>>1772485>A sports car with hard suspension is not fun to drive dailypussy nonsense
and a Porsche especially would be extremely fun to drive daily. I've owned a pretty cool classic sports car and commuting in it was based. The only reason not to was risk/cost. Most Porsches aren't full on tuned for the track either. Their ride quality is preddy gud. There's no reason why your 'nice' car would have to be, be regardless of what it is. What is your thinking, like early 00s stancekid faggotry? Why would you even want your nice car to have mega faggot suspension, unless you're regularly tracking it, in which case, why is it even road legal?
>not necessarily because someone will steal it.the risk of someone stealing your bike is somewhat equivalent to the cost and wear and risk of driving an expensive/exotic/classic car every day. I didn't mean to say it's exactly the same.
>It's kinda ridiculous that you can't at least have a decent commuter bike as your daily nevermind some $10k carbon fiber bike.You can, you can have a very decent commuter for under $500 if you can wrench. There are strategies you can take to avoid theft like heavy duty locks and secure parking at your work.
>>1772493>a "weekend car" generally has its value lowered by regular commuter use in a way that a bike doesn'tWrong. Carbon bike- single scratch or ding, frame might become worthless. Single crash. Worthless. Stolen, worthless. It's not exactly the same, a car is worn, a bike risks ruin, wear is more readily repairable, the issue is different, but equivalent.
