Would you rather?

  • Thread starter Thread starter motortrend
  • 22,046 comments
  • 1,272,776 views
So a Vantage isn't FR then? i would've thought that you would've put "neither" again...


And the Ferrari by FAR. I've always loved the 550/575.

No, the Vantage is FR.
 
No, the Vantage is FR.
jackie-chan-meme_reasonably_small.png

But uh Ferrari, becuase of the history behind it.......and I'm not a big fan of Astons
 
You dont want the Ferrari because it's FR, but the FR Aston is fine?
 
You dont want the Ferrari because it's FR, but the FR Aston is fine?

I don't want the Ferrari because it is ugly, and it's an FR Ferrari. I never really liked FR Ferraris.
That AM is much more aesthetically pleasing, at least to me.
 
gamerdog6482
I don't want the Ferrari because it is ugly, and it's an FR Ferrari. I never really liked FR Ferraris.
That AM is much more aesthetically pleasing, at least to me.

I totally agree!
 
1988_sledgehammer.jpg

1988 Callaway Sledgehammer
Price:$400,000
Top Speed: 254 MPH

OR​

ssc-ultimate-aero-2009-front-main-studio.jpg

2009 SSC Aero
Price:$660,000
Top Speed: Unconfirmed, but SSC states it can go 270 MPH​
 
Well, that isn't even really a contest, is it? SSC Aero versus a Corvette tuner?
SSC all the way.
 
Callaway, so I can rock my mullet, and listen to glam metal.
While dressed as while dressed as Crockett from Miami Vice
 
SSC, I've never really like the styling of the Sledgehammer.
Also, a C4 Corvette never did have the greatest handling.
 
You guys must street race a lot.

Here's one
'92 Supra TT
toyota-supra-1992a.jpg


'94 Supra TT
1108.jpg


Battle between Mk.3 and Mk.IV
 
Let's see...
Top one: Ugly. Pop-up headlights on that boxy frame?
Bottom one: Is red, and appears to be a targa, so I'll take that one.
I really don't like Toyotas though.
 
SSC, I've never really like the styling of the Sledgehammer.
Also, a C4 Corvette never did have the greatest handling.

Oh come on, you could literally FEEL the road in those things. :dopey:

But as for my choice, it would be the Callaway, while the SSC is just an amazing car, and would ultimately destroy the Sledgehammer in a race, I just love the Callaway, having seen it in person, knowing about it since my childhood, and watching the documentary on it enough to ruin the VCR we had when I was younger, it's just left an permanent imprint on my mind.
 
It's more about the steering feel, Dad and I were in one and the steering was very sloppy.

And am I detecting bias? ;)
 
I believe the MK.3 came in targa too.
MK3 supra ugly? Sacrilege!
 
^That.

The later one is a bit too rounded, but the mkIII is too boxy.

But the mkIII has cooler taillights, so I'll take that one. :dopey:
 
And am I detecting bias? ;)

No, I'm just stating my opinion on a car, like everyone else, there's no bias, bias would be
SSGAY SUX CUASE I LIKE CALLUHWAYE

but as for Supra's..........I honestly don't know, I love the MK III's looks over the MK IV's Ferrari-ish look, but the MK IV had performance that would make RX7's, and Skylines nervous......I guess the IV, because while it does look like a Ferrari, at least it doesn't look like the other Japanese imports of that era.
 
575 for me, that thing is sexy as hell
Edit: ssc and mk4
 
No, I'm just stating my opinion on a car, like everyone else, there's no bias, bias would be
SSGAY SUX CUASE I LIKE CALLUHWAYE

I was just joking that since you had grown up with the Sledgehammer, it will always be a part of you, and you'll naturally be biased towards it, like how I am with the F50, NFS:HP2. :lol:
 
Watt2159
1988 Callaway Sledgehammer
Price:$400,000
Top Speed: 254 MPH

OR

2009 SSC Aero
Price:$660,000
Top Speed: Unconfirmed, but SSC states it can go 270 MPH

Is that Callaway based on the C4 corvette or C5? I forget because i think the Callaway C12 was based off of the C5.
 
Is that Callaway based on the C4 corvette or C5? I forget because i think the Callaway C12 was based off of the C5.

C4 is the sledgehammer, c12 was the c5 that was slower than the sledgehammer if I remember correctly.....
 
il take 2009 SSC Aero because it looks better and the 94 supra tt because of the roof.
 
1992 Toyota MR2 - 100% Factory - 2.2l N/A I4 - Automatic Tranny - 157k miles - $5,000
1992%20Toyota%20MR2%20Yellow%202.JPG


1986 Toyota MR2 - 100% Factory - 1.6l N/A I4 - Standard Tranny - 83k miles - $5,000
mk1_b.jpg
 
More Toyotas? Really?
Uh...I guess the '86 because it has less miles.
 
I'd take the '92, I think it looks better as long as I can ditch the canary yellow. :yuck:
 
Manual wins almost every time, a stick vs stick battle with both of them having forced induction would be better.
 
92, because I'd swap the motor and tranny out anyways...
 
Back