Just so

Red, or maybe that burn your retina yellow

For really going fast, you want a closed car. True of most anything, XKE, Cayman, Shelby Daytona Coupe. I like the idea, but would do a stripper myself to make it light, rather than a special edition.

I like small cars myself. Smaller is lighter, lighter is almost always better to me.

I like it-looks like a mini Carrera GT from the rear

Aluminum doors, different bodywork behind the seats, different dash....

JR

Lets see it Wayne...

Yes Wayne, detailed pics are in order...

Ahhh he's pulling your leg...;);)

Yup, Waynes a tease.....

ok, so far we have Aluminum doors & cosmetic stuff (besides the deletions).

Any thing else??

YES, it is important to recognize that this is a step in the right direction.


Now where are my PCCB brakes & clutch; Mg wheels and CF unit body?

The PCCB brakes are on the options list, the wheels are the lightest 19" Porsche has yet offered (aluminum, not mag) and the CF frame is in the Carrera GT, where it belongs.

JR

a CF unit body belongs in every car!

- don't you want to be patriotic and save fuel?

I don't like the headlights.http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1257725677.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1257725691.jpg

Ha Ha!! :D:D:p I was waiting for someone - anyone - to eventually say that. Classic.

I think this is definitely heading in the right direction - lighter, more powerful, sports design cues (ala 968 CS). I bet a Cayman version (CS or RS) must be a certainty now - I hope and pray.

By the way, I wouldn't complain about paying $65k for this car. Over here in Australia we pay in the vicinity of $AUD135k list price for a standard Boxster S, which works out at about $USD125k at current conversion rates!!!!!! :eek:

That overhead shot reminds me of something...

time for an update of a classic poster:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1257735390.jpg

The original poster was funny because of the double meaning. Not so much with the remake.

I like it - Nobody on this board should ever question a sports car that maintains basic architecture while losing weight and gaining power.

BTW - I feel all small road going sports cars should be topless. Like all topless things, they are more fun. On the road, does it really doesn't matter if a coupe will go through a canyon 0.1255589 sec faster than a topless model.

I like it. Of course if I bought it, it would be my wife's drive, but I'd steal it away for some weekend twisties.

I meant to reply to Schumi's post earlier but never got around to it.

Data from accelerometers/gyros would be interesting, but in the end a car that feels more "flickable" tends to be more "flickable" regardless of what a sensor says.

Cars are very dynamic and are dependent on many factors outside of mass distribution (suspension/steering geometry & set-up, overall weight, torque availability, vertical CG, etc.) A light car with good weight distribution (but masses far from CG) may actually feel smore adjustable mid corner as you can use the end masses to move things around. A car with most mass at CG may have great initial rotation and ability to correct, but it may not be as adjustable.

But, all things being equal and starting from a design standpoint, there are obviously some ideals. Lower polar moment of inertia is good from this standpoint.

jurhip- all true, all true.

I have been on both the driving end and the designing end.

Regardless, I have a small black box that I can place in the center of any vehicle and after a short amount of track time tell you, justifiably and accurately, how 'fast' the car is, in more terms and variables that you would ever want to know.

Add them all up and you get what makes that 'feel' that you get when you are in a 'fast' car.

Hey Wayne,

Where are those pictures???