Driver's Education
Club Racing
Member List
RSS
Help
10-24-2007, 04:23 PM
The issue doesn't seem to be that there was a problem with this specific car, just that the CGT has inherent oversteer (oh gee, does that have something to do with 600 hp?) The points about the car not being inspected, etc, are totally irrelevant. Its all lawyer spin.
It's ridiculous that Porsche was named in this -- the guy that bought the car certainly knew he was buying a "race car for the street" and the guy who got in the car knew it as well (besides it was a track incident, what does race car for the street have to do with it anyway?). This is somehow Porsche's fault because the car didn't have PSM? Please...So now does Porsche have to put PSM on every car they make because they have the technology? Can I sue Chevy when I sprain my ankle getting out of my truck because of the inherent design flaw that it sits too high?
It's ridiculous that Porsche was named in this -- the guy that bought the car certainly knew he was buying a "race car for the street" and the guy who got in the car knew it as well (besides it was a track incident, what does race car for the street have to do with it anyway?). This is somehow Porsche's fault because the car didn't have PSM? Please...So now does Porsche have to put PSM on every car they make because they have the technology? Can I sue Chevy when I sprain my ankle getting out of my truck because of the inherent design flaw that it sits too high?