nurburg and top gear
 

can we please stop referencing these things? they arent quantitative objective factors and dont really tell us anything.

How else do you think they would test out a new "sports car?"
Do you have a better suggestion?

What would you suggest instead?

if it were up to me cars would be judged by rally!

500 prototypes for enthusiastic car fans (for free!) :happyanim:

Top Gear is just entertainment. People who take it for more than that are not doing themselves any favors. It's fun to watch but basically fake.

The Ring lap times have gotten way out of hand. The Ring is a very high speed course and though it is a great place to tune your suspension, actual lap times generally come down to how fast you can go on the straights. In a 12 mile course there are too many variables to use it as a reliable tool for comparisons.

Just my 2 cents

Nürburg Ring simulates street conditions, because of that it is being used as reference!

fixed it for you. It is a great place for testing and tuning suspension settings but a 12 mile course with a good amount of time spent in 6th gear means you can have a car with just ok handling and a ton of hp get a great time, but a car with great handling and not much hp will get an awful time. Personally I'd rather have the car with great handling. It's also hard to get comparable times since there are different course setups, different days with or without traffic and speed limits, no rules about what manufacturers can/cant change about the cars etc. If you are looking for an accurate comparison between cars you want to have as controlled an environment a possible.

well i get to work faster in my ls430 than my miata and those so it has to be the faster car because that is in actual street conditions. the ring is too big to have any real reference. use a much smaller track like buttonwillow where the driver and track contitions arent as big as a factor

EDIT:
Depending on which top gear you are watching, I'd have to respectfully disagree with you. I'll try to give my reason without sounding like a "fanboy." lol

Reasons I find that Top Gear (UK), can be seen as a source for "objective factors" are:

1) When testing a car they have a professional driving it.
2) They place it on a short track with different types of turns.
3) They compare other cars in that car's class.
4) They 'try' to be as unbiased to the car/company as possible (imo i think they do pretty well)

I mean, if you're going to buy a "sports car," wouldn't you want to see how it runs in a "sporty" environment? How many dealerships will be ok with you trying to do some maneuver that you plan on doing if purchasing a car while test driving it? That's why i reference that show and the nurb, because i can see the car at its FULL "sportiness."

Now, I do agree some of their segments are for entertainment purposes and are in no way helpful in deciding whether the car is worth your time or not, but i still think listening to that show's opinion can help influence your perception of a car.

That's just my 2 cents on that.
I personally love the (UK) show, but to each their own. :respekt:

I love the show too, but I would never make a buying decision based on one of the host's reviews, either negative or positive. I do think that their track is best thing out there for comparing cars. I was talking more about the flashy segments where Clarkson sees how much drifting he can do, or when they have their contests. They are fun to watch but not very useful as actual reviews. The Stig laps are great and I wish they would have him review the cars instead of the hosts. I want to know how it drives not how many cup holders it has. They should replace the boring interviews with Stig car reviews.

^ I generally prefer TopGear UK commentary and opinions because i resonate with their personalities and style of reviews. While its more entertaining than trying to be accurate, I don't think TopGear is complete void of being "real" to consumers like us.

5th gear and Edmond's that review cars try to be factual. Factual data isn't something that im completely into when reviewing a car. I really like the adjectives like..."it feels like wearing trousers that are made for fat blokes" or "its as fun as rubbing chilies in your eyes". I feel more in tune with those descriptions versus the equivalent, "the car is to big on the inside" or "a car lacking in performance". Those descriptions don't let me feel anything.

BTW even Topgear says stop benchmarking cars on the nurburgring.

That's true but it means a lot of the final judgement of the car is up to the reviewer's own personal bias. Just because Clarkson thinks one thing about a car doesn't mean it's true. Each host has their own idea of what a car should be and that shows through in their praising/panning of certain cars. It is always interesting though either way, it is definitely a good show to have around.

Just for fun, here are the top 10 Clarkson lines... In the world
http://www.jalopnik.com/5854141/the-...world/gallery/