GM is making some good stuff lately.

[Jeff]

Considering Chevrolets wonderful record of reliability, coupled with the fact that their new batteries for the volt still catch on fire....Not sure its the car for me. The reason that the Prius is even going plug in is so that Chevrolet doesn't give plug in cars a bad name in terms of safety.

LOL, c'mon Jason they're not that bad. Chevy's been doing electric cars since before toyota lost their balls.

Pwned.

[ViPER1313]

Just finished reading an article in Car and Driver where they pitted a ton of cars against each other at VIR. A stock 260hp Cobolt SS beat out a SC Lotus Elise, Evo MR, Honda S2000 CR and BMW 135i. At a price point of $24000.

[ScottyB]

At a price point of $24000

i've been hearing of people getting even better deals than that, like 22k for a loaded one.


on another note, what do you guys think about this bailout possibility? sounds like GM will be pulling out of NASCAR and the truck series as well...

[Steve85]

At a price point of $24000

i've been hearing of people getting even better deals than that, like 22k for a loaded one.


on another note, what do you guys think about this bailout possibility? sounds like GM will be pulling out of NASCAR and the truck series as well...

Not a big fan, it looks like they need to buy some time though...
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/com...2008021207

Cliffs notes...current per hour labor cost to GM is $78 in a few years it will be as low as $25 under the new contract with UAW.

$53/hr * 2080 hrs * 66000 emp = savings of ~$7.3B a year for US operations. These savings are 2 years away.

However, 2007 loss was $38B. So even after cutting US labor costs by 2/3, you are $31B short of profit.

Hourly line workers are not responsible for the value, design and quality engineered (or lack thereof on all 3) into a model that drives the sales volume.

Bailing out a company that needs to be revamped from head to toe is a bad idea. I realize they are currently in that process but I am sick of hearing that "it's the unions fault".

Under bankruptcy I think the current contract could become null & void or heavily modified allowing them to dismiss senior employees faster and cheaper. Probably why Pelosi / Frank are supporting it, not so much for the company but to protect the union workers.

[HAULN-SS]

Do you think it's the current line workers who are the major cost, or the already retired ones? Does that money all come from the same place eventually?

[BLINGMW]

A stock 260hp Cobolt SS beat out a SC Lotus Elise, Evo MR, Honda S2000 CR and BMW 135i.

This sounds rigged to me. The tires on the other cars were crap or the drivers sucked. No way. Link to the article anywhere?

[Mike]

A stock 260hp Cobolt SS beat out a SC Lotus Elise, Evo MR, Honda S2000 CR and BMW 135i.

This sounds rigged to me. The tires on the other cars were crap or the drivers sucked. No way. Link to the article anywhere?

yeah... what was their ring time, anyway?

[Steve85]

A stock 260hp Cobolt SS beat out a SC Lotus Elise, Evo MR, Honda S2000 CR and BMW 135i.

This sounds rigged to me. The tires on the other cars were crap or the drivers sucked. No way. Link to the article anywhere?

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_...08_feature

I read the same article a few days ago.

[BLINGMW]

thanks for the link. And just as I suspected, no mention of controlling variables, no mention of whose driving what, what the temperatures were, or if they were all on the same day, or anything. And big surprise, as usual, they didn't bother to control the largest variable, tires. As soon as I read this, I stopped:

"The naturally aspirated Elise (190 horsepower) that ran at VIR in 2006 scampered around the 4.2-mile course in 3:09.2 versus 3:16.6 for the supercharged version.
That earlier Elise was equipped with wider and stickier tires, which offset the SCÔÇÖs extra punch."

So yeah, put the good tires on the SC Elise and it would have wasted the Cobalt. Better yet, make some attempt to put everyone on similar compound tires with sizes the same or close to factory sizes, and it might have been a worthwhile test. But no-one does that (other than GRM). They act like the tires that come from the factory are a permanent part of the car. And the manufacturers know this, so ship the Cobalt with some decent tires that don't last particularly long and make some compromises in NVH and you win. Another useless, but expensive, test.

[Evan]

that VIR article is a gigantic pile of flaming poo.

I really dont know why anyone reads the car rags anymore to be honest.

[Hunter]

Better yet, make some attempt to put everyone on similar compound tires with sizes the same or close to factory sizes, and it might have been a worthwhile test. But no-one does that (other than GRM). They act like the tires that come from the factory are a permanent part of the car. And the manufacturers know this, so ship the Cobalt with some decent tires that don't last particularly long and make some compromises in NVH and you win. Another useless, but expensive, test.

Agreed x eleventybillion

The tires are an enormous variable that gets completely ignored. If you send the car out with some sticky tires it has an enormous advantage. On the other hand, cars like the 135 or 335 come with those TERRIBLE run flat tires, whose motto seems to be: "if the traction's bad enough in the first place, there will be no perceived loss of traction with a flat tire!"

Anyone know what kind of tires the Cobalt comes with?

[ScottyB]

Anyone know what kind of tires the Cobalt comes with?

continental contisport's IIRC

[Steve85]

Wow...I don't see the problem..Lotus apparantly went with skinnier less sticky tires and it went slower, that's what happened, that's what they wrote.


If they are looking to compare cars how they come from the factory why would you change tires?

Corvette BASE w/Z51 and run-flats...5th overall.

I think the point of the article is being missed.
It wasn't a test to see of the Lotus was faster than a Cobalt (for example), it was...

We want to see how well a wide ­variety of performance cars combine their various dynamic elements in absolute terms in a controlled environment.

Controlled environment for the car, not between tests of each car. The controlled environment is the track, as opposed to highways and bi-ways. I thought that was pretty clear...It doesn't matter what one car had versus the other.

It was not an effort to determine which of these cars would make the best track car with years of racing and sticky tires.

It's not a perfect test but none are. Once you start modding (tirese included) then you start getting into the whole problem of price difference not allowing a fair comparison.

I mean if you want to put Hoosiers on the Lotus and the Cobalt then the Cobalt also gets upgrades equal to the value of the difference in price and now they need to weigh the same, so on and so on...

Oh... and I normally only read one car mag and it does not do "road tests" but in this situation I had a choice of Car and Driver, Womans World and Bass Fishing something or other...

[D_Eclipse9916]

They also didnt include wether they were still at manufacturer rated tire pressure. I loled in a Car and Driver I found the other day where they did a skidpad test, a stock gsx did .85g on the skidpad, changed tire pressures and they got .89 on the shame shitty 215s that came on the car stock.

I forget what the corvette of the time jumped up from, but it wasnt as much of a dramatic difference, but still was worth at least .2gs from what I Remember just changing the pressures.

[Maengelito]

its the last page in the article:

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/features_classic_cars/the_lightning_lap_2008_feature+page-24.html">http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot ... ge-24.html</a><!-- m -->

The cars featured here are all unmodified production vehicles, but we did request models equipped with performance-enhancing options such as larger brakes, stiffer suspensions, and the best wheel-and-tire packages. After filling each car with premium fuel, setting tire pressures to the manufacturersÔÇÖ recommended numbers, and checking the oil, we mounted a Racelogic PerformaceBox GPS-based data logger on the windshield to record lap times and other figures. The three drivers were Tony Quiroga, Tony Swan, and Larry Webster. Each was assigned several cars. Weather has a pronounced effect on vehicle performanceÔÇöa car runs faster when itÔÇÖs 70 degrees than when itÔÇÖs 90ÔÇöso the drivers cycled through their cars twice, running three to five laps per session. The lap times are the best each car produced in either session.

[CaptainHenreh]

That sounds reasonable.

I don't think GM offers a hoosier tire package out of the box.

[BLINGMW]

I think the point of the article is being missed.
It wasn't a test to see of the Lotus was faster than a Cobalt (for example), it was...

We want to see how well a wide ­variety of performance cars combine their various dynamic elements in absolute terms in a controlled environment.

OK. But no-one wants to know that. The average joe reads the article and goes, "DAYUM, the cobalt is faster than a supercharged lotus!" And then people go quoting it on forums. Like this one. It's a disservice to the community. Much more useful would be "which car is the fastest around VIR equipped with some decent Z rated tires like anyone would suit them if they actually owned one and cared about performance"? Just because one manufacturer happens to make a package with some better tires than another shouldn't be allowed to shadow all the actual engineering differences between the cars.

[WRXtranceformed]

Engineering differences aside, I think it's perfectly valid to compare cars with equipment that can be obtained from the factory on an off-the-showroom car. It doesn't take anything away from the Cobalt at all, in fact I'm surprised if the Chevy equips Cobalt SS's with better tires than an Elise. That's a very surprising avenue for a carmaker to cut corners on considering the Lotus is really only known for its cornering ability...

[Hunter]

Like Channing said, tires are always viewed as part of the car in these tests, but as enthusiasts, we know the tires have a huge effect on a cars performance and they are changed frequently during the life of a car. How many of us run the stock tires when we're on the track?

My point being, if you are going to treat the comparison as one for car enthusiasts, rent out a track for a weekend, use professional drivers, break lap times broken down by sections, and compare the times to the tenth of a second, why not fix the variable that could make a 5+ second difference in lap times? I'm sure someone would love the free publicity of making their tire the official car and driver test tire.

I just think the car makers design and build the car, not the tire, and I'd love to see tests that reflect that without a hidden tire test built in.


edit: I just noticed they actually aren't professional drivers, which would make me want to develop some kind of driver correction formula that compares times in similar cars, then weights the time obtained by a particular driver in a particular car. Maybe break it down by FWD, RWD, AWD, high power, low power, heavy, light, etc. You could even find a probability of a time being the fastest time that car was capable of that day!

Whoa... I blacked out... the nerdy side took over... sorry about that.

[WRXtranceformed]

Like Channing said, tires are always viewed as part of the car in these tests, but as enthusiasts, we know the tires have a huge effect on a cars performance and they are changed frequently during the life of a car. How many of us run the stock tires when we're on the track?

My point being, if you are going to treat the comparison as one for car enthusiasts, rent out a track for a weekend, use professional drivers, break lap times broken down by sections, and compare the times to the tenth of a second, why not fix the variable that could make a 5+ second difference in lap times? I'm sure someone would love the free publicity of making their tire the official car and driver test tire.

I just think the car makers design and build the car, not the tire, and I'd love to see tests that reflect that without a hidden tire test built in.

I see your point, but then the car isn't stock anymore. Why not swap a turbocharger or supercharger pulley at that point, or open up the exhaust? I'd be willing to bet that a lot of enthusiasts that take cars like these to the track and actually go to the length of swapping out to R-compounds are probably swapping out other stuff in their cars as well, unless they're racing in a class that doesn't allow it.

That possibility aside though, when you give everyone the same tires they aren't stock anymore and it completely throws that whole comparison of the cars out the window. You are then testing yes, the engineering of them but this isn't the point of that test. Who the fuck would want a Cobalt over an Elise? Who would argue that the Elise isn't a better engineered car? Nobody. But the point remains that the SS did beat it in a track comparison because GM decided to equip it with better tires from the factory (unless they supplied a ringer, which is possible for those crooked mag tests) and in stock form, which again is the purpose of the comparison, this makes it a faster car.