At least Car & Driver put the correct car in front in the pic.
#1
At least Car & Driver put the correct car in front in the pic.
<center><img src="http://www.caranddriver.com/image_cache/DATA/Caranddriver/images/2002/december/0212_hottin_away.jpg"></center><p>
#5
Still ranks among the most useless comparisons they've ever done.
Did they actually imagine a fictional buyer out there wrestling with the decision between these 4 cars, configured as they were?
Trending Topics
#9
Proof that magazines respond to ad dollars.
That test is living proof that when a new car comes out and the manufacturer pays big bucks in ads on the magazine, they will tailor a test that allows the new product to show off.
However this test takes the cake.
The 350Z still would have beaten a 225TQ in performance numbers but it would it
have been closer and more respectable, I still think the Audi is much classier and elegant, plus a $600 chip on the 225 will overcome the performance deficit.
The S2000 in this test was suspiciously slow, the Mach One was totally out of place, a Boxster should have been included and a Z4 3.0i also.
And since the TT was a 2002, what about the Z3 3.0i coupe?
Wait a couple of years when the 350Z ads die down and they will throw the 350Z to the wolves.
However this test takes the cake.
The 350Z still would have beaten a 225TQ in performance numbers but it would it
have been closer and more respectable, I still think the Audi is much classier and elegant, plus a $600 chip on the 225 will overcome the performance deficit.
The S2000 in this test was suspiciously slow, the Mach One was totally out of place, a Boxster should have been included and a Z4 3.0i also.
And since the TT was a 2002, what about the Z3 3.0i coupe?
Wait a couple of years when the 350Z ads die down and they will throw the 350Z to the wolves.