Mercedes S63 AMG Vs. Jaguar XJR

[Rainer271]

If you’re looking for the ultimate luxury car but secretly want a car that can take nearly any other car off the line, the Mercedes S63 AMG is the car for you. But other brands have come out with their own version of luxury sport saloon, including Jaguar with the XJR.
Both cars offer the luxury and space of a fine limousine with supercar power that comes from a V8 and providing over 525bhp. With 577bhp and 900Nm of torque, the twin-turbo Mercedes already has a more powerful engine than the 542bhp supercharged XJR. But the Jaguar is the lighter of the two.
Putting the two luxury sports saloons to the test, they were pitted them against each other in a head-to-head matchup.


http://www.emercedesbenz.com/autos/mercedes-benz/s-class/mercedes-s63-amg-puts-jaguar-xjr-to-shame/

 

[Betty Swollocks]

rs271, this is basically a glorified advert for Mercedes-Benz. Why not post the ACTUAL article from Auto Express?

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/merced...des-s63-amg-vs-jaguar-xjr-super-saloon-battle

Another example of a British magazine NOT being biased.

 

[Rainer271]

I didn´t know the article in Auto Express. Therefore.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

I didn´t know the article in Auto Express. Therefore.

Maybe if you took time to actually READ the links you relentlessly and incessantly post on here, you might have seen it. It's on the very FIRST page of that MB link.

Seriously, this forum isn't just a place for you to keep spamming with your links. Some are useful. The majority are just none stories and you even create brand new threads for them! It's annoying when people hit "new post" and then read yet another link from you that you clearly haven't bothered to read.

 

[Rainer271]

Did you have recognized that Betty Swollocks and Bull Shit have the same initials? I ask me why. And it has no sense to react of my post because you are know on my ignore list.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

Did you have recognized that Betty Swollocks and Bull Shit have the same initials? I ask me why. And it has no sense to react of my post because you are know on my ignore list.

Completely selfish attitude. Just continue to keep using GCF as a springboard to other websites then. It's not good etiquette what you do. Just posting a link. How about adding some text so somebody who is reading knows whether to click on the link or not? How about actually CONTRIBUTING once in a while instead of relentlessly posting these links to other websites? By doing what you're doing you're wasting people's time, because first they have to open a thread when it shows there is a NEW post, only to find it's just a link that they have no idea whether they want to read or not. Often it's something that's been posted before, or in this case, nothing but PR guff for MB.


Line four of the rules of the forum:

General Posting Guidelines:

4. Don't create posts with nothing but a link. For example, if you are going to link to a news article, provide a summary of it.


Also in the rules

No Flaming. A "flame" is when you insult someone. Don’t use insults, swear or use any words that are deemed inappropriate, anywhere in the forum. If you flame someone, you are risking being banned. The staff can’t read EVERY single post on the forum; however, in the event that an inappropriate post is overlooked, there is a strong chance that some member will report it to the moderators. Any threads/posts of this type will be deleted.

What was it YOU said?

"Did you have recognized that Betty Swollocks and Bull Shit have the same initials?"

 

[martinbo]

@rs271 - you continue to simply post links to other websites, in spite of repeated requests not to do so in the past. You are redirecting traffic using our website as a launch pad. It will get you banned. You also chose to insult another member who merely pointed out your incessant post whoring and link dumping. This will also get you banned. Enough already.

 

[Rainer271]

1. How many of all posts here are links to other sites? From where are much informations when not from other sites?
When I check some discussions I can show you within minutes dozen links to other sites.
Much posts contains videos and text from other sites.

2. The reason of my reaction of B.S. post is that he shows regular an arrogant behaviour. He might dictate what is allowed to post, he might dictate who can post ...
I´m sure I have only wrote what many users are thinking about B.S.

 

[Betty Swollocks]

1. How many of all posts here are links to other sites? From where are much informations when not from other sites?
When I check some discussions I can show you within minutes dozen links to other sites.
Much posts contains videos and text from other sites.

There is nothing wrong with providing links to other sites, but posts SOLELY containing a link are annoying because the post adds nothing to the forum unless you click on the link. People don't want to open a thread that contains a "new" post only to find it's just a link. It's time consuming and it's not always clear what the link leads to. You might as well just go on Google instead of this forum to find info.

2. The reason of my reaction of B.S. post is that he shows regular an arrogant behaviour. He might dictate what is allowed to post, he might dictate who can post ...

Arrogant? I merely pointed out that what you were doing goes against forum rules. Rules that YOU signed up for when you joined the forum. I am NOT dictating anything. I don't make the rules. However, I agree with them and the rules are there for very good reason.

YOU responded to that by insulting me, and yet you call ME arrogant?