south
Vorsprung Visionary
Oh come on, Bob! You can't seriously be complaining given that you're still around.And some things never change which is sad but to be expected I suppose.
Best regards,
south
EVO ECOTY 2011 Results
- Thread starter Soup
- Start date
Best regards,
south
Mr Robert
Kraftwagen König
Well, to be fair, as he still is around, he can complain
But, in all fairness, such discussions have no place in this thread. This is about the eCoty 2011 and the glorious thorn that is the BMW 1M ;-)
Sunny said:
But the perception of those things changes driver to driver and magazine to magazine. If people took the word of these magazines as gospel, cars like the Audi R8 wouldn't exist because Audi would have gone out of business years before the R8 was launched following criticism after criticism on inert handling and numb steering.
Deckhook said:
A unique perspective, but also a perspective heavily biased by the race cars they have driven. It's almost like asking someone what constitutes 'normal', everyone will have a different opinion depending on past experience.
True that everyone's opinion of normal will be different, as will luxury, sportiness, etc. but where racing professionals differ from joe average is they have a unique prespective and knowledge of what a car is actually doing when they drive them and can describe what that is. We don't always have to agree with their preferences or opinions but we should respect their professionalism and knowledge.
This is highly humorous coming from someone who previously said that if both Autocar and Evo agree on something, then it is the truth. Why the change now? Is it because both Autocar and Evo have said some cars are better than the McLaren?
But you are proving my point from previous discussions: People will buy what they like. A car doesn't have to be dynamically superior for it to earn a place in the market. That doesn't diminish the importance of jouralists' subjective assessments, because no where are they saying a McLaren isn't worth buying, nor an Audi.
Sunny
Premium
No one said you should take anything as gospel. You are just wasting your breath attacking at a straw man there.
I don't remember making any remark about Autocar and Evo Guibo unless you'd care to point to it. I'm merely attacking the premise that magazine opinions should be held in such high regard. They don't even remain consistent over time relative to one car. I believe Evo actually said that a few detail improvemnets could see the 12C topple the Ferrari. It may well be that following the ECOTY they find those improvements to be present. If not, it will only be a matter of a few months until things are ironed out.
I don't understand where you're going with stating the obvious either.
The point is that with Evo, Autocar, Auto Express and MT so at odds with their selections, I frankly could not give a damn about their selections. Mature customers tend to read between the lines and find the bits that are relevent to them and then test drive the car themselves.
I don't understand where you're going with stating the obvious either.
The point is that with Evo, Autocar, Auto Express and MT so at odds with their selections, I frankly could not give a damn about their selections. Mature customers tend to read between the lines and find the bits that are relevent to them and then test drive the car themselves.
You said that while masquerading as "BD-" on 6speed.
They don't have to be consistent in order for them to be relevant. The Cayman R, 458, and GT3 RS's consistently finish near the top. In a field of 10+ cars, we don't have to consider their exact finishing order. Just as we don't need to have politicians agreeing on the importance of the order of social issues (spending for infrastructure, national defence, education, jobs growth) to understand that these are still important and relevant concepts.
Mature customers also tend not to say the McLaren wins in the test that matters, when it is ranked below the 458 in AMuS. Speaking of which, there is another consistency: 458 coming out on top of the MP4-12C in all the British tests, and a German test (very objective-based with less regard to the subjective traits of a supercar) where the 12C should have done better.
You were asked in a previous post whose opinions you do trust. You ignored it, so I'll repeat the question: Who are these people that you know who would be in a better position to assess these cars over the same roads, the same track? Would they include a local McLaren dealer perhaps, or your buddies over on mclarenlife?
Maybe what FromageFrais means is that a professional racing driver's preference might be different than that of a normal customer simply because they have the skills to explot the chassis to the full and reach that sweet point which is unobtainable to the rest of us mere mortals so we may exvaluate the more mundane aspects of a car, even so called supercars?
Exactly Deckhook but not just that. You may have noticed that certain motoring jounos are naturally better in some cars than others, a key example would be HvS and the 911. Roger Green of Evo also has a Porsche racing background, as does Harris who owns an RS 4.0. These backgrounds will undoubtedly lead them to favour Porsche-genes on a 'better the devil you know' basis. Simister and Barker are more Ferrari-orientated. Ultimately it depends on which people you pick to run the test.
Guibo your accusing posts are getting a little dull. Perhaps if you threw in a little jig every now and again it would keep them more entertaning. Where consistency matters, i.e. performance, the 12C wins the day. Even on inferior tyres with a broken suspension on an early prototype before detail improvements it can still put in decent times. On bad day with the 458 anything can happen.... 12s quarters, slower laps than a GT3 RS.
Guibo your accusing posts are getting a little dull. Perhaps if you threw in a little jig every now and again it would keep them more entertaning. Where consistency matters, i.e. performance, the 12C wins the day. Even on inferior tyres with a broken suspension on an early prototype before detail improvements it can still put in decent times. On bad day with the 458 anything can happen.... 12s quarters, slower laps than a GT3 RS.
Zafiro
Supreme Roadmaster
Sportscar of the year is about the best sportscar. Thats something we mortals cant say anything after a 30 minutes testdrive and certainly not when we cant explore what a car is capable like these guys know how to.
The difference between EVO crew and us is that they drive cars for a living and tried all sorts of cars during their lifetime. They can explore a car's pontential to fully. They driven the cars hour after hour.
Their experience is far more important than the opinion coming from us mortals. Something everyone here should agree on instead of trying the twist the result and having excuses why the result should be different because their favorite car didnt end up the way they were hoping for.
The difference between EVO crew and us is that they drive cars for a living and tried all sorts of cars during their lifetime. They can explore a car's pontential to fully. They driven the cars hour after hour.
Their experience is far more important than the opinion coming from us mortals. Something everyone here should agree on instead of trying the twist the result and having excuses why the result should be different because their favorite car didnt end up the way they were hoping for.
... and the 12C is best. 
Why would it matter what their racing background is? It's not like the winner was decided purely on 10/10ths at-the-limit pace. The GT3 RS was better than the McLaren in a number of categories that had nothing to do with pace. Is it your contention that the winner should be decided on the basis that it's easier for the average person to extract the most from it? Ie, faster pace in the hands of normal people?
My posts are accurate, and if you feel they are accusatory, perhaps it is you who is at fault. Performance is not exactly consistent, as you say yourself the 12C is slower in some tests. Broken suspension? That's not how Ben Collins described it. McLaren were given time to "fix" the suspension, were allowed a change of tires (Corsas), and still came up short. And just listen to yourself: You say that it shouldn't take journalists wringing out a car at 10/10ths to determine a winner, yet you are now boasting that the 12C wins the day based on 10/10ths performance with journalists driving in a manner not experienced by most people on anything resembling a normal basis.
Actually that would be a very valid point to make because what ready is the benefit of being the quickest if 95% of mere mortals couldn't get close to theirs. It's one of the reasons I personally prefer the Cayman over the 911.
I didn't say it wasn't valid. I just wanted to hear him say it.
(Though, as I noted, it's obvious Evo didn't make their assessments purely on 10/10ths at the limit handling pace. Other factors were involved.)I didn't say it wasn't valid. I just wanted to hear him say it.
True. But he definitely made a valid point about the position the GT3RS 4.0 finished in and it's familiarity to some if not all of the EVO test team because they generally get to drive each others car. Is it ever possible to have a truly unbiased result..... I somehow doubt it.
So does that mean you will never again read any subjective assessment of cars? Why read something if you're going to pass it off as biased; that would just be wasting your time.
His position seems to be that the Evo test team have a Porsche racing background, so would be in a position to exploit its capability which would thus bias its ranking. Not sure if that applies to Mike Duff, who also rated the Porsche over the McLaren. Fine, let's suppose there truly never is an unbiased result. Let's assume that all subjective rankings, as he would put it, are BS. The law of averages, being what they are, should indicate that the McLaren should have an equal share of comparo wins against the 458 and various GT3 RSs, from all the various mags that have tested them. Yet it does not. Perhaps the "bias" is not really a bias at all, but merely reflective of what more people want more of the time: a car that feels more organic, more alive yet still responds faithfully and predictably. And one that doesn't feel as if it's unfinished; when you pay that much for a car, you have a right to expect more especially if the manufacturer in question promised more.
I'm not aware that any of Autocar's staffers have a GT3 RS, yet they ranked the Porsche higher than the McLaren. Same for TopGear, Autocar, AutoExpress, Fifth Gear, Car, Auto Motor und Sport, and Evo when it came to compare the 458 and McLaren. Ok, I can understand bias when one magazine might say something. But the calls of "bias" look very tenuous when it's seven who say basically the same thing.
Sunny
Premium
Only a moron would assume the only reason a journalist likes/prefers a GT3 cause he/she owns one when the more commonsense answer is other way around - he/she owns one cause he/she likes it that much in the first place. I can't think of a more profound statement of preference by a journalist than voting with his/her own money.
Trending content
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Gone off track Cost Cutting Discourse moved from next-gen G65 X5 thread- Latest: SaltkjelenBMW
