Car & Driver = morons

KritiKaL · 12-14-2005, 02:23 AM

I was just surfing through the car and driver website and i found this article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....page_number=12

Can someone PLEASE explain to me how their test driver could only post a 5.3 second 0-60time and a 13.5 second time in the quarter with an STi that is that heavily tuned???!!! and this was supposedly with a "proffesional" driver!!!!!!!! i mean road and track just did a test of an 06 STi bone stock that had better #'s than that(5.1s 0-60 i believe)

WRXtreme · 12-14-2005, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Car and Driver

The main problem was weight. The STi came in at a porky 3309 pounds, 184 more than the HKS Evo and 338 greater than the Buschur Evo. Plus, Gidley conceded that he had no experience launching the car from a standstill, a tough task with a high-powered four-wheel-driver.

Weight and most importantly the driver had no experience launching the beast.

KritiKaL · 12-14-2005, 08:41 AM

i still find it rather hard to believe that less than 200 lbs made that much of a difference, i mean there are guys w/ cobb stage 2 wagons easily putting down those #'s, i dunno maybe i am wrong, but those times just seemed a bit screwy....

fast_dak · 12-14-2005, 09:24 AM

Not to mention it makes 450hp, 150 hp over the stock STI, and it's slower than a stock STI?? Course, a bad launch, or not knowing how to drive a particular car, can easily make ya lose a second in the 1/4

jwtarbaj · 12-14-2005, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KritiKaL

I was just surfing through the car and driver website and i found this article:

http://www.caranddriver.com/article....page_number=12

Can someone PLEASE explain to me how their test driver could only post a 5.3 second 0-60time and a 13.5 second time in the quarter with an STi that is that heavily tuned???!!! and this was supposedly with a "proffesional" driver!!!!!!!! i mean road and track just did a test of an 06 STi bone stock that had better #'s than that(5.1s 0-60 i believe)

RTFA and it will explain. They have produced a better number with their own test driver on a stock model.

The article clearly says the driver had "no experience launching". So why is Car & Driver to blame since it was the company who brought the cars perogitive to choose their test driver or let C&D driver make the run? If you look the actual run in that car was quite competitive and had he been familiar with launching he would have been competing for #1 or 2 spot.

genkidama20 · 12-14-2005, 03:45 PM

Quote:

The main problem was weight. The STi came in at a porky 3309 pounds, 184 more than the HKS Evo and 338 greater than the Buschur Evo. Plus, Gidley conceded that he had no experience launching the car from a standstill, a tough task with a high-powered four-wheel-driver.

Hmmm... I would agree with the thread title: Car & Driver = morons

imbeterthanu · 12-14-2005, 07:02 PM

thats the article i was talking about, like a month ago. yeah its disapointing

04WRXn00b · 12-14-2005, 07:34 PM

Very weak sauce indeed. That driver still probably lanches better than I could

KritiKaL · 12-14-2005, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwtarbaj

RTFA and it will explain. They have produced a better number with their own test driver on a stock model.

The article clearly says the driver had "no experience launching". So why is Car & Driver to blame since it was the company who brought the cars perogitive to choose their test driver or let C&D driver make the run? If you look the actual run in that car was quite competitive and had he been familiar with launching he would have been competing for #1 or 2 spot.

I do agree with that somewhat, but in my eyes a "proffesional" driver would have a pretty steep learning curve for launching, i mean honestly it isn't that hard to launch a rex and get decent times, especially when it's that heavily modded...that's just IMO though

jwtarbaj · 12-14-2005, 10:13 PM

Yes I agree this Pro driver should have been able to learn. They get multiple runs at it. My point is C&D is not responsible. It's not their driver and they offer the car maker the option to bring their driver which they did so biatch about them for bringing a pretty slow learner.

I find Car and Driver very good reading especially compared to other car rags liek Motor Trend or Road & Track. The latest issue has a great letter from the Editor about the EPA CAFE standard and what a joke it is. Good reading on that one. Doesn't seem to be on their website yet though.

02 WRX · 12-15-2005, 10:31 AM

Price as tested: $91,915 (base price: $83,647)

does look nice but not for that price...
and the times are way off. they didnt seem to have trouble launching the evos.

jwtarbaj · 12-15-2005, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 02 WRX

Price as tested: $91,915 (base price: $83,647)

does look nice but not for that price...
and the times are way off. they didnt seem to have trouble launching the evos.

Can everyone READ the article in the link above before saying the times suck etc.

Every company that brought a car could either bring a driver or allow CandD driver to make the runs.

The Subaru builder ESX chose to bring a driver. That driver apparantly sucked. End of story. Yes we know the numbers are off. The drived was teh suck at launching and didn't adapt to it it seems.

/End Rant
//let this thread die now please!

Nose Nuggets · 12-15-2005, 11:57 AM

so, do you think they just gave him one run and that was it? or do you think 13.5 was the best he could do after a day.

WRXtreme · 12-15-2005, 07:04 PM

I hope it wasn't the best run he could do or that isn't saying much for him. I think you could still run a 13.5 if you bogged the car off the line.

imbeterthanu · 12-15-2005, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WRXtreme

I hope it wasn't the best run he could do or that isn't saying much for him. I think you could still run a 13.5 if you bogged the car off the line.

yeah im gonna have to agree with him. thats probably what he did. that car SHOULD be a 11 sec car.