FWD Vs. RWD Vs. AWD
23 August 2002, 11:40 AM
#181
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Claudius... I'm finding it really difficult to communicate with you.
I have never stated that they DIDN'T ban them because it made the cars faster, although I strongly dissagree that this is the case. I merely said that there could / would have been other reasons. I suggested reasons, and gave insight into the reasons why I thought this was the case. I didn't just say "THEY BANNED THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE TOO FAST". Blanket statements!
Surely they banned active suspension and bigger wheels because Minardi would not have been able to afford them, not because they were improving performance.
I will take my blanket statements to other people as stupid and narrow-minded as myself, communication will be improved.
24 August 2002, 07:10 AM
#183
Hi Jeremy
True ride & handling development tests are very long drawn out processes. You need all sorts of tests on all sorts of surfaces.
But this is to test 1 vehicle to get it to the point you want it (or as close as possible).
The problem with comparing 2 vehicles is that you are never comparing like for like.
If you compare the length of 2 peices of string, you are comparing 2 identical items apart from 1 parameter, and it is that parameter you want to test.
Even if 2 cars are only different by 1 paramter (which is going to be closer to 100's of thousands) we are never interested in just testing what that 1 parameter is.
When we did the F355 vs Scoobies test, it was a pure handling test and a 1/4 mile.
The handling test was based on a rough course I came up with years ago as it has just about every type of level surface bend there is. Slow, medium, fast - tightening, opening, constant - Accelerating, Braking, neutral - left entry right, right entry left - etc - etc.
We used bruntingthorpe as it has a changeable surface.. but it is still very smooth so it did not take in to account the ability of the scoob to ride bumps and maintain control. And in addition, it highlighted the F355's ability to change direction and grip (and basically be VERY VERY fast) on smooth surfaces.
We could have then done a bumpy surface test, but the scoob would have eaten the F355 alive without question. So what would that have proved?
At the end of the day, you can only derive any conclusions by limiting the scenario to a very specific task.
All the best
Simon
True ride & handling development tests are very long drawn out processes. You need all sorts of tests on all sorts of surfaces.
But this is to test 1 vehicle to get it to the point you want it (or as close as possible).
The problem with comparing 2 vehicles is that you are never comparing like for like.
If you compare the length of 2 peices of string, you are comparing 2 identical items apart from 1 parameter, and it is that parameter you want to test.
Even if 2 cars are only different by 1 paramter (which is going to be closer to 100's of thousands) we are never interested in just testing what that 1 parameter is.
When we did the F355 vs Scoobies test, it was a pure handling test and a 1/4 mile.
The handling test was based on a rough course I came up with years ago as it has just about every type of level surface bend there is. Slow, medium, fast - tightening, opening, constant - Accelerating, Braking, neutral - left entry right, right entry left - etc - etc.
We used bruntingthorpe as it has a changeable surface.. but it is still very smooth so it did not take in to account the ability of the scoob to ride bumps and maintain control. And in addition, it highlighted the F355's ability to change direction and grip (and basically be VERY VERY fast) on smooth surfaces.
We could have then done a bumpy surface test, but the scoob would have eaten the F355 alive without question. So what would that have proved?
At the end of the day, you can only derive any conclusions by limiting the scenario to a very specific task.
All the best
Simon
24 August 2002, 11:19 AM
#184
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was that a 'Handling' or 'Roadholding' test? The former is subjective the latter mathematical.
If you go here;
http://www.jkwebdesign.co.uk/lexusclub/onallfours.htm
you can read some of the more basic stuff.
If you go here;
http://www.jkwebdesign.co.uk/lexusclub/onallfours.htm
you can read some of the more basic stuff.
24 August 2002, 11:48 AM
#185
It was handling / performance, which is partly subjective and partly "scientific".
The common factors were the course and the driver and each car was driven at it's true limit of performance (given a margin for human error which was ironed out by 3 runs - usually within about a tenth of a second of each other - except for a couple of spins).
The timing of the course was one factor which said which was more performant, and the subjective descriptions of the handling at the various points on the circuit was the deeper analysis. This was not meant to say "this is *better* handling that that", but to say, "this handles in *this way* under *these circumstances*".. basically the standard stuff you have to do for testing / development.
Cheers
Simon
The common factors were the course and the driver and each car was driven at it's true limit of performance (given a margin for human error which was ironed out by 3 runs - usually within about a tenth of a second of each other - except for a couple of spins
).The timing of the course was one factor which said which was more performant, and the subjective descriptions of the handling at the various points on the circuit was the deeper analysis. This was not meant to say "this is *better* handling that that", but to say, "this handles in *this way* under *these circumstances*".. basically the standard stuff you have to do for testing / development.
Cheers
Simon
24 August 2002, 07:51 PM
#186
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did you 'adjust' the cars at all?
Or was existing parameter testing, I do quite a bit of testing and 'adjusting' for my marque of car and find that just the standard set-up of Toe-in and camber etc to be very much as you say biased toward 'safe' understeer, have you used your knowledge of this testing skills to provide different set-ups for this site?
I have still got all my old gear for on the road calibration, I think it is surprising to many what you can do to improve almost any car over standard.
Or was existing parameter testing, I do quite a bit of testing and 'adjusting' for my marque of car and find that just the standard set-up of Toe-in and camber etc to be very much as you say biased toward 'safe' understeer, have you used your knowledge of this testing skills to provide different set-ups for this site?
I have still got all my old gear for on the road calibration, I think it is surprising to many what you can do to improve almost any car over standard.
24 August 2002, 08:25 PM
#187
agreed Mycroft..
out of interest, which marque and what kind of testing?
I have been planning for some time to do some work on developing various set-ups for the different models of impreza, but time has stopped me unfortunately.
It would be nice to develop set-ups for each model, and for each main driving style and provide progressive guidelines from each set-up to let the individual tune them further to suit.
The tests on the F355 thing were just how the cars arrived. Some standard, some with specific mods (which were noted in the test).
All the best
Simon
out of interest, which marque and what kind of testing?
I have been planning for some time to do some work on developing various set-ups for the different models of impreza, but time has stopped me unfortunately.
It would be nice to develop set-ups for each model, and for each main driving style and provide progressive guidelines from each set-up to let the individual tune them further to suit.
The tests on the F355 thing were just how the cars arrived. Some standard, some with specific mods (which were noted in the test).
All the best
Simon
24 August 2002, 09:42 PM
#188
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon,
Come on know, lets be real here. Just because as you point out that its immposible to completly judge anything unless it is on a exact like for like one-to-one basis, does not mean different cars cannot be compared to one another in many different catagories. It just takes work to do! Sure it is not easy to do, sure the results will not be perfect, but we can without question improve the state of the art in road testing by quite some margin. In your absolutist view we would never again compare the handling of two different cars. Now how many of us forum members would want that? In fact that is a good part of the art of being a car enthuisast in the first place!
Come on know, lets be real here. Just because as you point out that its immposible to completly judge anything unless it is on a exact like for like one-to-one basis, does not mean different cars cannot be compared to one another in many different catagories. It just takes work to do! Sure it is not easy to do, sure the results will not be perfect, but we can without question improve the state of the art in road testing by quite some margin. In your absolutist view we would never again compare the handling of two different cars. Now how many of us forum members would want that? In fact that is a good part of the art of being a car enthuisast in the first place!
24 August 2002, 11:25 PM
#189
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
your absolutist view
Claudius calls him a spineless bitch without any real POV, you call him absolutist.What happened guys ... words don't mean anything anymore in English ?
Yours puzzled.
25 August 2002, 03:45 AM
#191
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that this has anything to do with the current conversation but after reading the whole 10 pages.......
Simon,
In the BMW hold down the traction control button for 3 seconds to fully disable the system. I think the handbrake warning light switches to orange instead of red when the system is disabled. It resets when you switch the car off though.
Have fun.
DAYZEE.:-)
Simon,
In the BMW hold down the traction control button for 3 seconds to fully disable the system. I think the handbrake warning light switches to orange instead of red when the system is disabled. It resets when you switch the car off though.
Have fun.
DAYZEE.:-)
25 August 2002, 08:19 AM
#192
Dayzee.. You are an ABSOLUTE legend!!!
jeremy...
OK.. I was merely linking in the fact we are talking about comparing AWD with RWD.. if you just want to compare two cars.
You take every possible surface / envirnment and throw away all the ones that the two cars will not be used on (or that you don't care about). This creates a subset of surfaces / environments to test both in.
Then take every possible road course layout, and norrow it down to a representative subset of layouts. Break each of them up into further subsections (where you end up getting things like 1/4 mile straights, concentric circles, etc).
Then make a number of handling courses made up of firstly individual specific types (tight twisty, fast open, medium, all tightening bends, all opening, all constant radius, etc).. then a number of combined courses with combinations of each of the above... this means one might have a bias towards opening bends that go in to straights, another is opening that go in to tightening same direction bends, etc, etc)
Then put each car (with serious monitoring equipment and data logging) through each course, on each surface, in each environment / condition with a HIGHLY skilled driver. * see below
Then give all the data to a very powerful computer or a genius, and analyse the hell out of it.
Get all of that output data and give it to a group of very skilled chassis engineers, motorsport experienced dynamics experts, the development driver, etc, etc.
At the end of all of that you should have a list of things like "car a appears to create more lateral load on outside front tyre during basic induced stage 2 turn-in over left rear single wheel input low frequency bump environment on .8 MU dry tarmac using ideal slip angle on outside front and inside rear with 10 ltrs of fuel and driver weight of 13 stone where turn-in was followed by 80MPH straight line braking point, to 63MPH initial turn-in and 62MPH stage 2 data sample at 8 degrees from initial turn-in heading."
At the end of all of that, you could take a high level view on it all and maybe decide that "car a is the one for me"?
I wasn't being pedantic. I was just saying that, if you want science, you need to go the whole hog. If you just want to see how the cars go, the current mag tests are a lot better than they used to be, and will get better than they are now, but they will always be met with "we could surely do this better?".
All the best
Simon
* why only highly skiled driver?
There is no such thing as an average driver. All drivers are better at some things than others. It is not a case of being 43% good. Some may be pretty decent on smooth tarmac on constant radius bends, but useless on tightening slippy bends, with a carefully positioned series of low frequency bumps before and after the apex, etc, etc. So you can only test the *car* if the driver is as little of the package as possible.
jeremy...
OK.. I was merely linking in the fact we are talking about comparing AWD with RWD.. if you just want to compare two cars.
You take every possible surface / envirnment and throw away all the ones that the two cars will not be used on (or that you don't care about). This creates a subset of surfaces / environments to test both in.
Then take every possible road course layout, and norrow it down to a representative subset of layouts. Break each of them up into further subsections (where you end up getting things like 1/4 mile straights, concentric circles, etc).
Then make a number of handling courses made up of firstly individual specific types (tight twisty, fast open, medium, all tightening bends, all opening, all constant radius, etc).. then a number of combined courses with combinations of each of the above... this means one might have a bias towards opening bends that go in to straights, another is opening that go in to tightening same direction bends, etc, etc)
Then put each car (with serious monitoring equipment and data logging) through each course, on each surface, in each environment / condition with a HIGHLY skilled driver. * see below
Then give all the data to a very powerful computer or a genius, and analyse the hell out of it.
Get all of that output data and give it to a group of very skilled chassis engineers, motorsport experienced dynamics experts, the development driver, etc, etc.
At the end of all of that you should have a list of things like "car a appears to create more lateral load on outside front tyre during basic induced stage 2 turn-in over left rear single wheel input low frequency bump environment on .8 MU dry tarmac using ideal slip angle on outside front and inside rear with 10 ltrs of fuel and driver weight of 13 stone where turn-in was followed by 80MPH straight line braking point, to 63MPH initial turn-in and 62MPH stage 2 data sample at 8 degrees from initial turn-in heading."
At the end of all of that, you could take a high level view on it all and maybe decide that "car a is the one for me"?
I wasn't being pedantic. I was just saying that, if you want science, you need to go the whole hog. If you just want to see how the cars go, the current mag tests are a lot better than they used to be, and will get better than they are now, but they will always be met with "we could surely do this better?".
All the best
Simon
* why only highly skiled driver?
There is no such thing as an average driver. All drivers are better at some things than others. It is not a case of being 43% good. Some may be pretty decent on smooth tarmac on constant radius bends, but useless on tightening slippy bends, with a carefully positioned series of low frequency bumps before and after the apex, etc, etc. So you can only test the *car* if the driver is as little of the package as possible.
25 August 2002, 10:49 AM
#193
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 7,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was thinking....
We all agree (I think) that AWD has superior traction.
Therefore, to get a worse lap time in an AWD car (compared to a RWD car) the handling must be sufficiently worse that corner entry and apex are much slower than in a RWD car? In essence, the 'going around the corner' bit must be worse by more than the extra traction on exit makes up.
Obviously this discounts extra weight -- the C2 vs C4 test would have been better if the C2 carried some ballast (in the right places) and I suppose it would have to then run the C4's spring and damper settings.
We all agree (I think) that AWD has superior traction.
Therefore, to get a worse lap time in an AWD car (compared to a RWD car) the handling must be sufficiently worse that corner entry and apex are much slower than in a RWD car? In essence, the 'going around the corner' bit must be worse by more than the extra traction on exit makes up.
Obviously this discounts extra weight -- the C2 vs C4 test would have been better if the C2 carried some ballast (in the right places) and I suppose it would have to then run the C4's spring and damper settings.
25 August 2002, 11:24 AM
#194
OK.. now we're getting somewhere
That is correct, except that the apex speeds (for instance) would not have to be *that* much greater in RWD, compared to AWD for 2 reasons..
remember that AWD would only be adding a *traction* benefit if there is enough available power to spin the rears (had it been RWD).. this is not THAT common, except in slow corners. (side note.. even in these circumstance, this is only a traction advantage not cornering grip).
Then the second reason is this... if you come out of a bend 1MPH faster than the next guy, you carry that extra 1MPH all the way to the end of the straight.
A very slight advantage in corner exit speeds makes a surprisingly big difference to lap times.
All the best
Simon
That is correct, except that the apex speeds (for instance) would not have to be *that* much greater in RWD, compared to AWD for 2 reasons..
remember that AWD would only be adding a *traction* benefit if there is enough available power to spin the rears (had it been RWD).. this is not THAT common, except in slow corners. (side note.. even in these circumstance, this is only a traction advantage not cornering grip).
Then the second reason is this... if you come out of a bend 1MPH faster than the next guy, you carry that extra 1MPH all the way to the end of the straight.
A very slight advantage in corner exit speeds makes a surprisingly big difference to lap times.
All the best
Simon
25 August 2002, 11:27 AM
#195
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From experiences on other forums Mycroft has the car which is the basis for all cars in existance on earth, ever, a Soarer!!
Therefore 'm sure he will be able to instruct us all on all aspects of handling.
Therefore 'm sure he will be able to instruct us all on all aspects of handling.
25 August 2002, 11:35 AM
#196
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 7,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very slight advantage in corner exit speeds makes a surprisingly big difference to lap times.
However, I'll throw a spanner in the works
I had some instruction at a trackday from Hyla Breese (ex Autobytel Lotus Elise Championship, now a BTCC driver). I attempted to use "Ah, but as it's 4WD it's not ideal for going round a track" as an excuse for my 'performance'
and he said "it should be better round here as it's got more traction out of corners". Mind you, it was a tight at twisty circuit (Bentwaters airfield, RIP 
)[Edited by carl - 8/25/2002 12:00:52 PM]
25 August 2002, 05:45 PM
#197
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#From experiences on other forums Mycroft has the car which is the basis for all cars in existance on earth, ever, a Soarer!!
Therefore 'm sure he will be able to instruct us all on all aspects of handling.#
-and your contribution to this debate is?
Therefore 'm sure he will be able to instruct us all on all aspects of handling.#
-and your contribution to this debate is?
26 August 2002, 10:26 AM
#198
Scooby Regular
I am lead to believe that AWD is for women that can't ACTUALLY drive properly, and RWD is for men that can!!!!
.............wondered why I keep buying 4WD cars all the time.
.............wondered why I keep buying 4WD cars all the time.
26 August 2002, 05:22 PM
#199
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simon,
Thanks for the more thoughtful reply this time. I agree with you that indeed if you want science then do science. However I must take issue with you about your comment that:
If you just want to see how the cars go, the current mag tests are a lot better than they used to be, and will get better than they are now, but they will always be met with "we could surely do this better?".
I have been reading cars mags now for far longer than Id like to admit. Ive read everything from the old Motor to Fast Lane right up to today. And I can tell you right now mag tests are NOT a lot better than they used to be, in fact they are worse. If you doubt me then I ask you to go back and read Motor from around 86-90, in that mag they actually did do scientific testing. Or look at Fast Lane and read Mark Hales numerous meticulously written track-tests and road car group tests in which offered far far more handling details than any of today. And no I am not dreaming, I have saved a lot of these mags, and re-read them every now and again when I want to recall what good auto journalism is all about. Simon, actually there is no comparison at all really. Todays articles lack any sort of objectivity or even subjective consistency at all. (If you do have any recommendations of good articles please do let me know) In fact there isnt even the text available to be descriptive In the first place- just for pictures! So absolutely we could do this better! But no we do not need to go to the extremes you suggest to do so.
We do not need so many measurements of speed and g forces. We simply need back to back comparisons of cars in convoy. Also we are not looking for which car has the most grip or speed, but rather the ones which have enough speed and grip combined with special qualities that drivers would find the most useful on real roads. Qualities like steering feel, progressiveness, ability to regain control, predictability, stability etc. Id bet such a comparison could best start with you Simon. As a True Grip feature comparing an Impreza with a Evo- finally we could get a understanding on really what these cars do in x,y,z situations. We could learn which dynamics/systems help the driver as opposed to leave him/her as a passenger, out of the loop unable to know when the car will not make that next corner!
Thanks, JL
Thanks for the more thoughtful reply this time. I agree with you that indeed if you want science then do science. However I must take issue with you about your comment that:
If you just want to see how the cars go, the current mag tests are a lot better than they used to be, and will get better than they are now, but they will always be met with "we could surely do this better?".
I have been reading cars mags now for far longer than Id like to admit. Ive read everything from the old Motor to Fast Lane right up to today. And I can tell you right now mag tests are NOT a lot better than they used to be, in fact they are worse. If you doubt me then I ask you to go back and read Motor from around 86-90, in that mag they actually did do scientific testing. Or look at Fast Lane and read Mark Hales numerous meticulously written track-tests and road car group tests in which offered far far more handling details than any of today. And no I am not dreaming, I have saved a lot of these mags, and re-read them every now and again when I want to recall what good auto journalism is all about. Simon, actually there is no comparison at all really. Todays articles lack any sort of objectivity or even subjective consistency at all. (If you do have any recommendations of good articles please do let me know) In fact there isnt even the text available to be descriptive In the first place- just for pictures! So absolutely we could do this better! But no we do not need to go to the extremes you suggest to do so.
We do not need so many measurements of speed and g forces. We simply need back to back comparisons of cars in convoy. Also we are not looking for which car has the most grip or speed, but rather the ones which have enough speed and grip combined with special qualities that drivers would find the most useful on real roads. Qualities like steering feel, progressiveness, ability to regain control, predictability, stability etc. Id bet such a comparison could best start with you Simon. As a True Grip feature comparing an Impreza with a Evo- finally we could get a understanding on really what these cars do in x,y,z situations. We could learn which dynamics/systems help the driver as opposed to leave him/her as a passenger, out of the loop unable to know when the car will not make that next corner!
Thanks, JL
26 August 2002, 05:52 PM
#200
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Where age and treachery reins over youthful exuberance
Posts: 5,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeremy, the idea of Simon testing cars is an excellent one. I know him a little and he is exceptionally qualified. But I think he would admit that any back-to-back testing would only be valid for a restricted number of identical tests conducted within a few hours of eachother. This is why the motor industry built MIRA and their prototype cars spend thousands of hours pounding around it laden with computer monitored sensors. And then a few million road miles.
You're probably right that in general magazine car tests have become more superficial, but that is because that is what their readers want. Motor went bust many years ago and, believe it or not, Max Power is by far the biggest-selling motoring mag in Britain.
Also, when it comes to truly objective and exhaustive testing no magazine can ever achieve that. The simple reason being (apart from massive and unsustainable cost, ref Motor) that they only get cars on test for two weeks and have no control over the weather.
Best regards,
Richard.
PS Edited to add that, while I'm on, Performance Car tested two 'identical' RWD and 4WD cars some years ago. I think the cars were a BMW 525 and a 525X which was a 4x4 they produced for a very limited time. Test Editor Barker swore the RWD would be faster, but the 4WD won it by a whisker. So what does that prove? Proabably nothing
[Edited by Hoppy - 8/26/2002 5:58:15 PM]
You're probably right that in general magazine car tests have become more superficial, but that is because that is what their readers want. Motor went bust many years ago and, believe it or not, Max Power is by far the biggest-selling motoring mag in Britain.
Also, when it comes to truly objective and exhaustive testing no magazine can ever achieve that. The simple reason being (apart from massive and unsustainable cost, ref Motor) that they only get cars on test for two weeks and have no control over the weather.
Best regards,
Richard.
PS Edited to add that, while I'm on, Performance Car tested two 'identical' RWD and 4WD cars some years ago. I think the cars were a BMW 525 and a 525X which was a 4x4 they produced for a very limited time. Test Editor Barker swore the RWD would be faster, but the 4WD won it by a whisker. So what does that prove? Proabably nothing
[Edited by Hoppy - 8/26/2002 5:58:15 PM]
26 August 2002, 06:25 PM
#201
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
happy,
Again, I must reiterate I am speaking about merely improving testing for handling. I see no good reason why this cannot happen. And I see no good reason why someone of Simon's talents could not do so. A back to back set of tests in varied conditions/roads with suitable criteria for repeatability and reaction could easily be done, lets not fall back of excuses.
Thanks, JL
Again, I must reiterate I am speaking about merely improving testing for handling. I see no good reason why this cannot happen. And I see no good reason why someone of Simon's talents could not do so. A back to back set of tests in varied conditions/roads with suitable criteria for repeatability and reaction could easily be done, lets not fall back of excuses.
Thanks, JL
26 August 2002, 06:43 PM
#202
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Where age and treachery reins over youthful exuberance
Posts: 5,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jezza, I'm on your side! I worked for many years as a magazine technical editor (not cars!) but over the last decade all product reviews have been 'dumbed down' and I don't like it either. What I'm saying is that it's not going to change. Sorry, but true.
On the other hand, this thing called the internet is a wonderful invention for uncovering incredibly interesting but often obscure detailed information. ScoobyNet is entirely devoted to just one model of one make of car! Whatever you want to know about a Subaru Impreza, someone on here will know it And unless it's something commercially sensitive, someone will tell you - all for free.
So I'm not complaining
Cheers,
Richard.
On the other hand, this thing called the internet is a wonderful invention for uncovering incredibly interesting but often obscure detailed information. ScoobyNet is entirely devoted to just one model of one make of car! Whatever you want to know about a Subaru Impreza, someone on here will know it
And unless it's something commercially sensitive, someone will tell you - all for free. So I'm not complaining
Cheers,
Richard.
26 August 2002, 06:55 PM
#203
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happy,
Well if your on my side you will realize that the only way to judge the (evo)lution of a car is to compare it with its peers. I see no harm in Scoobynet comparing the Impreza to its peers. After all Scoobynet is read by quite a few influential industry people, who probably have the capacity to use the comparisons to build Impreza's that are even better in the future. Lets not close ourselves off here limiting the future development of the Impreza to comparisons only with itself!
Thanks, JL
Well if your on my side you will realize that the only way to judge the (evo)lution of a car is to compare it with its peers. I see no harm in Scoobynet comparing the Impreza to its peers. After all Scoobynet is read by quite a few influential industry people, who probably have the capacity to use the comparisons to build Impreza's that are even better in the future. Lets not close ourselves off here limiting the future development of the Impreza to comparisons only with itself!
Thanks, JL
26 August 2002, 06:55 PM
#204
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hoppy, very true !
Jeremy, I think the only mag in the world (as far as I know them of course) that does repeatable back to back testing is Sport Auto. It's a crying shame that it's only available in German ... but the setup is: same (very competent, read brilliant) driver doing the same tests on the same circuit (NurburgRing) with all types of road/surface/corners you can think of. Next to that, windtunnel testing, a load of objective criteria (and even an explanation as to how they test). As far as performance cars go, there is no equivalent that I know of. Not Evo, not Car, etc... Dismiss it all you like in the Anglo-Saxon world, your loss really...
See http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp for the results of those tests BTW.
Simon would probably be able to do even better testing, but his body physique might skew power to weight ratio's too much (just a joke )
If I had money, I'd publish that mag in English. It is *exactly* what you'd all want to read.
Edited to make things clickable
[Edited by EvilBevel - 8/26/2002 6:57:05 PM]
Jeremy, I think the only mag in the world (as far as I know them of course) that does repeatable back to back testing is Sport Auto. It's a crying shame that it's only available in German ... but the setup is: same (very competent, read brilliant) driver doing the same tests on the same circuit (NurburgRing) with all types of road/surface/corners you can think of. Next to that, windtunnel testing, a load of objective criteria (and even an explanation as to how they test). As far as performance cars go, there is no equivalent that I know of. Not Evo, not Car, etc... Dismiss it all you like in the Anglo-Saxon world, your loss really...
See http://www.track-challenge.com/main.asp for the results of those tests BTW.
Simon would probably be able to do even better testing, but his body physique might skew power to weight ratio's too much (just a joke
)If I had money, I'd publish that mag in English. It is *exactly* what you'd all want to read.
Edited to make things clickable
[Edited by EvilBevel - 8/26/2002 6:57:05 PM]
26 August 2002, 07:17 PM
#205
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Evil,
thank you for enlightening us about Sport Auto! Its sounds as if they are one of the few that actually give a sh#- about testing. Indeed I agree with you too that I bet Simon could do a better job-as well as Mark Hales or John Barker. I think they could do better than the Germans because in addition to utilizing the meticulous testing methodologies, the best English drivers seem better able to speak about the nuances of subjective handling characteristics,(progresivness, predicability, feel of on-limit reactions etc) such as those able to help a driver percieve better the reations of their car as well as its intentions.
Evil, it might be very informative for those of us who cannot speak German if you might let us know every now and again what Auto Sport says about certain cars.
Such as, what do they think of the Impreza?
thank you for enlightening us about Sport Auto! Its sounds as if they are one of the few that actually give a sh#- about testing. Indeed I agree with you too that I bet Simon could do a better job-as well as Mark Hales or John Barker. I think they could do better than the Germans because in addition to utilizing the meticulous testing methodologies, the best English drivers seem better able to speak about the nuances of subjective handling characteristics,(progresivness, predicability, feel of on-limit reactions etc) such as those able to help a driver percieve better the reations of their car as well as its intentions.
Evil, it might be very informative for those of us who cannot speak German if you might let us know every now and again what Auto Sport says about certain cars.
Such as, what do they think of the Impreza?
26 August 2002, 09:21 PM
#206
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mycroft my man, not adding to the debate at all.
Just waiting to see how long you behave yourself! You see there are a lot of people out there that do respact other marques without needless disparagement. Close.
Just waiting to see how long you behave yourself! You see there are a lot of people out there that do respact other marques without needless disparagement. Close.
26 August 2002, 11:39 PM
#207
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeremy ... the title of the Impreza test was "Good egg or firestarter" (very roughly translated).
In short... they were totally *over the moon* with it. They are often accused of being a "German" mag, so favoring Porkers, Audi, BMW etc... but ...
Funny thing is... they adored the Impreza (also tested it as a long termer, meaning 62.000 miles) as well as the Evo6. They admitted they were quite surprised. They would probably still say today there has been no car with the same value for money in any test they did. For comparison, they totally *slagged* (in a polite German way) the Golf 4-motion...
What still puzzles me until today ... they didn't think the Impreza understeered. (talking MY00 GT Turbo here). That snippet made me realize it's all about how & where we drive these cars. It's also a pretty bold statement. But.
We are talking Horst Von Saurma here, a man that can do 7:30 laps ... My best laptime in the same car would be about 2 minutes more, so very very hard for me to say he is wrong... He lapped the Impreza in 8:37 (full course, so about 8:10 bridge to gantry)
Other snippets about "we constantly fight over who get's the keys to the Impreza at the weekend" really brought it home: they loved the car to bits. As an aside, they had even more respect for the Evo6, so much that (together with Ralliart Germany) they prepared one to participate in the 2002 24hours of the Ring.
I understand what you say about subtle language, but, even if German is only my 4th language, they really know how to write a fantastic article, bold, honest, but poëtic at the same time.
They also compared AWD systems later on doing some tests up a snow covered hill, and again they still praised the "ricer". Quite peculiar for a German mag.
Their articles are both "founded" and well written. As I said, if only they would have an English translation...
In their last big contest, the main price was a MY02 STi ...
In short... they were totally *over the moon* with it. They are often accused of being a "German" mag, so favoring Porkers, Audi, BMW etc... but ...
Funny thing is... they adored the Impreza (also tested it as a long termer, meaning 62.000 miles) as well as the Evo6. They admitted they were quite surprised. They would probably still say today there has been no car with the same value for money in any test they did. For comparison, they totally *slagged* (in a polite German way) the Golf 4-motion...
What still puzzles me until today ... they didn't think the Impreza understeered. (talking MY00 GT Turbo here). That snippet made me realize it's all about how & where we drive these cars. It's also a pretty bold statement. But.
We are talking Horst Von Saurma here, a man that can do 7:30 laps ... My best laptime in the same car would be about 2 minutes more, so very very hard for me to say he is wrong... He lapped the Impreza in 8:37 (full course, so about 8:10 bridge to gantry)
Other snippets about "we constantly fight over who get's the keys to the Impreza at the weekend" really brought it home: they loved the car to bits. As an aside, they had even more respect for the Evo6, so much that (together with Ralliart Germany) they prepared one to participate in the 2002 24hours of the Ring.
I understand what you say about subtle language, but, even if German is only my 4th language, they really know how to write a fantastic article, bold, honest, but poëtic at the same time.
They also compared AWD systems later on doing some tests up a snow covered hill, and again they still praised the "ricer". Quite peculiar for a German mag.
Their articles are both "founded" and well written. As I said, if only they would have an English translation...
In their last big contest, the main price was a MY02 STi ...
27 August 2002, 12:39 AM
#208
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>> They also compared AWD systems later on doing some tests up a snow covered hill, and again they still praised the "ricer". <<
That would be the nr2/2001 SportAuto. Armin Schwarz drove the Impreza WRX, BMW330xi, Audi RS4, VW Bora V6, EVO VI and Porsche 911 Turbo on a small, snowy course with tight corners, uphill and downhill. The WRX won uphill, being second downhill (behind the EVO).
They praised the WRX for its overall package, handling and its very good ABS-system (!) but found it to be a bit nervous on high speed.
(The article is a bit too large to translate)
That would be the nr2/2001 SportAuto. Armin Schwarz drove the Impreza WRX, BMW330xi, Audi RS4, VW Bora V6, EVO VI and Porsche 911 Turbo on a small, snowy course with tight corners, uphill and downhill. The WRX won uphill, being second downhill (behind the EVO).
They praised the WRX for its overall package, handling and its very good ABS-system (!) but found it to be a bit nervous on high speed.
(The article is a bit too large to translate)
27 August 2002, 01:03 AM
#210
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(jeremy, your e-mail bounced.. but i couldn't find a circuittest for the Beemer)
About AWD - RWD...
On the Nürburgring the Porsche Carrera 2 (rwd) did 8:17, the Carrera 4 (awd) took 8:23, 6 seconds more. On 0-200 the Carrera 4 was 0.8 sec slower than his rwd brother. SportAuto does write however that the (slower) tracktime with the awd was easier to realize because the car was better to drive on the limit.
Thanks to the awd the 911 could corner with a somewhat higher g than the rwd. (1.25 - 1.2)
Hunk
[Edited by Hunk - 8/27/2002 1:52:01 AM]
About AWD - RWD...
On the Nürburgring the Porsche Carrera 2 (rwd) did 8:17, the Carrera 4 (awd) took 8:23, 6 seconds more. On 0-200 the Carrera 4 was 0.8 sec slower than his rwd brother. SportAuto does write however that the (slower) tracktime with the awd was easier to realize because the car was better to drive on the limit.
Thanks to the awd the 911 could corner with a somewhat higher g than the rwd. (1.25 - 1.2)
Hunk
[Edited by Hunk - 8/27/2002 1:52:01 AM]