Porsche Boxster drivers - bigger knobs than Beemer drivers?

[Amelio]

thanks mate, but i've already had a porker

you had? and you what sold it? dear god why

And congratulations for listing your mods, are you looking for some sort of praise? Here you go.

[luthor1]

You must be reading a completely different thread? My 'argument' has not even been commented upon!

At no point has any point I've made been taken up! You have replied to nothing!

NOT ONE ANSWER!! All you've written is "if you think I'm a newb here's my list of stuff I've done to my car QED" You've not even said anything!!

And as for Laurens' pathetic attempt at pragmatism with her mystic ROFLSJHJSIFMS rubbish, it doesn't wash!!!

My comment on twobrutal was with a previous MR2 Turbo before I resolved the issues with the front end on mine.... hence my reitterating for the dumb that it can *easily* be resolved.

Weegaz, please direct me to the point where I got ***** slapped? You've not written anything dude!! It's clear for anyone to see!! Unless you can magic some clever/witty reposte ^^ up there with some clumsy EDIT: !!

You've not written anything of substance! Neither has Lauren!

You are both just waiting for the other person to go "Ha! Diversionary rhetoric" and the other will POUNCE like a feral cat with a "ROFLSIJ that got you Luthor!" without actually writing anything!

Amateurs. Total amateurs.

[luthor1]

thanks mate, but i've already had a porker

you had? and you what sold it? dear god why

And congratulations for listing your mods, are you looking for some sort of praise? Here you go.

Yeah, he sold it to upgrade to a better car, the Mk1.5!

ROFLAKOIEKFJBAABAKDIEWEKDKDEJFJD!!!

ROAJFJRU

DJKDISI


and finally this one'll crack you up

LOL!KFJFSUIOREJ$$£"$$£

[luthor1]

Yeah - weegaz, that final post of mine REALLY got ya didn't it!!

It's got all the ingredients, see! nothing of substance, an *assumption* without any facts, and blundering rhetoric.

I think I'm learning how to do this...

[tonigmr2]

Why do you have to be so aggressive? Everyone has their own opinion, if you want to keep your world view so be it.

I think resorting to comparing a tiptronic Boxster to a 1998 turbo is a bit desperate tbh - most petrol heads would go for the manual - I have however driven a tiptronic 911 and was very impressed and yes would have it over an MR2. I'd still go for the manual if I had the choice though.

Whatever the gearbox however, generically and chassis wise the Boxster is the better car - as a matter of interest have you driven one? To have such a strong viewpoint you must have compared them surely?
T

[Lauren]

Why do you have to be so aggressive? Everyone has their own opinion, if you want to keep your world view so be it.

I think resorting to comparing a tiptronic Boxster to a 1998 turbo is a bit desperate tbh - most petrol heads would go for the manual - I have however driven a tiptronic 911 and was very impressed and yes would have it over an MR2. I'd still go for the manual if I had the choice though.

Whatever the gearbox however, generically and chassis wise the Boxster is the better car - as a matter of interest have you driven one? To have such a strong viewpoint you must have compared them surely?
T

DING to what Toni said. Basically Andy can't stand losing an argument, hence the desperation in picking a tiptronic boxster to compare with his MR2 turbo that has to be reasonably extentisively modified to make it a 'better car' in his eyes.

The truth there are cars out there that are simply better out of the box.

[Greddy-Matt]

Surely this has to be a pointless argument? You can only drive any car to the limits of your skill! I mean you could put me in a Boxter or 911 and Andy/Lauern/Toni in an MR2 Im pretty sure they'd run circles round me all day long on or off the track.

[Lauren]

Surely this has to be a pointless argument? You can only drive any car to the limits of your skill! I mean you could put me in a Boxter or 911 and Andy/Lauern/Toni in an MR2 Im pretty sure they'd run circles round me all day long on or off the track.

Its not really about outright speed though Matt, its about how involving and how rewarding you find the balance of the car.

[luthor1]

Lauren - this is you slating the MR2 Turbo, it's that simple. You've trawled pages of this forum doing that for years. It's pathetic, and I think, anti-IMOC. You shouldn't s**t where you eat.

It's tiring hearing your high-brow, looking down at people attitude. I've been arguing at length for pages and pages and pages here that it's ONES OWN OPINION and each and every time I write that, you digress with more rhetoric, acronyms and diversionary tactics to maintain your position and rubbish mine.

You want everyone to know YOU are right, YOUR idea of what car is best is believed, because it inflates your fragile ego.

I on the other hand will argue to the death that it's personal opinion. Because that's what it is. You can call me aggressive, whatever you like, but I am arguing passionately that you should not be tolerated when you ram down peoples throats, repeatedly, that you know best.

People can make their own minds up thankyou very much.

[luthor1]

I'll cut and paste from earlier, since you all can't be bothered to read it...


Comparing the ridiculous automatic Boxster to the '2 turbo simply serves to demonstrate the equally ridiculous statement - "boxsters are better than MR2 Turbos".

[Lauren]

Lauren - this is you slating the MR2 Turbo, it's that simple. You've trawled pages of this forum doing that for years. It's pathetic, and I think, anti-IMOC. You shouldn't s**t where you eat.

It's tiring hearing your high-brow, looking down at people attitude. I've been arguing at length for pages and pages and pages here that it's ONES OWN OPINION and each and every time I write that, you digress with more rhetoric, acronyms and diversionary tactics to maintain your position and rubbish mine.

You want everyone to know YOU are right, YOUR idea of what car is best is believed, because it inflates your fragile ego.

I on the other hand will argue to the death that it's personal opinion. Because that's what it is. You can call me aggressive, whatever you like, but I am arguing passionately that you should not be tolerated when you ram down peoples throats, repeatedly, that you know best.

People can make their own minds up thankyou very much.

Andy, with all due respect it is you that is coming across as agressive. I am not 'slating' the mr2 turbo, I am merely trying to provide some balance that is all. It is not me that has a fragile ego, it is clearly you. But never mind.

I couldn't care less if you agree with what i've said, but clutching at straws to lend credence to your argument is starting to look a bit desperate really.

Now you try and play your trump card, that i'm 'always slagging off the mr2 turbo and its anti-IMOC'. Really? Is it the case that we need to adapt our opinions for this forum? Is one point of view correct and another not to be tolerated?

If you think that I look down on you, then that is your inference and perhaps says more about you than it does about me.

[luthor1]

Surely this has to be a pointless argument? You can only drive any car to the limits of your skill! I mean you could put me in a Boxter or 911 and Andy/Lauern/Toni in an MR2 Im pretty sure they'd run circles round me all day long on or off the track.

Its not really about outright speed though Matt, its about how involving and how rewarding you find the balance of the car.

See - right here... "it's not really about outright speed..."

This is your OPINION, yet you are writing a sentence that is a dictation.

You are telling Matt the "way things are" and at the end, you are telling him HIS opinion, by using the word "you" instead of "I".

If you'd have written "It's not really about outright speed Matt....it's about how rewarding I find the car.." you'd have my respect, however, as usual, you are dictating to him.

I am beginning to wonder if you even notice? Have a long think Lauren - read that sentence again and tell me you are happy with it on balance? I'm sure Matt doesn't want to be told what *HE* finds important about a car does he now?

[luthor1]

I couldn't care less if you agree with what i've said, but clutching at straws to lend credence to your argument is starting to look a bit desperate really.

I haven't clutched at any straws, as any impartial reader will have observed. You have failed to answer a very simple question which is would you have an auto boxster over the 1998 Turbo.

I'm not comparing the cars as you've tried to digress, I am not even asking you to rate them. I am merely asking you which car, out of those 2, would you own.

There cannot be any clutching at straws in a simple question like that? However, you not answering that question speaks volumes about you and your position in this discussion, because I don't really believe you would have the auto. I never did. However, once you admit that, you cannot say "boxsters are better". Which is what you are trying to say.

[MR2_Turbo]

ive had both, mk1 and mk2

mk2 handles like a turd, mk1 is sublime

Just out of curiosity, how does a turd actually handle??

[Lauren]

I haven't clutched at any straws, as any impartial reader will have observed. You have failed to answer a very simple question which is would you have an auto boxster over the 1998 Turbo.

I'm not comparing the cars as you've tried to digress, I am not even asking you to rate them. I am merely asking you which car, out of those 2, would you own.

There cannot be any clutching at straws in a simple question like that? However, you not answering that question speaks volumes about you and your position in this discussion, because I don't really believe you would have the auto. I never did. However, once you admit that, you cannot say "boxsters are better". Which is what you are trying to say.

I must admit i'm close to speechless at your continued argument.

I do not understand why you continue to insist on comparing a manual car with an automatic one, just to try and win a failed argument over which might be a better car. Obviously this is because if it were a manual boxster it would effectively be a no-brainer.

Andy I just cannot believe you pursue a semantic argument so, by trying to compare the least desirable boxster with the most desirable mr2 turbo, that has been modified to improve on its compromised dynamics.

Lets turn the question around. Would you rather have a 3.2 boxster S or a 90 rev1 mr2 turbo? errr... the answer is obvious.

[luthor1]

Yes it is obvious, and I'd choose the Boxster clearly!!

The fact you cannot bring yourself to write that you'd choose the MR2 Turbo is quite silly realy, it's just the mirror of your own argument.

HOWEVER - yet again, I draw your attention to your comment of "boxsters are better than MR2 Turbo's". This sentence I believe I have folded away sufficiently, we can now move on, since we can now more accurately write "I will buy the car I like and you buy the car you like"

I don't believe you'd get the tiptronic boxster any more than you think I'd get a 1990 manky turbo.

However, on a written forum, semantics is all we have and YET AGAIN you fail to answer the post regarding your tone to Greddy-Matt and HOW you come across!! Hilarious!! Rhetoric! Digress! Quickly!! Don't answer the points!!

[luthor1]

Andy I just cannot believe you pursue a semantic argument so, by trying to compare the least desirable boxster with the most desirable mr2 turbo, that has been modified to improve on its compromised dynamics.

...and again - I am not comparing these cars... and I will write this, everytime you say I am comparing them. I am not comparing them. I was making a point regarding the sentence "boxsters are better than MR2's".

I am not comparing them. Get over it. Your attempt at making my comment look ridiculous will be batted away every time you write it. I was not comparing them.

[Lauren]

...and again - I am not comparing these cars... and I will write this, everytime you say I am comparing them. I am not comparing them. I was making a point regarding the sentence "boxsters are better than MR2's".

I am not comparing them. Get over it. Your attempt at making my comment look ridiculous will be batted away every time you write it. I was not comparing them.

/withering. I am not trying to make your comments look ridiculous, you clearly need no help with that.

You are essentially having a 'per se' argument by concentrating on the minutae of detail to lend credence to your argument.

Besides, i'm not going to buy a boxster, but i am off to look at a DC2 this weekend.

[luthor1]

What you are actually buying makes no difference to your argument.

There is no focusing on the minutae, there is just you dodging and darting this way and that to avoid the inevitable.... you were offered the Pyhrric victory which you didn't take, now it's all about how aggressive I am, how I make myself look ridiculous, and not actually discussing the points any more.

You've moved away from your original argument, distancing it. You refuse to reiterate it, ignoring it comment after comment..

"BOXSTERS ARE BETTER THAN MR2 TURBOS"

Let's not forget that one everybody. Let's look through her previous pages of posts and see how she's distanced herself from that statement maneuvering to a higher ground, abandoning the original argument in a veil of rhetoric and acronyms, digressions and post-ignoring.

Your use of 'per se' is incorrect aswell, but I won't even go into that now.

[Tiamat]

Why are you two even bothering? You clearly not going to change each other's mind. Why not give it a rest?