On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six cylinder
engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me take
it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual transmission,
all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and 22-24 mpg on the
highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.

On 5/23/15 7:49 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else and
was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four cylinders
and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six cylinder
engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me take
it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual transmission,
all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and 22-24 mpg on the
highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.


The $80,000 sticker price on the Corvette in question will buy you a
very nice new Porsche, though not the model you had. It'll be a much
more finely finished and executed car than the Corvette, nearly as fast,
too.

My dad took an early 70's Corvette in on trade on a new boat. He kept it
for a few days and then traded it to a car dealer friend of his for some
other vehicle. He said the Corvette rode too hard for his taste and
backside.

On 5/23/2015 8:09 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 7:49 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else and
was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four cylinders
and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six cylinder
engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me take
it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual transmission,
all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and 22-24 mpg on the
highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.


The $80,000 sticker price on the Corvette in question will buy you a
very nice new Porsche, though not the model you had. It'll be a much
more finely finished and executed car than the Corvette, nearly as fast,
too.

My dad took an early 70's Corvette in on trade on a new boat. He kept it
for a few days and then traded it to a car dealer friend of his for some
other vehicle. He said the Corvette rode too hard for his taste and
backside.


The '70's vintage Corvette I drove for a week was horrible. Maybe there
was something wrong with it but it shook and quaked horribly.
Maybe it was because it was a convertible.

My lawyer friend has a naturally aspirated Porsche 911.
If I were ever to get another one I'd probably forgo the
twin turbo. Other than the blistering acceleration of the turbo, there
isn't much difference in handling or ride and his has all the horsepower
you would ever need for driving on the road. Mine was basically the
racing version but had all the finishing touches (nice interior and
sound dampening) that they leave out to reduce weight in the full bore
racing version.

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else
and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four
cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six
cylinder engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage
I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me
take it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual
transmission, all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and
22-24 mpg on the highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.


Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?

On 5/23/2015 11:51 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else
and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four
cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six
cylinder engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage
I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me
take it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual
transmission, all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and
22-24 mpg on the highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.



Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically or
you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 11:51 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else
and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference
between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of
cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you
about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four
cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six
cylinder engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage
I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me
take it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual
transmission, all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and
22-24 mpg on the highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.



Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically
or you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.




My current tow vehicle is an ML550. The X5 50i I replaced was like your
Porsche and the new car like the M5 - a very different "feel". It's the
only thing I don't like about it but there is a significant difference.
I notice it immediately if I hit an off ramp just a little faster than
I'm used to.

As far as speed, I'm lucky to be in an area where 80 is the norm so as
long as I'm not the fastest on the road, I'm fine. The police here seem
to really like to target the new-generation pony cars anyway.

On 5/24/2015 11:23 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 11:51 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else
and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference
between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of
cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you
about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four
cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six
cylinder engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage
I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me
take it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual
transmission, all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and
22-24 mpg on the highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.



Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically
or you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.




My current tow vehicle is an ML550. The X5 50i I replaced was like your
Porsche and the new car like the M5 - a very different "feel". It's the
only thing I don't like about it but there is a significant difference.
I notice it immediately if I hit an off ramp just a little faster than
I'm used to.

As far as speed, I'm lucky to be in an area where 80 is the norm so as
long as I'm not the fastest on the road, I'm fine. The police here seem
to really like to target the new-generation pony cars anyway.


Speaking of pony cars ... I had a new (in 2008) Mustang "Bullitt" for a
while. Long story as to how I happened to acquire that one. It was
a surprisingly fast and good handling car. Not in the same league of
the BMW M5 or the Porsche but at about 1/4th the price not bad at all.

On Monday, May 25, 2015 at 3:48:47 AM UTC-7, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 11:23 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 11:51 PM, Username wrote:
Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/23/2015 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 1:16 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 11:37 AM, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 May 2015 19:45:49 -0500, Califbill
wrote:

Keyser Söze wrote:
Got talked into a test ride today in a 2015 Corvette
convertible (don't
ask) at a dealership while I was waiting for something else
and was
impressed and disappointed. I was impressed with the car's get
up and go
and its cornering abilities...very nice. I was disappointed
with the
seeming hugeness of the car from the exterior and the
relatively tiny
passenger space inside. I was disappointed with the garishness
of the
interior, and the fit and finish of some items. I didn't like
the seats
all that much, and I thought the car rode, well, hard.

The sticker price on the car was $80,000. Dunno what it might
sell for...

Be this has what to do with boating?

Hey it is an overpriced chunk of fiberglass, with an oversized
engine,
sold to people with an over riding desire to boost their self
esteem.
Sounds like a lot of "performance" boats they sell.

Lots of cars are overpriced. At least the Corvette is fun
to,drive. Have
a friend with a new vette. Says ease up to 90 mph and it goes in
to 4
cylinder mode and averages 46.5 mpg. Car ride hard? How many
soft riding
cars handle worth a crap.



I know you won't understand this, but there is a difference
between a
firm-riding car and a hard-riding car. Also, there are plenty of
cars
that are fun to drive. Oh, and your friend is bull****ting you
about
getting 46 mph at 90 mph while the car is running on four
cylinders and,
even funnier, you believe it.

Of course you know all. Very aerodynamic vehicle. Does not take a
lot of
power to maintain speed.


Oh, I wasn't disputing that half a Corvette engine could drive the
car to
90 mph. That's still more than 200 hp, right?

The bull**** is the miles per gallon claim. I suspect the car's
computer
is confused by the shutdown of four cylinders and is reporting three
times the MPG the drivetrain is actually producing.

I think it measures fuel flow, so hard to be confused.



I don't understand why anyone would be interested in 48 MPG running on
half the engine in a performance oriented car like a Corvette. Then
again, I wouldn't want a Corvette. I've driven three. The first (and
probably the best that I can remember) was an early 1950's model ..
can't remember if it was a '54 or '55, but I know it had a six
cylinder engine. I was only 16 years old and the owner of the garage
I worked at
in the summer had it in storage. He got it out one day and let me
take it for a spin.

The second was a mid 70's model. Horrible. Handled terribly, shook,
quaked and knocked the fillings out of your teeth.

The third was a new one that I test drove about 3 years ago when half
thinking of getting another toy. Much improved but still did nothing
for me.

By far the best performance orientated vehicle I've ever owned was a
2002 Porsche 911/996 twin turbo. 450 hp, six speed manual
transmission, all wheel drive and still got 18 mpg around town and
22-24 mpg on the highway. The ride was firm but not harsh
and it handled like it was on rails. Best engineered automobile I've
ever driven.

I had to get rid of it though. If I had kept it much longer I would no
longer have a driver's license.



Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically
or you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.




My current tow vehicle is an ML550. The X5 50i I replaced was like your
Porsche and the new car like the M5 - a very different "feel". It's the
only thing I don't like about it but there is a significant difference.
I notice it immediately if I hit an off ramp just a little faster than
I'm used to.

As far as speed, I'm lucky to be in an area where 80 is the norm so as
long as I'm not the fastest on the road, I'm fine. The police here seem
to really like to target the new-generation pony cars anyway.


Speaking of pony cars ... I had a new (in 2008) Mustang "Bullitt" for a
while. Long story as to how I happened to acquire that one. It was
a surprisingly fast and good handling car. Not in the same league of
the BMW M5 or the Porsche but at about 1/4th the price not bad at all.

I was satisfied with my two Lincoln Mk. VII LSC's one was an 89 and the last was a 92. Way cool for what they were.

On 5/24/15 8:47 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 May 2015 04:58:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically or
you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.



I was lucky to have the Corvette before we really had a speed limit.
The cops were pretty rare on the beltway before the double nickel made
speeding a profit center. I have made many laps of the Beltway at well
over 100. The vette topped out around 140 with a stopwatch in measured
miles although the speedometer said 160 or so. You could see the gas
gauge move at that speed.



I had one really rich guy friend when I was in junior high and high
school. On his 16th birthday, his dad bought him a new Jag XK150
roadster. Grrrr. Anyway, we were out on the Connecticut Turnpike one
bright sunny afternoon and he decided to see how fast it would go. We
were doing 125 when he passed a State Trooper, who pulled us over.

The trooper recognized my buddy's last name and asked if his dad was the
lawyer who handled cases for cops killed or disabled in the line of duty
in terms of collecting substantial settlements from the insurance
companies/municipalities, et cetera. Turns out he was. My friend got
away with a warning. Too cool.

My sports car supposedly will do 175 mph, but I've never had it above
110. Route 4 has County Mounties and Staties *everywhere*

On 5/24/2015 9:08 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:47 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 24 May 2015 04:58:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Wasn't the M5 easier to run too fast?


Both the Porsche and the M5 were too tempting to run too fast. That's
why I wouldn't have a license today if I still had either of them.

The M5 was fast (500 hp) but lacked the "feel" of the Porsche and was
far too complicated and computer dependent for it's own (and the
owner's) good.

For sports/performance cars of this type I am not a big fan of
automatic, sequential transmissions. The M5 would shift automatically or
you could control shifting manually using the stick or the paddles.
Still wasn't the same as the Porsche with a conventional 6 speed and
clutch. As far as pure acceleration the Porsche was faster.

The biggest difference was in normal, around town driving. The M5 felt
like a stiffly sprung BMW 535 but at 30-40 mph the Porsche still felt
like a sports car.



I was lucky to have the Corvette before we really had a speed limit.
The cops were pretty rare on the beltway before the double nickel made
speeding a profit center. I have made many laps of the Beltway at well
over 100. The vette topped out around 140 with a stopwatch in measured
miles although the speedometer said 160 or so. You could see the gas
gauge move at that speed.



I had one really rich guy friend when I was in junior high and high
school. On his 16th birthday, his dad bought him a new Jag XK150
roadster. Grrrr. Anyway, we were out on the Connecticut Turnpike one
bright sunny afternoon and he decided to see how fast it would go. We
were doing 125 when he passed a State Trooper, who pulled us over.

The trooper recognized my buddy's last name and asked if his dad was the
lawyer who handled cases for cops killed or disabled in the line of duty
in terms of collecting substantial settlements from the insurance
companies/municipalities, et cetera. Turns out he was. My friend got
away with a warning. Too cool.

My sports car supposedly will do 175 mph, but I've never had it above
110. Route 4 has County Mounties and Staties *everywhere*

Why own it then, if you are afraid to use it the way it designed to be
driven

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."