I just finished the article on the Viper/GT2/GT-R/Corvette previously talked about in this forum. But reading the results, Out of the four categories
3 are ones the matter Chassis, Powertrain, and Experience. Porsche won all three of those categories. ALL THREE. And finished SECOND!

The remaining category VEHICLE Porsche lost to the GT-R. That category had the IMPORTANT column of
BACK SEAT SPACE!!!!! the Nissan got 5 points to Porsches 0 to Corvettes 0 to the Vipers 0! These are TWO seat cars. I dont buy one of the most expensive cars in the world based on the rear seat space. its TOTALLY irrelevant!
TRUNK SPACE was another important category!. That whole Section should be renamed. The Categroy Car And Driver uses to FIX the results in ANY way
C&D would care to have the result come out! I am surprised they just dont call it the C&D FUDGE factor column! Just blows me away that they even expect us to believe this crap. If this mag and R&T wasnt free to me for being in the industry I wouldnt even open up the damn thing thats best used for bird cage bottoms.
I guess I am glutton for punsihment, my own fault?

 

Excellent points....I didn't pick up on that.

 

JT they have been doing it for years and really it should be called the

Lets RIG the Test

column

 

I still read them from time-to-time (not so much anymore since I've found the perfect car) but I stopped getting bummed out about if my car is not on top a long time ago. Let's face it, anybody who can afford to buy a GT2 can have just about any car they want so there must be a reason for buying a "#2" car. Based on the car mag reviews back in '00/01 I thought about selling my 996TT and getting a Z06 or a Viper. They both seemed like much better deals based on the $$$ and perf numbers. Drove them both. Didn't like the Z06 at all. The Viper was a joke. Both blunt instruments that get the job done but can't come close to the shear pleasure of driving a Porsche. It's hard to quanitify that kinda stuff. Plus, as you point out, they weigh in factors that don't mean anything to somebody looking at these types of cars like rear seat room, fuel economy, yady yada yada.

 

Roland I hear ya. I drove a VIper GTS for a day once a couple years ago
and my feet were screwed up for a month!!! with that offset pedal crap in the
viper I kept hitting the brake in my Porsche for awhile everytime I pressed the
accelerator. DOnt drive a Viper unless youre going to buy it!!

 

About car mags; just read the British EVO and the German Sport Auto

(With Sport Auto you do not need the knowledge of German, just check the numbers they provide - in every supertest they test each car very extensively compared to others and there is a lot numerical data provided)

 

Kaizu thanks for the tips. I will check them out.

 

EVO is the best and C&D the worst. My favorite category C&D uses is the 'gotta have it' factor. What kind of BS is that?

 

I just like to look at the pictures and go over data for comparison sakes. Their subjective evaluations and opinions mean **** to me.

 

Gentlemen, for a $4.50 cover I don't expect Pulitzer Prize winning authors, and by the amount of ads in that rag, I think he with the most ads wins any test.

 

The way I see it, most car mags are now written for the sheep. People that really don't have much of a clue and don't get a chance to drive these cars.

I used to have a tiny bit of respect for Auto Journalists. Now that I have seen many of them drive cars, I have none.

These people are paid to write. 99.7% of them can't drive and have no business describing the handling of a high performance vehicle.

They would be much better off going the Top Gear route in having a Stig involved any time a high performance car is tested. They can then tell them what to write.

Some of the mags seem to get it as the frequently employ real race driver to do some of their tests...

My real pet peeve is their spy information. No one ever goes back and hold them to the fire for all of the BullSh$t they spew about future cars that they really know nothing about....

Cheers!

 

you're reading these mags with the wrong attitude. you expect a fair and unbiased treatment, when you should be reading it as if it were a WWF program! after getting body slammed and triple-teamed, the GT-R shakes it off and pins all of them!

 

My favorite -SPORTS CAR MARKET -hands down, it's the old Alfa Letter. ALL around car mag for those of us who like old cars and the auction scene!

 

Also known as their "Fudge factor" so that they can ensure BMW wins every comparo...

 

I'm a HUGE fan of car mags. It's the only thing I have to get an idea on how cars perform to help me purchase. I just:

1. Ignore the subjective stuff and study the numbers.
2. Compare numbers from R&T,C&D and MT on road tests taken on cars that have been out for a while (i.e., to avoid the GT-R problem). Do not use their "First Drive" numbers.
3. Check performance numbers over several issues of each mag.
4. Ignore track times... there are too many variables with the different drivers and track conditions.
5. Concentrate on acceleration times greater than 60 MPH. For example, MT has:

Scuderia

0-60: 3.1 sec
0-100: 7.1 sec
1/4-mile: 11.2 @ 126.7 MPH

CGT

0-60: 3.6 sec
0-100: 7.3 sec
1/4-mile: 11.1 @ 133.4

Does that mean a Scuderia is faster than a CGT? Yes, if you both start from a dead stop and try 10 or 20 times for the fastest 0-60. No, if you both start from 60 in the right gear and floor it. 60-100 in the CGT is 3.7 and the Scuderia is 4.0. Also, the 1/4-mile end speed is nearly 7 MPH faster in the CGT. So, in a race starting at 60, the CGT will clearly pull the Scuderia.


With this, I think you'll find accurate acceleration and skidpad numbers. I've spoken to the test guys at these magazines many times, and the acceleration and skidpad tests are done very carefully and many times for each car. They don't make up the numbers.

After buying my cars, I'll race them against others on the track and find very similar results to the mags.

BUT, keep in mind, that cars today are VERY close. Even two cars, that differ by 1 second or more in the 1/4-mile, or .5G or more on the skidpad, can seem nearly identical on the road or track depending upon the driver's response time, skill, etc. I was at Willow Springs a few years ago, and a guy in a STOCK Nissan 350Z blew away all the Porsches and Ferraris lap after lap. He's been driving the track for 20+ years, and there was no way we could beat him. So, I usually only use the published Nurburing times as a rough guide. If cars are within 10 seconds of each other after 8 minutes of CRAZY FAST driving, I take that as being nearly identical. I've seen cars spaced by 10 seconds on the ring perform nearly identical to each other on the road and track with drivers having similar skills.