[whiteboyblues2001]

It looks to me as though the C7 GS ran in a light rain. That makes it's time even more impressive!

You wanted to know the track conditions, and if things were equal? It looks like that the GT350R and C7 GS were run in conditions that favored the GT350R (because it wasn't raining), and it still got killed by the C7 GS, same driver, same course, same year, but it rained on the Corvette.

That C7 GS is amazing!

[shaffe]

Wow the GS was flying!!!!!!!!

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

These guys are not amateurs. They are professional drivers because they get paid to drive. Not professional race car drivers, but they are professional drivers none the less. They have been driving professionally for decades, and when the magazines do these tests, they usually use the more/most experienced drivers they have to get the most accurate results. To call them amateurs is not at all correct. They drive for a living, and they drive performance cars in performance situations a heck of a lot more than the rest of us. Even the most dedicated track rat doesn't have near the experience that these guys have. Why? It's their job, they do it for a living, which makes them a professional, btw.

They ARE armature drivers. Driving is not their profession, writing is. They don't get paid to drive, they get paid to write. They are no more a professional driver than a sportscaster is a professional athlete.

Are they better than you or me, most certainly. That in itself doesn't negate the fact that they are amateurs. It’s difficult for professionals to put up consistent lap times on a daily basis, let alone yearly. Throw in different amateur drivers years apart…you get the picture.

[Thor142]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

They ARE armature drivers. Driving is not their profession, writing is. They don't get paid to drive, they get paid to write. They are no more a professional driver than a sportscaster is a professional athlete.

Are they better than you or me, most certainly. That in itself doesn't negate the fact that they are amateurs. It’s difficult for professionals to put up consistent lap times on a daily basis, let alone yearly. Throw in different amateur drivers years apart…you get the picture.

OK listen if you're going to be a magazine racer you have to take what you can get from the Magazines. Not pick out what you like and then complain about tires or drivers or whatever when you don't like a result.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

They ARE armature drivers. Driving is not their profession, writing is. They don't get paid to drive, they get paid to write. They are no more a professional driver than a sportscaster is a professional athlete.

Are they better than you or me, most certainly. That in itself doesn't negate the fact that they are amateurs. It’s difficult for professionals to put up consistent lap times on a daily basis, let alone yearly. Throw in different amateur drivers years apart…you get the picture.

Your analogy is not at all accurate. No sportscaster gets out on a pro field and performs sports activities. They watch from the sideline and write about it. The auto reviewers in questions, GET PAID TO DRIVE the cars, and then write about their experience. The don't sit in the sidelines of the track, watch pros drive, and then report on it. COMPLETELY 100% DIFFERENT!!! When you get paid to drive, you are by definition, a professional driver. Even truck drivers are professional drivers. No, they aren't professional race car drivers, but they are professional drivers none the less.

But these car reviewers (the ones used to test the cars) will have significantly more experience at driving around a track than any amateur. Calling them an amateur is not at all accurate. And not only can they drive the cars, they can look for aspects of the vehicle's performance and articulate them in a written article. That is their profession, and that is what we need. Can a race car driver be faster and a bit more consistent? Yes. But these reviewers have been hotlapping, day after day, year after year, in cars of all makes and models, in all kinds of conditions, and they do it for their profession. They have decades of experience under their belts that can tell us a ton of great information. It just so happens, that this is the kind of information that we need.

To call them an amateur is a gross over exaggeration.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Thor142

OK listen if you're going to be a magazine racer you have to take what you can get from the Magazines. Not pick out what you like and then complain about tires or drivers or whatever when you don't like a result.

Take what you can get...as long as it's good data. I've said it all along. Them being amateurs in it's own right doesn't bother me.

[Mr. Wyndham]

???

Randy Pobst?

EDIT: Nevermind...wrong magazine. Nevertheless....what more valuable information would a professional driver's time provide? A hero time? Nobody buying these cars are "professional" drivers by any account. So what they're providing is the number a really, really, really good driver can provide on the same track with all of these hundreds of cars. That is invaluable. Whether they are "professional drivers" or not is moot, besides the point, and totally dependent on the definition one uses for "professional".

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

Your analogy is not at all accurate. No sportscaster gets out on a pro field and performs sports activities. They watch from the sideline and write about it. The auto reviewers in questions, GET PAID TO DRIVE the cars, and then write about their experience. The don't sit in the sidelines of the track, watch pros drive, and then report on it. COMPLETELY 100% DIFFERENT!!! When you get paid to drive, you are by definition, a professional driver. Even truck drivers are professional drivers. No, they aren't professional race car drivers, but they are professional drivers none the less.

But these car reviewers (the ones used to test the cars) will have significantly more experience at driving around a track than any amateur. Calling them an amateur is not at all accurate. And not only can they drive the cars, they can look for aspects of the vehicle's performance and articulate them in a written article. That is their profession, and that is what we need. Can a race car driver be faster and a bit more consistent? Yes. But these reviewers have been hotlapping, day after day, year after year, in cars of all makes and models, in all kinds of conditions, and they do it for their profession. They have decades of experience under their belts that can tell us a ton of great information. It just so happens, that this is the kind of information that we need.

To call them an amateur is a gross over exaggeration.

These guys are no more a professional than I am. I have years of experience in the 1/4 mile and thousands of passes. Am I a professional? Hell no. To say such would be an insult to those that do it for a living.

These amateurs can not extract the performance needed in all vehicles, plain and simple. The car that is easier to driver will be quicker...but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the quicker car. This is the difference between them and the pro's. The Pro's are able to extract every ounce of performance out of the vehicles.

In the end, it's these guys jobs to write sell magazines. They don't get paid to drive cars, they get paid to write articles.

You can argue with me until you're blue in the face...I'm not budging on this one.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

???

Randy Pobst?

EDIT: Nevermind...wrong magazine. Nevertheless....what more valuable information would a professional driver's time provide? A hero time? Nobody buying these cars are "professional" drivers by any account. So what they're providing is the number a really, really, really good driver can provide on the same track with all of these hundreds of cars. That is invaluable.

A pro driver would provide consistency that can only be found with those that have the years of experience and training. It's the only way for a good comparison.

What happens when you have a "really good" driver put lap times up last year and a "really really really good driver" put up lap times this year? Consistency.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

A pro driver would provide consistency that can only be found with those that have the years of experience and training. It's the only way for a good comparison.

What happens when you have a "really good" driver put lap times up last year and a "really really really good driver" put up lap times this year? Consistency.

You're debating tenths of a second displayed in a magazine, and creating a pointless debate besides the point.

This isn't a race/competition...this is a simple comparison for you and I, the average driver. If the journalist drivers can provide a tolerable level of consistency, then validity is maintained...understanding that this is a magazine, and not an FIA release.

Some pro drivers are not consistent...some are bulls...yet they are "pro" because they get paid to do it.

I've never really understood the desire for the robot-like consistency in lap times. It will not matter in the real world.

I go to Gingerman Raceway nearly every year....this year I was down almost 10 seconds off of last years times...not sure if it was my equipment setup, tires, heat, or me...could have been all four....but ultimately, I was working on the technique of the line for that track...Once I got it together, I was pretty consistent in that day alone. Does that make me a pro driver?

Relax....The point of this article, and this thread...is to highlight just how fast these cars are capable of going...And there's no doubt - they're damn quick!

[mcsoul]

Watching the 570s and 488GTB laps with the speeds they are capable of, I started to think I would need to wear an adult diaper to drive a car that fast on VIR.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

These guys are no more a professional than I am. I have years of experience in the 1/4 mile and thousands of passes. Am I a professional? Hell no. To say such would be an insult to those that do it for a living.

These amateurs can not extract the performance needed in all vehicles, plain and simple. The car that is easier to driver will be quicker...but that doesn't necessarily mean it's the quicker car. This is the difference between them and the pro's. The Pro's are able to extract every ounce of performance out of the vehicles.

In the end, it's these guys jobs to write sell magazines. They don't get paid to drive cars, they get paid to write articles.

You can argue with me until you're blue in the face...I'm not budging on this one.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

I didn't say or even imply that the magazine guys are on the same level as a professional race car driver. But your analogy is completely inaccurate. By your analogy, a guy who never went down the 1/4 mile track but sits on the sideline and writes about it, has the same skill level as you. My point is, that is not true. If you put 1000s of passes down on a 1/4 mile track, you are better than folks that haven't. Plain and simple.

But to call these drivers amateurs and the same as a guy on the sidelines is not at all a fair analogy. They drive stock performance cars for a living with the purpose of being able to articulate in an article how the car performs and how it compares to others. Isn't that the skill set we are looking for??

It really doesn't matter at all which car Randy can drive faster unless you plan on hiring him to drive you around all day. By your own words, you will never be able to do what he does. What we need as consumers, is an objective evaluation of the performance characteristics of these vehicles, and how they compare to one another. As it turns out, that's exactly what the reviewers do for a living.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

You're debating tenths of a second displayed in a magazine, and creating a pointless debate besides the point.

This isn't a race/competition...this is a simple comparison for you and I, the average driver. If the journalist drivers can provide a tolerable level of consistency, then validity is maintained...understanding that this is a magazine, and not an FIA release.

Some pro drivers are not consistent...some are bulls...yet they are "pro" because they get paid to do it.

I've never really understood the desire for the robot-like consistency in lap times. It will not matter in the real world.

I go to Gingerman Raceway nearly every year....this year I was down almost 10 seconds off of last years times...not sure if it was my equipment setup, tires, heat, or me...could have been all four....but ultimately, I was working on the technique of the line for that track...Once I got it together, I was pretty consistent in that day alone. Does that make me a pro driver?

Relax....The point of this article, and this thread...is to highlight just how fast these cars are capable of going...And there's no doubt - they're damn quick!

I'm talking seconds, not tenths.

You're point highlights mine about the importance of testing on the same day.

I'm not arguing that an amateurs times aren't valid given the same day...I never had a problem with that. It's most likely MORE reflective of what our capabilities would be in said vehicles. I'm not arguing about the times posted by the same driver on the same day.

For the very last time, I have a problem with different amateurs recording laps in different years and all of you somehow thinking those times are the gospel...when in fact, we have no idea what a true head to head would be. Pro drivers would reduce some of this noise, but it still would be largely invalid when comparing runs on different days.

What a pro driver would give you would be what the vehicle is capable of, period.

[RLHMARINES]

GM has definitely raised the bar with this 6thgen Camaro performance wise, bar none.
Chevy has moved each model up to the next level performance wise from the previous generation.

The 6thgen V6 1LE is the equivalent to the 5thgen SS on the track performance wise.
The 6thgen SS is the equivalent to the 5thgen 1LE performance wise.
The 6thgen 1LE is close to being the equivalent to the 5thgen Z/28 in most cases performance wise.

The upcoming ZL1 and Z/28 will set new performance benchmarks when the numbers are released and cars are tested.

Long live GM Performance..Long live Team Camaro..