The Truth About 'Ring Times?

[Blue Menace]

I ran across this article over on the svtperformance forum. Very interesting read.

http://www.speedsportlife.com/2008/1...itter-porsche/

[Bad@ssCamaro]

Awesome read and interesting perspective on this whole 'ring times. I guess this means we should all abandon the hype associated with it and expect more of an apples to apples comparison to the competition from the manufacturers. I like the idea of how Porsche sought out to improve their vehicles from one year to the next, but I would think that is what all of the successful manufacturers seek to do in order to maintain foothold or increase marketshare in their perspective markets.

I'm pretty sure that most of us bench racers like to see our vehicles being associated with numbers that are achieved at the 'ring just to give us extra bragging rights, but the final decision to purchasing a car comes down to satisfying several criteria. And at least for me, aesthetics, handling and performance on the street come first at a price that is reasonable.

[ffrcobra_65]

So I was told there in no third party involved to certify/verify the car and the time it ran so how can anyone believe anything legit about a ring time. Besides the cars, most cars, that ran there were "pre-production" cars so who knows. For the time to be valid, get a friggin third party involved, test a car that is from a showroom floor, that's it. Otherwise, those bragging about "ring time" are just grasping.

[Rangore]

Interesting read

[ffrcobra_65]

Thr article is an awakening for some.

[rez333]

Oh, but 99% of those on ZL1 forums would swear the ZL1 'ring times were like, totally legit.

[truth411]

Originally Posted by rez333

Oh, but 99% of those on ZL1 forums would swear the ZL1 'ring times were like, totally legit.

Great article, and yes some car companies cheat( Nissan, Porsche), but thats totally not from what I have seen from GM, they dont BS around about the abilities of there performance cars. Also amongst all the manufacturer's there the most consistently transparent and releasing video. So while I agree with the article, I still think GMs ringtimes are real, probably same goes for Ferrari. I think we can all agree with the ZL1 VIR laptime.

[ffrcobra_65]

Originally Posted by truth411

Great article, and yes some car companies cheat( Nissan, Porsche), but thats totally not from what I have seen from GM, they dont BS around about the abilities of there performance cars. Also amongst all the manufacturer's there the most consistently transparent and releasing video. So while I agree with the article, I still think GMs ringtimes are real, probably same goes for Ferrari. I think we can all agree with the ZL1 VIR laptime.

Define real when there are technically no rules and no third party to watch over things. So do you think an actual production ZL1 can actually repeat the same lap time?

[truth411]

Originally Posted by ffrcobra_65

Define real when there are technically no rules and no third party to watch over things. So do you think an actual production ZL1 can actually repeat the same lap time?

I agree that some manufacturers are suspect, but I am personally unaware of GM BSing about the capabilities of its performance cars. They do release video, claim the specs are the same bar the roll cage for safety of course, they use their own test engineers not a pro race drivers. So yes I do have a innocent until proven guiltily mindset, so it means yes i do think a stock ZL1 can reproduce a very similar time with the same driver in similar conditions, but to your point all these laptimes are technically not verifiable. See what I'm saying.

[ParisTNDude]

I read the article in it's entirety and didn't find anything that would invalidate the claimed times of any of those who posted "record runs". I'm absolutely certain that if you could buy a couple weeks time on any track and drive it often enough, you could post a very respectable time for your car and it's supposed class, especially if you had the equipment and staff as well as a good driver. It's very much the same as someone posting very fast 1/4 mile times on a track that a car much more powerful and capable couldn't beat in it's attempts. Why? Different track different day, different driver capabilities, mood...etc, etc. If you saw the times posted by those "record" runs and don't understand the variable factors involved in running the lap, different day, climate, time of day and track condition you need a little more knowledge of the subject. However, when running a lap on any road course, oval track or drag strip, starting from a dead stop at any given point on the track and running a lap to that same point or through the lights, should give you an indication of the car's capabilities, especially if the same protocol was used by others and their results are known. NASCAR does that several times a week. I think the article failed to give credit where it was due regardless of which car ran the lap. I ran about 20 laps on the "ring" and it holds a pretty special place in my auto experience memory...to say that running fast on the ring doesn't mean anything, kinda bothers me. I was curious what Jack Baruth's qualifications were for writing the article and, googling, can't find that he's the greatest road course driver or champion of anything. As a matter of fact several of the articles I read called him a "troll"...great reputation! Just my opinion

[Blue Menace]

Check this out:
http://75.125.242.10/view/i3aki

He seems more experienced than 99% of the other posters on this forum.

[ParisTNDude]

Whoo, hoo, 4 podium finishes in a Ford Focus and a BMX racer. I read that and kinda discounted it as lacking in experience. I don't really call that well qualified to discount anyone's Nurburgring lap record...sorry...my honest opinion.

Read this where he's called " A professional internet troll" by Jalopnik.
http://jalopnik.com/5881961/new-moto...internet-troll

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by rez333

Oh, but 99% of those on ZL1 forums would swear the ZL1 'ring times were like, totally legit.

They are relative at least to all other GM efforts. Can't say what legitamacy is there for other manufacturers. GM is giving you their apples to apples comparison. So Corvrtte to Camaro or even CTS V or even Cobalt SS Turbo are all relative numbers.

[CamaroSkooter]

I don't like the constant battle of who's-got-the-best-'ring-time shenanigans because the numbers themselves don't mean anything to a normal person buying a car. Someone says a car ran a 7:29 lap time. Okay. And? Why do I care?

If you want bragging rights, go to a track and race and get your own personal best. Otherwise, you're simply bragging about someone else's lap times at a track you'll probably never be allowed to drive on anyway. Wow. Congrats. I'll go give that other guy a pat on the back and tell him, "good job!" You, on the other hand, just look like a tool.

And considering all of the times that have been "recorded" have been posted during private testing after who knows how much tuning and track prep were put into the vehicle, how applicable does anyone really think those numbers are to the off-the-shelf vehicle available on the showroom floor?

Until someone puts together a list of criteria for testing, and uses a reliable third-party validation method, it's all just a bunch of chest thumping and over-inflated egos.

If car companies want any legitimate numbers to tout, here's what they should do:

1) Take an off-the-production line vehicle for testing.
2) Use 93 octane gas only.
3) Don't touch anything on the vehicle. This means:
a) no electronic tuning.
b) no suspension modifying.
c) no roll cages.
d) no modifications that would normally void any of the vehicle's warranties.
4) If multiple sets of tires are needed for testing, the tires can only be the exact same brand and model that come on the vehicle from the factory.
5) the only thing they are allowed to change is the driver.

I think that would make the times make a lot more sense.

But that'll never happen, and we're going to continue to see ridiculous times set by vehicles that are no more stock than the "stock" cars used in NASCAR.