Quote:
Originally Posted by Cavpilot2k
I would consider it, but $60k is a lot for a Toyota. It had better deliver the goods. Problem is, the M2 will be out 2-3 years before this thing, so for most, the decision will already be made.
Also, looking at the geometry of the rear roofline, I bet it will suffer from the same thing that kept me from seriously considering a 370Z, which is horrendous rearward visibility. I am an experienced urban parallel-parker, but when I tested the Z, I was afraid to back it into its parking space at the dealership. Rearward Visibility is virtually nonexistant, and if you have to parallel regularly, it would be a nightmare. This car looks similar.
|
There you go! So however good the FT-1 might be, it is too much because it is a Toyota. Explains why BMW doesn't build any Z4 M, M3 CSL, M1 etc..., because however good it is, it is not a Porsche. So what counts more is the badge, not so much the car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anodite10
The Golf R may really sway some people from the M2? Maybe for the M235i it makes sense, but the M2?
They're like in totally different leagues.
|
Q: How do non-enthusiasts (90% - statistic pulled out of the air) define a sports car?
A: By how fast it accelerates.
Q: According to which criterion do non-enthusiasts buy a sports car?
A: According to how practical it is.
Well that is an oxymoron in theory, but not in practice. Golf R400 will be more practical (hatch) and faster (0-100 km/h in 3.8 sec) thanks to AWD, again according to the 90%.