Car and Driver Lightning lap Test Falsified?
Oct 20, 2008, 05:37 PM
#92
I can't believe I bothered to read the whole thread, but since I did, I feel compelled to post.
Straights. By a lot.
No. That yellow SS in the test with the WRX, MS3, and Ralliart was an open differential car. Its a $500 option, and that car did not have it. They were complaining about it.
What year were they? The slightly older supercharged version of the SS are dogs. They ran one 2006 or 2007 in Lightning Lap, and its nowhere near as fast as the new car. If they were the new car, did they have the LSD option? Did you ask them? Were they accomplished drivers?
Yes. In all this, the one car I have the most issue with is the Elise. This is the third year, and they've had an Elise or Exige every year. This one did really badly.
One huge thing to understand for everyone reading this is that this test might not have brand new perfect cars from the factory. While they are on factory rubber, they might have somewhat worn tires, etc. I'm also pretty sure they did not use the same driver on all cars, which would also skew results.
I'd lay money that the Elise this year was sick in some way.
Its not a hair faster, its substantially faster. An X MR with an SST will make about 205whp on Andrew's dyno. A turbocharged Cobalt SS make about 225whp. Not add in the fact that the MR weighs over 600 pounds more.
You put these two cars next to each other at 60mph and take off, the SS will flat out _destroy_ the MR. When you look at the corner entry and exit speeds of the MR, you understand that it only is that fast on VIR because its a handling masterpiece. The achilles heel of the CZ4A chassis is that it has a little four cylinder to pull around an overweight 3600 pound whale of a car. Look at it that way, and you'll see the MR did great.
Don't agree with this either. I think the turbo Ecotec could take a lot more abuse than the 4B11.
The problem is that the Cobalt's power is near maximum for traction on street rubber. Race rubber is a different story.
The Cobalt was not built and tuned by dummies. Google "John Heinricy". Its a purpose built vehicle and what it can accomplish when you consider the sum of its parts is almost amazing.
They aren't real skidpad numbers. See below what ibognar wrote, but I'm sure you know this already.
I agree with this completely.
Get real dude, they might not all be the same guy, but they are pro level drivers. If you went out on that track, you couldn't touch that time in the same car, I promise.
Stop making excuses for the MR and realize that as heavy as it is and as low as power as it has, it did freaking awesome against the SS. Virginia International Raceway has some seriously high speed sections.
With similar power:weight, the MR would be quite a bit faster than the SS. But it wouldn't be stock vs. stock, would it?
I think if you look at the data completely unbiased, you'd see that your tone and posts are what is generating what you detect as sarcasm from him.
This is similar to what you said about AMS vs. Turbotrix awhile back before you understood all the facts. Look before you leap, bro! You're rushing into battle armed with nothing but your underwear and incomplete information. Your intentions are good, but your preparation is just horribly lacking, and it hurts your credibility when posting.
In the other test the WRX was faster then a SS. So figure that one out...
So with that logic the WRX 08 is faster then a STI and the evo .
So with that logic the WRX 08 is faster then a STI and the evo .
today i was at englishtown road race , and i was watching the SS cars like a hawk.
My conclusion is, 2 things is possible about them:
1/ they are not even nearly as track ready as they say
2/ those SS drivers sucks.
My conclusion is, 2 things is possible about them:
1/ they are not even nearly as track ready as they say
2/ those SS drivers sucks.
One huge thing to understand for everyone reading this is that this test might not have brand new perfect cars from the factory. While they are on factory rubber, they might have somewhat worn tires, etc. I'm also pretty sure they did not use the same driver on all cars, which would also skew results.
I'd lay money that the Elise this year was sick in some way.
You put these two cars next to each other at 60mph and take off, the SS will flat out _destroy_ the MR. When you look at the corner entry and exit speeds of the MR, you understand that it only is that fast on VIR because its a handling masterpiece. The achilles heel of the CZ4A chassis is that it has a little four cylinder to pull around an overweight 3600 pound whale of a car. Look at it that way, and you'll see the MR did great.
The engine is superior
The problem is that the Cobalt's power is near maximum for traction on street rubber. Race rubber is a different story.
The Cobalt was not built and tuned by dummies. Google "John Heinricy". Its a purpose built vehicle and what it can accomplish when you consider the sum of its parts is almost amazing.
It's been a while since I've read the article and I'm too lazy to go and review it but...I don't think those G numbers were generated on a skidpad. They were measured on a track during the course of a lap. You therefore can't compare them to skidpad G ratings. Therefore no rigging, that's just how they turned out.
There is no reason to think the test was biased/falsified. People keep on raising the issue of advertising, have you ever opened a Car and Driver? They have advertisements for Mitsubishi, Ford, Chevrolet, Honda, Subaru, Porsche, Nissan, Dodge, etc., why would they prefer one manufacturer over another when they all pay fees to advertise? Are you going to side with one person over another if they're both paying your bills? No you're damn well going to stay impartial to keep the money coming.
Maybe, although I think it's more likely that ASC was on, which actually hurts laps times. It doesn't allow the rear to rotate much and that hurts the handling performance. I think you are right though, the driver most likely didn't have much seat time in the EVO and didn't realize that it could do more than what he was giving it. Who knows?
Stop making excuses for the MR and realize that as heavy as it is and as low as power as it has, it did freaking awesome against the SS. Virginia International Raceway has some seriously high speed sections.
With similar power:weight, the MR would be quite a bit faster than the SS. But it wouldn't be stock vs. stock, would it?
This is similar to what you said about AMS vs. Turbotrix awhile back before you understood all the facts. Look before you leap, bro! You're rushing into battle armed with nothing but your underwear and incomplete information. Your intentions are good, but your preparation is just horribly lacking, and it hurts your credibility when posting.
Oct 20, 2008, 06:38 PM
#94
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the guys claiming that the SS can't make up that much time in the straights, the SS had a peak speed of 127 vs. 120 for the evo X. and the uphill sector where its supposedly slower has turns on it. A FWD car is going to have trouble putting down power compared to an AWD car going uphill while turning.
The lotus was having gearbox issues, thus the much slower time
you should be happy that there is more competition out there for the evoX at a lower price, it just means that Mitsubishi will have to either add power or reduce weight from the evo in order to keep up. more competition is always good for consumers
The lotus was having gearbox issues, thus the much slower time
you should be happy that there is more competition out there for the evoX at a lower price, it just means that Mitsubishi will have to either add power or reduce weight from the evo in order to keep up. more competition is always good for consumers
Oct 20, 2008, 06:52 PM
#95
that is a 8 + minutes course with miles straights , orange and apples.
Nurburgring punish cars, if they cant go over 150 mph, period.
And who knows it was rain or not between those two test. or summer or winter etc. Oh i know it stupid to assume those differences...
you can come up anything you want. The numbers are in this test there, and they showing. after 5 section 1.7 sec advantage to the MR. Including up hill straight too. Now the rest of the track is really no major differences , so there is no place where really the SS can make up 2 sec over the MR based on the 5 section they point out.
Weirdest thing is. the SS gain 2 sec over the MR /which is barely pulled 0.90 g's.. same on the driver/ in the UNDOCUMENTED areas.
But i'm sure it doesn't raise any question in you. Because you are not biased towards the SS. But we are , for sure.
Nurburgring punish cars, if they cant go over 150 mph, period.
And who knows it was rain or not between those two test. or summer or winter etc. Oh i know it stupid to assume those differences... you can come up anything you want. The numbers are in this test there, and they showing. after 5 section 1.7 sec advantage to the MR. Including up hill straight too. Now the rest of the track is really no major differences , so there is no place where really the SS can make up 2 sec over the MR based on the 5 section they point out.
Weirdest thing is. the SS gain 2 sec over the MR /which is barely pulled 0.90 g's.. same on the driver/ in the UNDOCUMENTED areas.
But i'm sure it doesn't raise any question in you. Because you are not biased towards the SS. But we are , for sure.
Did you see the undocumented yellow areas? Almost all straights
Oct 20, 2008, 06:57 PM
#96
here is the chart.
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...08+Results.pdf
Almost all straights.. Huh?
sector 4 wich is also almost straights and give good advantige for the lighter more power full fwd cars , because it is up hill the evo MR did :
section 4 / take a look/
virtually is a long straight a way and UP HILL, where the SS supposedly makes up its own lost times in the turns, right? Because it is lighter fwd etc etc... that is the only explanation the 2 sec gain over the evo. It is done deal the evo is better in turns.
So strangely the evo have almost 7 mph more entry speed, Strangly because it comes out from the yellow zone, where the SS should be lot faster due the straight part, and the made up times there. Which is suppos to be more then the MR won by those 5 sections... the 5 recorded sections the MR won by 1.7 sec, and the twilight zone won by SS 2 sec.
So 2 mph more average speed- and 1 mph exit speed advantage. So the Evo run 0.5 sec faster in this "easy" section. So if the up hill straights, dont give any advantige for the lighter , fwd car then what is?
or the sector 2 is almost a straight too.
what a surprise the evo is got a higher peak speed by 1.2 MPH, avarage speed is 5,8 mph higher, exit speed is 2.2 mph higher, and run faster 0.6 sec.
So im sure the SS will murder the MR by 2 sec on those yellow straights... we can call them a twilight zone...
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...08+Results.pdf
Almost all straights.. Huh?
sector 4 wich is also almost straights and give good advantige for the lighter more power full fwd cars , because it is up hill the evo MR did :
section 4 / take a look/
virtually is a long straight a way and UP HILL, where the SS supposedly makes up its own lost times in the turns, right? Because it is lighter fwd etc etc... that is the only explanation the 2 sec gain over the evo. It is done deal the evo is better in turns.
So strangely the evo have almost 7 mph more entry speed, Strangly because it comes out from the yellow zone, where the SS should be lot faster due the straight part, and the made up times there. Which is suppos to be more then the MR won by those 5 sections... the 5 recorded sections the MR won by 1.7 sec, and the twilight zone won by SS 2 sec.
So 2 mph more average speed- and 1 mph exit speed advantage. So the Evo run 0.5 sec faster in this "easy" section. So if the up hill straights, dont give any advantige for the lighter , fwd car then what is?
or the sector 2 is almost a straight too.
what a surprise the evo is got a higher peak speed by 1.2 MPH, avarage speed is 5,8 mph higher, exit speed is 2.2 mph higher, and run faster 0.6 sec.
So im sure the SS will murder the MR by 2 sec on those yellow straights...
we can call them a twilight zone...
Last edited by Robevo RS; Oct 20, 2008 at 07:07 PM.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:15 PM
#97
here is the chart.
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...08+Results.pdf
Almost all straights.. Huh?
sector 4 wich is also almost straights and give good advantige for the lighter more power full fwd cars , because it is up hill the evo MR did :
section 4 / take a look/
virtually is a long straight a way and UP HILL, where the SS supposedly makes up its own lost times in the turns, right? Because it is lighter fwd etc etc... that is the only explanation the 2 sec gain over the evo. It is done deal the evo is better in turns.
So strangely the evo have almost 7 mph more entry speed, Strangly because it comes out from the yellow zone, where the SS should be lot faster due the straight part, and the made up times there. Which is suppos to be more then the MR won by those 5 sections... the 5 recorded sections the MR won by 1.7 sec, and the twilight zone won by SS 2 sec.
So 2 mph more average speed- and 1 mph exit speed advantage. So the Evo run 0.5 sec faster in this "easy" section. So if the up hill straights, dont give any advantige for the lighter , fwd car then what is?
or the sector 2 is almost a straight too.
what a surprise the evo is got a higher peak speed by 1.2 MPH, avarage speed is 5,8 mph higher, exit speed is 2.2 mph higher, and run faster 0.6 sec.
So im sure the SS will murder the MR by 2 sec on those yellow straights... we can call them a twilight zone...
http://www.caranddriver.com/content/...08+Results.pdf
Almost all straights.. Huh?
sector 4 wich is also almost straights and give good advantige for the lighter more power full fwd cars , because it is up hill the evo MR did :
section 4 / take a look/
virtually is a long straight a way and UP HILL, where the SS supposedly makes up its own lost times in the turns, right? Because it is lighter fwd etc etc... that is the only explanation the 2 sec gain over the evo. It is done deal the evo is better in turns.
So strangely the evo have almost 7 mph more entry speed, Strangly because it comes out from the yellow zone, where the SS should be lot faster due the straight part, and the made up times there. Which is suppos to be more then the MR won by those 5 sections... the 5 recorded sections the MR won by 1.7 sec, and the twilight zone won by SS 2 sec.
So 2 mph more average speed- and 1 mph exit speed advantage. So the Evo run 0.5 sec faster in this "easy" section. So if the up hill straights, dont give any advantige for the lighter , fwd car then what is?
or the sector 2 is almost a straight too.
what a surprise the evo is got a higher peak speed by 1.2 MPH, avarage speed is 5,8 mph higher, exit speed is 2.2 mph higher, and run faster 0.6 sec.
So im sure the SS will murder the MR by 2 sec on those yellow straights...
we can call them a twilight zone... and yea it looks pretty believeable to me. You're quoting all the information from the documented areas.
You don't think it's possible? Cuz it happened. And all that stuff you said about the ring...
i guess yea there could have been some factors. But there's a 20 second difference, like it or not. If the SS's suspension was tuned on the ring I believe it will work out well for VIR
Last edited by kyoo; Oct 20, 2008 at 07:19 PM.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:20 PM
#98
yep, look up those yellow "straight a ways" /which they are no straighter then any timed section in overall/ and say it honestly, it will make 2 sec difference , after you know one of the longest straight a way , the SS lost buy shocking 0.5 sec...
And that section also comes from the yellow straight on up hill. And the half of the track ruled by the MR by 1.7 sec...
So who they really kidding?
I wouldn't say anything if it wouldn't be that obvious.
And that section also comes from the yellow straight on up hill. And the half of the track ruled by the MR by 1.7 sec...
So who they really kidding?
I wouldn't say anything if it wouldn't be that obvious.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:26 PM
#99
yep, look up those yellow "straight a ways" /which they are no straighter then any timed section in overall/ and say it honestly, it will make 2 sec difference , after you know one of the longest straight a way , the SS lost buy shocking 0.5 sec...
And that section also comes from the yellow straight on up hill. And the half of the track ruled by the MR by 1.7 sec...
So who they really kidding?
I wouldn't say anything if it wouldn't be that obvious.
And that section also comes from the yellow straight on up hill. And the half of the track ruled by the MR by 1.7 sec...
So who they really kidding?
I wouldn't say anything if it wouldn't be that obvious.
They took seconds off the Cobalt's track time,
or they didn't drive the X hard enough?
Cuz the X's time is quicker/equivalent than the IX MR's, albeit on a different day, and this is a power course with a lot of straights. So what are you saying?
Oct 20, 2008, 07:26 PM
#100
Newbie
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Make no mistake, the laptimes are somewhat decent numbers to help compare with, but they aren't the end-all. Look at Top Gear, the Stig managed a slightly faster time with the STi than the Evo.. and look at how it fared here. There are so many variables, and some drivers may just be better with certain cars for no real reason. No one is going to buy a Cobalt SS over an Evo X except where price is an issue. The Cobalt SS is pushing the bounds of FWD performance, but it's still FWD...
Oct 20, 2008, 07:29 PM
#101
im talking about everything BUT the documented sectors
and yea it looks pretty believeable to me. You're quoting all the information from the documented areas.
You don't think it's possible? Cuz it happened. And all that stuff you said about the ring...
i guess yea there could have been some factors. But there's a 20 second difference, like it or not. If the SS's suspension was tuned on the ring I believe it will work out well for VIR
and yea it looks pretty believeable to me. You're quoting all the information from the documented areas.
You don't think it's possible? Cuz it happened. And all that stuff you said about the ring...
i guess yea there could have been some factors. But there's a 20 second difference, like it or not. If the SS's suspension was tuned on the ring I believe it will work out well for VIR
Little thinking here so it might be make it clear for you too.
If you bring the car up a winner, over BIG names like Lotus SC and the Evo etc. You shouldn't be show the track parts where the SS won? So no even a slightly chance for doubt. Since you are the under dog, on home track?/being US car/
Instead to show the parts and times, where you actually got beaten . And some part basically murdered?
So why not you show the parts where you where the winner and say hey the rest of it is not even importnat because in overall we where faster.. as our example shows ...
But no they "recorded " times actually lost by 1.7 sec. which is not really small only in 5 sections....
But some how the SS twilight zone where no timing exist the SS makes up 2 sec suddenly.
Yeah i know i'm thinking wrong.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:30 PM
#102
yeah the mysterious SS twilight zone...
Little thinking here so it might be make it clear for you too.
If you bring the car up a winner, over BIG names like Lotus SC and the Evo etc. You shouldn't be show the track parts where the SS won? So no even a slightly chance for doubt. Since you are the under dog, on home track?/being US car/
Instead to show the parts and times, where you actually got beaten . And some part basically murdered?
So why not you show the parts where you where the winner and say hey the rest of it is not even importnat because in overall we where faster.. as our example shows ...
But no they "recorded " times actually lost by 1.7 sec. which is not really small only in 5 sections....
But some how the SS twilight zone where no timing exist the SS makes up 2 sec suddenly.
Yeah i know i'm thinking wrong.
Little thinking here so it might be make it clear for you too.
If you bring the car up a winner, over BIG names like Lotus SC and the Evo etc. You shouldn't be show the track parts where the SS won? So no even a slightly chance for doubt. Since you are the under dog, on home track?/being US car/
Instead to show the parts and times, where you actually got beaten . And some part basically murdered?
So why not you show the parts where you where the winner and say hey the rest of it is not even importnat because in overall we where faster.. as our example shows ...
But no they "recorded " times actually lost by 1.7 sec. which is not really small only in 5 sections....
But some how the SS twilight zone where no timing exist the SS makes up 2 sec suddenly.
Yeah i know i'm thinking wrong.
And I added it up. The total time for the Cobalt in the recorded times was 57.6 seconds. 1.7 seconds less for the X MR.
Meaning the "twlight zones" makes up for 2 minutes and 15 seconds of mostly relatively straight and not too technical areas. Do I think the Cobalt can gain 2 seconds within those 2 minutes and 15 seconds? I think so. I believe that first, before believe C&D cheated the time. I'll eat my words if they did, but like most people have said here, they most likely did not cheat
Last edited by kyoo; Oct 20, 2008 at 07:38 PM.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:39 PM
#103
I mean, Rob, what are you saying?
They took seconds off the Cobalt's track time,
or they didn't drive the X hard enough?
Cuz the X's time is quicker/equivalent than the IX MR's, albeit on a different day, and this is a power course with a lot of straights. So what are you saying?
They took seconds off the Cobalt's track time,
or they didn't drive the X hard enough?
Cuz the X's time is quicker/equivalent than the IX MR's, albeit on a different day, and this is a power course with a lot of straights. So what are you saying?
Also if you actually don't put the SST in the S-Sport mode who know how it runs ? or didnt turn off the ASC? who knows what they did? They dont have to "cheat " just using the wrong set up for race.
Many way you can milk the test .
And oh boy they did. It is still unbelivable they put the Lotus bihind the SS. No boundaries anymore.
Glows off ... Chevy strikes back !
Oct 20, 2008, 07:41 PM
#104
I can say this. If you do under 0.90 g's in turns in the X/ which are capable of to do at least 0.98 g's/. You at least, not driving hard at all. When you do over that with other cars. Which are less capable on skid pad . And that is a fact. I know it sounds weird for some but this is just plane fact.
Also if you actually don't put the SST in the S-Sport mode who know how it runs ? or didnt turn off the ASC? who knows what they did? They dont have to "cheat " just using the wrong set up for race.
Many way you can milk the test .
And oh boy they did. It is still unbelivable they put the Lotus bihind the SS. No boundaries anymore.
Glows off ... Chevy strikes back !
Also if you actually don't put the SST in the S-Sport mode who know how it runs ? or didnt turn off the ASC? who knows what they did? They dont have to "cheat " just using the wrong set up for race.
Many way you can milk the test .
And oh boy they did. It is still unbelivable they put the Lotus bihind the SS. No boundaries anymore.
Glows off ... Chevy strikes back !
And those g's are skidpad g's, or tighter turns
and the independent testing also put the elise sc behind the ss... I don't understand like.. It's such a great time, why is this so hard for people?
Last edited by kyoo; Oct 20, 2008 at 07:44 PM.
Oct 20, 2008, 07:46 PM
#105
Like I said, so what are you saying? Who cheated?
And I added it up. The total time for the Cobalt in the recorded times was 57.6 seconds. 1.7 seconds less for the X MR.
Meaning the "twlight zones" makes up for 2 minutes and 15 seconds of mostly relatively straight and not too technical areas. Do I think the Cobalt can gain 2 seconds within those 2 minutes and 15 seconds? I think so. I believe that first, before believe C&D cheated the time. I'll eat my words if they did, but like most people have said here, they most likely did not cheat
And I added it up. The total time for the Cobalt in the recorded times was 57.6 seconds. 1.7 seconds less for the X MR.
Meaning the "twlight zones" makes up for 2 minutes and 15 seconds of mostly relatively straight and not too technical areas. Do I think the Cobalt can gain 2 seconds within those 2 minutes and 15 seconds? I think so. I believe that first, before believe C&D cheated the time. I'll eat my words if they did, but like most people have said here, they most likely did not cheat
I cant bealive you say" relatively " because relatively the other 5 is straight too. and if you really take a look at it it is even straighter then a yellow ones. Not as many hard turns etc,
But if you say so.
Then we cant make a conversion here. I see the rest of track just as hard and technical then a recorded 5. But i never been in VIR so those turns maybe straights in the real life.