Lambo Gallardo or Ferrari 360 CS? - Page 5

wEstSide · 11-26-04, 09:49 PM

I meant to say that the F50 wasn't as good as its predecessor, which means it is not worth its own production. I don't know about you guys but I've always been taught that if a son can't surpass his father, there is no point in having a son.

BIGpassion · 11-26-04, 09:55 PM

As far as this thread has come, it has some what drifted off track. but this time im not going to ask people to get back on the original statement. im just going to sit back and watch those posts keep flooding in and chip in with my own comments every now and again, im starting to enjoy watching people debate on what they believe....therefore im going to give my own two pennies worth.

So, there seems to be a little "thing" going on at the moment with LateNightCable and allanlambo which is on the lines of an "italian civil war" ( sort of ) between lamborghini and ferrari. in my eyes, if someone was just to ask me what i thought of lamborghini and ferrari, i would say....lamborghini is a company that is rock solid in a sense of all-round capabilities, the are consistantly producing high range, top quality cars. i would say that they are always making cars on the same wavelenght if you know what i mean, if you dont i mean that they are always making cars that are similar, just at different price ranges, an example, the gallardo is just a de tuned and cheaper version of the murcielago. as for ferrari, i would say that they are alot more varied in their production cars, an example of this variation is an enzo and the 612, two completely different cars, and as for ferraris being boring i would say that what i have just stated suggests that ferraris are not boring at all in every way. lamborghinis are still king of the hill for me though, purely because of individual taste.
----------------
i hope my post has been taken into account LateNightCable and allanlambo so it could help you conclude your topic.
----------------
BIG p

allanlambo · 11-26-04, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wEstSide

I'm not really sure, I haven't driven either one. From what I've seen, the Gallardo is badass, and the CS is even "badder". However, the Gallardo has a v10, and is cheaper by a healthy 40,000 dollars. The CS has a sequential as opposed to a conventional 6-speed. It's also 700 pounds lighter (!) than the Gallardo. Gallardo has AWD, which is sweet, but is still a little slower in straight-line speed, most likely due to the extra weight, as it has 100 more peak ft/lbs of torque at 4500 than the CS, and about 75 more peak hp at 7800, both of which come before the Ferrari. As for revs, both hit power up till the redline, 8500 rpm for the CS and 7800 rpm for the Gallardo. As for speed, the CS definitely wins, but not by much. I've seen the Gallardo lap and it does pretty well, even though it is limited by weight. The CS still obliterates the Gallardo when it comes to track times, but in terms of straight line speed, the Gallardo is pretty close.

It seems to me you are asking, "Which would you rather own?" The answer is the Gallardo, the CS might be sportier, but the Gallardo is more comfortable, and AWD makes it less of a hassle to drive. I don't know for sure though, I might drive the CS and become hooked.

May I digress?

Quote:

As for the F50, it is trash

Very true, F40 beats it any day of the week, fiscal year, Yemenese calendar year, etc. F50 was not well thought out, really.

The Gallardo is much quicker than the 360CS in straightline speed. Been there, done that.

allanlambo · 11-26-04, 10:03 PM

Ferraris are crap, i can say it, i own them. I speak from experience. I dont say everything is crap compared to Lamborghini. Porsche is an AWESOME car. Give me a Gt2 over any Ferrari barring an Enzo or F40.

Yes, the F50 is trash, ive driven them. It is a shitbox. The F40 is awesome. Period point blank, end of story. The F40 is one of the greatest cars ever made.

LateNightCable · 11-26-04, 10:25 PM

I wouldn't say there is an Italian Civil War going on here, but there is a particular member who seems to want to throw this discussion off, and dis-regard anyone else's opinion but his own. He has made his preference quite evident, and now needs shut up, for he is running in circles. Anymore spout offs from him will be deleted or edited in a rather humorous fashion. Westside on the other hand posted one of the most fair and objective opinions in this thread, lets see more of those.

The F40 does indeed rank as one of the best Ferrari's ever made. Proving that they are capable of building a masterpiece when they put their minds to it. Lambo just needs more autonomy from heavy handed Audi/VW.

BIGpassion · 11-26-04, 10:36 PM

i rekon this has proven to be quite a popular topic, and to be honest im not suprised, there are interesting conversations going on. it has been spoilt in a way i think, i think some people might just be a little harsh against ferrari

wEstSide · 11-27-04, 02:02 AM

Quote:

The Gallardo is much quicker than the 360CS in straightline speed. Been there, done that.

Well, that contains only a modicum of truth according to the numbers I've seen. I've never witnessed a race, but the numbers claimed by Ferrari would put it .2 seconds faster than the Gallardo in the quarter, faster to 100 mph, and tied to 60mph. Not surprising with the weight discrepancy.

As for the Ferrari-bashing, I don't hate them. They make fine cars, and I have nothing against that. The CS is a great car, so is the F50. The F50, however, had some problems, which shouldn't come on a car of that price.

allanlambo · 11-27-04, 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wEstSide

Quote:

The Gallardo is much quicker than the 360CS in straightline speed. Been there, done that.

Well, that contains only a modicum of truth according to the numbers I've seen. I've never witnessed a race, but the numbers claimed by Ferrari would put it .2 seconds faster than the Gallardo in the quarter, faster to 100 mph, and tied to 60mph. Not surprising with the weight discrepancy.

As for the Ferrari-bashing, I don't hate them. They make fine cars, and I have nothing against that. The CS is a great car, so is the F50. The F50, however, had some problems, which shouldn't come on a car of that price.

Look at real numbers, not Ferrari quoted numbers. Ferrari also quoted Hp, and weight figures which are untrue, and proven so by ferrari members who dynoed and weighed their cars.

skyline_r34v · 11-27-04, 07:53 AM

Where's the proof showing they lied about their hp and weight figures??

If there's no proof, this is just all hear-say. You say don't believe Ferrari, so now I say why believe you?

Without proof you're just another voice spoken into the wind.

bleh · 11-27-04, 05:14 PM

how much of a weight difference and hp difference. and you also must include all of the variables: dry weight vs. wet. or whp vs bhp vs crank.

it is also important to note that every dyno is different and you will get much different readings on an na car with varying altitude, temperature, and humidity. also the weight of the tires and rims will not only effect the weight of the car put also what the dyno reads. there are so many variable that must be accounted for.

there must be a significant difference in hp to justify a false claim by ferrari.