Gemballa & Pagani...

  • Thread starter Thread starter logi74
  • 78 comments
  • 2,695 views
Apparently, the Koenigsegg is wholly unreliable.
 
Onikaze
Hmm...2 million and change for a tweaked porsche...

Or 2 million and change for a Ferrari 250 GTO...
Click to expand...

It'd take at least 4 million to get a GTO, and if it's at a big auction it could run you over 10. Depends upon the prestige and history of the particular car.
 
ultrabeat
Apparently, the Koenigsegg is wholly unreliable.
Click to expand...
I beleive it. They run, what, 800 BHP out of a V8 the size of a Mustang's? I'm suprised it doesn't blow up run they turn the ignition.
 
It's a twin-supercharged and intercooled 4.7L V8, developed by Koenigsegg themselves.
 
Wolfe2x7
It's a twin-supercharged and intercooled 4.7L V8, developed by Koenigsegg themselves.
Click to expand...
I know it's an in-house engine. I was just stating the Mustang to quote size relavancies. It seems an awful lot of power to get out of such a small (again, relavancies) engine. Not even the Ferrari F40 LM pulled that much power to engine size.
 
Toronado
I know it's an in-house engine. I was just stating the Mustang to quote size relavancies. It seems an awful lot of power to get out of such a small (again, relavancies) engine. Not even the Ferrari F40 LM pulled that much power to engine size.
Click to expand...

I knew you were referring to the Mustang as a comparison. I just added that bit to clarify for other people; I wasn't sure if it was made by Koenigsegg myself, until now. :)

Anyway, the Koenigsegg makes 171hp/L. Not exceptional for a forced-induction engine by any means, but the displacement -- and therefore, the power output -- is relatively large. Oh, and the F40 LM made 230-240hp/L. (700/720hp from a 3L engine). :)
 
Wolfe2x7
I knew you were referring to the Mustang as a comparison. I just added that bit to clarify for other people; I wasn't sure if it was made by Koenigsegg myself, until now. :)

Anyway, the Koenigsegg makes 171hp/L. Not exceptional for a forced-induction engine by any means, but the displacement -- and therefore, the power output -- is relatively large. Oh, and the F40 LM made 230-240hp/L. (700/720hp from a 3L engine). :)
Click to expand...
Ohh...I thought it had a 4.0 litre. Never mind then.
 
Crap, have 250 GTO's been trading for 4 Million+ now?

Man, I'm never going to get one.

I need to start killing rich people and laundering their money.
 
Onikaze
Crap, have 250 GTO's been trading for 4 Million+ now?

Man, I'm never going to get one.

I need to start killing rich people and laundering their money.
Click to expand...

Hiya! :D :O :lol: Meow! (='.'=)

You can always try stealing one! :sly: Problem is....where can you find one? :odd:
 
iceburns288
One sold for 14 million in 1990 or 1991. :sly:
Click to expand...

250%20GTO-5.jpg


:drool:
 
you could get one of those... or a superformance daytona coupe and put a supercharged 427 in it... thats what i'd do anyway...
 
logi74
250%20GTO-5.jpg


:drool:
Click to expand...

Hiya! :D :O :lol: Meow! (='.'=)

Sometimes I wonder about classic cars....What are the many reason why do some still like older cars compared to new ones? :odd: That Ferrari 250 GTO is a good example since you guys are talking about it. :O Is it simply something that is deep in your heart or is it something like looks? :odd: Performance from the past and performance in the present? :odd:
 
it has to do with the fact that they are pretty rare, where they were raced when they were new, who raced them, any wins they have and such. it also has to do with the performance and looks yes but mostly its kinda like owning a coin the government only made, say, 100 of and someone took that one into space or something like that.
 
It's the same reason a Japanese businessman would pay twenty or thirty million dollars for a Van Gogh and only a hundred thousand or so for a painting by a young artist which may or may not look ten times better.

It's all about owning a piece of history.
 
I love classics and older cars, but I don't give a crap about how rare it is, whether it won races, or how it performed... :)

If rarity was a necessity, I wouldn't love cars like the 911 or Fairlady Z. But I do.
If racing history was a necessity, I wouldn't love cars like the BMW 507 or (80's) Testarossa. But I do.
If performance was a necessity, I wouldn't love cars like the Honda S600 or Austin-Healey Sprite. But I do.

The above qualities are nice, but to me, a car should have some sort of "kick***" or "awesome" factor, which is hard to define. Then again, I seem to like all kinds of classic cars, so maybe a definition wouldn't be feasible anyway. :D

I love the 250 GTO because it's got performance, it's got racing history, it's got sexy yet bad*** looks, and it's both kick*** and awesome. :p
 

Latest Posts

Back