+- Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org)
+-- Forum: Madison Motorsports (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Lounge (https://forum.mmsports.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Popular Mechanics Acceleration Nation 2 (/showthread.php?tid=501)
Popular Mechanics Acceleration Nation 2 - .RJ - 05-24-2004
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars_trucks/2004/5/acceleration_nation_2/index.phtml">http://www.popularmechanics.com/automot ... ndex.phtml</a><!-- m -->
(who remembers the first article?)
- Evan - 05-24-2004
bah, they called a street sequential box a manumatic
- BLINGMW - 05-24-2004
bah, that test is severely lacking. I don't see ANY e30's in there!
- .RJ - 05-24-2004
Thats because the lights would time out by the time one got to the end of the dragstrip
- PDenbigh - 05-24-2004
I have to gloat that the top two are either all Ford (well, in theory) or are powered by Ford. Yay!
- JackoliciousLegs - 05-24-2004
they only pulled a 4.58 in the z06... interesting...
- G.Irish - 05-24-2004
What that test tells me is that the Ford GT is making significantly more power than 500/500. It weighs 600 lbs more than the S7, has smaller tires (315 in the rear vs. 345 in the rear for the S7), and gives up 50 hp and 60 ft-lbs of torque to the S7 yet it is faster to 60 and only loses by .2 in the quarter? Ludicrous speed!
- G.Irish - 05-24-2004
Ferrari, when invited, flatly turned us down. We asked the folks from Maranello to bring a Ferrari 360 Stradale, a Ferrari 575 Maranello or a 650-hp Enzo--or all of them. But Ferrari's press officer told us, "Ferrari will no longer participate in any comparison tests." O-kay. Wimps.
Once again this why I can't be full-hearted Ferrari fan. They have a rich racing heritage and invariably make sexy, evocative, and fast cars but every now and then they act like elitist pompous pussies.
And for Porsche, why didn't they send a GT2?
- PDenbigh - 05-25-2004
G.Irish Wrote:And for Porsche, why didn't they send a GT2?
Yeah, good question. I often wonder what sort of pitch the testing companies have to make ot these manufacters to get these exotic cars.
- .RJ - 05-25-2004
G.Irish Wrote:What that test tells me is that the Ford GT is making significantly more power than 500/500
The numbers were updated to 550/550 I believe.
- BLINGMW - 05-25-2004
Pete, I often wonder too. And I can't really blame Ferrari for backing down and being "elitist pompous pussies". If some mag came to me asking to borrow a $200,000+ hand crafted car just so they could rag on it and "prove" something with a test that I already know the results of from much of my own (and probably more complete) testing, I wouldn't just hand over the keys. Especially when I know my work of art will be beaten by some supercharged American sled.
Although, apparently Lambo didn't mind subjecting their Gallardo to comments like:
"you'll have the satisfaction of knowing that your Vette trips the clocks with the same exact ET as the exotic Lamborghini, which costs more than three times as much."
Yeah, that does wonders for the marque. Maybe if Ford and Chevy want to RENT one of my supercars for a hefty price so they can pump up the image of their cars, I'd think about it.
AND DON'T GET ME STARTED on the tires. The biggest advantage to bringing all these cars together to do a test is remove the variable of the location and weather conditions. And of course, verification by a 3rd party is a good thing too. Oh yeah, and good pictures and bragging for a magazine article. BUT, why go through all that trouble just to run the test on whatever tires come on the cars? So:
A) You've completely thrown away the biggest advantage of bringing them together, you might as well have just compared someone elses #'s on paper. It would save a lot of $$ and time.
B) I'm never convinced any magazine that advertises for some of the cars they're testing is unbiased. Who really knows if #'s were massaged?
C) So we're left with the real reason the test is done. To get some good pics and interest from the readers of our magazine so we can justify our exsistance to our advertisers. Who really cares about making an unbiased test and eliminating variables when there's MONEY to be made!
I can only hope that the Ferrari that might have been subjected to this test was out conquering twisties instead. :wink:
- Mike - 05-26-2004
.RJ Wrote:G.Irish Wrote:What that test tells me is that the Ford GT is making significantly more power than 500/500
The numbers were updated to 550/550 I believe.
He, just a slight "update." I wish Honda would come out with a car and accidentally underrate it 50hp/50ft-lbs.
- G.Irish - 05-26-2004
BLINGMW Wrote:Pete, I often wonder too. And I can't really blame Ferrari for backing down and being "elitist pompous pussies". If some mag came to me asking to borrow a $200,000+ hand crafted car just so they could rag on it and "prove" something with a test that I already know the results of from much of my own (and probably more complete) testing, I wouldn't just hand over the keys. Especially when I know my work of art will be beaten by some supercharged American sled.
Actually now that you mention it Ferrari didn't have much to gain from this test. They're not making anymore Enzos so its not like they have any interest in giving them one. And I'm sure they figured the 360 CS would get smoked in a straight line comparo like this one. I guess I don't like Ferrari's attitude of "If we're not gonna win we're not gonna play". I suppose for a small manufacturer like Ferrari getting into horsepower/top speed/acceleration wars is not a good business strategy.
But no comparos with Ferraris again ever? I guess that's so insecure Ferrari owners will always have an excuse when they lose to a cheaper car. All I have to say is if I owned a F-car I wouldn't care that I got rolled by an Evo in my F355, I'd still be going home with his girlfriend.