Twins are slow? Not as slow as these cars!

[totopo]

[quote=babydriver;2052530]

Originally Posted by mav1178

Not a problem! I enjoy a spirited debate. With that in mind, check out this article from Road and Track concerning times with the Primacy vs. the Dunlop Direzza. It is clear that in every respect (in this trial) the Dunlop did better than the Primacy:

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cult...ransformation/

So to kind of clarify, I am not saying no tires are ever better than the primacy HP, but that primacy HP are decent tires, comparable to the UHP class. Whenever people talk about track times, and look up the real data, and see that the fr-s times are kind of meh, everyone always says, "it's on prius tires, put it on better tires and it'll beat <insert car here>". And I'm saying that's not quite true. The primacy HP gets very reasonable OEM tire times. While you can improve on it, it's not like swap to a reasonable streetable summer tire and all of a sudden it jumps to the M4/mustang gt whatever class.

So to clarify further, tires are generally grouped in vague classes. Yes the best tire in one class may be faster than the worst tire in the class above, but the classes work decently well. They go (roughly)

Racing Slicks
DOT legal racing slicks
DOT legal track tires
Extreme Performance tires
Maximum Performance tires
Ultra High Performance Tires
High Performance Tires
All the other Summer tires
Everything else

So the Primacy HP, even though they are classified as GT touring summer tires, they actually get decent lap times, in the UHP range. The Dunlop direzza star spec are in the Extreme Performance category, 2 steps ups. They weren't great EP tires, and why they killed it quickly and developed the star spec II, but they weren't bad. Very few cars come out of the factory with OEM EP tires for a lot of reasons. But when you start saying a car on XXX tires is faster than YYY car, then it's not quite a same comparison because both cars are now running different tires. getting 2 seconds from a tire to a EP tire is actually not that impressive. It's pretty standard, and some cars can see a lot more benefit.

PS. a lot of people, especially older people, use UTQG as a vague marker of grip. It is no longer really valid. It used to be roughly okay, but tire tech has tremendously improved in the last couple of decades. The modern push, especially in the performance driven tires, is fueled by autocross and club racing, which usually has tire classes based on UTQG. So that's why there are certain UTQG's that tires come out in. But a modern tire with high UTQG may outperform an older tire with worse UTQG. For example, the Nitto NT05 has a UTQG of 200, but it's currently one of the best EP tires, and faster than tons of tires with UTQG's in the 100's, and faster than older tires with UTQG's under 100. It was specifically designed to hit that 200 goal so that it can run in certain "street tire" car classes. This is also party of the reason that when looking at fastestlap times, it's important to look at cars produced in similar years. Tires keep getting better so lap times keep dropping, and they don't go back and retest old cars on new tires.

[tahdizzle]

[quote=totopo;2052763]

Originally Posted by babydriver

So to kind of clarify, I am not saying no tires are ever better than the primacy HP, but that primacy HP are decent tires, comparable to the UHP class. Whenever people talk about track times, and look up the real data, and see that the fr-s times are kind of meh, everyone always says, "it's on prius tires, put it on better tires and it'll beat <insert car here>". And I'm saying that's not quite true. The primacy HP gets very reasonable OEM tire times. While you can improve on it, it's not like swap to a reasonable streetable summer tire and all of a sudden it jumps to the M4/mustang gt whatever class.

So to clarify further, tires are generally grouped in vague classes. Yes the best tire in one class may be faster than the worst tire in the class above, but the classes work decently well. They go (roughly)


Racing Slicks
DOT legal racing slicks
DOT legal track tires
Extreme Performance tires
Maximum Performance tires
Ultra High Performance Tires
High Performance Tires
All the other Summer tires
Everything else

So the Primacy HP, even though they are classified as GT touring summer tires, they actually get decent lap times, in the UHP range. The Dunlop direzza star spec are in the Extreme Performance category, 2 steps ups. They weren't great EP tires, and why they killed it quickly and developed the star spec II, but they weren't bad. Very few cars come out of the factory with OEM EP tires for a lot of reasons. But when you start saying a car on XXX tires is faster than YYY car, then it's not quite a same comparison because both cars are now running different tires. getting 2 seconds from a tire to a EP tire is actually not that impressive. It's pretty standard, and some cars can see a lot more benefit.

PS. a lot of people, especially older people, use UTQG as a vague marker of grip. It is no longer really valid. It used to be roughly okay, but tire tech has tremendously improved in the last couple of decades. The modern push, especially in the performance driven tires, is fueled by autocross and club racing, which usually has tire classes based on UTQG. So that's why there are certain UTQG's that tires come out in. But a modern tire with high UTQG may outperform an older tire with worse UTQG. For example, the Nitto NT05 has a UTQG of 200, but it's currently one of the best EP tires, and faster than tons of tires with UTQG's in the 100's, and faster than older tires with UTQG's under 100. It was specifically designed to hit that 200 goal so that it can run in certain "street tire" car classes. This is also party of the reason that when looking at fastestlap times, it's important to look at cars produced in similar years. Tires keep getting better so lap times keep dropping, and they don't go back and retest old cars on new tires.

Kind of off topic but nt05s chunk bad.

[DantKR]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

To nit-pick just a bit more, there's also been some debate about whether new Stig is faster than old Stig.

But generally I agree, the list of Top Gear track times is much more credible than the first SOW list you posted. Same publication, same methodology, generally same driver, all professional drivers, etc.

If you'll notice, there are also less surprises to be found on that list (i.e., you don't see the Twins beating a Z06, Ford GT, 911 Turbo, M5, etc)

They stated when they brought in the new stig that he had posted very similar times as the old one in the same cars/conditions.

[babydriver]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

To nit-pick just a bit more, there's also been some debate about whether new Stig is faster than old Stig.

I wondered if anyone would mention that! Since the new Stig's identity is not known (yet), we'll just have to speculate on that one.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

Kind of off topic but nt05s chunk bad.

Great... was that on a Twin or other lightweight car? I knew they were among the slowest EP tires, but didn't know about the chunking problems.

I had chunking issues on my old Sumis and thought I had gotten past that by switching to NT05's. Haven't see any chunking yet, but have only done one track day on them so far.

Originally Posted by DantKR

They stated when they brought in the new stig that he had posted very similar times as the old one in the same cars/conditions.

Yeah I don't know or care enough about the Stig to say haha. I just know people have gone back and forth on the issue.

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Great... was that on a Twin or other lightweight car? I knew they were among the slowest EP tires, but didn't know about the chunking problems.

I had chunking issues on my old Sumis and thought I had gotten past that by switching to NT05's. Haven't see any chunking yet, but have only done one track day on them so far.

This is from experience on AutoX and on heavier cars.

[totopo]

Originally Posted by babydriver

Here's another group of times, these from Top Gear, most with the Stig, but a few with Vettel and Hamilton. The GT 86 is number 153 on the list:

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/top_gear_track.html

Some cars that were slower than the GT 86 on this track:

Nissan 350Z
Mazda RX-8
BMW M5
BMW M3
Lotus Esprit
Audi TT 3.2 Quattro
Mercedes SLK 350
Jaguar XKR
Lotus Elise
Porsche 986 Boxster
BMW Z4 3.0i
Honda S2000
Maserati Coupe Cambiocorsa
Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione
Porsche 944
Porsche 928
Aston Martin DB5
Mini Cooper (dead last on this list) - Richard Hammond

All were driven by the Stig on the same course except as noted above. That removes the variable of the driver completely (except for the Mini Cooper). It should be noted that the Ford GT did considerably better in the hands of the Stig, finishing 45th on the list, well ahead of the GT-86.

I'm not too big a fan of top gear times. I think it's fairly accurate for the super cars, like the top 50. But they are a entertainment show, and like best motoring, I feel like they sandbag some cars and try harder for other cars. Like for example, the 370z superlap, the stig misshifts twice and fiddles with the shifter the entire time, and that's supposedly the "fastest lap" that they post. Also, the corvettes never seem to get a good time on top gear, but they consistently beat super cars on other laps with pro drivers. Similarly how the vettes can never seem to do well on best motoring. But in any case, let's take a look at that list again. The z4 was running on vw, why I posted that reply. If you also take out all the cars produced before like 07 (tiresssssssssss), it looks more like:

123. Subaru Impreza WRX STI 1:28.20 115 '07 300 / 1527 The Stig
124. BMW Z4 sDrive35i 1:28.20 115 '09 306 / 1580 The Stig
126. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo X FQ300 SST 1:28.22 115 '08 291 / 1590 The Stig
127. Opel Astra OPC 2012 1:28.30 115 '12 280 / 0 The Stig
130. VW Golf GTI (MkVII) 1:28.60 115 '13 230 / 1351 The Stig
136. Ford Focus RS 1:29.30 114 '09 305 / 1467 The Stig
138. Ford Focus ST 1:29.60 113 '12 250 / 1432 The Stig
139. VW Golf Mk7 GTi (220 hp-version) 1:29.60 113 '13 220 / 1351 The Stig
145. Renault Megane Sport F1-Team R26 1:30.60 112 '07 231 / 1375 The Stig
146. Ford Focus RS500 1:30.80 d 112 '10 350 / 1450 The Stig
152. Vauxhall VXR8 1:31.30 111 '07 417 / 1812 The Stig
153. Toyota GT-86 1:31.30 111 '12 200 / 1180 Stig
163. Renault Clio RS 200 EDC 1:32.00 110 '12 200 / 0 The Stig
169. VW Golf Mk V GTI Edition 30 1:32.60 110 '07 230 / 1332 The Stig
171. Ford Fiesta ST 1:32.70 110 '13 180 / 1248 The Stig
179. Peugeot 208 GTI 1:33.20 109 '12 200 / 1160 The Stig

Which is pretty consistent with what is posted previously.

PS, stop trying to compare modern lap times to cars in the early 2000's. It reminds me of that guy that was trying to compare the frs times to a 1970's 911 turbo lap time and say the frs is faster than a 911 turbo.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by totopo

PS, stop trying to compare modern lap times to cars in the early 2000's. It reminds me of that guy that was trying to compare the frs times to a 1970's 911 turbo lap time and say the frs is faster than a 911 turbo.

Bet I can kick his ass!

[babydriver]

totopo, you are guilty of a couple of logical fallacies here:

1. Cherry picking your data -- leads to the conclusion that you wanted

2. Ad hominum attack -- if you don't like the data, attack the source. Which is fine if you then do not use the same data (cherry picked) to make your own point. I asked you if you have a better source of lap times. Do you?

[totopo]

Originally Posted by babydriver

totopo, you are guilty of a couple of logical fallacies here:

1. Cherry picking your data -- leads to the conclusion that you wanted

2. Ad hominum attack -- if you don't like the data, attack the source. Which is fine if you then do not use the same data (cherry picked) to make your own point. I asked you if you have a better source of lap times. Do you?

I'm just explaining why the times are what they are. When you have differing data, you have to look at everything and analyze why it is different. When you see a lap time where the frs is faster than a ford GT, your first reaction should be to say, "why"? Look at multiple data points, look at as many factors as you can, then work from there.

If you look at the all the times on fastestlaps, then certain trends appear. The best ones to look at are ones with smiliar drivers, such as Autozeiting, Hockenheim short, vairano handling course, the randy pobst times for the Cali tracks, top gear track, tsukuba, some of the nordschliefe times (the industry sponsored or pro driver ones). When you start to do that, there are basically no suprises. Most of the cars line up pretty similarly across all the tracks. Sure some cars switch places on one track compared to the other. There is variation from different conditions, some tracks favor higher hp, some tracks favor lighter, etc. etc. But when you look at all of those tracks together, them most of the cars end up in the same place. So if you look at the top gear times, and go "OH WOW THE FR-S IS FASTER THAN AN Z4, M3, M5, S2000, AND 350Z!!!!!" Guess what, a ford focus ST is faster than all those times too. And so is the VW golf GTI mk7. Now in your mind, is a ford focus ST faster than an M3? If you think the data is not consistent, you have to think why.

I wouldn't quite say I am "cherry picking" data to prove a point, I am trying to synthesize all the data to make sense of things and have consistency. So let's look at the Z4 by comparison on all the tracks:

Autozeitung test track
77. BMW Z4 sDrive 35is 1:42.30 '10 340 / 1605
280. Toyota GT-86 1:49.90 '12 200 / 1180

Hockenheim Short
273. BMW Z4 sDrive 35is 1:16.10 123 '10 340 / 1605
468. Toyota GT-86 1:19.40 118 '12 200 / 1180

Vairano Handling Course
109. BMW Z4 sDrive35i 1:23.91 '09 306 / 1580
148. Toyota GT-86 1:26.22 '12 200 / 1180

Top Gear Track
124. BMW Z4 sDrive35i 1:28.20 115 '09 306 / 1580 The Stig
153. Toyota GT-86 1:31.30 111 '12 200 / 1180 Stig

no suprises.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by babydriver

OK, fine. Please provide a credible one.

I'm not sure there is one. I would look to the motor trend lightning laps.

[themadscientist]

I'm already tired of the little man syndrome I'm seeing in some BRZ/FRS owners. It's bad enough when people outside the community erroneously bag on the car using false paradigms, to see owners internalize it and get defensive is sad.

It's a $30,000 car with 200HP. It's never going to smoke a Mustang down a drag strip. It's never going to show an Elise its as on a track and it's never going to carry as much as Forester and if you want real carbon fiber interior, buy a Ferrari. Quit making excuses and looking for any data points that skew reality towards whatever erroneous assumption you are trying to make.

No excuses are required because it's an amazing, nimble, speedY sportY car at an attainable price point with the ability to adapt and evolve to individual driver desires with basic bolt ons and upgrades readily available on the rapidly expanding aftermarket.

If you are mad and embarrassed because it won't do what it was'nt built to do (see above) then that is YOUR fault, not the car's. If you lay awake at night frustrated that the car doesn't have 500hp and something twice the price can go faster than it in a straight line or around the track I suggest two possible courses of action you one dimensional, pathetic, striving, confused little person.

1. Realize what the car is, that your expectations are unreasonable given the facts and begin to enjoy the fun little car you bought.

2. Realize that you are suffering from debilitating and terminal low self esteem and that without the ability to mature and grow you must insulate yourself from all possibility of being stripped of your chosen automotive shell and thus required to exhibit a personality of your own, effect humility and be able to appreciate your own personal growth irrespective of whatever car you own. Drive your FRS or BRZ to your Nissan dealer and trade it in on this.



See how the ladies are already hot and bothered and you aren't even in there? That means the car doesn't need you to get YOU laid either and if you already need it for all the other areas where you can't perform I guarantee you you suck at attracting women too so just get past the denial, buy a car that can easily hide what a loser you are and be happy. Happy as a hippo.

Even better, your old car will have a second chance as it sits on the used car lot at that Nissan dealer that sold you the GT-R, the Chevrolet dealer that sold you the Corvette, the Ford dealer that sold you the Mustang or whatever car you chose as a personality prosthetic.

Perhaps the very next day some person who gets what these little cars are and loves them on the merits will be able to buy it and love where you just denied you hated it and made excuses for the mistake YOU made when you bought it. Sell to Good Home.

"why did the last guy get rid of them?"

"they wouldn't fetch a ball."

[tahdizzle]

Don't listen to @themadscientist, he's just a troll. You guys keep on debating.


and

[themadscientist]

Must I punish you again?