Quote:
Originally Posted by Chutzpah
Nah, that’s a convenient excuse people throw out there … they can do it.
They just understand their audience… and that audience (for the most part) wants performance more than perfection. If a 50k truck can look perfect, so can a 80k car. I guess my point is you shouldn’t have to pay 100k + for something to look like it’s quality. In this case, Chevy wins hands down.
|
Not an excuse IMO.
Like, what can you buy for $80k that's luxury that will match the performance of a GT500? You can barely get into a M3/M4 for that money, and forget about it when you start to add options. And dealers don't carry bare bone basics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s2mikey
The idea of even paying that much for a Mustang is downright insane as it is. $80K+ for a Mustang? I know, its got eleventy-billion horsepower. But still. If I spend $80K on a car its going to have a prancing horse or a bull on it somewhere. 
As for Ford Chevy/ fit & finish? Neither will make you forget Lexus but they are about average for their price range and lineage. Mostly. |
Sure, Big 3's fit and finish isn't as nice as a Lexus, but it will eat Lexus for lunch in terms of performance. RC-F is the most track-oriented Lexus on sale now and it's still a complete joke.
Toyota doesn't really know how to do performance car chassis, with GR Yaris possibly being the only exception, maybe. I think it was either BMW or Porsche - probably the former since BMW help Toyota made the Zupr4 - straight up laughed at Toyota for making garbage chassis that's unsuitable for performance cars.
BTW, older Ferrari and Lambo aren't exactly known for their reliability so there is that.