Lightning Lap - 2016 - Car & Driver

[KentState]

So what exactly is the point of comparing cars with considerably different tire compromises? For example, when those massive near-R compounds on the new 350R wear out in a couple months, is anyone really going to keep putting on something that ridiculous to drive around regularly? Or is anyone who cares about absolute best possible lap times in those other cars going out on comfortable and long-lasting street tires? These aren't rhetorical questions.

The comment was meant to put any such comparison into perspective of what real people actually do at a race track. When you take your fancy new car there, nobody is looking to beat some other fancy car. The only times you're comparing against are yours, because they'll suck anyway, or an instructor's which is how you'll know/verify they suck. Also, very few people (you'll know because you'll have a licence) are going to take nice uncaged cars out there at 10/10th. Most any owner trying to replicate magazine times or that last half sec or whatever is a surefire way to end rubber side up.

Comparing new car models can be fun, but the way this is being done is set up to sell cars and not much more.

So your response to his comment is more passive aggressive insults? Not sure what or who you are arguing with because no one made any claims like your are inferring.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

These aren't rhetorical questions.
.

Are you sure? Because my tires can beat up your tires....... I have time slips from the Nurburgring to prove it. It doesn't matter what I bolt my YetiGrip Smooth Riders by Yokosumoho to because they are the win. Every. Single. Time. They also provide the most comfortable ride. Pillowtop. They get good traction in the snow too! Like a real life yeti. The best there ever was or will be. Any group of chassis engineers who chooses any tire other than these is an idiot. Anyone who purchases a car without them is also an idiot. In fact, anyone who doesn't immediately go buy them is ........... well you get the point.

This level of hyperbole is exhausting. I hope you actually get paid to agitate others. Lawyer?

 

[iCyborg]

I don't think anyone in the history of ever has said that a Viper ACR and a V6 Camaro are apples to apples. It's a list of lap times and cars...not a comparison of equals.

It's not a problem of comparing different classes. Take the Charger Hellcat; the journalists mention that the tires are skimpy. And for M4 GTS, they use much better tires, BMW sent 10 cars and their own driver (I believe he was only guiding/instructing the journalists for the actual lap time, but still...), probably a tuned suspension for that track, perhaps gear ratios, camber/toe etc.

To put it in IT terms: imagine a list of GPUs ranked by their FPS in some particular game benchmark. Except some GPUs are modified with custom aftermarket cooling and OC-ed to hell and back, some are stock, some are tested on heavily OC-ed liquid cooled i7s, others on stock i5s, etc. Hey look at that Asus GTX 1060 beating a Gigabyte GTX 1070...
How useful would such a list be, not just as a measure of general performance, but even for just that particular game?

I'm not saying the list is worthless, but it's fair to point out that lap times on their own only tell a small part of the story.

 

[agent00f]

So your response to his comment is more passive aggressive insults? Not sure what or who you are arguing with because no one made any claims like your are inferring.

I suppose feeling insulted to learn something explains the situation. If there's no argument over what's been said, then there shouldn't be any controversy that this sort of comparison isn't terribly meaningful, at least not to the degree that some seem to find significance in judging by the earlier posts.

What matters a lot more is accessible performance for typical owners, which is where that supposedly slow r8 for example would do a lot better than its time suggests.

In general absolute lap times are also just about the worst metric for choosing a ride. Nobody drives like that on real roads, and as mentioned nobody at a race track cares anyway.

I mean, if laps times are what matters, a $15k 250cc superkart is about on par with $1m GT1's or even prototypes on road courses.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

I'm not saying the list is worthless, but it's fair to point out that lap times on their own only tell a small part of the story.

Jesus, it's like talking to somebody with aspergers. Nobody buys a car after looking only at lap times. This is just entertainment. Maybe you and agent00f would be more interested in an article comparing the latest minivans.

 

[jlee]

Jesus, it's like talking to somebody with aspergers. Nobody buys a car after looking only at lap times. This is just entertainment. Maybe you and agent00f would be more interested in an article comparing the latest minivans.

Only if they have the same tires, though.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

What matters a lot more is accessible performance for typical owners, which is where that supposedly slow r8 for example would do a lot better than its time suggests.

Why are you so hung up on the R8? You can get the V10+ with the same Michelin Sport Cup 2's as the GT350R. That way, when you get passed by a Mustang that costs less than half what you paid for the R8, at least you'll know you have the same tires.

 

[agent00f]

Jesus, it's like talking to somebody with aspergers. Nobody buys a car after looking only at lap times. This is just entertainment. Maybe you and agent00f would be more interested in an article comparing the latest minivans.

What's really entertaining is showing up the guys in their new car&driver certified mustangs in a rental minivan.

 

[iCyborg]

Jesus, it's like talking to somebody with aspergers. Nobody buys a car after looking only at lap times. This is just entertainment. Maybe you and agent00f would be more interested in an article comparing the latest minivans.

Dude, you need to chill. What in my 2 posts deserves insulting me like this? Because I dared to agree that the comparison indeed is not fair? My post was neither confrontational nor impolite, so your response was uncalled for.

And if no one thinks much of the list, why posts like these:
"When you go on the track check your ego at the door. That 2-4 year old M5/6, S6, RS5, Cayman S, Boxster, Elise, Evora, C63, GT, Evo, WRX, STI, Golf R, and GS-F are going to have to waive that little Focus by.
Teehee that makes me giggle a little bit. I want one."

Maybe most people here have bothered to read how individual cars were tested, but I'm pretty sure lots of people who just looked at the compiled list would draw incorrect conclusions...

 

[KentState]

Dude, you need to chill. What in my 2 posts deserves insulting me like this? Because I dared to agree that the comparison indeed is not fair? My post was neither confrontational nor impolite, so your response was uncalled for.

And if no one thinks much of the list, why posts like these:
"When you go on the track check your ego at the door. That 2-4 year old M5/6, S6, RS5, Cayman S, Boxster, Elise, Evora, C63, GT, Evo, WRX, STI, Golf R, and GS-F are going to have to waive that little Focus by.
Teehee that makes me giggle a little bit. I want one."

Maybe most people here have bothered to read how individual cars were tested, but I'm pretty sure lots of people who just looked at the compiled list would draw incorrect conclusions...

I do agree with your statement and it's a very fair point. I actually enjoy reading (and watching) the individual cars and learning what makes them unique on the track. Entry/exit speed and feel are very important which the numbers don't always tell. That's how you get a car like the Z/28 and GT350R do better at certain tracks. In general, it's for entertainment and giving us readers something that we won't experience since most of us can afford one of the cars on the list, not 10.

 

[JulesMaximus]

What is the point of bold type on some of the times?

 

[foghorn67]

I suppose feeling insulted to learn something explains the situation. If there's no argument over what's been said, then there shouldn't be any controversy that this sort of comparison isn't terribly meaningful, at least not to the degree that some seem to find significance in judging by the earlier posts.

What matters a lot more is accessible performance for typical owners, which is where that supposedly slow r8 for example would do a lot better than its time suggests.

In general absolute lap times are also just about the worst metric for choosing a ride. Nobody drives like that on real roads, and as mentioned nobody at a race track cares anyway.

You keep saying stuff like it's new knowledge to someone here. I don't know who you are talking to or who you think you are educating.
If you didn't derail each and every thread, this would be comical. I could use a daily dose of hilarity.
But nope. Our fun discussions turn into your damn ego needing inflating.
It would be one thing if this was an actual argument, but it isn't. It would be another if it was one level above where everyone mostly agreed but somebody wants to be pedantic. But it's not that either.
You simply can't move beyond the fact you are no more knowledgeable or experienced than anyone here.
Play it safe, always assume your peers are better. You could learn a lesson in that regard.


Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[agent00f]

I do agree with your statement and it's a very fair point. I actually enjoy reading (and watching) the individual cars and learning what makes them unique on the track. Entry/exit speed and feel are very important which the numbers don't always tell. That's how you get a car like the Z/28 and GT350R do better at certain tracks. In general, it's for entertainment and giving us readers something that we won't experience since most of us can afford one of the cars on the list, not 10.

Magazines tend to somewhat embellish and generally write to be gratifying reading material instead of accurate account of performance. Their audience are after all not necessarily racers or even fast drivers, nor themselves for that matter. This doesn't mean it's fiction, but I find readers often take them quite seriously.

Also, their official page is already out: http://www.caranddriver.com/feature...results-historical-lap-times-and-more-feature
Worth mentioning as another example of less than straightforward presentation for their historical times that VIR was renovated in 2014 or so and is now faster.

You keep saying stuff like it's new knowledge to someone here. I don't know who you are talking to or who you think you are educating.
If you didn't derail each and every thread, this would be comical. I could use a daily dose of hilarity.
But nope. Our fun discussions turn into your damn ego needing inflating.
It would be one thing if this was an actual argument, but it isn't. It would be another if it was one level above where everyone mostly agreed but somebody wants to be pedantic. But it's not that either.
You simply can't move beyond the fact you are no more knowledgeable or experienced than anyone here.
Play it safe, always assume your peers are better. You could learn a lesson in that regard.

Comparing cars with <<1g tires and 1.2g tires, and run what you brung with a team of vehicles/tires/engineers is absolutely comical. I would say there was an argument above of whether it was comical or not, which was rather settled by introduction of new facts.

 

[foghorn67]

Comparing cars with <<1g tires and 1.2g tires, and run what you brung with a team of vehicles/tires/engineers is absolutely comical. I would say there was an argument above of whether it was comical or not, which was rather settled by introduction of new facts.

You aren't going to like this. Everyone here knows it. The car rags know this too...fun fact...there is a sidebar on tire choices and the trending performance over the years at Lightning lap.
You are deliberately ignoring the fact everyone knows this.
Let that sink in. There was no introduction of facts. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nichts.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[Fenixgoon]

You aren't going to like this. Everyone here knows it. The car rags know this too...fun fact...there is a sidebar on tire choices and the trending performance over the years at Lightning lap.
You are deliberately ignoring the fact everyone knows this.
Let that sink in. There was no introduction of facts. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nichts.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

TFP strikes again!

 

[agent00f]

You aren't going to like this. Everyone here knows it. The car rags know this too...fun fact...there is a sidebar on tire choices and the trending performance over the years at Lightning lap.
You are deliberately ignoring the fact everyone knows this.
Let that sink in. There was no introduction of facts. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Zero. Nichts.

That's great everyone agrees how comical such comparisons are so we laugh at the people who take them seriously together.

But it's too bad they forgot to mention all the cars as of late got extra positions on the list from the new wider surface; good thing it works out for a publication whose business is predicated on selling new cars.

 

[Fenixgoon]

That's great everyone agrees how comical such comparisons are so we laugh at the people who take them seriously together.

But it's too bad they forgot to mention all the cars as of late got extra positions on the list from the new wider surface; good thing it works out for a publication whose business is predicated on selling new cars.

let me guess, you bitch about pike's peak, too.

 

[agent00f]

let me guess, you bitch about pike's peak, too.

Pike's peak record is an all out challenge, whereas it seems the cars on ordinary street tires are hardly trying. Seems if we're all on the same page as foghorn insists this shouldn't be terribly contentious.

 

[foghorn67]

That's great everyone agrees how comical such comparisons are so we laugh at the people who take them seriously together.

But it's too bad they forgot to mention all the cars as of late got extra positions on the list from the new wider surface; good thing it works out for a publication whose business is predicated on selling new cars.

Again. Passive aggressive insult.
By stating it's a comical comparison, you infer those that enjoy the article don't have the wealth of knowledge you were born with. I was going to say you obtained your vast knowledge, but you seem like some sort of elitist which inclines you to think you were maybe born with it. And it's your duty to expound upon internet knowledge like a town cryer or street evangelist.
The article does a pretty good job of being transparent. They are open about all the things that add up to their lap times. Tires, surfaces, the huge tree now gone, etc.
They like "geeking out", just like we do.
I think you are jealous of two things.
1- automotive journalists. We know you have nothing but contempt for them, so let me help you with that. They drive things you don't have access to. They drive these desired vehicles on the track, on public streets and closed roads. They get paid to do it. They also bring them home for a while.
Oh wait, that doesn't help.
2-Other people having fun. You hate it. You want people to feel bad for it. You can't have it, insult those that do.


Sent from my SM-G930T

 

[agent00f]

Again. Passive aggressive insult.
By stating it's a comical comparison, you infer those that enjoy the article don't have the wealth of knowledge you were born with. I was going to say you obtained your vast knowledge, but you seem like some sort of elitist which inclines you to think you were maybe born with it. And it's your duty to expound upon internet knowledge like a town cryer or street evangelist.
The article does a pretty good job of being transparent. They are open about all the things that add up to their lap times. Tires, surfaces, the huge tree now gone, etc.
They like "geeking out", just like we do.
I think you are jealous of two things.
1- automotive journalists. We know you have nothing but contempt for them, so let me help you with that. They drive things you don't have access to. They drive these desired vehicles on the track, on public streets and closed roads. They get paid to do it. They also bring them home for a while.
Oh wait, that doesn't help.
2-Other people having fun. You hate it. You want people to feel bad for it. You can't have it, insult those that do.

This is another topic where additional knowledge helps: http://archive.is/yv5XS

 

[jlee]

TFP strikes again!

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

The Lightning Lap isn't a fair comparison? Next thing you know somebody will tell me Top Gear isn't a good source for car reviews.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Side note, since the discussion earlier was about tires. I went through the list of cars in the OP. Staying only with "OEM" offered tires, unsurprisingly the majority come stock with some flavor of Michelin or Pirelli.

By far the most common tire was the Michelin Pilot Super Sport and Pirelli P Zero, which are both summer tires. The exotic and tuned cars typically also had (optional?) track ready tires -- the most common is the Pilot Sport Cup 2. A couple outliers had track tires that are supposedly "streetable" but have no business being driven on regular roads -- like the P Zero Troffeo's (NSX) and Kumho Ecsta V720 (Viper ACR).

The most interesting to me is the Camaro SS with Goodyear Eagle F1's. That's one hell of a track time on runflats (!).

 

[agent00f]

The Lightning Lap isn't a fair comparison? Next thing you know somebody will tell me Top Gear isn't a good source for car reviews.

That must be why they present it as a numbered/ordered list of ostensibly best performers, instead of a set of somewhat arbitrary lap times.