EVO ECOTY 2011 Results

[Guibo]

Ask yourself why Autocar rated the same cars in a different order. Ask yourself why Auto Express rated them in yet another order. Ask yourself, who gives a damn.

Different tester, different tastes, different testing criteria, different testing routes. I don't recall Auto Express's verdict on 1M vs Cayman R. I don't have to ask myself who gives a damn, since it's obvious by multiple posts here that there are enough people who give a damn, you included. You apparently care enough to post in the Evo forums to (that's probably you starting the thread too; same creepy avatar as in the GT-R forum):
"Is ECOTY a farce now?" discussion on Evo Community

Simply because people have different tastes and different ranking orders, that does not mean the importance of subjective evaluation diminishes. Nor does it raise the importance of objective lap times, as you love to push from various forums. If subjective opinion didn't count, Evo wouldn't be nearly as widely read as it is.

 

[Deckhook]

^ I bet many have been question the results of this test over multiple forums because rightly or wrongly it's at odds with what would be expected. Maybe EVO testers have softened their opinions over the years and their values have changed somewhat. The odd thing I have with the placements is that the right car finished on top as per usual and for all the reasons that Porsche design into all of their sportscars, especially the ones that have a desire to be used on the track.

 

[Guibo]

^ I bet many have been question the results of this test over multiple forums because rightly or wrongly it's at odds with what would be expected. Maybe EVO testers have softened their opinions over the years and their values have changed somewhat.

But whether it's at odds with what's expected comes down to the same fundamental concept: different people have different tastes. This is a concept that should be foreign to no one and the wide variety of machines under test reinforces it. I would wager a lot of the people crying on forums don't even have an idea of the criteria involved. For that, we cannot say the magazine is at fault. When we look at the comments within the article, consider where other cars fall down (crudeness in the Lotus, a certain lack of grunt in the Cayman R), reflect on criteria and winners in past issues (the winning Ford GT 6 years ago was not the sharpest to drive, nor the 599 GTB that beat out the 997.1 GT3), then we perhaps should realize that our expectations did not mesh with theirs and as it is they who are doing the testing and determining the criteria, who are we to say it's wrong? If all players were allowed equal opportunity to shine over the same roads and on track, there shouldn't be a problem.
I wouldn't say all of the reasons for the GT3 RS 4.0 winning are designed into all of their cars. The Panamera in various guises has been panned on the pages of Evo.

 

[Deckhook]

^ Guibo, the Panny isn't a sportscar it's a big heavy saloon and the same goes for the Cayenne and what makes the GT3RS so special is there in the Cayman R, it is closer to the winner in concept and execution than any other car here and another thing it's no exactly short of grunt, that comment in EVO was laughable it reaches 200km/h only 0.3s slower than either a 1M or M3.

 

[Guibo]

^ Guibo, the Panny isn't a sportscar it's a big heavy saloon and the same goes for the Cayenne and what makes the GT3RS so special is there in the Cayman R, it is closer to the winner in concept and execution than any other car here and another thing it's no exactly short of grunt, that comment in EVO was laughable it reaches 200km/h only 0.3s slower than either a 1M or M3.

Fair point about the Panny.
And you are sure they defined "grunt" as merely a full-bore run through the gears from a dead stop to 200 kph?
I have to ask: What made you think long and hard about a 1M in a world where the base Cayman and Cayman S exist? Have you test driven all 4 cars (1M, Cayman R, Cayman S, base Cayman)?

 

[FromageFrais]

Different tester, different tastes,

Exactly. Different a**holes different opinions. Everyone is entitled to both.

 

[martinbo]

Exactly x 2. Different logins, same outcome.

 

[Monster]

what makes the GT3RS so special is there in the Cayman R, it is closer to the winner in concept and execution than any other car here and another thing it's no exactly short of grunt, that comment in EVO was laughable it reaches 200km/h only 0.3s slower than either a 1M or M3.

For one, the GT3, along with the entire 911 series are rear engine cars, so the driving experience will be different from the Cayman. This might be quite obvious but it appears to be overlooked.

Exactly x 2. Different logins, same outcome.

Well said Martin, I am sure Bob will have to agree to this .

 

[martinbo]

Well, I wouldn't necessarily say he'd agree, so to speak, but I'm certain that he'd be able to attest to the fact.

 

[FromageFrais]

Exactly x 2. Different logins, same outcome.

I don't know what you're trying to insinuate here. I'm simply pointing out that these are just opinions that we're getting so animated about. They have no basis in science, nor are they cast in stone. I frankly find it an abomination that the Aventador is down in 6th but that's just another opinion. Opinions should not be used by manuafcturers as badges of merit, especially when they come from the likes of ex-Group C racing drivers who have about as much in common with the average driver as my driving skills have in common with Sebastian Vettel's.

 

[Zafiro]

I don't know what you're trying to insinuate here. I'm simply pointing out that these are just opinions that we're getting so animated about. They have no basis in science, nor are they cast in stone. I frankly find it an abomination that the Aventador is down in 6th but that's just another opinion. Opinions should not be used by manuafcturers as badges of merit, especially when they come from the likes of ex-Group C racing drivers who have about as much in common with the average driver as my driving skills have in common with Sebastian Vettel's.

Some opinions are worth more than others, unfortuanly. I have more trust in people who have driver skills and spend a lot of time driving these cars hour after hour than I trust people who spent times on Internet thinking they know things about cars they even haven't driven.

 

[castagna]

Oops...

 

[FromageFrais]

Some opinions are worth more than others, unfortuanly. I have more trust in people who have driver skills and spend a lot of time driving these cars hour after hour than I trust people who spent times on Internet thinking they know things about cars they even haven't driven.

I agree. Some opinions are worth more than others but I prefer the opinions of real people who I know rather than magazine opinions that are touted about the internet by people who think they have skills comparable to an ex-Group C racing driver.

 

[FromageFrais]

The point being is that the opinion developed by an ex-Group C/pro racing driver after drifting a GT3 RS 4.0 round the bend of a closed country road at 90mph using both sides of the road has absolutely no relevance to me, my driving skills, or my likely application of the car. I am wise enough to know and understand this rather than fooling myself into believing that I too will possess such skills and circumstances.

So in short these magazine opinions are important if you live inside a computer game or a parallel universe, or think that you're a pro-GT racer, but to most people on planet earth, they're just internet noise.

 

[Zafiro]

I agree. Some opinions are worth more than others but I prefer the opinions of real people who I know rather than magazine opinions that are touted about the internet by people who think they have skills comparable to an ex-Group C racing driver.

Who are these people you talking about and what were their verdict after driving all these cars?

 

[Deckhook]

For one, the GT3, along with the entire 911 series are rear engine cars, so the driving experience will be different from the Cayman. This might be quite obvious but it appears to be overlooked.

You might have misunderstood my meaning here. Execution and concept meaning developed with the intention to be used on the track so steering, weight, brakes and chassis have be honed with this in mind.

I'm surprised you felt the need to highlight the 911's engine position as no one here doesn't know this fact or how it alters it's behaviour to all the other cars in this test.

Well said Martin, I am sure Bob will have to agree to this .

And some things never change which is sad but to be expected I suppose.

 

[Zafiro]

The point being is that the opinion developed by an ex-Group C/pro racing driver after drifting a GT3 RS 4.0 round the bend of a closed country road at 90mph using both sides of the road has absolutely no relevance to me, my driving skills, or my likely application of the car. I am wise enough to know and understand this rather than fooling myself into believing that I too will possess such skills and circumstances.

So in short these magazine opinions are important if you live inside a computer game or a parallel universe, or think that you're a pro-GT racer, but to most people on planet earth, they're just internet noise.

This post is just plain weird......

 

[Sunny]

Stuff like steering feel, body control, damping, throttle response, how well the car rides, quality of gear shift and a host of other thing don't change with skill level of the driver. What changes is what they can can do with it. So the idea that some how the opinion of expert drivers somehow doesn't matter is ludicrous.

 

[Deckhook]

A racing driver not only has the skill to take a car to its limits of traction in a controlled manner but driving racing cars as a reference point means they have a unique prespective on things like steering, brakes, chassis balance, throttle response, etc; all the things that make a great driver's car.

 

[Guibo]

I don't know what you're trying to insinuate here. I'm simply pointing out that these are just opinions that we're getting so animated about. They have no basis in science, nor are they cast in stone. I frankly find it an abomination that the Aventador is down in 6th but that's just another opinion. Opinions should not be used by manuafcturers as badges of merit, especially when they come from the likes of ex-Group C racing drivers who have about as much in common with the average driver as my driving skills have in common with Sebastian Vettel's.

I think he's insinuating that you are logging in under different names as you have done in other forums, especially after being banned. For which you have boasted that you will keep doing so in an effort to "make the lives of moderators miserable," or words to that effect. Seems you are well on your way to doing that here. See? Two logins, same outcome.

Why would they need to have basis in science or be cast in stone in order to have relevance? I think the fact that Evo can sustain such a following based largely on opinion (and yes, spectacular photography) tells us science is only a very small part of the equation in what delivers their COTY. It's odd that you're only now noticing the disparity in ability between your average motorist and Group C/F1 drivers when before you were extolling the virtues of the MP4-12C on the day that didn't matter (after test day, and after further fettling), and at the hands of someone who'd be as gifted as McLaren's own Chris Goodwin who, unlike most customers, knows the intricate handling quirks of the car. You even bragged about Matt Prior's assessment from Autocar that it appears to be a car developed for racing drivers for racing drivers.
The only animation I see is started by people who are not happy that their favored car did not finish in the expected position, to which I (and others before me) ask: What is your personal experience with these cars? If such things do not matter, then perhaps you'd be better off not reading them and then, appropriately enough, not commenting on them. How's that for a perfect solution that we (or at least to those of us w/o multiple accounts) can agree to?