Go to car


Latest Comments
Car: 98677   By: Skid   Comment: "I think '66 is the only year I like the Caprice ro..."
Car: 37161   By: DiRF   Comment: "As a piggyback on that... still on my vacation in ..."
Car: 37161   By: DiRF   Comment: "So, apparently, Kranefuss wasn't the *only* team o..."
Car: 78637   By: DiRF   Comment: "Welp, Renault-Samsung Motors doesn't exist as a br..."
Car: Fpost   By: DiRF   Comment: "Just got in today. Will hit the Hall of Fame tomor..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Linkage
Plates
Bling Bling
Photo
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images

 Other

Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
FAQ
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List

 Login

Username:

Password:


Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password


View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.


Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=52788
Submitted by: 427 Vette
Comments: 38  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 05-22-2006
View Stats Category: Vehicle Group
Description:
Ford GT and BMWs


   Comments

Showing page: 1 of 2
[
1 2 ]

#1
5-23-2006 @ 03:11:21 AM
Posted By : Kranium Reply | Edit | Del
I never understood why GT's are even made. Why pay 120 grand for something that no better than a 60 grand Z06?

#2
5-23-2006 @ 03:12:29 AM
Posted By : Altima35se2003 Reply | Edit | Del
#1, there is quite a bit of difference.

point taken.

people have paid more for less


#3
5-23-2006 @ 03:28:13 AM
Posted By : Kranium Reply | Edit | Del
I don't see the difference. The vette is just as quick, handles just as well, and is of good quality.

#4
5-23-2006 @ 03:29:35 AM
Posted By : Sensekhmet Reply | Edit | Del
#3, And has a much bigger range on one tank.

#5
5-23-2006 @ 11:38:59 AM
Posted By : 427 Vette Reply | Edit | Del
#1, It's about 150k, people buying a Ford GT are probably not looking for the best bang for the buck. Being said I'd take a GT over a Z06 anyday. Mid-engine layout lacking stability control, fun times.

#6
5-23-2006 @ 12:02:18 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#3, funny, I haven't heard of GT's roofs flying off

#7
5-23-2006 @ 12:08:35 PM
Posted By : ricerocketboy Reply | Edit | Del
#5, so would I.

#8
5-23-2006 @ 12:21:42 PM
Posted By : Adambomb Reply | Edit | Del
Oh, and I saw my first GT the other day.

#9
5-23-2006 @ 12:46:10 PM
Posted By : Subourbon187 Reply | Edit | Del
Although I'm always a fan of the MR crowd, I'd take a Vette, preferably a Z06. Nearly identical performance specs for half the price and it's 200 pounds lighter

#10
5-23-2006 @ 01:40:52 PM
Posted By : Altima35se2003 Reply | Edit | Del
GT doesn't have a cobal't/malibu's interior

#11
5-23-2006 @ 02:05:34 PM
Posted By : thontor Reply | Edit | Del
#6, the roof didn't fall off.. just the skin of the roof.. and it was a bad batch of adhesive.. not a design flaw

#12
5-23-2006 @ 02:14:00 PM
Posted By : stang392 Reply | Edit | Del
#11, the point still stands

#13
5-23-2006 @ 02:46:02 PM
Posted By : solid_snake Reply | Edit | Del
#11, I don't think it really matters when the GODDAMN ROOF OF YOUR NEW CAR FLYS OFF if it was a design flaw or not.

#14
5-23-2006 @ 04:48:49 PM
Posted By : Disrupture Reply | Edit | Del
The GT is exclusive, it's a legend. It's beautiful in every aspect. I would take it over ANY vette.

#15
5-24-2006 @ 12:32:37 AM
Posted By : Kranium Reply | Edit | Del
#5, Lack of a stability control is not a good thing, unless maybe you are a pro driver.

If people don't mind the GT being so expensive, then why do they complain about the nsx (one of the best handling cars and handmade) being so expensive?


#16
5-24-2006 @ 12:33:10 AM
Posted By : Subourbon187 Reply | Edit | Del
#15, It's furrin!!!!!111 :p

#17
5-24-2006 @ 12:36:45 AM
Posted By : Altima35se2003 Reply | Edit | Del
#15, age, low hp, lack of understaning of it's appeal, nationalistic car hate, car image, other factors

#18
5-24-2006 @ 04:53:51 AM
Posted By : Sensekhmet Reply | Edit | Del
#15, Lack of stability control is always a good thing. When you have even a basic understanding of how a car handles you'll try correcting it when something goes wrong. You end up fighting the stability control and you die.
Oh, and I still don't understand why the fuck do all these ASRs, ESPs and shit cut off throttle just when you need it to pull the car out of a slide.


#19
5-25-2006 @ 12:30:03 AM
Posted By : Kranium Reply | Edit | Del
Once again, lack of a stability control system is not a good thing. Even a pro driver would have a hard time being as good as a finely-tuned system. It allows people that are average drivers to handle a high-powered car and to be able to drive it in the rain and snow.

Top gear tested a jag in the winter, once with the stability control on and once off. They drove it 70 mph on a frozen lake and tried to avoid 3 obstacles. Despite their best attempts, the car only managed to avoid the first two, which called for swerving left and right, and plowed through the third one sideways. With the stability system on, it managed to miss all three with no sliding at all. On ice. At 70 mph. Sorry, but even a rally driver can't brake individual wheels.


#20
5-25-2006 @ 12:36:24 AM
Posted By : Altima35se2003 Reply | Edit | Del
#19, Top Garth also conducted a test with a 2003 Nissan Altima and the car is a totally different beast without it. Granted it was hard drving in town not a Scandinavian Death Challenge.

Showing page: 1 of 2
[
1 2 ]


Login to leave a comment

Classifieds 
Click here to post your own classified ad






Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Friday, April 26, 2024 08:57:32 AM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Ricecop. All rights reserved.