GTPNewsWire
Contributing Writer
- 21,450
- GTPHQ
This is the discussion thread for a recent post on GTPlanet:
This article was published by Andrew Evans (@Famine) on July 23rd, 2017 in the Car Culture category.
Watch This Ultra-Rare CLK-GTR Roadster Get Spanked Up a Country Road
- Thread starter GTPNewsWire
- 59 comments
- 3,998 views
- 2,187
- Kansas City
- PsuPepperoni
If you're going to drive it like that at least put an obnoxiously loud exhaust system on it
- 9,800
- Denmark
Not only would I not want to initiate drifts in a super rare CLK GTR, but these guys do it on grass with a Porsche 917 parked in close proximity. Nor do I appreciate how they treat it down that bumpy country road. Sure, cars are built to be driven but GT1 offspring arguably belongs on a properly paved surface. Too much risk everywhere here. 👎
- 30
- racecarman
Stupid
- 4,089
- Utah
Although I wouldn't even do this to my peasant Chevy (because it could break and I can't afford to fix it), I'm glad to see someone actually driving and having fun in a car. Nothing grinds my gears more than seeing pretentious pricks hovering around a trailer queen... Or a Ferrari.
I've seen similar videos. Not sure if it's the same guys. They grab supercars like F50's, drive them hard and throw them around like cheap Asian cars. Without destroying them, of course. Love it.
EDIT: I finished the whole video. And yeah... that was a bit too much...
I've seen similar videos. Not sure if it's the same guys. They grab supercars like F50's, drive them hard and throw them around like cheap Asian cars. Without destroying them, of course. Love it.
EDIT: I finished the whole video. And yeah... that was a bit too much...
Last edited:
- 1,604
- Here and there...
- SUBMANIAC
I felt bad for the car the whole time. Having heard how CLK-GTR are breaking left and right, seeing this one being roughed up on grass, uneven terrain and all... nope. The owner might have fun, but this isn't right. This car belongs on a track, not this. I cringed when I saw how close the car was from scraping the ground at the end...
- 13,261
- GTPlanet
- Street-King-07
- Quattro Saltire
If TaxTheRich can have a tug of war with a pair of F50s and set an XJ220 on fire doing a burnout, then caning a CLK-GTR down a back lane around a mansion shouldn't be much more of a problem.
I'm confused because on one hand, I'm glad someone is actually went and started driving it around especially for cars like these.
On the other hand, it seems to be a bit reckless to drive on a road like that. Should have been on much smoother roads instead.
I always wondered how would be like seeing one of these driving on the road along with traffic?
On the other hand, it seems to be a bit reckless to drive on a road like that. Should have been on much smoother roads instead.
I always wondered how would be like seeing one of these driving on the road along with traffic?
- 40,693
The road version sits like half an inch higher than the race version McLaren linked above. There are some videos of them on YouTube and the like of them failing to properly navigate out of McDonald's parking lots; so I imagine if you came up on one on a glass smooth highway and waved to the driver, he would smile at you and all of his teeth would rattle out.
- 189
- Australia
I take every step I can to avoid watching their videos. Fair enough to be super rich and trash your mega-car. But it's pointless posturing of the worst kind to video it and promote it to folk who aspire to an experience in one of those cars let alone own one. If you want to burn your XJ220, set fire to it and walk away.
Remember nothing is stopping those idiotic ***** from donating their tax free money to something worthwhile, to say I wish them bad karma is an understatement to the max.
/and breath
[edit] To be clear, race, rally, whatever, use the car for what it was built for of course - we'll all enjoy that.
- 24,612
- Anoka, MN
Is that your car in your avatar? Because if it is I'm sure the money spent on those presumably expensive rims could have provided quite a few needy people with meals.
Matej
Premium
- 2,006
- Zagreb
Seconded. There is no point in owning a car like this if you don't take it for a drive every once in a while. That's same as buying a rare, factory sealed black label PS1 quality game with manual and everything, and then keep it on your shelf for eternity.
Of course, more care needs to be taken when deciding on where are you going to drive, how, and when, but that's a topic for another day.
- 17,834
- Florida
- GranTurismo0517
- RandomCarGuy17
Personally, I would keep it on a race track myself, but okay.
- 309
- Hoofddorp
- Maddens_Raiders
Some of the comments amuse me. The car is scraping or being abused on bumpy roads which... is the same thing cars do on a race track.
Yes, but sparks flying is apropos to the car being driven in its element on the track, right? Especially as it relates to all things CLKGTR, no? My inner Kaz shed a tear watching that video tbt ...
Danoff
Premium
- 33,840
- Mile High City
I think this one was built to qualify for a race.
article
It's a value proposition really. How much is it worth to go for a drive in a particular car. If your car is worth 6 million, it had better be worth an awful lot to thrash it like that. I think what a lot of people dislike in watching that is how needlessly the car is abused. It would be just as fun (or more) to be much nicer to the car, resulting in less overall wear and tear (cost) in the drive. It's kinda like watching someone pour a bottle of nice champagne in a river.
It'd be like a chef spending hours making a beautiful confection only to see it smashed in someone's face as a prank.
To be honest, cars can reach a price point where it's no longer worth it to drive them. You'd have a better experience driving something else for a lot less money. But if someone is going to take a car which has reached that level of value out, if for no other reason than to keep it lubed, then you'd like to see it done by someone who appreciates what is unique about that experience and who will take care to preserve the car for the long life it is obviously going to have.
- 29,619
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I don't know...that "Did someone say otherwise?" "argument" has always struck me as awful whiny. Also...
I'll concede that any other complaints of improper use appear to have been backed up with an acknowledgement that others' opinions may differ.
- 29,619
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Not at all. No, nobody ever said anything contrary to my comment prior to my comment. What does it matter? My statement was correct and was used to preface the subsequent "Get over it" comment. To play your game; did I say anyone said otherwise?
You appeared to imply my statement regarding claims of improper use was false, I merely provided an example and acknowledged that there was actually only one such claim. See, I like to make worthwhile arguments and back them up rather than simply ask if anyone said otherwise, and I felt it necessary to acknowledge my own mistake because those who ask if anyone said otherwise strike me as the sort who would also throw such mistakes in others' faces.
Then again, it occurs to me you may be the one doing the trolling, seeing as you've made no genuine effort to defend your "arguments."
Oh and just FYI, I went ahead and edited my initial response to the whole "Did anyone say otherwise?" to include the complete quote, as I wouldn't put it past someone who would ask that to edit their own comment so that the question is omitted.
Danoff
Premium
- 33,840
- Mile High City
Yes, when you said get over it. As a result, my response made sense.
That comment was directed at MY statement. See the part where I said "pretty sure I'm one of the people you're talking about". Then I put "despite" because those things didn't apply to me.
What mistake? You said you'd conceded something... unimportant... for no apparent reason.
It's the ad hominem followed by another ad hominem that makes your response "trolling". And defend them against what?
...followed by another ad hominem.
Last edited:
- 29,619
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
For the record, that comment was directed at those clearly complaining about improper use (having since read your latest post not part of this utterly useless string that I'm now so very bored of, I still don't see any such complaint--unless I'm not getting the point of that champagne analogy), only one of which I've since seen as not possessing the aforementioned personal opinion qualifier. This is the mistake I made; I used a plural when the singular was appropriate.
Clearly you and I have different definitions of trolling. My "trolling" remarks were made toward you only in that you were the one who asked "Did someone say otherwise?" It's that half-assed argument that I resent because those who use it don't have any reasonable argument and only aim to disqualify statements. Why didn't you ask McLaren (not tagged as I'm not trying to drag anyone else into this useless conversation) if anyone said race cars don't incur damage on the track? (That was rhetorical.)
Anyway, I'm done. Feel free to respond but don't expect any further replies from me.
One last comment, separate from the above. While I agree that this sort of exhibition is utterly tasteless--someone likened it to pouring champagne into a river--it's their right to do it so long as they're prepared to account for any mishaps. I really don't care about these cars (I've gone into this elsewhere and don't intend to do so here), but they're just things that, as I've already said, can be fixed.
Similar threads
