Quote:
Originally Posted by lemming
sure.
i'm comfortable with that.
i'd take a porsche over any mclaren or ferrari, if only because of the superior dealer network and greater number of knowledgeable mechanics.
at this level of car, which is vastly removed from a camry, anything subjective can be the decision maker and one could not fault anyone else for how they make their decision.
|
Yeah- I never get the whole debate on car forums about what constitutes a "valid comparison" for an individual buyer. If somenoe is comparing 2 cars, then its valid. On bimmerfest, for example, someone is comparing a 535d to a Panamera. Kind of strange given the big price spread, etc. And of course people jump on him that his comparison "isn't valid". Well, if its valid for him then its valid. Of course, everyone told him "well if you can afford a panamera, get a panamera" (except for the most die-hard fanboys)
Personally, I find it most interesting to read about comparisons at a particular price point. Because I tend to think "what can I get for this amount of money". Regardless of whether the cars are apples/oranges in other ways. A base Cayman vs a Stingray would be interesting to me for example. There was another comparison test floating around of a Fiesta ST vs an e46 M3...that's also interesting even if its "not valid".
More often than not, the car that costs more ends up being the "better car" which makes comparisons of non price matched cars kind of boring unless its a true underdog story. New car leasing muddies the waters further...An Audi S4 might end up costing as much to lease as a BMW 550 for example. SO there's lots of reasons to compare cars that seem apples and oranges.
That being said even price matched comparisons of new/used cars don't tell the whole story if you omit ownership costs. A Ferrari 456 will cost you a lot more to maintain for example than a new 911S.