Manifold

If you look at their speeds through the climbing esses (see other thread), they were moving pretty fast. But I agree that you need a good pro in the driver's seat for a comparison of the cars rather than car/driver combos, along with taking care to check alignments, optimize tire pressures, equalize track conditions, etc. I look at these lap time comparos as being ballpark, at best.

Just in time

For me probably more important than time results are the qualitative conclusions of the testers. These comparisons are no better than the testers. The cars are not really comparable. That is why there is Balance of Performsnce adjustments when these cars compete in the same racing series. For real numbers we need pros with real knowledge of each car charactesristics. Feel, however, is a subjective thing. I suggest we hone in on what the testers think about the cars more than on absolute numbers, although I recognize these results probably approximate the deltas pros would come up to without BOP. How to compare a blown large V8 with a smaller displacement NA engine?

ShakeNBake

I think what you can read into it is that some cars are harder to drive than others - speed comes from confidence.

Just in time

Absolutely correct. In sports when the stars fail a discussion about lack of confidence usually ensues. I happens in every sport be that golf, tennis, baseball, etc.

kfmcmahon

no, but the Cup cars and GT3R do.

The point is a most on here have pointed out, the supercharger, while good for 10-20 laps at a DE (or fewer laps in the case of the 1.7 roots type in the Z06) is not ideal for racing. The C7R (and the C6R & C5R before them had a 5.5 L NA pushrod V8)....never forced induction.

ShakeNBake

Lots of turbos are racing. The reason you don't see a supercharger application is that they are less efficient fundamentally. There is nothing about a SC that provides a benefit to a race car when the cost and packaging opportunity would lead you to a different solution (more rpm, higher displacement, turbos). The reason a SC gets useds is because there is a constraint that forces your hand. I.e I have an E90 M3 and I want more power....it's really easy to bolt a SC onto an existing design without fundamentally changing the characteristics of the original goals.

kfmcmahon

Yeah I got it, I don't want to get in any arguments and I think the ZR1 Sc is great for what it is, but was just pointing out that the Corvette racing team that has won so many LeMans, ALMS and now Tudor races is not the same engine as was implied earlier

I agree turbos are better suited for racing

ChicagoM4

Why would having pro drivers in the seat make the results any more relevant? The majority of us are not pro drivers but would benefit from easier-to-drive cars if it is lap times that we are concerned about. Obviously, the results are highly variable and are not conclusive due to the drivers, track used, conditions.... but hey, it sells magazines.

I would love to have a gt3 over any other car on the list, 991 or 997 for that matter, because of all sorts of variables... Not just a lap time

Mvez

I look forward to the RS lap time....

ShakeNBake

Yes, I subscribe to your thinking. What car is the most fun to drive, and what car will i be able to drive the fastest.

However - people were measuring member length in this thread based on the ultimate speed of a car, and my point was that you can't compare without a pro driver, especially in the timeframe allotted to the exercise.

Good example - we had an event in Texas where Andy Lally was the center stage - he would drive your car, allow you to ride and record data to learn where you might be able to gain some speed. He clocked a 1:49.9 in my RS, which at the time bested my triumph of 1:50.3....and that was within 3 laps of getting into my car COLD. Since then I have been able to get a couple seconds faster that his best time, but that is the culmination of a couple years, and that experience with Lally.

I put more stock into Motortrend's efforts to compare with Randy Pobst driving. Car & Driver is not a group that I hold in high regard in terms of driving skill. But they are a good indication of what mortals will experience.

trev0006

Good point.

MaxLTV

Because most amateur drivers are not consistent enough to drive any conclusions from lap times. These cars are often within 2-3 seconds of each other, and that's less than a difference between tired and non-tired amateur. On top of that, non-pro drivers could be much better in one car but much worse in another because they have a "style" that's better for a particular car and cannot adapt to every car they drive equally. The latter point applies to pros as well, just to a lesser extent.

allans

^^^ THIS.

turbo8765

Do you have data on the consistency, or lack thereof, of the pool of drivers used for the LL test?

Keith Verges - Dallas

While the GT3 can be run harder and more consistently on track esp with higher ambient temps, I was surprised at the delta with the Z06. And the configuration they used removes a lot of the hp effect of the run from Oak Tree. Chevy made sure their car shone