[mjk3888]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

Your mom.

HAHA! Well played sir!

I bet the V6 1LE could outrun the GT350R if it had sport cup 2's on it.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Egon

The fact is that this is not bogus data. It is data and it is relatively good data at that. Most of these cars would never be compared to one another in a head to head basis sponsored by a media outlet since it would be silly to compare a Dodge Viper ACR directly to a Ford Focus RS and write an article about it that made sense. Also it is sometimes impossible to compare different cars built in different years in a same day same driver test. The older car may no longer be available in stock form or it could be in disrepair and people would argue just as loudly about that invalidating any test. How are we to compare the new Acura NSX to its predecessor from the 90s? They probably don't make the stock tires it came with from the factory anymore, does that invalidate the comparison? The 91 NSX didn't have sophisticated traction control like the new one does, does that invalidate any comparison? Are car manufacturers suppose to keep pristine examples of every car they make in a glass cases that say "incase of test brake glass" just to satisfy your rigorous testing methods?

I won't attack you personally on this, but you are creating an impossible to meet testing criteria and your stubbornness to admit that fact is why others are focusing on your user name as the reason you refuse to see this. The reality is that the C&D Lightning Lap is one of the best resources out there for historical comparison between cars, there really is nothing like it out there anywhere else. Is it perfect, certainly not, but we can make educated assumptions from the data they bring us from their testing. It is controlled, accurate and unbiased and gives us the chance to compare vehicles that normally would never have been compared otherwise. If you refuse to accept that then there will be people here and elsewhere that will attribute that to bias on your behalf and if so that is honestly on you.

In the end, if you don't believe that the V6 1LE is faster around VIR than the Mustang GTPP (or whatever cars we are talking about) then give us EVIDENCE to back up what you say, don't just throw out silly reasons to invalidate the Lightning Lap results.

Originally Posted by Gen5er

Very well said.

Couldn't have said it better, myself.

[6spdhyperblue]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

HAHA! Well played sir!

I bet the V6 1LE could outrun the GT350R if it had sport cup 2's on it.

if it had twin turbos it probably could beat the ferrari

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by mjk3888

HAHA! Well played sir!

I bet the V6 1LE could outrun the GT350R if it had sport cup 2's on it.

[Thor142]

I think MustangFanBoy is our most entertaining member by far.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I think MustangFanBoy is our most entertaining member by far.

Agree. Lively conversation

[SS 1LE]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I think MustangFanBoy is our most entertaining member by far.

But you know, fan boy or not, he doesn't become a turd wanker when people bust his chops, I must respect that.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Thor142

I think MustangFanBoy is our most entertaining member by far.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by SS 1LE

But you know, fan boy or not, he doesn't become a turd wanker when people bust his chops, I must respect that.

I expect heavy chop busting. You don't last long in this world without thick skin.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

Is it too much to ask for a magazine to hire a pro driver on staff for testing? I don’t think so. It seems like Randy Pobst is on Motortrends books and is the one doing the head to head laps. Why can’t these lightning laps be the same? There is enough noise in the lightning laps to add up to 5 or more seconds per lap. Simply changing the driver can account for several seconds.

Again, some of you can look past the noise and make a reasonable assumptions, but in the end…they are just that, assumptions. Many more of you take magazine times as gospel. I myself obviously do not.

You're making some fundamental mistakes in your definitions and assumptions.

Professional = paid to do a job. In this context, paid to hot-lap cars
Amateur = goes broke doing a hobby

You can be an amateur racer, a professional racer, an amateur enthusiast, and in this case of C&D, professional driving journalists. Whether you *like* that definition or not is totally irrelevant. You cannot bend definitions to suit whatever agenda you prefer.

C&D's editors, by the precise definition, are professional drivers. You're making an assumption they do not also do competitive racing, like Randy Pobst. Competitive racing does not make you a professional, by definition, however Randy is competitive, journalist, and professional. Therein lies your assumption errors. If they were wearing a fire-suit, you'd very likely not be discounting their laps.

To go further, having several drivers vying to post the quickest lap is a very good method to ensure you're extracting the most out of each car. Like you said, not every driver meshes with each car, so having a handful of drivers and picking the quickest lap is exactly what Lightning Lap is all about.

Nobody said you had to like it, but that's how it is.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Ryephile

You're making some fundamental mistakes in your definitions and assumptions.

Professional = paid to do a job. In this context, paid to hot-lap cars
Amateur = goes broke doing a hobby

You can be an amateur racer, a professional racer, an amateur enthusiast, and in this case of C&D, professional driving journalists. Whether you *like* that definition or not is totally irrelevant. You cannot bend definitions to suit whatever agenda you prefer.

C&D's editors, by the precise definition, are professional drivers. You're making an assumption they do not also do competitive racing, like Randy Pobst. Competitive racing does not make you a professional, by definition, however Randy is competitive, journalist, and professional. Therein lies your assumption errors. If they were wearing a fire-suit, you'd very likely not be discounting their laps.

To go further, having several drivers vying to post the quickest lap is a very good method to ensure you're extracting the most out of each car. Like you said, not every driver meshes with each car, so having a handful of drivers and picking the quickest lap is exactly what Lightning Lap is all about.

Nobody said you had to like it, but that's how it is.

You're not getting it. They don't get paid to lap cars. They get paid to write articles. If they don't write the article, they get no money.

Their end goal isn't to push the vehicles past the edge and back off slightly. They are doing the best they can with the limited skills they have acquired. This is someone who does stand up comedy once a month for fun but is a mortgage broker during the day. They're likely terrible comedians, but great brokers.

You are pushing magazine editors into the role of professional driver when they aren't, they are magazine editors. If they lost their job today, no-one would hire them as a professional driver to set great lap times, they would hire them for their editorial skills.

Edit:
I won't reply to this anymore, as we are obviously at an impasse.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

2016 Car & Driver VIR Lightning Lap videos.....enjoy!!!

1LE V6

1LE SS

GT350R

C7 Grand Sport

ACR

One thing that can be said about this test is that the Viper ACR is a nasty sob.

[Ryephile]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

You're not getting it. They don't get paid to lap cars. They get paid to write articles. If they don't write the article, they get no money.

Their end goal isn't to push the vehicles past the edge and back off slightly. They are doing the best they can with the limited skills they have acquired. This is someone who does stand up comedy once a month for fun but is a mortgage broker during the day. They're likely terrible comedians, but great brokers.

You are pushing magazine editors into the role of professional driver when they aren't, they are magazine editors. If they lost their job today, no-one would hire them as a professional driver to set great lap times, they would hire them for their editorial skills.

Edit:
I won't reply to this anymore, as we are obviously at an impasse.

The only thing I don't get is why you're insisting on confusing definitions. I'm afraid the impasse is inside your brain. You're getting hung up on "professional" when you're trying to say "competitive". All you have to do is admit they're getting paid to drive cars as the foundation for their story. They can't write a story or post videos if they don't drive the cars. It's hand-in-hand. Would you prefer they wrote a story without driving anything? Would that satisfy your definition of "professional"?

You also need to admit that you haven't spent any time looking them up to see if they are *also* competitive race drivers. Making an employable judgement call on their racing skills based on ignorance doesn't hold water.

End of the day, C&D's been doing this for a decade. Motor Trend is doing their version at Laguna Seca with Randy Pobst, Top Gear uses a few different Stig's over the years, and everyone laps the 'ring.

I agree you need to drop the topic, because it really can't go anywhere from here. You don't like Lightning Lap, nothing more for you to write here.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

You're not getting it. They don't get paid to lap cars. They get paid to write articles. If they don't write the article, they get no money.

Wrong, they get paid to lap cars AND write articles about the cars they lapped. If they don't lap the cars, they can't write an article about it, and they don't get paid. THEY ABSOLUTELY get paid to lap cars. This is not a matter of opinion. Tony Quiroga got paid for driving these cars. He was not off the clock doing it in his spare time.

Their end goal isn't to push the vehicles past the edge and back off slightly. They are doing the best they can with the limited skills they have acquired. This is someone who does stand up comedy once a month for fun but is a mortgage broker during the day. They're likely terrible comedians, but great brokers.

Again, WRONG!!!
Race car drivers DO NOT push the vehicles past the edge and back off slightly. The don't go past the edge at all. If they do, they lose time, and then they lose the race. Watch a race and listen, you won't hear or see the cars (the top fastest ones anyway) going past the edge of grip. If they do, they lose. It is incredible how these race car drivers can approach and reach the limit of the car WITHOUT going even a slight bit past. BUT, the reviewers spend a great deal of time pushing the car a little bit past the limit. They do it to evaluate the handling characteristics.

In addition, your analogy is completely inaccurate. The mortgage broker can do his job without ever telling a joke, and he does't get paid to do so. Tony CAN NOT write his article without driving the cars. It's impossible. Phony analogy!

You are pushing magazine editors into the role of professional driver when they aren't, they are magazine editors. If they lost their job today, no-one would hire them as a professional driver to set great lap times, they would hire them for their editorial skills.

Again, WRONG! They are professional drivers whether you like it or not. And the magazines are not going to hire someone to lap a car and write about it if they don't have major driving skills. In fact, the editors that are chosen for this specific task are most certainly chosen for their driving skills over their writing skills. If you have read anything in the last 20 years, you will see the quality of professional writing has gone downhill. If a guy is an amazing driver, and a so so writer, they will hire him. You can always have someone else help him with the writing part, but no one can help him drive the car. If a guy is a so so driver, and an amazing writer, they probably won't hire him, or they will put him on economy car or pickup truck reviews. They are not going to choose him to set a totally lame laptime and then write about it.

I understand your desire to have a pro race car driver do the tests, but intentionally understating the driving experience and capabilities of a guy who has gotten paid to set more hotlaps then all of us combined is a fail. Stephen King is a great writer, but no one is offering him a job setting hotlaps for a car review. Like it or not, these editors were chosen for their driving skills, not writing skills.

[devildog1679]

No excuses great time for the V6 but if you think for a minute that you can compare past times to current times you are smoking some serious stuff. Different drivers and days is enough to add or subtract a few seconds. As a perfect example the 2012 Caymen R posted a 3:03.9. This is a car with 330HP and weighs 2,900. Do you honestly think the Camaro with the same HP but weighing in at 600 more can beat it around VIR? I do own a 2012 Mustang but am going in next week to add to my collection a SS. I've owned both Mustangs and Camaro's over the years. Yes the new SS will trounce on my 2012 5.0 but to think the new V6 can beat the new 5.0 is laughable.