Supra Forums banner

1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Wobbiest: Three Laws Safe
Joined
·
6,137 Posts
I am surprised at the MS3 and 335 numbers. Great showing from those two. But quick is dead on.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,466 Posts
unless they are all on the same tire it's a ridiculous comparison.
Werd.

:lol: at BMW and their rediculous 42K dollar price tag. Looks to me like the EVO 9 MR is the best bargain of the bunch. 280 very tweakable hp, AWD, 4 doors, an awesome list of hardware (Brembos, BBS wheels, Recaro seats, Bilstein shocks?, carbon fiber wing, adjustable drivetrain, etc etc) a decent size trunk and a warranty. All for under 40K.
 

·
Champagne Papi
Joined
·
5,697 Posts
I'm still laughing from my last motor trend issue... Mazda speed 3 beat the s2k around laguna seca by 1/2 second:lol:



edit: nvm this is the issue
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,582 Posts
I was somewhat surprised at the strong negative comments they made about the new ZO6 ...or maybe considering it's Motor Trend, I shouldn't have been surprised.
 

·
Saved
Joined
·
643 Posts
As quick stated, even the playing field with the same tires for them all and the outcome will be much more realistic. Personally, I think that if the tires on the Z06 were better then the crappy run flats it has from the factory, it would be on top, even if the editors didn't think so. It already trails right behind the GT3 with the tires it has on. Subjectively, it might be more difficult to control, but fast is fast, and if with a new set of tires it beat the GT3, then there would be a new winner. Of course that's entirely subjective, and as they stated in there, the GT3's cup tires came like that from the factory, so it's fair game.

Josh
 

·
Aspiring viking
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
I thought the article was OUTSTANDING. They documented and measured a ton of very cool items that I've never seen in a magazine test before. There were over 15 different attributes that they measured.

Statistically, using all of their criteria except the subjective editor's pick, the Mini Cooper is the best value with the 3rd lowest price but the 4th best total points. The Evo was 5th most expensive as tested with a 5th place showing in total points. There was generally an inverse relationship between price and total points (and likewise the Laguna Seca track times), which should be intuitive.


As for the tires - this was a comparison of stock cars as delivered from the factory. Arguing that Motor Trend should supply a spec tire to "even the playing field" is silly. Why stop there - why not add some boost to the Evo and a reflash to the 335i? And maybe some coilovers for the MS3 and a supercharger for the S2000 while you are at it?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,170 Posts
As for the tires - this was a comparison of stock cars as delivered from the factory. Arguing that Motor Trend should supply a spec tire to "even the playing field" is silly. Why stop there - why not add some boost to the Evo and a reflash to the 335i? And maybe some coilovers for the MS3 and a supercharger for the S2000 while you are at it?
That is not an apples to apples argument and is almost a red herring.

If you want to measure the handling of a platform you should remove as many variables as possible. Equalizing tires is a significant way to do so.

Their methodology is definitely interesting. Their use of 'stock' tires (rather than a spec street tire) waters down this comparison to the point of near irrelevance to me. But hey -- they're so worried about their advertiser base it changes their focus IMO.
 

·
Aspiring viking
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
If you want to measure the handling of a platform you should remove as many variables as possible. Equalizing tires is a significant way to do so.
Their argument - and I believe it is completely viable - is that the tires are a part of the platform. If you want to be disappointed in someone for the tires on a particular vehicle, you should be looking at any of the manufacturers that supplied an "inferior" tire.

Or, you could just take the results for what they are: a ranking of the best handling examples of the short list of 100% stock vehicles represented, based on the criteria they listed. With that in mind, it is not unreasonable to say that the Cooper was the "real winner" based on value or the Z06 was the "real winner" based on how well it performed despite being handicapped by the manufacturer with shitty run-flats, or the Evo was the "real winner" because its performance would have moved past the other top finishers with some coilovers and basic bolt-ons while still costing significantly less. Ad nauseum.

But hey -- they're so worried about their advertiser base it changes their focus IMO.
How do you mean? It's an enthusiast magazine that is largely geared toward factory, stock production cars. They do their "tuner car" bits every now and then, but unlike the boutique magazines like Turbo, SCC, Modified, etc that is not their bread and butter.

On top of that, which spec tire should they have chosen? Should all the entrants have to ride on run-flats? Move up to the GT3's Michelins? How about Kumho MXes or BFG KDs because they are a more popular choice? What if one particular model of tire doesn't cover the whole spectrum from the Cooper's 205/40-18s all the way up to the Z06's 325/30-19s? :1poke:
 

·
Saved
Joined
·
643 Posts
I think for the equal tire argument "ideally" would be a good word to place in it. As Mr. Thorsen said not too many tire companies provide their highest performing tires in all sizes. However, all thoughts of impossibility in equalizing aside, i do believe that ideally it would be best to put them all on the same tires. In terms of actually determining true chassis and engine potential, a good set of tires can make the car, or in the case of low performance tires, break the car.

Josh
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,170 Posts
Their argument - and I believe it is completely viable - is that the tires are a part of the platform.
Yep -- I know that's their argument. I just think it's a ricidulous one. I always purchase better tires for my cars when I acquire the car.

Having a spec tire allows for a much more objective meansurement about which car is "best handling".

IMO to declare a car with r-compound tires as the "best handling" car over the rest on street tires is at best disingenuous.

If the tire were truly part of the platform then why is there a spec tire in organized racing? Equality and fair comparison. Isolation of variables. Etc.

With that in mind, it is not unreasonable to say that the Cooper was the "real winner" based on value or the Z06 was the "real winner" based on how well it performed despite being handicapped by the manufacturer with shitty run-flats, or the Evo was the "real winner" because its performance would have moved past the other top finishers with some coilovers and basic bolt-ons while still costing significantly less. Ad nauseum.
Those are fundamental characteristics of a car. Tires do not fall in that category. I'm sorry, but your argument here is not apples to apples.

On top of that, which spec tire should they have chosen?
I'll leave that determination to someone who has the time and money to define and execute a proper comparison test. I understand you disagree strongly with me, but trying to change the subject isn't taking away from my points.
 

·
Aspiring viking
Joined
·
1,842 Posts
If the tire were truly part of the platform then why is there a spec tire in organized racing? Equality and fair comparison.
I would argue that the spec tire is comparable to restrictor plates, pop-off valves, weight limits, turbo restrictions and all sorts of artificial limiters to performance used by sanctioning bodies to try and keep dissimilar platforms on a relatively level playing field.

True equality and fair comparison does not exist in any form of motorsport that I can think of - and I worked for the Skip Barber Pro Series (a spec form of open wheel racing).

Putting all the performers on a level playing field was not really the point of this article, as evidenced by the inclusion of a Civic Si and a Porsche GT3 in the same test.

I understand you disagree strongly with me, but trying to change the subject isn't taking away from my points.
Fair enough - you feel that testing 100% stock, as-delivered cars puts the results of the article "near irrelevance" and "ridiculous." You seem to suggest that, were you to own a Porsche GT3 or a Lotus Exige or an Evo, you would immediately replace the stock tires with something else.

I disagree with your points.

I do agree that using a spec tire could have made the results more meaningful, or that testing on stock tires and then a spec tire would have been great, or testing a stock and modified version of each platform would have been even better, etc. I still think it was a great article with viable results given their outlined parameters. :wavey:
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top