2011 Car & Driver Lightning Lap

[Chris B.]

Every year for the past six years, Car & Driver rents out Virginia International Raceway and has highly skilled/experienced drivers, some of them who race professionally or have raced professionally, take production street cars around the track's 4.2 mile Grand East course to see how fast they are. Funny how VIR calls the same course the Grand West Course They use advanced data acquisition systems that record data every 0.1 seconds for the entire lap for multiple laps. Then they publish the results. This year they added a truck category called LLT.

http://zx2.org/images/GrandWestCourseMapCorners.jpg

Its really worth picking up the issue to read the descriptions of each car or truck and the experience of driving them on the track. For example, the Charger SRT8 was described as the dancing hippo from Fantasia. The Boss 302 LS had the same corner and sector speeds as the Corvette Grand Sport, but weighs more, so its lap times were a little slower. They asked the question, is the Audi TT the ulitmate version of the VW Golf?

Here are the results from the latest issue:
LLT
BMW X5 M 3:11.1
Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 3:17.4

LL1
Honda Civic Si Coupe 3:24.1
Volkswagen Jetta GLI 3:27.3

LL2
Audi TT RS 3:4.8
BMW 1 Series M 3:6.6
BMW 335is 3:13.8
Dodge Challenger SRT-8 3:9.4
Dodge Charger SRT8 3:10.1
Ford Boss 302 Laguna Seca 3:2.8
Mini Cooper JCW Coupe 3:18.4
Volkswagen Golf R 3:14.0

LL3
BMW Z4 sDrive35is 3:10.4
Chevy Corvette ZR1 2:50.7 Other year was 2:49.8 on different tires
Lotus Evora S 3:5.9
Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Coupe 3:6.3
Mercedes Benz CLS63 AMG 3:4.9
Nissan GT-R 2:53.2
Porsche Cayman R 3:3.9

LL4
Porsche Panamera Turbo S 3:0.7

The 1 Series M costs about the same as a BOSS 302 LS, well more is you include the as tested price, and the question has been asked int he past, which is faster on a road course. This issue answered that. The BOSS 302 was faster by 3.8 seconds. The 1 series M is also a little over 1 second slower than the M3 around the same track.

Lightning Lap Overall Results:*

Make Model Min: Sec
Mosler MT900S 2 : 45.9
Dodge Viper SRT 10 ACR 2 : 48.6
Mosler Photon 2 : 49.8
Chevy Corvette ZR1 2 : 49.8
Lamborghini Gallardo LP570-4 Superleggera 2 : 51.8
KTM X-Bow 2 : 52.3
Nissan GT-R 2 : 53.2
Chevrolet Corvette Z06 2 : 53.5
Lamborghini Murcielago LP670-4 SV 2 : 53.9
Ferrari F430 Scuderia 2 : 54.6
Nissan GT-R 2 : 55.6
Porsche 911 GT3 RS 2 : 55.9
Porsche 911 Turbo S 2 : 57.5
Ariel Atom 2 : 57.6
Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG 2 : 58.0
Chevy Corvette Z06 2 : 58.2
Chevy Corvette Grand Sport 2 : 58.8
Audi R8 5.2 FSI 2 : 59.5
Ford GT 3 : 0.7
Porsche Panamera Turbo S 3 : 0.7
Chevy Corvette Z06 3 : 1.1
Chevy Corvette Z51 3 : 1.2
Dodge Viper SRT 10 3 : 1.6
Porsche 911 GT3 3 : 1.8
Ford Boss 302 Laguna Seca 3 : 2.8
Chevy Corvette Z51 3 : 3.6
Porsche Boxster Spyder 3 : 3.8
Porsche Cayman R 3 : 3.9
Cadillac CTS-V 3 : 4.0
Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 3 : 4.0
Cadillac CTS-V Coupe 3 : 4.2
Lotus Exige S 3 : 4.5
Audi R8 3 : 4.6
Audi TT RS 3 : 4.8
Mercedes Benz CLS63 AMG 3 : 4.9
Lotus Exige S 260 Sport 3 : 5.0
BMW M3 3 : 5.4
Lexus IS-F 3 : 5.4
BMW M3 3 : 5.6
Porsche Cayman S 3 : 5.8
Porsche 911 Carrera S 3 : 5.8
Porsche 911 Turbo 3 : 5.8
Ford Shelby GT500 3 : 5.9
Lotus Evora S 3 : 5.9
Mercedes Benz C63 AMG Coupe 3 : 6.3
Jaguar XKR 3 : 6.4
Mercedes C63 AMG 3 : 6.5
BMW 1 Series M 3 : 6.6
Mercedes Benz E63 AMG 3 : 6.9
Ford Shelby GT500 3 : 7.4
Lotus Evora S 3 : 8.3
Audi TTS 3 : 8.4
Ford Mustang GT 5.0 3 : 8.6
Jaguar XFR 3 : 8.9
Lotus Elise 3 : 9.2
Chevy Corvette 3 : 9.3
Dodge Challenger SRT-8 3 : 9.4
Porsche Cayman S 3 : 9.5
Chevy Camaro SS 3 : 9.5
BMW M6 3 : 10.0
Dodge Charger SRT8 3 : 10.1
BMW Z4 sDrive35is 3 : 10.4
BMW 335i Coupe 3 : 10.5
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo SE 3 : 10.6
Audi S4 3 : 10.8
Ford Shelby GT500 3 : 11.0
BMW X5 M 3 : 11.1
Audi RS4 3 : 11.2
BMW Z4 M Coupe 3 : 11.7
Nissan NIZMO 370Z 3 : 12.0
Nissan 350Z Track 3 : 12.5
Ford Mustang V6 3 : 12.5
Chevy Colbat SS 3 : 13.0
Ford Mustang GT 3 : 13.3
Mitsubishi Lancer Evo MR 3 : 13.3
Mitsubishi EVO MR 3 : 13.5
BMW 135i 3 : 13.7
Hyundai Genesis Coupe R Spec 3.8 3 : 13.8
BMW 335is 3 : 13.8
Subaru Impreza WRX STI 3 : 13.8
Lexus IS F 3 : 14.0
Volkswagen Golf R 3 : 14.0
Audi S5 3 : 14.6
Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 3 : 14.8
Honda S2000 CR 3 : 15.0
Pontiac Solstace GXP 3 : 15.5
Mazda Mazdaspeed3 3 : 16.0
Mazda Mazdaspeed3 3 : 16.2
Dodge Challenger SRT-8 3 : 16.3
Subaru Impreza WRX 3 : 16.5
Subaru WRX 3 : 16.6
Lotus Elise SC 3 : 16.6
Mazda RX-8 R3 3 : 16.7
Mini JCW 3 : 17.1
Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 3 : 17.4
Infiniti G37 Sport 3 : 17.5
Dodge Charger SRT8 3 : 18.2
Mini Cooper JCW Coupe 3 : 18.4
Mazda RX-8 3 : 19.0
Subaru WRX STI 3 : 19.0
Volkswagen GTI 3 : 19.3
Chevy Cobalt SS 3 : 20.6
Dodge Caliber SRT-4 3 : 20.8
Ford Mustang GT 3 : 20.9
Volkswagen R32 3 : 21.8
Mini Cooper S 3 : 22.9
Honda Civic Si 3 : 24.1
Honda Civic Mugen Si 3 : 24.8
Volkswagen GTI 3 : 25.1
Honda Civic Si 3 : 26.5
Volvo C30 T5 2.0 3 : 26.6
Volkswagen Jetta GLI 3 : 27.3
Mazda MX-5 3 : 29.3

*There may be a couple typos in there, but I copied and pasted these from C&D's web page and other threads about the current and past issues.

Hopefully this won't end up in a which of these cars tested for their performance on a race track is a daily driver in 3 feet of unplowed snow with 2 inches of solid black ice under the snow while driving up a mountain in the Rockies thread like last year's thread about this issue did.

Last Year's Lightning Lap Thread (http://www.tristatetuners.com/forum/showthread.php?t=108098)

[O2SpecV]

hmm i would love to pick up an issue of this, but i would rather want to see video!

[Ender81]

I would rather have the 1 series M. I don't care about the laptime I just dig that car. Nothing against the M3 or the Boss.

[mcperson2k]

The TT is pretty impressive... Obviously not as slow as people make them out to be.

[Chris B.]

The TT is pretty impressive... Obviously not as slow as people make them out to be.

The TT RS that was tested has quite a few upgrades over the regular model. 360 HP instead of 211 HP, 343 ft-lbs of torque instead of 258 ft-lbs of torque to start. It also has wider wheels and tires with performance tires, adjustable magnetic ride suspension, different brakes and exhaust, etc... Its not the same TT as the regular models.

[Chris B.]

I would rather have the 1 series M. I don't care about the laptime I just dig that car. Nothing against the M3 or the Boss.

Being a smaller car, the 1 series M probably feels more like an E36/46 than the current M3 does.

[Chris B.]

hmm i would love to pick up an issue of this, but i would rather want to see video!

They will probably have videos available within a week or two. By this time last year various cars' lap videos were available.

[JB'sLGT]

The 302 Laguna Seca comes with R-Comps from the factory. A better comparison would've been the "regular" Boss.

[nuTinmuch]

I'm a little surprised at how close the Golf R is to the STI.

Also disappointed to see that they didn't retest the 370 now that its breaking/engine cooling issues have been fixed.

[Chris B.]

The 302 Laguna Seca comes with R-Comps from the factory. A better comparison would've been the "regular" Boss.

Several of the other cars they have tested int he past also come with R compound tires form the factory including at least one of the Corvettes. Its a test of production cars with factory options. The tires on the 302 LS are DOT legal and a factory option. I haven't heard of anyone objection to the Pilot Sport Cup tires on some of the 911's and Corvettes in the past tests.

[nuTinmuch]

Several of the other cars they have tested int he past also come with R compound tires form the factory including at least one of the Corvettes. Its a test of production cars with factory options. The tires on the 302 LS are DOT legal and a factory option. I haven't heard of anyone objection to the Pilot Sport Cup tires on some of the 911's and Corvettes in the past tests.

Yeah, I never understood this complaint. Tires might me easy to switch out, but they're still factory equipment.

It isn't a test of potential, it's a test of what you can buy and take to the track today.

[Chris B.]

I'm a little surprised at how close the Golf R is to the STI.

Also disappointed to see that they didn't retest the 370 now that its breaking/engine cooling issues have been fixed.

They did get a few laps out of the car before the brakes failed suddenly and posted a time. Maybe Nissan didn't want to resubmit a car?

I was disappointed that Ferrari didn't make a 458 Italia available in time for the test.

[Chris B.]

When talking with Ender81 tonight, he mentioned how the 1 Series M beat the old iron block Shelby GT500's lap times.

That brings up a good point, no matter how much power you have, a nose heavy car that doesn't transition well requires a lot of power to put down a good lap time. The 2011 aluminum block version of the GT500 is about 3.5 seconds faster per lap than the 2010 iron block version of the same car. Weight and weight placement make a big difference in handling.

[sean3]

Several of the other cars they have tested int he past also come with R compound tires form the factory including at least one of the Corvettes. Its a test of production cars with factory options. The tires on the 302 LS are DOT legal and a factory option. I haven't heard of anyone objection to the Pilot Sport Cup tires on some of the 911's and Corvettes in the past tests.

It's a Mustang though. I initially read it and thought "WOW THE MUSTANG DESTROYS EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND ITS PRICE RANGE", then remembered the LS edition comes with different tires. I understand what they did, but I think it's stupid. These kinds of comparisons REALLY need to be run on identical tire compounds... but that's not reasonable to ask for.

The 1 series M and Boss 302 are around the same price. If you glanced at this test you'd think the Boss 302 is worlds faster when in reality it's only slightly faster with a large tire advantage.

[JB'sLGT]

Several of the other cars they have tested int he past also come with R compound tires form the factory including at least one of the Corvettes. Its a test of production cars with factory options. The tires on the 302 LS are DOT legal and a factory option. I haven't heard of anyone objection to the Pilot Sport Cup tires on some of the 911's and Corvettes in the past tests.

I get that, but I'm not talking about Corvette ZR1s and Porsche GT3s. They're both comparably tired and in the same class.

I could put the same tires on the M1 and it would've been right there with the times of the Boss LS. The tire wear rating for the Boss LS's Pirellis are 60 and the M1's Michelins are 220. Factory option or not, it's pretty easy to see someone is playing with a stacked deck.

[Chris B.]

The other cars in the test that come with R comps come with better R comps. The Pirellis on the 302 LS aren't as good as the Pilot Sports on the other cars. Pirelli makes another R comp that is more on the levle of the Pilot Sport, but Ford didn't offer it for one reason or another. Maybe because they wanted a tire that wouldn't make the car undriveable in the rain like many Pilot Sport Cup equipped cars are. They are better than the performance street tires most of the other cars come with. Some of the cars in the comparison only come from the factory with performance all season tires. Sure it would be nice to fine one performance tire that is available in the stock size of every car that Car 7 Driver might ever test on a road course, but like you said that's not practical. Its a test of what the manufacturer offers and is available for consumers to buy.

Maybe comparisons like this will encourage more manufactures to offer better performing vehicles. Just look at how much has changed since the first Lightning Lap comparison 6 years ago.

Also the 1 Series M has the boost controlled by the computer so that it develops peak torque at low RPM and keeps the flat torque curve until high RPM. It has 370 lb-ft of torque at 1500-1700 RPM. The Boss 302 LS doesn't develop that much torque until very high in the RPM range. Due to the 1 Series M's broad torque curve, the drivers needed to shift less in some parts of the track and that shaved time off their laps according to the article. The sections where it didn't have to downshift is where it was faster than the 302 LS and other cars that ran faster lap times. Each car has advantages and disadvantages.

[Chris B.]

I get that, but I'm not talking about Corvette ZR1s and Porsche GT3s. They're both comparably tired and in the same class.

I could put the same tires on the M1 and it would've been right there with the times of the Boss LS. The tire wear rating for the Boss LS's Pirellis are 60 and the M1's Michelins are 220. Factory option or not, it's pretty easy to see someone is playing with a stacked deck.

BMW has offered the Pilot Sport Cup on some models of the M3 as a factory option in the past. Its even mentioned in the little owners manual that comes with the Pilot Sport Cup tires. I'm sure BMW could have offered lower treadwear rated performance tires with the 1 Series M if they wanted to, but the simple fact is they didn't. Its how the car is available from the factory.

The Pilot Sport PS2's on the 1 Series M are rather soft for 220 treadwear tires that do very well in autoX and track use for street tires, so its not like the car comes with hard all season tires.

Also you can't compare treadwear ratings of tires of different brands to each other to compare their grip. The Pilot Sport Cups and the Pirellis on the Boss 302 LS have the same treadwear rating, but anyone that has used both would say the Pilot Sport Cups have more grip and are a better overall dry track tire. Sure the 302 LS had grippier tires the other cars in the test, but it didn't have an as advanced stability control program as other cars in the test. Should we nitpick every detail of the two cars? The Boss 302 LS didn't have a computer controlled rear diff that can act as a locked diff to gain more traction out of the corners. I don't think any non BMW product in its price range in the comparison had that. Should we have to add that to each car in the 1 Series M's price range to even out the fairness of the test? Should we have to change the stability control progras of each car so they are more evenly matched? Is BMW playing with a stacked deck because they have a computer controlled rear diff while the Boss 302 LS has a diff who's basic design goes back 40+ years? What about "free" mods that you can do to some cars to increase their performance? If we nitpick tires, differentials, stability control, then should we nitpick details such as why didn't they do the "free" power mods that you can do in some of the cars tested?

What if we did change the tires and the stability control program of some of the cars didn't act properly because instead of pulling 0.92 lateral g's the cars now were pulling 1.2 lateral g's and the program wasn't designed for it?

The rules specifically state that Car & Driver asked the manufacturers to provide the most track friendly wheels and tires available. Here is the little rules section that was published in the magazine last year:
http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/377439/the-rules-box-photo-377459-s-original.jpg

If its what the manufacturer offers in a mass produced vehicle, then its not playing with a stacked deck or using a ringer vehicle. The 1 Series M was a lower production model than the Boss 302. Its production stopped in December 2011. BMW didn't offer tires more performance oriented than the Pilot Sport PS2. For something so limited in production, they could have offered different tires as a factory option, but they didn't.

This is a test of cars as available form the factory. Sure you can modify these cars in many different ways to make them faster, intakes, headers, exhausts, computer reprogramming, different wheels, different tires, different seats, removing air conditioning, etc.... but that's not how they are delivered from the factory.

[nuTinmuch]

People also put way too much weight on this specific test in general, just as way many people put a lot of weight on the Nurburgring + the Top Gear test track.

Every track is different, and likewise, conditions are different at the LL from year to year.

What the Lightning Lap does show, though, is that almost everyone is improving year to year.

It's fun, though.

They did get a few laps out of the car before the brakes failed suddenly and posted a time. Maybe Nissan didn't want to resubmit a car?

I think they did the test a little earlier this year. There are only a few 2012 370s around the country right now, and afaik, there was a pretty huge delay in getting them out, as the plant they are built at was still recovering from last year.

[JB'sLGT]

not quoting your whole post

BMW has offered the Pilot Sport Cup on some models of the M3 as a factory option in...

Just admit the Boss has a huge advantage over the other cars in its class b/c it has R-Comps...even if they are a factory option.

Also, no one competitive in autox runs PS2s b/c they're expensive and no where near grippy enough (we're talking street tire classes).

[Chris B.]

not quoting your whole post
Just admit the Boss has a huge advantage over the other cars in its class b/c it has R-Comps...even if they are a factory option.


Each car has different things that give it advantages in different areas. The 1 Series M's broad torque curve gives it an advantage over naturally aspirated cars that have a narrower range of peak torque. For example, compare the Honda S2000 CR to the 2010 Mustang GT. They have about the same power to weight ratio, but the Mustang has a broader range of torque. The S2000 makes most of its torque from 6000-8000 RPM. The Mustang makes most of its torque from 1500 RPM to 5700 RPM. The Mustang weighs at least 700 lbs more than the S2000 CR and the S2000 CR has a lower frontal area and a lower Cd. The S2000 CR has the Bridgestone Potenza RE070 tires with a treadwear of 140 and the Mustang has the Pirelli tires with a treadwear of 220. Yet, the Mustang runs faster lap times in this test even though its heavier, has less grippy tires, has a larger frontal area, and more drag because it has a more torque over a wider RPM range. Just like the 1 Series M has more torque over a wider RPM range than the Boss 302 LS. The broad range of torque is even mentioned in the article as an advantage the 1 Series M has over many of the other cars in the test. Each car has its advantages and disadvantages.

If a manufacturer puts good tires on some of its limited production cars and some people don't like it then they should complain to the car manufacturers and not on forums. Back in 1999-2000 you could get the same ties on the Ford Escort, as part of a factory option package, that came standard on the BMW M3 and some Ferraris of the time period.


Also, no one competitive in autox runs PS2s b/c they're expensive and no where near grippy enough (we're talking street tire classes).


I never said they were a class leading must have tire, but for a true street tire they are pretty grippy and do well. Look at the SCCA and BMW CCA results from the events in the San Fran area from a few years back. There were quite a few people running those tires who weren't far off the pace of the hot street tire class tires of the time and some people using those tires had PAX times that were close to the fastest PAX times of the day.

[mcperson2k]

not quoting your whole post



Just admit the Boss has a huge advantage over the other cars in its class b/c it has R-Comps...even if they are a factory option.

Also, no one competitive in autox runs PS2s b/c they're expensive and no where near grippy enough (we're talking street tire classes).

Dude is the point of this test really flying that high over your head? factory factory factory

[JB'sLGT]

Each car has different things that give it advantages in different areas.

Alright. Since you're still avoiding it, you either don't know how much of an advantage R-Comps will give you at the track or you just won't admit it. Factory shmactory.



I never said they were a class leading must have tire, but for a true street tire they are pretty grippy and do well. Look at the SCCA and BMW CCA results from the events in the San Fran area from a few years back. There were quite a few people running those tires who weren't far off the pace of the hot street tire class tires of the time and some people using those tires had PAX times that were close to the fastest PAX times of the day.

Results from a few years ago can't be used today. Tire technology has changed too much. You also can't use results from a local region. There are huge differences in overall competition in local regions. You can have 5 great drivers at an event and 50 hamfists. If you want the most accurate results, look up the results from Nationals. Then you'll see what tires the best of the best are running.

[DaveSTi]

Also keep in mind how these results would vary from track to track. VIR is a big HP track.

[sean3]

A huge area under the curve for the motors power output or a fancy differential/stability control system is an advantage of the car. You can't really change that. Tires CAN and WILL be changed by anyone buying these cars to drive them hard. Anyone cross shopping the 1 M and Boss 302 (or anything else in their price class) will end up with the same tires regardless of which model they start with.

You can blame BMW for not putting a sticker tire on their car
You can blame Ford for sending a car they knew would out class the competition solely based on their OEM tire choice
You can blame C&D for knowingly using a car that has disproportionately sticky tires for its class

No matter where you point the finger, its an unfair test and completely useless. It provides no useful information to anyone considering buying some of these cars.

[jpalamar]

No matter where you point the finger, its an unfair test and completely useless. It provides no useful information to anyone considering buying some of these cars.

It is a comlpetely fair test. They are street legal cars that are stock. This isn't a test of potential but a test of what you can drive off the lot.

[Chris B.]

Alright. Since you're still avoiding it, you either don't know how much of an advantage R-Comps will give you at the track or you just won't admit it. Factory shmactory.


I'm not avoiding the issue. I'm stating that you are focusing on one narrow part of the overall package of each car. Each car has certain aspects FROM THE FACTORY that give it ADVANTAGES and DISADVANTAGES. Should we disable all the electronic differentials and electronic stability programs on all the cars? Should we limit the boost of the turbochargers on the forced induction cars in certain RPM ranges to give them the same power curves as the naturally aspirated cars?

If you don't like the way the test was run and the rules Car & Driver set up that's fine. You can rent VIR, get your hands on the cars, get the data logging system, hire professional drivers, and buy the same tires for every car, and run your own test.

Ford went by the rules just like every other manufacturer. They weren't stacking the deck. They were making a track ready production car.

http://media.caranddriver.com/images/media/377439/the-rules-box-photo-377459-s-original.jpg


Results from a few years ago can't be used today. Tire technology has changed too much. You also can't use results from a local region. There are huge differences in overall competition in local regions. You can have 5 great drivers at an event and 50 hamfists. If you want the most accurate results, look up the results from Nationals. Then you'll see what tires the best of the best are running.


Thank you Capt. Obvious!
http://zx2.org/riceboard/cptobvious.jpg

The Pirelli tires that come from the factory on the Boss 302 LS are an old design and many of the tires you see on the 302 LS have production dates in 2007 and 2008. Motor Trend's article even mentioned the same thing about one of the 302 LS models they tested. The 302 LS they tested had tires produced in 2008. The P Zero Corsa system tires were replaced by the P Zero Torfeo tires in 2009. The P zero Trofeo are comparable to the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup. The P Zero Corsa tires last 12,000-15,000 miles when used as a combined track day and daily driving tire. The Pilot Sport Cup and the P Zero Trofeo last5,000-6,000 miles on the same cars in the same conditions according to people who have used both tires. The P Zero Corsa tires are not some super sticky must have R compound tire. They are a second rate R compound tire or something that might be considered "baby's first R comp." In reality, they are a little better than the hot SCCA street tire class tires, but are not to be thought of as being in the same class a Hoosier R6 or Pilot Sport cup.

Again you didn't read what I said above. I stated that "for a true street tire they are pretty grippy and do well" and gave examples.I know there are certain tires that are the most competitive and the best to use. The San Fran region of the SCCA had quite a few people go to nationals over the years and the times people ran on the PS2's weren't too far off the top drivers from that region in the street tire classes. Basically they were less than 2 seconds slower per 60 seconds of course time when compared to the hot street tire class tires of the time period. They also are a soft grippy compound that seems last most drivers 15,000-20,000 miles. It proves my point that the PS2 is not a crappy tire. Its a very well performing true street tire and has been for a while.

[fitftw]

lol Miata came in last. Too many long straights.

[Chris B.]

Also keep in mind how these results would vary from track to track. VIR is a big HP track.

VIR's long course is a big HP track. VIR's grand course doesn't give as much as an advantage to big HP cars if they don't have very good handling. They lost quite a bit of speed in the infield Patriot course section and some of the other corners. For example, compare the lap times of iron block Shelby GT500's tested and the V6 Ford Mustang. The V6 Mustang GT was bouncing off the speed limiter for 14-15 seconds per lap and its lap times were 1.5 seconds slower than the first gen GT500 and 5 seconds slower than the newer version of the iron block GT500 with stickier tires.

[JB'sLGT]

Again you didn't read what I said above. I stated that "for a true street tire they are pretty grippy and do well" and gave examples.I know there are certain tires that are the most competitive and the best to use. The San Fran region of the SCCA had quite a few people go to nationals over the years and the times people ran on the PS2's weren't too far off the top drivers from that region in the street tire classes. Basically they were less than 2 seconds slower per 60 seconds of course time when compared to the hot street tire class tires of the time period. They also are a soft grippy compound that seems last most drivers 15,000-20,000 miles. It proves my point that the PS2 is not a crappy tire. Its a very well performing true street tire and has been for a while.

So if they're 2 seconds off the best summers at the time, that means they're at least 4 seconds off a race compound. 4 seconds is a lifetime on a 60 second course. Even 2 seconds is a lot.

It's not perfect (and by not perfect I mean add/subtract a couple tenths), but a lot of SCCA regions use .975 as a pax modifier for cars that wish to race street tires in classes that allow race tires. The pax assumes you are running extreme performance summer street tires which need to have a minimum of 140 treadwear to be eligible. Using this formula, the M1 has an adjusted time of 3.01.94 seconds, almost a full second quicker than the 302 LS and that's on the M1's second tiered summer tires.

And thanks for the picture. It was pretty funny.

[DaveSTi]

VIR's long course is a big HP track. VIR's grand course doesn't give as much as an advantage to big HP cars if they don't have very good handling. They lost quite a bit of speed in the infield Patriot course section and some of the other corners. For example, compare the lap times of iron block Shelby GT500's tested and the V6 Ford Mustang. The V6 Mustang GT was bouncing off the speed limiter for 14-15 seconds per lap and its lap times were 1.5 seconds slower than the first gen GT500 and 5 seconds slower than the newer version of the iron block GT500 with stickier tires.

You're putting WAY too much effort into this discussion. :lol::wink:

[nuTinmuch]

Was the Challenger the 392? If not, I'm a tad suspicious.

[Chris B.]

Was the Challenger the 392? If not, I'm a tad suspicious.

Yes, it was the SRT8 392.

You're putting WAY too much effort into this discussion. :lol::wink:

Yea, I guess I am.

[Chris B.]

So if they're 2 seconds off the best summers at the time, that means they're at least 4 seconds off a race compound. 4 seconds is a lifetime on a 60 second course. Even 2 seconds is a lot.


True, but its hard to find a true longer life daily driveable street tire that's much better than 2 seconds off a hot street touring class tire.


It's not perfect (and by not perfect I mean add/subtract a couple tenths), but a lot of SCCA regions use .975 as a pax modifier for cars that wish to race street tires in classes that allow race tires. The pax assumes you are running extreme performance summer street tires which need to have a minimum of 140 treadwear to be eligible. Using this formula, the M1 has an adjusted time of 3.01.94 seconds, almost a full second quicker than the 302 LS and that's on the M1's second tiered summer tires.


http://i383.photobucket.com/albums/oo276/coolaidgto/BenchRacing-1.png

I don't see how SCCA AutoX PAX relates at all to road course use. Its making way too many assumptions, especially with the wide variations in race tires and street tires and their performance on a track.

For example, the new Pilot Super Sports will run lap times very close to the Pilot Sport Cup tires on the same car for a few laps, then when the Super SPorts start to heat up, their lap times drop off. Some good street tires will run soem good lap times for a short period and others will last longer before they run into heat issues. The same can be said about R compound road course tires. I know a few guys that swap tires depending on the length of the race or time trial. Some will run an A6 on the road course for time trials hoping they can get in a couple good laps before the tires overheat and become worthless while others will run harder tires and hope for a few phenonimal clean laps in a 20 minute time trial session. Then there are other R comps that will last several hundred miels without issue, but won't ever run a lap time comparable to what an R1 or R6 is capable of.


And thanks for the picture. It was pretty funny.


I was hoping someone would get some humor out of this. THings may be getitng way too serious.

[Chris B.]

A huge area under the curve for the motors power output or a fancy differential/stability control system is an advantage of the car. You can't really change that.


You can change that depending on how much money you want to spend. adding a low boost turbocharger or supercharger to some cars will add quite a bit of power and change the shape of the power curve. You can also change cams, intake minifold, compression ratio, etc... You can also change the type of differnetial andsome cars do have some reprogrammable parts in their stability control and traction control systems. I can change the traction control programmign and the ABS programming in the Mustang through either a flash programmer or an aftermarket part or a part form another model of Mustang. I'm sure it can be changed in other cars too.


Tires CAN and WILL be changed by anyone buying these cars to drive them hard. Anyone cross shopping the 1 M and Boss 302 (or anything else in their price class) will end up with the same tires regardless of which model they start with.

You can blame BMW for not putting a sticker tire on their car
You can blame Ford for sending a car they knew would out class the competition solely based on their OEM tire choice
You can blame C&D for knowingly using a car that has disproportionately sticky tires for its class

No matter where you point the finger, its an unfair test and completely useless. It provides no useful information to anyone considering buying some of these cars.



You also have to consider who the cars are marketed to. The Boss 302 LS is marketed to people who will use the cars ont he track and Ford/Mustang enthusiast. Having some sticky tires on the car is a marketing/selling point for the car. With the 1 Series M, maybe BMW some sticky tires that last 12,000-15,000 miles wouldn't be as much of a selling point. I've seen well over a dozen different Boss 302's at various track days since July while I've only ever seen one of the BMW 1 Series M's at a track day since then. Maybe BMW got their tire choice right for their market.

I really wouldn't blame Ford for sending a car that met exactly what Car 7 Driver asked for, the most track capable factory options. If anything, I'd blame Ford for going cheap and getting ancient R comps made 3+ years ago instead of Pirelli's latest R comps.

[Chris B.]

This is one result that impressed me. It shows us how far technology has come in a short time.

Ford GT 3:0.7
Porsche Panamera Turbo S 3:0.7

A 4 door car that you can throw a couple baby seats int he back and fill up the trunk with groceries and it runs the same lap time as the Ford GT. :eek:

[amp]

one of the best tracks ive been in...
made a one lap video during warmup back in 05... good visual to the map posted..
dont mind the low res vid.. we didnt have the luxury of gopros or small digis back then..

check it here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQdRB3mrraA)

[sean3]

You can change that depending on how much money you want to spend. adding a low boost turbocharger or supercharger to some cars will add quite a bit of power and change the shape of the power curve. You can also change cams, intake minifold, compression ratio, etc... You can also change the type of differnetial andsome cars do have some reprogrammable parts in their stability control and traction control systems. I can change the traction control programmign and the ABS programming in the Mustang through either a flash programmer or an aftermarket part or a part form another model of Mustang. I'm sure it can be changed in other cars too.






Tires wear out. They're not a modification, they're a consumable. You can (and will) go to your favorite local tire shop and have new ones put on in an hour after your old ones wear out. You can't just "add a turbo" without running into issues with heat and dozens of other problems.

And the 1 M is a ///M car. Are they not meant for track use? Though I guess their actual buyers are mostly pretentious jackasses on BFC and other sites, but I digress... :-p

[nuTinmuch]

Tires wear out. They're not a modification, they're a consumable. You can (and will) go to your favorite local tire shop and have new ones put on in an hour after your old ones wear out. You can't just "add a turbo" without running into issues with heat and dozens of other problems.

And the 1 M is a ///M car. Are they not meant for track use? Though I guess their actual buyers are mostly pretentious jackasses on BFC and other sites, but I digress... :-p

There are a lot fewer of them, too.

[JB'sLGT]

I don't see how SCCA AutoX PAX relates at all to road course use. Its making way too many assumptions, especially with the wide variations in race tires and street tires and their performance on a track.

I was hoping someone would get some humor out of this. THings may be getitng way too serious.

I only used it as an example because someone used an autox example in an earlier post. lol It does have some merit though. I don't know of any other kind of timed racing where competitors use both racing compound tires and street tires.

I'm never too serious. We're just talking cars here. :)

[DaBombDiggidy]

same tire test would have been better, but this still isn't a bad benchmark.

oh and i <3 seeing the vette/viper over the GTR.

[jpalamar]

Tires wear out. They're not a modification, they're a consumable.

I would say tires are a modification. If I took my Mustang to the track and ran an insane 60' I wouldn't say my car was stock... it was stock with drag radials/slicks/ect..

By your thought process brakes would be a consumable and not a modification. But what about big brake kits? Isn't that kinda that same idea as sticky tires?

same tire test would have been better, but this still isn't a bad benchmark.

oh and i <3 seeing the vette/viper over the GTR.

Yea, the Vette and Viper are retarded good cars. Much better then they get credit for most of the time. They are just much harder to drive then a GTR. My next car will be a Viper GTS because it actually requires skill to drive :-)

[DaBombDiggidy]

I would say tires are a modification. If I took my Mustang to the track and ran an insane 60' I wouldn't say my car was stock... it was stock with drag radials/slicks/ect..

By your thought process brakes would be a consumable and not a modification. But what about big brake kits? Isn't that kinda that same idea as sticky tires?



Yea, the Vette and Viper are retarded good cars. Much better then they get credit for most of the time. They are just much harder to drive then a GTR. My next car will be a Viper GTS because it actually requires skill to drive :-)

late 90s GTS FTMFW i dont know why they even bothered making the rt-10s. IMO they were the last true muscle car.

&

sean is talking about strictly wear parts. big brake kits dont apply because you need an aftermarket caliper, now if every car had the same type pad that would be another way to level competition as well.

[jpalamar]

now if every car had the same type pad that would be another way to level competition as well.

But then you might as well say every car should have the same motor, or same suspenions... maybe even just test the same car over and over again.

[nuTinmuch]

But then you might as well say every car should have the same motor, or same suspenions... maybe even just test the same car over and over again.

Obviously the point of the test was to take stock vehicles out to a track and see what they can do -- this includes all the stock equipment, and so that's basically exactly what they did.

But at the same time I think it is reasonable to point out how silly such a test is because of variables that car manufacturers toss up in the air. This is basically the reason why all bench/magazine racing is stupid, though.

Because really and truly, anyone seriously concerned with how fast their car goes around a track is going to be replacing their tires, pads, fluid(s), and brake lines before ever letting their car touch hot asphalt. Not to mention an alignment.

Personally, I'd love to see a test that included everything above. It would be interesting to see just how much time the less hardcore cars picked up.

[Chris B.]

But at the same time I think it is reasonable to point out how silly such a test is because of variables that car manufacturers toss up in the air. This is basically the reason why all bench/magazine racing is stupid, though.


And everyone forgets that Randy Pobst driving the Miata around VIR's grand course could beat almost everyone on the forums here driving the 1 Series M around the same course. :lol: Most of the people here don't have the skill to use more than 90% of the car's potential on a road course.

[Chris B.]

Here are some scans of the part of article someone else posted up on another forum.

http://i.imgur.com/qRgsW.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ZHnRP.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/B7a9f.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/kKrS3.jpg

[nuTinmuch]

And everyone forgets that Randy Pobst driving the Miata around VIR's grand course could beat almost everyone on the forums here driving the 1 Series M around the same course. :lol: Most of the people here don't have the skill to use more than 90% of the car's potential on a road course.

You're being generous. He could drive a minivan around the course faster than most people here, myself included.

[mcperson2k]

I don't understand why everyone is ****ting their trousers. Its a FACTORY test... One of the reasons they do this is because the majority of sports cars sold, aren't ever modified. The majority of 1M owners will need new tires and go out and buy the factory default that is recommended for their car. I just don't understand why so many people on car forums don't realize that 99% of the things that go on in the auto industry, are for the masses... Not for the minority (YOU).

[sean3]

I would say tires are a modification. If I took my Mustang to the track and ran an insane 60' I wouldn't say my car was stock... it was stock with drag radials/slicks/ect..

By your thought process brakes would be a consumable and not a modification. But what about big brake kits? Isn't that kinda that same idea as sticky tires?





You're pretty much right about that. In the drag racing world, stickier tires are a mod. But ponder this:

Lets say hypothetically your Mustang and a Camaro with similar price/weight/power are being compared. The Camaro comes from the factory with E/T streets, and your Mustang has garbage summer tires. If the Mustang runs a 12.0@120 with a 2.0 60' and the Camaro runs an 11.2@118 with a 1.6 60', is the Camaro really the faster car? Would you consider that fair?

Pads and rotors are consumables. A big brake kit is a large modification. I didn't think about brake pads. Wonder how the 1 M and 302 LS OEM brake pads compare.

[Proven]

It's always fun to see your favorite type of car or manufacturer come out on top in a test like this. As car guys though, we all know that a test like this isn't the end all / tell all proof that your car (or fav.) is better. Track size, Track shape, DRIVER, seat time driver had in said model, etc etc. all play a role in the results. I also think it's fair to question things Tires and even break pads.

OP, I think because you have a Mustang and mentioned a couple times how the Mustang came out on top it's coming off like your using this as proof to your likings. Regardless, you do have a good point with how test's like this are great because it makes manufactures step things up!

[Chris B.]

I only used it as an example because someone used an autox example in an earlier post. lol It does have some merit though. I don't know of any other kind of timed racing where competitors use both racing compound tires and street tires.


If you read the section of the article I put up about the ZR1, the difference on the ZR1 between the Michelin PS2's and the Pilot Sport Cups was 1.1 seconds around VIR on the ZR1. Part of the reason may be that the test was run this year after there was several days of rain and the track was less "sticky" than previous years according to the article. People have raved about the PS2's for a while. Looks like they aren't half bad on a road course.


OP, I think because you have a Mustang and mentioned a couple times how the Mustang came out on top it's coming off like your using this as proof to your likings.


Anyone that knows me knows that I'm not a very brand loyal person or loyal to any particular make or model. If I was a Mustang/Ford fan, I wouldn't be telling all my friends to do LS motor swaps in their Subarus. lol I'd do an LS9 swap in the Mustang if it wasn't so expensive and wouldn't upset the weight balance too much. I also am a big fan of classic Porsches and also use to race in the various import/sport compact drag racing series that were so popualr 10 years ago. I also use to love my Oldsmobile.


Regardless, you do have a good point with how test's like this are great because it makes manufactures step things up!


I can't wait to see Brembo 4 piston calipers available as a factory option on the Chevy Aveo and Kia Rio!

[Chris B.]

You're being generous. He could drive a minivan around the course faster than most people here, myself included.

We need to set something up with Randy in a Minivan doing a lap around VIR trying to beat some random person's lap time in the 1 series M. Sort of like Sabine going around the 'ring on the old episode of Top Gear.

[nuTinmuch]

We need to set something up with Randy in a Minivan doing a lap around VIR trying to beat some random person's lap time in the 1 series M. Sort of like Sabine going around the 'ring on the old episode of Top Gear.

That would be hysterical.

Actually, that would make an excellent YouTube series or something. Random people from forums vs. a pro driver in a hilariously slow car.

[RWDTurbo149]

wow really suprised to see the genesis R-Spec beat the STI

My genesis was a turd, i cant imagine how it could possibly beat the STI. It handled awesome i just didnt think that awesome (plus the poopy tranny + choked stock power:bigeek:)

[Scapegoat]

this forum is funny... we don't get simple rules regarding factory option comparison laps...