Wait a minute, I resemble that remark. :D

They aren't stupid questions. And the reason many people don't answer his questions is because they don't have good answers.

Why do you think it "idiotic" to provide him with the reasoning (answer) to why you think the way you do (that is, to provide the answer to the question he asked you)??

Who Said it wouldn't happen!?
 

A Porsche dealer in Northern California posted details on the forum, claiming new 2015 model-year Boxster and Cayman variants will go on sale next May. The new models would carry the GTS designation, and are alleged to produce 370 hp and 325 lb-ft of torque, up 45 hp and 53 lb-ft from the current Cayman S, and 55 hp and 59 lb-ft from the Boxster S. According to the post, the GTS models would be priced around $75,000.

Read more: http://wot.motortrend.com/we-hear-gt...#ixzz2hoSPunjM
Follow us: @MotorTrend on Twitter | MotortrendMag on Facebook

382(W/P corrected) to 400 with the same torque is all but equal!:thumbs:And Glad to see it, since, GM hasn't reflected all my romantic aspirations, especially lately (Ring Time!).:eek:

Maybe they will add some fiber and stuff for that little bit!:thumbs:

:rock:

So you're able to provide a reason, but you're unwilling to do so. Is that a distinction without a difference? You would have a more solid argument if you were both able and willing to name for me one single car with Porsche Turbo levels of power, AWD, and a DCT, for $65k. I have a hunch that you are "unwilling" to identify this car probably because you are unable to do so.

Gots To Love All Their Marketing!
 

As soon as the C7Z51 hoopla was completing we magically heard about the Zxx in 2015. And similarly just to catch anybody not all in that new Cayman stuff hit the airways!:rofl:

And that stuff officially made Notch wrong about his Porsche brand!:eek:

Love the Drama!:cheers:

:rock:

Yep.

Why is it some people here shy away from actual discussions about cars and resort quickly to the "ignore" and "troll" angles when they are asked to explain/defend something they posted??

Provide any post(s) where I have bashed Corvettes, Corvette enthusiasts, or American car manufacturers.

Well, as I posted earlier, I do autocross, so that type of low speed stability at the limit is important to me! :thumbs:

Your attempt at an analogy seems to fail. Yes, most who study WW II and the subsequent history of "Operation Paperclip" know that those two rockets were both designed by Von Braun.

OTOH, I don't think Dr Porsche had anything to do with the Corvette.......

So you value low speed stability over winning? The Porsche was faster in the slalom.

This sounds like a good hunch:

"'An ad hominem' is an argument that attempts to undermine an argument based on an irrelevant fact about the person making the argument (or of another person who agrees with the argument), for example by attacking their character or motives. 'Ad hominem' reasoning is normally described as an informal fallacy, more precisely an irrelevance.
'Ad hominem' circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source. This is fallacious because a disposition to make a certain argument does not make the argument false."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
The suspicion, as evidenced by DCTandAWD's failure to reply, is that they have no logical basis for their argument, so must therefore resort to these petty derailments and attacks on personal character.

No it doesn't. It asks you to compare your like for American aircraft over German aircraft, with American rockets (designed by a German) vs German rockets (designed by the same German).

It's much like this GM commercial which misses the irony of what they are really saying; They show the Saturn V throughout the commercial, a rocket designed by a German who is known as "the father of the American space program"...http://www.infoplease.com/biography/...rvonbraun.html), and end up showing a Vette while saying "America still builds rockets". Still? Had it not been for von Braun, there would likely never have been a Saturn V, and who knows how long it would have taken the U.S. to figure rockets out. So, yes, if GM wants to hang their hat on a correlation between the success of the Saturn V (and our subsequent space program), achieved by a German engineer, and the Corvette, then talk to GM about it.

Yes, that's it.

Bump...for Tuxnharley.

...........and your point is............. what, exactly?

Perhaps you hadn't noticed, but Airbus just beat out Boeing for orders on the A380 over the B787 - because of their subsidies to the Japanese airlines, no doubt.

I said it "seems to fail". It still does, to me. You introduced a new topic - Rockets - that I didn't bring up in an effort to twist my logic. I do not accept your change of topic.

If we were to follow your logic we would have to give credit to the Russians for the Corvette since Zora was a Russian immigrant.

And the P47 was designed by Seversky, also a Russian immigrant.

Who cares where they came from - it's where they were able to achieve success that matters. They key word in the quote you chose is "builds". I didn't see the Russians or the Germans going to the moon...............:D

It looks like 427C5 is back again under yet another name for a 3rd try at getting banned....................:crazy2::rofl:

In the words of Ronald Reagan - "There you go again!" :D trying to attribute a need for "winning" to me. :lol: