Gumpert Coming Out of Nowhere!

[clutch-monkey]

good point, if the gumpert is tricky then it may have had a freak lap, lol. the viper might be slower but perhaps it is consistently achieving it's times.

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by clutch-monkey

good point, if the gumpert is tricky then it may have had a freak lap, lol. the viper might be slower but perhaps it is consistently achieving it's times.

True. I think that's where the longer laps can help a little, but really "the fastest car" is so dependant on specific tracks and drivers and conditions that people are always going to complain about inconsistencies. Still I don't think you'd be short of volunteer drivers for these enduro comparisons.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by wwgkd

That adjustable aero and suspension is from the factory and 100% US street legal. The version they ran is in fact the version sold here that you can drive on the street, despite what fanbois on teh internets are saying (not meaning you, there's a lot of that going around and it's easy to get confused.)

I am not saying the adjustable aero and suspension by themselves are not street legal. I'm saying that components on the splitter as used for the 'Ring test have been deemed illegal in some parts of the US. I'm not going to delve into the federal motor vehicle code, but perhaps there are laws regarding parts of the car extending a certain distance beyond the leading edge of the bumper; these laws could be designed for pedestrian safety purposes.

From the C&D test:
"For the street, [Chrysler engineer Jeff] Reece unbolted the front splitter (illegal for the street, it removes easily with eight bolts and fits under the hatch)..."
I would be amazed if C&D came to the conclusion that the splitter was illegal all on their own.

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by Guibo

I am not saying the adjustable aero and suspension by themselves are not street legal. I'm saying that components on the splitter as used for the 'Ring test have been deemed illegal in some parts of the US. I'm not going to delve into the federal motor vehicle code, but perhaps there are laws regarding parts of the car extending a certain distance beyond the leading edge of the bumper; these laws could be designed for pedestrian safety purposes.

From the C&D test:
"For the street, [Chrysler engineer Jeff] Reece unbolted the front splitter (illegal for the street, it removes easily with eight bolts and fits under the hatch)..."
I would be amazed if C&D came to the conclusion that the splitter was illegal all on their own.

Ah, I see what you're saying. That's correct, but it's a little part that comes standard with the car and easily bolts and unbolts. It's not like it's that big, either, it just fills in a little dip in the splitter. Here it is with and without that bolted on. Minor details.

[Badsight]

Originally Posted by clutch-monkey

not really
with a track that long it's impossible to differentiate which car is better when the times are within seconds of each other
too many variables.

no

the Ring is a long track & is very bumpy & uneven , it shows real world road ability far better than short tracks

with its length , an easy to push car is going to have a great time & a difficult to drive car is going to have a horrible time

short distances dont show the difference enough

[pimento]

Originally Posted by Badsight

no

the Ring is a long track & is very bumpy & uneven , it shows real world road ability far better than short tracks

with its length , an easy to push car is going to have a great time & a difficult to drive car is going to have a horrible time

short distances dont show the difference enough

The variables don't come from the track, they come from having different drivers, different levels of track knowledge, different weather conditions, all that sort of stuff. As far as the track goes, it would be a good way to show real world ability.. all else being equal.

[clutch-monkey]

Originally Posted by pimento

The variables don't come from the track, they come from having different drivers, different levels of track knowledge, different weather conditions, all that sort of stuff. As far as the track goes, it would be a good way to show real world ability.. all else being equal.

exactly. it's a ridiculous benchmark. something only the most retarded of benchrest racers use as a valid measurement to distinguish cars that are seconds apart

[wwgkd]

Originally Posted by clutch-monkey

exactly. it's a ridiculous benchmark. something only the most retarded of benchrest racers use as a valid measurement to distinguish cars that are seconds apart

I'll admit that if they're only a couple seconds apart I generally call it a draw, but what do you suggest as a better alternative? Not many track are as well known or respected world wide, so how do you choose which one track will be the benchmark? There's always going to be variables, one car will run much faster (relatively) on a tighter course than a more open course, or vice versa, so saying which car will be fastest on any course by using one course is futile anyways. And judging the "street performance" is also futile since none of the cars being discussed could be run anywhere near their limits on public streets in anything even remotely resembling a safe manner. It's just jello wrestling; an entertaining way of ranking cars that doesn't really decide which one you want to take home.

[Ferrer]

How many people here race cars?

I'm guessing not many. Therefore, what's the point of having the absolute fastest lap time?

[clutch-monkey]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

How many people here race cars?

I'm guessing not many.

yup
off the top of my head, track regulars;
Matra
Charged
pokey (i think?)
that viper guy
frederik

that's all i remember for now, out of hundreds of users?

[Ferrer]

Originally Posted by clutch-monkey

yup
off the top of my head, track regulars;
Matra
Charged
pokey (i think?)
that viper guy
frederik

that's all i remember for now, out of hundreds of users?

I meant race, not track. On that basis only Fred and charged AFAIK.

My point is, lap times are for racers. For the rest of us mere mortals they are a bit meaningless.

[clutch-monkey]

Originally Posted by Ferrer

I meant race, not track. On that basis only Fred and charged AFAIK.

My point is, lap times are for racers. For the rest of us mere mortals they are a bit meaningless.

that's true. and neither of them are using late model cars either - older, much lighter stuff.

[henk4]

I recently did my first lap around the Ring, it was on my bicycle and it took me 1 hour and about 15 minutes (distance 28 km). There are some quite steep climbs there.

[Matra et Alpine]

^^^^^^^^^ picsorban

I also race, hillclimb and rally. Classics mainly, but also a few outings with the RX-8 -- yes including a full on gravel stage !!! yikes

I also do some track tuition and have an apartment at the 'Ring.

What relevance are ring times ?
Nowhere near the top of the list of things to have in a car ( road or competition ).
BUT, I think the value of the 'Ring times are

1. Proves the car IS capable and has few vices ( or at least small enough to be surmounted )
2. Increases confidence of car for daily use ... why ? Because "proper" 'Ring testing puts on lots of miles stressing suspension and other components, so improviong things for road use.
3. It's great for internet debates
4. It attracts drivers to want to bring their cars and see how they do. ( sic. )

as said, tho', it's jsut a number and once you get with 10-15 seconds of each other it's moot. If looking at it from a road use persepctive I'd even suggest getting within 1 minute is enough

I view it like bhp/litre. An insight into other things but not a true metric.

[clutch-monkey]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

I view it like bhp/litre.

that's a good way of putting it.