View Single Post
      01-24-2007, 10:06 PM   #30
swamp2
Lieutenant General
swamp2's Avatar
United_States
214
Rep
10,201
Posts

 
Drives: E92 M3
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Diego, CA USA

iTrader: (1)

Feature is not equivalent to engineering

Quote:
Originally Posted by replicat View Post
No engineering classes needed to know that the car doesn't have half the engineering that the M3 does...they are just adding onto the chassis.

Its a joke to me...period.
Come on now. Calling the car a "joke" is clearly an overstatement. I'd love to see an experienced Toyota track guy in the IS-F hand you your a$% in your new M3 . I like what I have seen and heard about the new M, esp. compared to the IS-F, as much or more than anyone. However, the presense of particular features is not really the same as the level of engineering. Yes in general more features require more engineering, but to say the M3 has LSD and IS-F does not (or whatever feature it may have that IS-F does not) is hardly the same as saying the M is more "engineered". It is simply more featured and more speced. So indeed you don't need an engineering background to say one car has more features. Even an engineering background would not really tell you much about which car has more engineering. Only a comparison of all features, engineering man hours, innovation, testing, R&D, etc. would tell you which car is more or better engineered. Perhaps I am being a bit pedantic but I simply prefer honest and precise language. If you still really think the IS-F is a joke you should join Toyota's IS engineering team for a week (wouldn't that be fun). Cheers.