That GTI was "newer" but it wasn't the new MK5. It was the older MK4. 180hp and a curb weight near the Crossfire's. You should have beat him, especially with rwd. The new MK5s with 200hp and much more torque run about equal with a Crossfire in the 1/4. Although at higher elevations, turbo charged motors lose less power than n/a motors. So, who knows what the deal was.

As far as beating an RX-8 or a G35, I believe you. There are just too many variables to take into consideration. The RX-8 is limited by its lack of torque, but if you catch an RX-8 already rolling and in the heart of its powerband, it can hang with/or take a Crossfire.

It's true that a lot of the automatic cars are faster these days than the manuals. The car magazines prove this on a regular basis. Yes, a clutch will usually give you a quicker launch than powerbraking, but the speed with which modern 6 and 7 speed automatics shift often make up the difference in the 1/4 mile where 3 or 4 shifts are necessary.

AND sometimes automatics, no matter how good they are, fail to respond by downshifting or more commonly by shifting too early, even under hard acceleration. This is a common complaint in many of the new car reviews. If you've got a G35 with an automatic that doesn't do exactly what it's supposed to, a manual Xfire could and would beat it.

Do you know how many times the car magazines have to run the cars they test 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile to get their best runs? Sometimes 10-20 times and they experiment using every shifting technique (for manuals and automatics) and every launch technique. The differences in times are huge depending on technique. It's safe to say that most of us, no matter how bad *** we think we are, don't get the best results unless we have practiced a hell of a lot.

I say it's enough knowing that your Crossfire looked a lot better going down the track than that GTI