Sport Auto: Wet Handling Course
- Thread starter Bruce
- Start date
Some of the member responses to this test are really interesting - if not a little illuminating as to personal predjudices. Not at all surprising to see Klier and Audiholic at odds about the results.
Personally, I look at cars in a few different lights. Certainly, overall performance is a quantifiable measure, but just as certainly, overall performance differs as road and weather conditions change.
I think that the Wet Handling Course provides another insight into real world performance that 0-100 times, skidpad times and other strict performance statistics just don't.
In fact, I would submit that the Wet Handling Course provides a stat that is just as valuable as any other performance measure when attempting to quantify total performance - especially when that process leads to the selection of a daily driver.
Besides that, the RS 4 made a lot of really good cars look really average in this test.
Personally, I look at cars in a few different lights. Certainly, overall performance is a quantifiable measure, but just as certainly, overall performance differs as road and weather conditions change.
I think that the Wet Handling Course provides another insight into real world performance that 0-100 times, skidpad times and other strict performance statistics just don't.
In fact, I would submit that the Wet Handling Course provides a stat that is just as valuable as any other performance measure when attempting to quantify total performance - especially when that process leads to the selection of a daily driver.
Besides that, the RS 4 made a lot of really good cars look really average in this test.
Bruce
Kraftwagen König
Each his own, i've hardly ever have any doubts about Sport Auto and with this list, i still don't. I wouldn't call Sport Auto biased, maybe it was a bad day (or a good one) for a certain car:
Tyres play a very important role is this test, as does traction control so i wouldn't judge anything based on how the specification sheet reads.
I certainly wasn't calling Sport Auto into question. Nor, in fact, was I calling any member into question. My comment was specific about member's reactions to the test illustrating member's personal bias - right, wrong or indifferent.
In fact, I think that Sport Auto offers one of the most complete, unbiased platforms in automotive journalism. I do tend to judge cars based on the complete body of their test results, and the Wet Handling Course is a valuable component in that body of results. Certainly, tires, and traction control play a major role as does quattro!
My point was this - real world performance is more than a slalom, skid pad or a sprint to 100 kph. It is cold, hot, dry, low humidity, high humidity, altitude, rain and snow. The Wet Course adds another piece of the realworld performance puzzle.
Oh yeah, RS 4 rules!
Bruce
Kraftwagen König
I see, i misinterpeted your comment, sorry about that
S4Aero said:
Yeah I would agree, it's another important factor to realworld performance. In fact that's why I like Sport Auto so much, they have so many different and revelant performance tests.
That in my opinion is what sets it above most magazines!
And yeah, the RS4 rules
Bruce
Kraftwagen König
The wet handling course is quite new for Sport Auto and so far no Lamborghini has gone through it, but don't worry, the Murcielago LP640 (AWD, 640PS) will get a test around this circuit next month (as well as the general supertest data)
YoungWarrior
Diesel Dynamiker
I remeber someone was trying to tell me that 4wd doesnt have an advantage over RWD in the wet etc, well this list sure proves them wrong. Great result for the RS4 and porsche.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 1071
- Internal Combustion
