총 비용
-
공임
-
부품비
-
소요 시간
-
2026. 10. 16. 작업
The Rotrex Kid said: A very good Hagerty video about the car here: The actual car (minus the jumping boosters) is actually sounding prety decent, 1700kg aimed weight! It is technically interesting. Rear wheel drive is unexpected. It should deliver extraordinary performance numbers. If I was a billionaire, I don't think I'd be looking at one. The flying version? As someone else said, it will be fun to watch at stunt shows.
The Rotrex Kid said: TheJimi said: ajm_ph said: Yea, I literally said that I had no problem with people just saying it's cool. Heck, even in my first comment on this thread I said it was cool.But I think we are wasting each others time here.Yeah, just ignore that you're putting words into people's mouths and using that as the basis for your argument.I agree, though, we're wasting our time. Change vector Let's be straight. You called it a car - Twice.TheJimi said: My awe at the spectacle is only matched by my incomprehension at the negativity here.Is it a stunt? Of course it is.Is it designed to garner publicity? Well, duh. Yes it is.It's quite literally rocket science applied to a car, with serious engineering behind it, even if it has no real immediate practical value. Musk is, imo, a colossal w@nkhat, but credit where it's due - this is cool AF.Still can't believe we've just watched a car drive up a vertical ramp, go inverted, then control the descent and landing using gas thrust vectoring engines and some of you are pouring scorn It's not a car. It's a spaceframe with a body resembling a car stuck on top with some thrust motors and a massive air tank bolted inside that was (very likely) dragged up a ramp with an electro magnet. Nobody has said it's not cool. But it's not a car, AJM has raised very fair points that it is not a car, it is not something you can or will be able to buy and that is what Musk (as always spouting mostly BS) said. 'This will be actual car that is on the roads'What points, exactly, do you you're scoring here, when you're highlighting that I called it a "car"?Yeah, I called it a car and I'll still refer to it as a car, certainly for the purposes of making reference to the thing in question.Enjoy whatever gotcha-points you feel you've earned.(Dear god )
출처
이 사례는 PistonHeads에서 수집한 데이터입니다.
신뢰도 4.1점(높음) — 출처 소스의 전문성/검증구조를 기준으로 산정된 점수이며, 정확성을 보장하지 않습니다.
원문 보기 ↗BMW 5시리즈
In a multi story that I was using earlier this evening, the MOT ran out in May 24. I do find the car park ones odd, I've seen other seemingly abandoned cars in other car parks, I'd love to know the reasons.
포르쉐 카이엔
A somewhat unbalanced duo which is acknowledged from the start in this head to head. I would never put these two on the same page and i found myself unpicking the Porsche rather than comparing it to the Morgan. Despite the indifferences the 911 wins out.
차량 정보 없음
I got the make and basic model in three - not Cardle's answer though. Ironically I intended to type in Challenger but ended up typing Charger for some reason - so I got it right by default!
포르쉐 카이엔
If its styling fuses a little 6GT with a little 720S, I can't see it going far wrong.Building an SUV is a sad but perhaps necessary evil. Performance manufacturers should really look at a different set of priorities to luxury marques. A McLaren, Ferrari, Lambo, Porsche, or even Bentley SUV should be something that could conceivably win a race. Make the body low and wide, and if it has to be jacked up, make it jacked up for sand dunes and mud pits, not Kensington kerbs and speedbumps. Most importantly, make it weigh less! Else there's no S about it, it's just a big fat squishy UV.