Boxster S vs Nissan 350Z S Tune vs Chrysler SRT-6
03-08-2005, 08:28 AM
#1
Boxster S vs Nissan 350Z S Tune vs Chrysler SRT-6
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?se...article_id=1985
Overall win: Chrysler SRT-6 > Boxster S > 350Z S Tune
Are these guys on crack? It's an automatic with a big motor (albeit a supposedly very good automatic). It understeers badly. It's less than attractive (albeit polarizing). It's fast in a straight line.
Apparently it's way fast around the Streets of Willow Springs track (with their drivers) - 3.79s faster than the Boxster S and 1.45s faster than the 350Z. Something seems VERY wrong with those numbers. Granted, that track has some very long straights which could explain it, but seriously - putting the SRT-6 ahead of a Boxster S as a SPORTS CAR?
Ugh.
R&T has sunk to a new low.
Discuss.
Overall win: Chrysler SRT-6 > Boxster S > 350Z S Tune
Are these guys on crack? It's an automatic with a big motor (albeit a supposedly very good automatic). It understeers badly. It's less than attractive (albeit polarizing). It's fast in a straight line.
Apparently it's way fast around the Streets of Willow Springs track (with their drivers) - 3.79s faster than the Boxster S and 1.45s faster than the 350Z. Something seems VERY wrong with those numbers. Granted, that track has some very long straights which could explain it, but seriously - putting the SRT-6 ahead of a Boxster S as a SPORTS CAR?
Ugh.
R&T has sunk to a new low.
Discuss.
03-08-2005, 09:03 AM
#3
Yeah, but they didn't like it as much in the SLK and the SLK was (I believe) lighter and more nimble....
03-08-2005, 09:03 AM
#4
Registered User
Originally Posted by JonBoy,Mar 8 2005, 09:28 AM
Are these guys on crack? It's an automatic with a big motor (albeit a supposedly very good automatic). It understeers badly. It's less than attractive (albeit polarizing). It's fast in a straight line.
Ugh.
R&T has sunk to a new low.
Discuss.
Ugh.
R&T has sunk to a new low.
Discuss.
There's no way in hell I'd take a crossfire over a BS. I read another test with SLK C6 BS and crossfire (was it in C&D ?) the Crossfire came in dead last and wasn't even close to the top 3 cars.
oh well I won't cry for Porsche the true entheuasts know they make great drivers cars.If I made a list of cars I'd ever buy the crossfire would be down at the bottom and only if it was discounded 20% or more.
03-08-2005, 09:24 AM
#5
Registered User
Strange that they used the previous generation Boxster S, with only 258hp, rather than the new 280hp one they used in the Best All-Around Sports Car test.
03-08-2005, 09:30 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Youngstown
Posts: 695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
this is exactly why I phucking hate the politics of magazines...they publish bullshyte that we all know is false... a Boxster would own that srt-6 any day of the week unless its on the day we have to write an article to help sales 
03-08-2005, 09:41 AM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 2,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Chrysler's 330hp claim for a 3400lb car is a bit conservative. The friggen thing traps 108mph with an auto tranny!! I would say it's putting down at least 320whp. There are 280whp S/C S2000's at 2950lb or so running about the same trap speeds.
Trending Topics
03-08-2005, 09:56 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Brazoria
Posts: 1,351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Porsche felt like magic on the track. Its 3.2 liters and 258 bhp of VarioCam urge offered plenty of torque (229 lb.-ft. at 4600 rpm) to jump off corners even when the driver was forced to short-shift. Don't try that in your Honda S2000!
