This is sick. I wanna be sick!

[Tornado]

No I would not buy a Pagani or a Koenigsegg, as for the Bugatti you may want to brush up on your history. They started racing with the Type 13 in 1910, the type 35 is one of the most successful race cars ever built with over 2000 wins to it's credit, they swept the Targa Florio 5 years running (1925-29) and took LaMans in 39.

You mean the Bugatti that isn't even remotely the same Bugatti from the 1920s-1950s, and is really just a dumping ground for VW engineers to go nuts? That Bugatti?

Here is the deal, I wouldn't spend that kind of money for a race car that hasn't proven itself on the track.

Because that's oh so relevant when only a handful of cars Ferrari has made in the past 20 years actually were raced.

A concept that your feeble little mind seems incapable of grasping.

Like I said, others may use their own criteria for making such decisions, these are mine and I couldn't care less if you agree, like or even understand them.

You also don't care if you make a pretty much irrelevant statement equivalent to a logical black hole and then prove yourself incapable of defending it when it is questioned.

 

[Tesla]

No I would not buy a Pagani or a Koenigsegg, as for the Bugatti you may want to brush up on your history. They started racing with the Type 13 in 1910, the type 35 is one of the most successful race cars ever built with over 2000 wins to it's credit, they swept the Targa Florio 5 years running (1925-29) and took Le Mans in 39.

Now hold up a second. Forgetting the personal attacks for a moment, you previously said this:

I simply wouldn't pay 250K+ for what is essentially a street legal race car unless it has proven itself on the track, others are free to do whatever they wish.

.. Yet you now say you would happily purchase a car that has no racing heritage (that I'm aware of) and the only period of time that the manufacturer itself was competitive was pre-war era?

EDIT: Tree'd

 

[TankAss95]

Very nice.

 

[MustangManiac]

Now hold up a second. Forgetting the personal attacks for a moment,

I see you chose to call one out for personal attacks, problem is I was only responding in kind to the personal attack that was leveled at me first, somehow I do not find this surprising. You are right, I could say more, but that would certainly be against the AUP I signed when joining this forum. That being the case, I am done here, have a good day.

 

[gorsad]

Very nice.

👍

 

[McLaren]

No I would not buy a Pagani or a Koenigsegg, as for the Bugatti you may want to brush up on your history. They started racing with the Type 13 in 1910, the type 35 is one of the most successful race cars ever built with over 2000 wins to it's credit, they swept the Targa Florio 5 years running (1925-29) and took LaMans in 39.

Brush up on your own first, bud.

That Bugatti was Automobiles E. Bugatti & skipping over it being sold to Hispano-Suiza & then being later revived as an Italian manufacturer, today, it is known as Bugatti Automobiles S.a.S.

It's not the same Bugatti in any form, besides the manufacturer name. Not even the tiniest bit of racing heritage has ever been put into a Veyron.

Here is the deal, I wouldn't spend that kind of money for a race car that hasn't proven itself on the track. A concept that your feeble little mind seems incapable of grasping. Like I said, others may use their own criteria for making such decisions, these are mine and I couldn't care less if you agree, like or even understand them.

My feeble little mind? That's rich coming from someone who just tried to give me a history lesson without realizing that it inadvertently disassembled his whole argument.

There's nothing to understand. Your idea of how you'd spend your money is nothing more than borderline arrogance & by this point, a bit of hypocrisy as well.

 

[aadil717]

Here is the deal, I wouldn't spend that kind of money for a race car that hasn't proven itself on the track.

I'd just like to come here and bring this back to topic; the Lamborghini Aventador isn't a race car - so it does not need to prove itself on a track. It's built for the road, for it to be used on the road.

I'm not questioning your quote, as it's probably for the car manufacturers that actually race (Ferrari etc).
But I'd just like to say that Lamborghini doesn't have to prove anything. It has plenty of customers and a fan base that grows by every model, so if you wouldn't buy the car - it's fine there are plenty of others who appreciate the cars for what they are, they're not trying to be anything else.

 

[peter_vod69]

People in this thread need to have a good look at themselves.

 

[aadil717]

And posting that about people is really going to help you, isn't it?

 

[Zenith]

You'd be mistaken to think that anybody participating in this thread is losing sleep over the discussion.

 

[peter_vod69]

And posting that about people is really going to help you, isn't it?

I'm not sure what you mean, and I'm certain I don't care

You'd be mistaken to think that anybody participating in this thread is losing sleep over the discussion.

You all seem to be getting pretty wound up though, as if an argument on the internet was something that could convincingly be won or lost.

But whatever, have at it. It's quite entertaining...

 

[Tornado]

People in this thread need to have a good look at themselves.

And at least one person posting needs to take his own advice before he gives it. In fact, I think we've had this conversation before.

I'm not sure what you mean, and I'm certain I don't care

No one cares that you want to white knight again, either. So I guess we're at a crossroads.

 

[peter_vod69]

No one cares that you want to white knight again, either. So I guess we're at a crossroads.

You do, or you wouldn't have responded.

Oh and this:

 

[Tornado]

You do, or you wouldn't have responded.

Or I like toying with you. Or I just like to see you twist in the wind. Or I just wanted to make it clear that no one cares. Maybe it's even a combination. Your call, I suppose.


Hell. I might even just be bored.

Oh and this:

On an internet forum, a person who defends a member who is clearly wrong, usually with the hopes of gaining brownie points with said member. Often seen as negative behavior.

Your modus operandi seems to be to barge into a thread where two groups have finished arguing about something. Then you make a disparaging remark towards the members of the group that actually attempted to argue their position. Then you side with whatever group decided to just argue by being insulting while claiming that the other side is the one with the problem.

First time you claimed some sort of bandwagon mentality and kept claiming it when called on it. Last time you claimed everyone was taking themselves too seriously after being called on insulting people. This time you were a lot more vague about it, but seem to be playing the same card as the second time.




You've done it at least thrice from even my terrible memory, so I'm sure if I was to bother to actually look I'd find more examples. So, again: Follow your own advice before you give it.

 

[peter_vod69]

Where was I defending anyone? Who was I insulting? I just found it interesting/amusing how seriously some people take themselves. But hey, knock yourselves out.

Obviously I hit a nerve (again) because you had to damn near write an essay in response. Even if it was off on a tangent.

 

[Tornado]

Where was I defending anyone? Who was I insulting?

Riiiight.





Well, dig dig dig!

Obviously I hit a nerve (again) because you had to damn near write an essay in response. Even if it was off on a tangent.

Or, you know. Any of those things I already pointed out. Though do continue to believe you can get inside my mind. It is legitimately amusing.

 

[peter_vod69]

Riiiight.





Well, dig dig dig!


Or, you know. Any of those things I already pointed out. Though do continue to believe you can get inside my mind. It is legitimately amusing.

Oh I see. I was defending whomever was arguing with you, and you got insulted? In that case, I apologise.

By the way, that is a lovely font.

 

[TankAss95]

*grabs popcorn*

 

[aadil717]

Back ON TOPIC...

...I still hate gold chrome.

 

[Scaff]

OK - Its quite simple.

Cut the personal digs and get the thread back on topic, I don't care what anyone feels the provocation was you do not attack other members in any way.

Argue the point - don't attack the person making it (well if you wish to remain here that is).

 

[Lucas]

There's nothing to understand. Your idea of how you'd spend your money is nothing more than borderline arrogance & by this point, a bit of hypocrisy as well.

IMO, this is all that has to be said about this subject. There are no rules about what makes you want to buy a car, so it's pretty pointless to argue about what you should or should not buy.

However, other things can be argued since they are presented as a fairly illogical point of view:

You mean the Bugatti that isn't even remotely the same Bugatti from the 1920s-1950s, and is really just a dumping ground for VW engineers to go nuts? That Bugatti?

Not to mention this one hasn't really proved anything on the track, since as far as I know, it hasn't been raced.

It's not the same Bugatti in any form, besides the manufacturer name. Not even the tiniest bit of racing heritage has ever been put into a Veyron.

Precisely, it's no different than slapping Bugatti in a Ford Fiesta.




Comparing the racing achievements of a car marque than hasn't been really interested in racing (Lamborghini) with another one that has (Ferrari) is pretty pointless.

 

[Caliber]

Who in the world would want that, at least put white gold on the Lamborghini.

 

[peter_vod69]

It's not my cup of kopi luwak, but hell, if you are going to be flashy and over-the-top, why not go the whole nine yards? There are enough white repmobiles on the road.

Having said that, mine would be midnight blue.

 

[Hyped]

Comparing the racing achievements of a car marque than hasn't been really interested in racing (Lamborghini) with another one that has (Ferrari) is pretty pointless.

Add the fact that Ferrari only sold road cars to fund it's racing team that was quickly becoming bankrupt and Lamborghini was established because a tractor manufacturer was incredibly dissapointed in a Ferrari road car he purchased, which made him want to sell the BEST ROAD CAR they could.