I sold a 996 turbo, came up with a little more cash, and got a Gallardo since I don't have the budget or storage to keep adding cars. My only regret is that the Porsche was so driveable for every-day use, and maybe a little more neck wrenching acceleration than the Gallardo (had a chip for the turbo to about 525hp) But an afternoon in the Gallardo gives me no regrets. Just 'listening' to the engine is almost enough, and I have tracked both cars with similar lap times - but the Lambo just feels more like a race car.

My advice, would be as I did, to purchase a NEW modena 360, it only has 390 or 400 hp, and is an excellent learning supercar. After 10K with that, move on to somethign like a Gallardo (500hp) and on. I nearly died multiple times in a 360, doing cookies around sharp turns at 150+. But then, that is what the modena is, it has excellent handling. Porsches are for dentists and old women. My next car WILL be a 640 hp Murcielago GT, which is about 100 hp more than I know what to do with. Chow!

I have to say that the Murcie will feel way different than the 996. The Murcie also has smooth power, smooth as in constant brutal torque till redline. There is not let up in acceleration past 160mph.

I have a driven a CGT back to back and I can say that the Murcie does not feel far behind at all at high speed runs.

I've had a normally aspirated 996 tiptronic, 996 turbo (6spd, stock and after mods), F355, and diablo SV. no comparison in the 996 tip vs the diablo although it was a great daily driver and handled well. the turbo is a pretty stout car stock with good driveablility but stick 10-15k of turbo, exhaust, software, etc mods on it and it is explosive. ...and I can still drive it everyday. diablo has much more low end grunt than the turbo (think Z06 style if you've driven one of those) and great power all the way up but the big turbo boost on my porsche will tend to push the seat through your stomach a little more. I'm not a good enough driver to get the max out of either car so cant really say which is "faster". as previous post mentions, the passenger side blind spot is a killer and the view from the mirror reminds me of the little dentist mirror they stick in your mouth. just got this car but I love it! besides, if you were a teenager in the 80's, as I was, you probably had a poster of a lambo on your wall next to the one of farrah fawcett and you are wired to believe that super cars have doors that go up. didnt get to nail farrah but did get the lambo and it puts a permanent smile on my face every time I drive it.

btw - F355 was great fun, faster than the 996 tip, slower than the turbo and diablo.

if you are still considering the 996 tip go beat the crap out of it for a while. it will get better and you will learn to get more out of it (although probably not up to 6spd performance). the transmission has 256 different modes (or something like that) and usually sits in granny-mode unless you've been driving it hard. it's not "slow", just not in the same league.

short answer is YES. lambo is much better performing car than 996 (non turbo). if you can find a diablo for same price as a used 996 please tell me where I can buy another one!

I've had a carrera 4 cabrio (stick) and 2 996 turbos (stick), oh and a Cayenne Turbo . Speaking from experience of having owned a Murcie and driving just about every modern Lambo out there, I'd have to say that there is no comparison between naturally aspirated carrera and the bulls. Again, agree with many here. I also do agree that a turbo with some mods can come close or straight out beat a stock Lambo.

Can't beat the everyday driveability of the Porsches though.

in france there is a diablo 92 for 59000 euro for example
http://www.carclassic.com/default.asp , not the only one