Audi R8 v Porsche 911 Carrera GTS?

[IRIS]

I'm in love of the body of the 935. I drove a similar car in Hungary 10 years ago just a few times. 4 speed manual, almost 400HP. It was lots of fun, BUT after 3 days with my friend on the bumpy roads, I almost lost the fillings from my teeth, and I talked very loud with everyone. Sometimes it was really hard to keep this car on the road. (Specially on rainy days.) They are good on the highways ( specially in Germany) but for regular daily use I vote for sedans.They are much more comfortable. But for second car I can take any of them. Otherwise I'm an Audi fan.

 

[Promo]

I agree it's different, showing off a Tesla is more like showing off a $150k iPhone than a car. But it does deliver that acceleration and does it in a $150k vehicle. The cars that seem to come close to it look to be three to five times that price.

Agreed. It's also one of the safest cars on the road, has very high initial quality and excellent 3 year operation costs (meaning low maintenance and depreciation). The over-the air updates is seriously cool, evolving self driving capability impressive and the battery replacement cost guarantee is marketing genius. I know several people who own them and they love them. But they all get only ~250-300KM per charge vs. the claimed 500KM range. The cold kills the capabilities of the batteries.

But for me the current car has no soul. Maybe if Tesla continued development on the Tesla Roadster - with a focus on acceleration, handling, chassis feedback and Ferrari-like styling - things would be different.

Electric engines are still in their early days and the technology is rapidly improving. I don't expect IC engines to keep up with electric. The physics heavily favor an electric drive train whether it's powered by a battery or by an IC engine that serves only as an electric generator.

No doubt true, electric cars are the future. Perhaps fuel cells or supercapacitors may replace current batteries.

One of my customers is a battery developer and he claims +50% power density improvements and less sensitivity to temperature will be possible within the next 1-2 years. He claims the chemistry side is all but developed, the problems are high cost, cost of manufacturing and the extremely high short circuit current. If the car gets into a serious accident, the batteries could short and generate high currents and temperatures potentially killing the occupants and put rescuers at risk. Also +50% power density means +50% charge time assuming same charging voltage - this means charge times of 12+ hours at 240V

In the end there are people who still love their Model T antique cars and though they won't be the fastest I guess there will always be those who like their beefed up IC engine cars.

That's me! My dad has an old Jag E-type and I still get a thrill looking under the hood. I'd kill for a old Hemi Cuda, Shelby Cobra or another 67 427 vette. Cars are a passion for allot of people.

 

[Promo]

But aesthetically speaking and I can't believe I'm falling for it, the R8 has this ridiculously sexy look to it

It is! the only thing i would change is that black panel in front of the rear wheels. I think it would look better in the body colour.

 

[Jubee]

It is! the only thing i would change is that black panel in front of the rear wheels. I think it would look better in the body colour.

Agreed, that is nice but I guess they're going for contrast.

 

[Jubee]

I believe that when buying a pure enthusiast car, only you can answer that question for yourself.

Considering price, a more appropriate comparison would be R8 ($184K CDN) or 911 Turbo ($181K) - but the Porsche can approach $200K+ with a few mandatory options. A 911 Carrera GTS starts at $136K. I would go with the 911 Turbo because I value performance ahead of image, although both cars deliver plenty in both categories. I'd pick the R8 over the GTS.

The numbers:
The 911 Turbo is quicker: 0-60 in 2.6 sec vs 2.9 and quarter mile in 10.6/131 vs 10.9/129
The 911 Turbo stops faster (70-0): 139ft vs 153
The 911 turbo pulls more Gs on the skidpad: 1.06g vs 1.0
The Turbo is faster in the slalom: 48.1mph vs 47.4
The Turbo is 120lbs lighter
The Turbo get much better gas mileage (LOL)
http://www.caranddriver.com/compari...570s-2017-porsche-911-turbo-s-comparison-test

Driveability:
I have allot of experience with the 1986 Turbo and 1997 Turbo. The Turbo can be driven sedately in heavy traffic all day and then be raced on the track all night. It will be 100% reliable, never overheat, be predictable (less so the 86), be comfortable, good visibility, easy to park, provide every convenience, the 4WD system is great in all conditions and it gets decent gas mileage. When you give it the gas or go into a turn, it's JUST AMAZING - even an average driver (like myself) can get a lot out of that car and it "feels" so good. It doesn't just outperform 98% of other cars, it shreds them.

I've only driven an R8 once for about 20 minutes and since it was a friends, I couldn't really juice it. The overall feel is closer to a race car than the 911. Although it's numbers aren't as good, it feels faster, it responds faster and it gives more feedback. It feels more like a fighter jet than the 911. People definitely look at it more than the 911. It sounds great. Daily drivability is definitely poorer, visibility is poorer, it's hard to park because you can't see close to the car, it's less calm, it requires more effort and attention to drive (but that's what allot of enthusiasts value) . The car feels like it's on rails and it always wants to "go".

Be Aware:
Both cars are shockley reliable even when constantly driven hard. However maintenance is CRAZY expensive and parts are INSANELY expensive. You can't take either car to your reliable neighbour mechanic and they are so complex and packaged so tight, you can't buy the tools and learn to do it yourself (I tried). You need to be rich to keep these cars. I bought the 911s to drive for the summer and then flip, the demand is so high that selling them for a profit was a snap.

In summary, if you are looking for a jet fighter that will thrill you and garner much attention, the R8 is a great choice. If you want an even faster car that can be driven every day and is easier to drive at the limit, the Turbo is the way to go.

Carrera GTS won this out. The Audi is a beautiful car, but as an everyday driver, it couldn't be justified.

 

[hi up in the sky]

I'm going to be contrary... I bought one of the last non turbo Carerras, an early 2016. I wanted the narrow body style and a duck tail. On the street its loads of fun, and on the track it' even more fun. And unlike the Turbo I was able to get a manual transmission.

 

[SaturnFan]

Perhaps a nice run up the 400 will help one decide which is the better vehicle to purchase.

 

[Promo]

Carrera GTS won this out. The Audi is a beautiful car, but as an everyday driver, it couldn't be justified.

I'm going to be contrary... I bought one of the last non turbo Carerras, an early 2016.

Congratulations to both of you! Did you buy the 2WD or 4WD variants?

If you live in the west-end, I can recommend these three shops for reasonably priced maintenance/repair/mods:
http://www.clarksonfinecarsrw.com/
http://www.mantissport.ca/
http://crossavenueauto.aaro.ca/

I wanted the narrow body style and a duck tail. On the street its loads of fun, and on the track it' even more fun. And unlike the Turbo I was able to get a manual transmission.

I've always liked the wide rear flair of the earlier 911s with the big whaletail.

I like to row my cars too, but the new transmissions and paddle shifters are so much faster and precise and protect you from errors. Unfortunately for us, those auto cars are quicker in acceleration and around the track (assuming their drivers are experienced), but for my fun cars, I still buy standard.

If you track your car allot, you may want to consider buying stock in either Michelin or Pirelli. 911s eat tires.