Quote:
Originally Posted by footie
swamp,
Clearly you have a much different opinion on the EVO's abilities than myself. I take it you have owned one and so know more about what it can and cannot do.
As for what should make the GTR more advanced, some things we know already are as follows
This car has gearbox/diff etc all housed in a transaxle at the back of the car which is something the EVO doesn't have. Secondly it is using electronic dampers developed in association with Bilstein which again the EVO doesn't have. This car also has a V6 Twin-turbo engine while the EVO has basically the same engine it has used for the last God knows how many versions.
I seriously don't know where to start with the differences between the two, if you are under the impression that the EVO is as advanced then who am I to tell you that you are wrong, I only have my opinions based on what I have read and my experiences based on previous versions of both cars.
I believe as some others might that you argue for arguments sake and on almost every subject looking at the amount of threads you are currently active on. I don't doubt your knowledge on lots of things mechanical but that don't not mean that everyone has to agree with you just because you say it's so.  |
THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE EVO (new Evo X by the way) NOR ABOUT MY OPINIONS OF THE EVO (nor the M3)! My only point about the Evo X is that its S-AWC, ACD, AYC and DCT drivetrain systems very much rival/compete against the GT-R in many ways. I NEVER CLAIMED THE EVO WAS MORE TECHNICALLY ADVANCED THAN THE GT-R. My god, sometimes communicating with you is such an enormous challenge.
The rear transaxle is an innovation but simply more of a placement/weight balance innovation than a technical break through or technical innovation. Active dampers are something the GT-R has that the Evo X doesn't but is not really something you can use to claim the GT-R is so technically advanced. Other cars have had these features for years, probably a decade plus actually.
I have said it time and time again and it is simply this:
You made a bold, brash and unsubtantiated claim and I called you on it. Now you can not provide the evidence to back up your claim. Case closed. Let someone else step in and present what may subtantiate your claim, just because you can not substantiate it does not indeed mean the claim is not true. I just can not figure why you keep changing the topic, making this about me, the M3 or the Evo. Hmmm on further examination I guess it is simple: you got called and can not support your claim and it sucks for you.
Call it what you will but pointing out bold unsubstantiated claims and searching for the justification and evidence for such claims is a service to any board governed by the common rules of presentation, discussion and debate and for those truly interested in knowledge. I know many others here like epacy, lucid and southlight will agree 100% with this. Sorry it is not the particular way you like to debate or discuss. Have fun in your world of false beliefs without EVIDENCE to back them up.