? BMW has won the overall at nurburgring more than any other manufacturer in history. Lmao!In fact, the bmw 2002 won the very first 24hr nurburgring! Hahaha american education!
>>28987170>I don't knowYes I know you don't know anything about what you're talking about, which is why I keep saying [citation needed] when you make wild claims about the rulesets, but for some reason you keep trying to pretend you DO know.Very curious behaviour which you would only see from a Mustang handling enthusiast.
>>28987172>84 hoursyou gotta learn to read, nigger.
>>28987174I'm still waiting on the citation in the form of a lap time that this group A M3 is faster than the mustang under the same ruleset. yet, I've never got that, either. so i guess we can assume it's not until one is provided. at least I actually provided a lap time of a dodge stratus being faster than a 911.where is there a single lap time of a E30 beating a fox body mustang anywhere?
>>28987177Oh you would like to see the examples of E30s displaying superior handling to Mustangs in Group A racing as per my original claim?Why of course! That's no problem at all my little coper:https://youtu.be/lsSgJT9qW_M?si=ZkX-mUQe8hk3sv5m&t=484
>>28987182so no lap times and therefore no proof. would you like to read>>28986114 again and see the dodge stratus displaying superior handling to a 911? (with an actual timed lap).
>>28984640Was it a Ferrari?
>>28987177No because no one was retarded enough to race a fox body mustang bro. And if they were in the same class it would have been against an M1 or 850 something with similar displacement.Not that the M3 needed more displacement to beat the hp of even the highest output foxbody ever produced which is actually insanely embarrassing. And the s14s in the race cars made well over 300hp at 2 liters.
>>28987186Video proof of exactly what I described, which you will close your eyes and pretend isn't there and instead talk about completely different cars - because these are the things you must do as a Mustang handling enthusiast.
>>28987191that's a lot of assumptions with no evidence after you just coped about a dodge stratus handling better than a more powerful 911.
>>28987193there's no lap time in the video. you're making an assumption, so does this mean that because the dodge stratus race car doesn't cost 100k and isn't 1 minute faster than another racing variant of itself we can assume it uses production suspension components? i'm going to assume so just as you are with a video showing no actual qualifying times.
>>28987195I did not describe a lap time anon, I very specifically described an E30 outhandling a Mustang in Group A racing, and there you can see the video evidence of exactly what I described.
with no lap times, we'll never know if it actually out handled the mustang because the mustang, like the dodge stratus, could've ran a faster qualifying time than any of the times they ran actually racing, as race cars often do, but you don't know this because you don't actually know anything about motorsports. so you have no evidence that an E30 can out handle anything. just an assumption. just like i'm assuming the stratus handles better than a 911 that raced in a faster class.
closing my eyes rn so I can stay in denial and continue being a Mustang handling enthusiast
>>28987225you should close your eyes so you don't know that you conceded to a dodge stratus handling better than a 911.
>>28987234This is the power of spherical bushings
>POV: you're a Mustang handling enthusiast and you try to hang with an E30 in the corners
>>28987245this is the power of actual lap times (something the E30 doesn't have).
>>28987245Call it a rose joint, heim joint, rod end, or spherical bearing, but DO NOT call it a bushing.. ok???
>POV: you're a Mustang handling enthusiast
This has got to be top 3 worst threads of all time
>POV: you're a 911 with more power in a faster class trying to beat the lap time of a dodge stratus.
>the Mustang handling enthusiast is back to talking about completely different cars because he can't defend the Mustang's handling
is there where all the benchracers hang out?post your car and laptimes around your local track
>he actually conceded that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911 (a 911 in a more powerful faster class no less)
>b-b-b-but what about these completely different cars in completely different classes!??!?!MUSTANG BROS WE CAN STILL WIN if we just stop talking about Mustangs and pour all our hopes and dreams into completely different cars instead
>he's still coping about class differences despite the 911 being in the faster class with more poweroh no no no. not like this race car bros. if only we stuck to comparing production cars we wouldn't have allowed ourselves to go down such a retarded rabbit hole.
>>28987290Or get this get this get thisWe could compare cars that race against each other under the same rulesets>the mustang handling enthusiast HATES comparing cars under the same rules
>>28987294cool. so post the lap times of these cars under the same ruleset so we have something to compare.
>>28987296Yeah I'm compooning right now mustang bro >>28987251
>>28987299so you have nothing to compare and are just going back to conceding that a stratus handles better than a 911. a tale as old as time.if only the production E30 wasn't a slow piece of shit you wouldn't need to move the goalpost to 100k race cars with no lap times.
>>28987304>you have nothing to compareConvinced no one award
>>28987306yea, you convinced no one because you have no evidence. meanwhile, I have evidence that a stratus handles better than a 911.
>>28987308>I SAW NOTHING!!! IT'S NOT THERE PLEASE STOP LINKING IT!!!!least denialist mustang handling enthusiast
>>28987312>just make assumptions bro. we don't need actual stats just like the production E30 doesn't need to be faster than anything.so you're conceding that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911?
>>28987316>Hold up did you just ASSUME that because the E30 caught up to the Mustang in the corners and overtook it that it handles better?lollmao
>>28987318>hold up, did you assume that because a less powerful car went around a track than a more powerful car that it handles betterso you're conceding that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911?
The mustang handling enthusiast is once again defleting to completely different cars under completely different rulesets
the retard who originally moved the goalpost to race cars and cannot even provide any stats to compare said race cars cannot accept that his own logical conclusion would be conceding that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911.
He's going to keep pretending that comparing cars under the same ruleset is the same as comparing cars under completely different rulesets
he's going to keep pretending he's "comparing" anything with no stats and not just making assumptions, (just like you can do about the dodge stratus and 911).
Mustang handling enthusiasts be like:>I need to see the stats guys, I'm not sure which one of these cars handles better, let's not make any assumptions!
>just assume bro, you don't need evidenceso does this mean the dodge stratus handles better than the 911?>NO! YOU NEED EVIDENCE!
>Sure, it can drive around the Mustang on the outside, but does it really handle better?>I need a peer reviewed study to be sure
>sure, the dodge stratus can go around a whole track faster than a more powerful 911, but does that really mean i'm conceding that it handles better?>race cars don't matter unless I say they do
>but enough about talking about the cars I brought up, let's talk about some completely different cars from completely different classes Average mustang handling enthusiast argument
the real question is if any posters here could operate any of these cars on any tracks anywhere nearly as good as any of the times debated
>but enough about production cars that were originally brought up with actual stats, lets talk about completely different race cars with no stats >no you aren't allowed to bring up race cars that makes my point look retarded
>why talk about cars which share the original steel unibody and suspension layout of the cars I was comparing, when we could talk about completely different cars from different manufacturers instead!!The Mustang handling enthusiast will go to the ends of the earth to avoid actually discussing mustang handling.
>why talk about production cars with stats when we can just move the goalpost to these completely different race cars with no stats>why are you bringing up other cars? only i'm allowed to do that!>no a dodge stratus doesn't handle better than a 911 based on the race car>race cars only matter when I say they do!
Somebody get me some stats RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!I can't tell which one of these cars handles better!!! >>28987251
>he's back to conceding that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911
>faces once again with a point he can't contend, he once again deflects to completely different cars under completely different rulesets The Mustang handling enthusiast will go to the ends of the earth to avoid actually discussing mustang handling.
>he's too low IQ to see that his """point""" of using race cars (with NO stats) leads to a completely retarded conclusion>just ignore it and let's continue talking about cars with no stats anway!reminder that the Mustang SR, a fox platform is faster than any BMW from the same era (lol)
>he's going to keep pretending that comparing cars from completely different rulesets is the same as comparing cars under the same rulesetLeast disingenuous mustang handling enthusiast
>he's back to using the ruleset cope when the porsche is in a faster one and still went around the track slower>he's force to concede that a fucking dodge stratus handles better than a 911
>he's still making assertions about the rulesets after admitting he has literally zero knowledge about the rulesets
>he's making assertions about handling after admitting he has zero lap times to compare
CAN WE GET A FUCKING SCIENTIST IN HEREI need someone to calculate distances from the pixels in >>28987351 to figure out which car made it around the corner faster
I need to learn basic elementary school math because I can figure out if >400 HP is more than 300 HP and therefore the 911 is somehow not in a faster class.
>>28987777the jesus quads have spoken. the dodge stratus handles better than the 911 which is in a (higher HP and therefore faster) class.
>hopefully if I start talking about horsepower no one will notice I'm deliberately avoiding talking about the rules for handling modificationsleast disingenuous mustang handling enthusiast
>hopefully, if we just watch videos of cars driving on a track we won't have to discuss which one actually got the faster lap time in qualifying
>if I shift the goalpost to qualifying laptimes hopefully no one will notice the E30 overtly handling better on video
>>28987275Unique Poster Count: 4
>if I move the goalpost to "handling modification" no one will notice the stratus going faster around a track than a more powerful (and therefore in a faster class) 911
>that's not what goalpost means lmao
yea, asking for proof of something is not what "moving the goalpost" means. so where are the lap times.
the goalpost in that case is "cars being compared must be under the same ruleset" a very reasonable goalpost if I do say so myself
cool, so post some lap times so we can begin comparing.>no, just let me make assumptions based on some clipsso we can assume the more powerful 911 is in a faster class, and therefore, it is under a greater ruleset, equal to the dodge stratus class, plus the added benefit of being more powerful.
LETS NOT JUMP TO ASSUMPTIONS BROSWE CAN'T BE SURE WHICH CAR IS HANDLING BETTER IN THIS CLIP >>28987271
WE DON'T KNOW WHICH CAR HAS MORE HORSEPOWER BECAUSE I CAN'T DO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MATH! THEREFORE WE CAN'T BE SURE THE LESS POWERFUL DODGE STRATUS THAT WENT FASTER AROUND A TRACK HANDLES BETTER THAN THE 911
but is the stratus faster because it upgraded to spherical bearings which fundamentally change the suspension and increase lap times by 1 minute according to mustang handling enthusiasts
we can assume it's not without evidence just like we can assume which car handles better without evidence.
>video evidence of a car handling better isn't evidenceleast denialist mustang handling enthusiast
>according to mustang handling enthusiast*BMW enthusiast on a BMW forum
>higher horsepower stats isn't evidence of a faster class>a faster lap time isn't evidence of a car handling better>he just conceded once again that a dodge stratus handles better
a dodge stratus with suspension altering spherical bearings which improve lap times by 1 minute*
>a video of no lap times and therefore is evidence of nothing
It finished the race ahead of the Mustang, is that no longer evidence?
a dodge stratus (with less horsepower) went around a track faster, (and therefore cornered quicker) than the 911 (with more power). is cornering no longer evidence of handling?
OH NO NO NOHE DIDN'T ANSWER
OH NO NO! HE CAN CONCEDED THAT A DODGE STRATUS HANDLES BETTER THAN A 911
*when it is upgraded with spherical bearings which improve lap times by 1 minute
>when we assume based on a video of no laptimes and therefore no evidence
>race results aren't evidencehe's flailing lmaooooooo
>Mazda got race results>despite going slower around corners looks like it's not evidence. good thing we have lap times to prove which cars actually handled better.
It was evidence when you posted it up here >>28986325
the evidence that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911 was posted here>>28986114 I guess he finally concedes that the dodge stratus handles better than a 911.
OH NO NO NOHE FORGOT THAT HE USED RACE RESULTS AS EVIDENCE BEFORE LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
>>28984657
>Group A = showroom stockso now that we're admitting rulesets don't matter. is he finally admitting a dodge stratus handles better than a 911?
>race results aren't evidenceso why did you post it as evidence before little buddy?
Did I post group A results or showroom stock?If rulesets don't matter, then does this mean he concedes that the dodge stratus handles better?
Why did you post race results buddy?
Either two autists are raiding or one dude is samefagging
Race results of what
>race results aren't evidence, only lap times prove which car handles betterso why did you post race results?
Race results of what?
>no no! I didn't say race results don't count as evidence!!! I just said Group A race results don't count as evidence!OH NO NO NOHE'S TRYING TO WALK IT BACK
>i didn't say suspension upgrades don't count, I said they only count if the E30 has it!!OH NO! HE'S SAYING THE DIFFERENCES IN RULESETS DON'T MATTER!!! GUESS HE CONCEDES THAT THE DODGE STRATUS HANDLES BETTER PERIOD NO COPE!
>maybe if I start talking about something else everyone will forget about me contradicting myselfWhy did you post race results as evidence little buddy?
>contradicts himself saying you can't compare race cars>contradicts himself saying you can't compare cars with suspension upgradesWhy did you post race cars with upgraded suspension little nigglet?
OH NO NO NOHE'S JUST GOING TO KEEP PRETENDING HE DIDN'T DO IT
>he just keeps pretending he didn't concede that a dodge stratus handles better than a 911
>the mustang handling enthusiast lacks the IQ to even remember the things he already postedhowling
>the BMW nigglet can't do basic math to tell the difference between horsepower ratings, doesn't understand factory backed vs privateer, didn't know that race cars are faster in qualifying and therefore, are not showing their peak performance in the race, thinks a front wheel drive touring series has better suspension than fucking IMSA GTU, and proceeds to claim the dodge stratus ONLY handles better than the 911 because of said suspension upgrades, while suggesting that the only way to compare an E30 to a Mustang, is when the E30 has $100,000 worth of mods dumped into it by a factory works teamthe ironing of this little nigglet.
are race results evidence or not little buddy?
are race cars evidence of handling or not little nigglet?
CAN WE GET A FUCKING SCIENTIST IN HERE to answer whether or not race results are evidence?Anon can't seem to make up his mind
can we get another set of jesus quads to determine if race cars are evidence or not? anon can't seem to make up his mind as to whether he thinks a dodge stratus handles better than a 911.
If the race cars raced against each other under the same production based ruleset it should be a pretty good comparison, now lets hear the explanation for race results being but not being evidence
A dodge stratus is under a production based rulesetA 911R is under a more relaxed production based ruleset and makes more powernow let's hear why race cars being compared is evidence but not evidence. let's hear why a car under a better more powerful ruleset lost.
OH NO NO NOHE STILL WON'T ANSWER HIS CONTRADICTION
OH NO NO NOHE STILL DOESN'T REALIZE THE IRONING OF HIS OWN CONTRADICTION!
Suddenly pretending that I made a contradiction doesn't get you out of answering for your own contradiction little buddy
>you can compare race cars, except you can't>you can compare race cars with 100k worth of mods, except you can't>not a contradiction
>you can compare race cars which raced each other under the same ruleset but not race cars which didn't race each other under completely different rulesetsBased non-contradictionNow are race results evidence?
>you can compare production cars in actual showroom stock production series>but not race cars with extensive modifications ($100,000 worth) with no lap timesbased non contradiction.Now does a dodge stratus handle better than a 911?
but that's not why you said race results aren't evidence little buddy, we can all still see the post
but cars having supposed "handling upgrades" are why you claimed we can't compare cars of different rule sets, even if the opposing car that lost has the advantage of being in a better one. so are race cars comparable or does handling upgrades not matter?
>the opposing car that lost has the advantage of being in a better oneA meaningless assertion after you already admitted you "don't know" anything about the rulesets.Now are race results evidence?
>>28988039>comparing race cars is meaningless unless we know what handling upgrades they usedI guess by your own admission the race results of group A isn't evidence. since we don't know what upgrades either car had and the performance enhancements of group A cars varies as proven by dick johnson and his custom RS500.
Autism is one hell of a drug.
>>28988049If we know they were both adhering to the same production based ruleset then it's a pretty good indicator that the comparison will be fair.Unless you're a mustang handling enthusiast who can't admit when he contradicts himself...
>>28988059so why was dick johnson's RS500 faster than other RS500s? doesn't sound like the comparison between Group A cars of the exact same model was fair.
>>28988062>Dick Johnson wasn't good enough to build a Mustang properly so the comparison isn't fair!!!>akshually.... Dick Johnson was TOO GOOD at building his Mustang so the comparison isn't fair!!!Least contradictory Mustang handling enthusiast, now can we use Johnsons race results or only his lap times?
