2015 Car and Driver Lightning Lap Results
09-12-2015, 11:33 PM
#31
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.
The C&D tests show what a fast and seasoned HPDE driver might be able to do with one of these cars where as the MT tests with Randy show what a pro can do.
Even then, the C&D testers are pretty quick. Jim Mero ran a 2:41 in much cooler conditions on a track he's test muled many times on a car he developed where as the C&D crew in 100 degree weather and hot swapping cars managed a 2:44. Pretty respectable I'd say. Scaling that to Thill, you're looking at a 2 second delta.
Just because it's not Randy doesn't mean they can't drive.
09-12-2015, 11:55 PM
#32
Without that, I might trust your opinion about how well the power windows work.
Seriously, I am talking about measuring the maximum capability of a car - and even then it gets all mixed up due to setup, maintenance, etc.
What these shootouts do measure is the ability of common joes to drive the car fast. And again, I'm not surprised, it takes a lot more skill to drive a 911 fast, even with the nannies, steering and an automatic.
09-13-2015, 01:15 AM
#33
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: West Vancouver and San Francisco
Posts: 4,186
Received 1,149 Likes
on
567 Posts
Both tests have value.
The C&D tests show what a fast and seasoned HPDE driver might be able to do with one of these cars where as the MT tests with Randy show what a pro can do.
Even then, the C&D testers are pretty quick. Jim Mero ran a 2:41 in much cooler conditions on a track he's test muled many times on a car he developed where as the C&D crew in 100 degree weather and hot swapping cars managed a 2:44. Pretty respectable I'd say. Scaling that to Thill, you're looking at a 2 second delta.
Just because it's not Randy doesn't mean they can't drive.
The C&D tests show what a fast and seasoned HPDE driver might be able to do with one of these cars where as the MT tests with Randy show what a pro can do.
Even then, the C&D testers are pretty quick. Jim Mero ran a 2:41 in much cooler conditions on a track he's test muled many times on a car he developed where as the C&D crew in 100 degree weather and hot swapping cars managed a 2:44. Pretty respectable I'd say. Scaling that to Thill, you're looking at a 2 second delta.
Just because it's not Randy doesn't mean they can't drive.
Just as an example - I could drive M3 on mosport within ~1 second of a pro given same tires, and I was within just 2.5 seconds of Randy on my M3 the very first time I drove laguna seca (with just regular summer tires and alignment, so same stock car), but I'm probably more than 5 seconds off a pro's pace in GT3. Why? Because I'm not a pro, and I drive the way I know how to drive and not necessarily the way it's best for a particular car. That's why I think lower skilled even very fast drivers may be inconsistent of favor certain cars. Better than nothing, of course.
09-13-2015, 01:35 AM
#34
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 12,439
Received 3,791 Likes
on
2,193 Posts
I was not trying to diss C&D drivers - just responding to the question why amateur drivers are not good testers.
Just as an example - I could drive M3 on mosport within ~1 second of a pro given same tires, and I was within just 2.5 seconds of Randy on my M3 the very first time I drove laguna seca (with just regular summer tires and alignment, so same stock car), but I'm probably more than 5 seconds off a pro's pace in GT3. Why? Because I'm not a pro, and I drive the way I know how to drive and not necessarily the way it's best for a particular car. That's why I think lower skilled even very fast drivers may be inconsistent of favor certain cars. Better than nothing, of course.
Just as an example - I could drive M3 on mosport within ~1 second of a pro given same tires, and I was within just 2.5 seconds of Randy on my M3 the very first time I drove laguna seca (with just regular summer tires and alignment, so same stock car), but I'm probably more than 5 seconds off a pro's pace in GT3. Why? Because I'm not a pro, and I drive the way I know how to drive and not necessarily the way it's best for a particular car. That's why I think lower skilled even very fast drivers may be inconsistent of favor certain cars. Better than nothing, of course.
