Lap times RX-8 vs. others
03-02-2006, 03:52 PM
#1
Registered
Thread Starter
Lap times RX-8 vs. others
On the recently closed thread someone mentions Hockenheimring and how the Mazda loses to the M3.
Let me point out that there are different layouts of this circuit, and the times derived could have easily been utilizing the configuration with long straights. Gee, do you think a car with 100% more torque, 100 more horses and only 400 pounds heavier might post a little quicker time than a mini-beer-keg-engined car? Congratulations are in order....to the car and to Captain Obvious.
Let me point out that there are different layouts of this circuit, and the times derived could have easily been utilizing the configuration with long straights. Gee, do you think a car with 100% more torque, 100 more horses and only 400 pounds heavier might post a little quicker time than a mini-beer-keg-engined car? Congratulations are in order....to the car and to Captain Obvious.
03-02-2006, 04:22 PM
#2
The RX-8 actually does better on the skidpad (.91g) than the M3, according to Car & Driver and MotorTrend.
There's no reason to dispute the numbers from Top Gear: None.
Ike is the kind of guy who would trumpet the Top Gear results if they cast his fancy Lancer in a good light...
There's no reason to dispute the numbers from Top Gear: None.
Ike is the kind of guy who would trumpet the Top Gear results if they cast his fancy Lancer in a good light...
03-02-2006, 04:30 PM
#3
Shock and Awe
The problem with Top Gear is that the vehicles are not being tested necessarily under the same circumstances. They run at different times of the year, different times of the day, different weather, wet tracks, dry tracks, etc... There is no real honest comparison. In order to get a fair comparison between cars, you have to test them on the same track, in the same conditions.
03-02-2006, 04:33 PM
#4
Sport Auto test on Hockenheim short, which looks like this...
It's a fairly short track at 1.6 miles and a track that absorbs some of the power differential between cars. 2 seconds over 1.6 miles is a pretty big difference.
It's a fairly short track at 1.6 miles and a track that absorbs some of the power differential between cars. 2 seconds over 1.6 miles is a pretty big difference.
03-02-2006, 04:36 PM
#5
Originally Posted by RotoRocket
The RX-8 actually does better on the skidpad (.91g) than the M3, according to Car & Driver and MotorTrend.
There's no reason to dispute the numbers from Top Gear: None.
Ike is the kind of guy who would trumpet the Top Gear results if they cast his fancy Lancer in a good light...
There's no reason to dispute the numbers from Top Gear: None.
Ike is the kind of guy who would trumpet the Top Gear results if they cast his fancy Lancer in a good light...
Skid pad is about as meanigless of a stat as 0-60 is on a race track. Unless you're racing around in a circle.
03-02-2006, 04:54 PM
#7
Originally Posted by BlueEyes
RotoRocket, you have no idea what you're talking about. I have listed many times the reasons to dispute top gear numbers, and for that matter, any numbers from test done on different days, in different conditions, by different drivers.
Skid pad is about as meanigless of a stat as 0-60 is on a race track. Unless you're racing around in a circle.
Skid pad is about as meanigless of a stat as 0-60 is on a race track. Unless you're racing around in a circle.
My next project car is Dodge Dakota bearing a LS7. It will be king of all tracks.
03-02-2006, 05:01 PM
#8
Administrator
no stats mean anythign and no dyno numbers can be compared to each oterh and no lap times can be trusted or compared. so from now on anyone of you in this thread or the last mentions numbers from any source ill close the thread? whats the point of the discussions if no ones figures are accurate?
03-02-2006, 05:15 PM
#9
Originally Posted by RotoRocket
Sure buddy. Skidpad numbers are irrelevant.
My next project car is Dodge Dakota bearing a LS7. It will be king of all tracks.
My next project car is Dodge Dakota bearing a LS7. It will be king of all tracks.
03-02-2006, 05:46 PM
#10
Originally Posted by zoom44
no stats mean anythign and no dyno numbers can be compared to each oterh and no lap times can be trusted or compared. so from now on anyone of you in this thread or the last mentions numbers from any source ill close the thread? whats the point of the discussions if no ones figures are accurate?
03-02-2006, 06:01 PM
#11
You're right. It does show what a car can do in capable hands based on the conditions. I wouldn't deny that. We do have to assume they care enough to do enough laps to get a good one, though. And as you said, we can't compare these times and draw any reasonable conclusion.
As far as the stig, many think there are a variety of stigs, and their schedules determine who is used. No way to really know. I believe the M3 was tested by the black stig though, and the 8 the white stig. So, even if we assume the stig is one person, the cars were still tested by different people.
As far as the stig, many think there are a variety of stigs, and their schedules determine who is used. No way to really know. I believe the M3 was tested by the black stig though, and the 8 the white stig. So, even if we assume the stig is one person, the cars were still tested by different people.
03-02-2006, 08:43 PM
#12
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RotoRocket
Sure buddy. Skidpad numbers are irrelevant.
My next project car is Dodge Dakota bearing a LS7. It will be king of all tracks.
My next project car is Dodge Dakota bearing a LS7. It will be king of all tracks.
03-02-2006, 08:45 PM
#13
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ryan13b
Blueeyes is downplaying the fact that the tests do show certain things.
It shows exactly what cars can do based on the conditions with a professional driver.
Now, without knowing the conditions, you can't compare the raw data.
Knowing the conditions of the track you are able to handicap the cars appropriately, that said. The M3 in the dry could probably do it in about 1-1.2 seconds quicker than the RX-8.
Keep in mind that the track wasn't completely dry during the RX-8 test, even though Jeremy Clarkson said it was, you can see several spots with standing water.
And the Stig has been the same for the past 2 seasons.
It shows exactly what cars can do based on the conditions with a professional driver.
Now, without knowing the conditions, you can't compare the raw data.
Knowing the conditions of the track you are able to handicap the cars appropriately, that said. The M3 in the dry could probably do it in about 1-1.2 seconds quicker than the RX-8.
Keep in mind that the track wasn't completely dry during the RX-8 test, even though Jeremy Clarkson said it was, you can see several spots with standing water.
And the Stig has been the same for the past 2 seasons.
03-02-2006, 08:47 PM
#14
DGAF
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NoTears316
The problem with Top Gear is that the vehicles are not being tested necessarily under the same circumstances. They run at different times of the year, different times of the day, different weather, wet tracks, dry tracks, etc... There is no real honest comparison. In order to get a fair comparison between cars, you have to test them on the same track, in the same conditions.
03-02-2006, 09:08 PM
#15
Shock and Awe
Even if it was the same guy, something as simple as differing ambient temperature will generate havok on a car's performance. If you dont believe me, then dyno your car on a cool dry day, then dyno it again on a hot muggy day. I guarantee you will get different numbers. The same happens when you test drive different cars on different days under different circumstances. How hard is that to understand?
03-02-2006, 09:13 PM
#17
A nice step up!!!
Oh, and I agree, unless the test is controlled (OR) you take into account all of the performance errors that could be attributed to the differences (which would be hard) and generate a margin of error from the test, they don't mean a whole lot.
03-02-2006, 09:28 PM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's some times from the same day. No M3, but the S4 which is usually a little slower around the track than the M3 is present.
03-02-2006, 09:48 PM
#20
Registered
Thread Starter
Even when there's a controlled test, let's say 8 different cars with the same driver all done on the same day, would there not be some margin of error?
Take for example spring of '92 Road & Track test with Danny Sullivan as the driver. The RX-7 lambasted every other car out there. But who's to say that if Senna had driven the NSX that instead of losing to the Mazda by 2.3 seconds (or whatever it was) that maybe the NSX would've only lost by 7/10ths of a second. And what if the RX-7 had been faster even still in the hands of oh, Johnny Herbert instead of Sullivan?
At what point do you take the results for what they are and recognize that they are reasonably accurate? White stig, black stig....if the temperatures and humidity are close, even if tests are done weeks or months apart, can you not assume that under pretty much the same conditions the outcomes would be repeatable?
Take for example spring of '92 Road & Track test with Danny Sullivan as the driver. The RX-7 lambasted every other car out there. But who's to say that if Senna had driven the NSX that instead of losing to the Mazda by 2.3 seconds (or whatever it was) that maybe the NSX would've only lost by 7/10ths of a second. And what if the RX-7 had been faster even still in the hands of oh, Johnny Herbert instead of Sullivan?
At what point do you take the results for what they are and recognize that they are reasonably accurate? White stig, black stig....if the temperatures and humidity are close, even if tests are done weeks or months apart, can you not assume that under pretty much the same conditions the outcomes would be repeatable?
03-02-2006, 09:57 PM
#21
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rx-A-Ho
Where in this article did it say all runs were on the same day?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Touge
Canada Forum
0
08-11-2015 10:19 PM
Touge
Canada Forum
0
07-28-2015 09:52 PM
Touge
Canada Forum
0
07-18-2015 05:41 PM
