[MediaArtist]

Let's give the GTR some compounds, and the ZR1 a GTR computer. I think that will satisfy this debate.

[caradd]

So the Golf R is .2 of a second behind the 335is, that is pathetic.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by caradd

So the Golf R is .2 of a second behind the 335is, that is pathetic.

That is pretty crazy. I expected the "is" to do much better.

[abbar]

1m clocked virtually the same time as the c63amg.....

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by stefan

The Boss 302 is the eyebrow raiser on that list.. wow.

Well, to be fair, it is the LS version, meaning R-comps.

I think they said the LS was about one second faster on Laguna Seca itself, so the non-LS version would be... dunno... maybe a couple seconds slower at VIR?

[stefan]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

Well, to be fair, it is the LS version, meaning R-comps.

I think they said the LS was about one second faster on Laguna Seca itself, so the non-LS version would be... dunno... maybe a couple seconds slower at VIR?

Didn't catch that it was LS with r-comps. Huge unfair advantage... take back what I said.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by stefan

Didn't catch that it was LS with r-comps. Huge unfair advantage... take back what I said.

A couple seconds? That still puts it on par with the TT-RS and ahead of the 1M by a couple seconds still. They're DOT-legal tires, so I'm not sure what the "unfair" advantage is.... Not like they're track-only racing slicks...

[stefan]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

A couple seconds? That still puts it on par with the TT-RS and ahead of the 1M by a couple seconds still. They're DOT-legal tires, so I'm not sure what the "unfair" advantage is.... Not like they're track-only racing slicks...

If you want to run r-comps in a comparo, all cars should have r-comps. DOT-legal doesn't matter, as we all know how much more grip you can get from an r-comp.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by stefan

If you want to run r-comps in a comparo, all cars should have r-comps. DOT-legal doesn't matter, as we all know how much more grip you can get from an r-comp.

The whole entire point of this comparison is that all cars are in showroom stock condition.

If manufacturers would like their cars equipped with R-comps in these comparisons, maybe they should offer them like that off the showroom floor...? If we start modding the cars (and yes, if they don't come with R-comps, putting R-comps on them would be a modification), then what?

"Well they got to modify theirs, so we get to modify ours."

Then all the JB, PROcede, Cobb, and GIAC type people come out of the woodwork, and eventually what you have is a tuner shootout and the whole point of the comparison is gone out the window.

No mods means no mods. If these cars are road-legal, showroom stock, then any numbers put up are most definitely valid in a head to head comparison. There is no "fair" or "unfair". Put a personal asterisk next to the ZR1 and BOSS if you'd like, but they absolutely belong in the comparison as-is. What's next, we penalize cars that don't have the burden of having more than two seats, or penalize the cars which gain a HUGE "unfair" advantage from being so small/light from the factory? Do all the other manufacturers get to now remove their back seats and maybe even shrink their chassis for this comparison?

Maybe your solution is to penalize the ZR1 and BOSS by making them modify their own cars to put less sticky tires on? Still not showroom stock then. It's a silly argument. Just add a couple seconds to see where the cars would be if you bought it and for some reason decided to put less sticky, non-R-comp tires on. But as the results stand now, they're most definitely valid.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

The whole entire point of this comparison is that all cars are in showroom stock condition.

If manufacturers would like their cars equipped with R-comps in these comparisons, maybe they should offer them like that off the showroom floor...? If we start modding the cars (and yes, if they don't come with R-comps, putting R-comps on them would be a modification), then what?

"Well they got to modify theirs, so we get to modify ours."

Then all the JB, PROcede, Cobb, and GIAC type people come out of the woodwork, and eventually what you have is a tuner shootout and the whole point of the comparison is gone out the window.

No mods means no mods. If these cars are road-legal, showroom stock, then any numbers put up are most definitely valid in a head to head comparison. There is no "fair" or "unfair". Put a personal asterisk next to the ZR1 and BOSS if you'd like, but they absolutely belong in the comparison as-is. What's next, we penalize cars that don't have the burden of having more than two seats, or penalize the cars which gain a HUGE "unfair" advantage from being so small/light from the factory? Do all the other manufacturers get to now remove their back seats and maybe even shrink their chassis for this comparison?

Maybe your solution is to penalize the ZR1 and BOSS by making them modify their own cars to put less sticky tires on? Still not showroom stock then. It's a silly argument. Just add a couple seconds to see where the cars would be if you bought it and for some reason decided to put less sticky, non-R-comp tires on. But as the results stand now, they're most definitely valid.

Valid argument. I just thought the 302 LS came with Pzeros. At least it does in Canada. Did I miss that it is an option? Though I'd agree that even factory options should count. I just don't know what most buyers would do with rcomps in day to day driving. Could be a liability issue for the manufacturer.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by stefan

Valid argument. I just thought the 302 LS came with Pzeros. At least it does in Canada. Did I miss that it is an option? Though I'd agree that even factory options should count. I just don't know what most buyers would do with rcomps in day to day driving. Could be a liability issue for the manufacturer.

Aren't the PZero Corsa Systems R-comps? I thought they were, I think those are the tires that come on the LS edition.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

Aren't the PZero Corsa Systems R-comps? I thought they were, I think those are the tires that come on the LS edition.

Ah you may very well be right. I thought they were run of the mill Pzero's. Pretty awesome you can get the corsa's with a new car. I bet you have to sign some sort of waiver ala M3 CSL.

[daixloxbmw]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

The whole entire point of this comparison is that all cars are in showroom stock condition.

If manufacturers would like their cars equipped with R-comps in these comparisons, maybe they should offer them like that off the showroom floor...? If we start modding the cars (and yes, if they don't come with R-comps, putting R-comps on them would be a modification), then what?

"Well they got to modify theirs, so we get to modify ours."

Then all the JB, PROcede, Cobb, and GIAC type people come out of the woodwork, and eventually what you have is a tuner shootout and the whole point of the comparison is gone out the window.

No mods means no mods. If these cars are road-legal, showroom stock, then any numbers put up are most definitely valid in a head to head comparison. There is no "fair" or "unfair". Put a personal asterisk next to the ZR1 and BOSS if you'd like, but they absolutely belong in the comparison as-is. What's next, we penalize cars that don't have the burden of having more than two seats, or penalize the cars which gain a HUGE "unfair" advantage from being so small/light from the factory? Do all the other manufacturers get to now remove their back seats and maybe even shrink their chassis for this comparison?

Maybe your solution is to penalize the ZR1 and BOSS by making them modify their own cars to put less sticky tires on? Still not showroom stock then. It's a silly argument. Just add a couple seconds to see where the cars would be if you bought it and for some reason decided to put less sticky, non-R-comp tires on. But as the results stand now, they're most definitely valid.

+1

Keep in mind everything is a compromise. Cars with performance enhancing parts will obviously do better in track/race-oriented comparisons like Car and Driver's Lightning Lap. However, on the opposite extreme, these same cars will likely be penalized in reliability/comfort comparisons in Consumer Reports for example.

So these manufacturers have obvious decided that these cars should focus on performance by sacrificing other things. So if the ZR1/Boss appears at the bottom of a Consumer Reports list, would you put an asterisk by the Ride Quality and Snow/Rain Handling categories stating that it would do better if it had properly All-Season Tires and suspensions set up for comfort?

[MediaArtist]

Originally Posted by daixloxbmw

+1

Keep in mind everything is a compromise. Cars with performance enhancing parts will obviously do better in track/race-oriented comparisons like Car and Driver's Lightning Lap. However, on the opposite extreme, these same cars will likely be penalized in reliability/comfort comparisons in Consumer Reports for example.

So these manufacturers have obvious decided that these cars should focus on performance by sacrificing other things. So if the ZR1/Boss appears at the bottom of a Consumer Reports list, would you put an asterisk by the Ride Quality and Snow/Rain Handling categories stating that it would do better if it had properly All-Season Tires and suspensions set up for comfort?

If we did that, the Euro fanboys wouldn't have a reason to be peeved that USA won this time, and that's not fun.

[US///M3]

The Porsche Panera bread!!! My Lord, takin numbers,naming names. Amazing times for such a big ,heavy car.wow! well done Porsche.
BMW showing was a disappointment.