>Ferrari 488 GTB >250k supercar with active aero and DCT

>slower than a v6 automatic altima with more weight and less power
explain this to me

>>16340259
Ferrari a shit

Also 2 seconds is almost nothing on the ring.

Ferrari was a meme before there were memes

File: 2014-Corvette_rear-suspension_a.jpg (133KB, 1024x569px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 1024x569px

>Leafsprings
allow it senpai

Is that 0-60 times?
My shitbox can do 0-60 in 0:10

File: time attack.jpg (209KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1600x1067px

>>16340274
By not caring about daily driving comfort, costing 150k, and being equipped with a package which costs 80k and replaces almost half the shit on the vehicle while adding a ricey looking bodykit

http://www.nismo.co.jp/en/news_list/2014/news_flash/140006.html

A much better (but STILL cheaper) competitor is the Viper ACR, which completely fucking obliterates it which you don't want to admit

>>16340301
>By not caring about daily driving comfort
gtr is roomy, has a good trunk and seats 2 qt's in the back. we arent talking a viper here...

the viper acr is a track toy. it has no place on the streets unless you want to show off to friends by shredding along in 3rd gear sideways

>Next moron thinking time of Nords run conducted by manufacturer is relevant and can be compared to time made by independent magazine.

>>16340375
would i be wrong in thinking that a manufacturer will stay for as long as possible to get the quickest time from their car in ideal conditions, whereas journalists just do a few hot laps on whatever day no matter the conditions? so one could assume that manufacturer times are most representative of a cars maximum performance... and third party tests are just a show of an individuals performance on that specific day in those specific conditions, not actually what the car is capable of in its entirety? seems there could be a lot more possible variations between the third party tests...