More ACR butt kicking....At Laguna Seca

[SnakeBitten]

Just got the new MT. First off you are all used to the Viper not winning despite leaving a trail of disemboweled supercars in its wake. No difference in this latest test. Randy Pobst did the tests. He loved the Viper but placed it 7th behind the M3, RX8, R8, GTR, Porsche etc because of the usual idiotic testing parameters. There were even more useless test parameters that conspired to keep the Viper from getting the top spot. Too crude and brutal lol.

The good stuff. Viper ACR destroyed 2nd place by almost 5 seconds. No need for how bad the others placed got ate. Viper did a 1:35 lap while the next closest contender did 1:40 and slower. The lap breakdown showed how much of a staggering advantage the ACR has over anything thrown at it, Even Pobst said this is a totally different performance dimension than any production car present. In some turns the Viper was almost 20mph faster than the GTR or R8 which posted similar 1:40 laps. This car just destroys the competition. The Porsche turbo was almost 7 secs slower. Simply an incredible machine. BTW the R8 won overall.

America's Best Handling Car - Track Testing - Comparison - Motor Trend

 

[Warfang]

Another "honest" comparison.

Quick count... how many Audi/GM/Nissan/Infiniti ads are there compared to Chrysler in that issue?

 

[ViperTony]

When I see "Subjective Rating/Ranking" I throw the article away. It's such a load of **** I honestly don't understand why people buy Motor Trend anymore. I can't remember the last time I picked up a car mag. They're useless.

 

[SnakeBitten]

Carmag politics notwithstanding how does that 1:35 lap by the ACR at Laguna sound to the resident hotshoes?

 

[Camfab]

Seriously, I think there is a secret campaign to kill the ACR by the mags. Not sure if GM is behind it or what. Every article I've read has it destroying every car in the field and then it boils down to refinement. I'm not kidding here either, if the Corvette or any other manufacturer made a similar car it would be plastered over every mag as the KING. I'm sorry but if anyone does'nt realize this is the baddest performance car on the planet they are'nt real car guys. I'm not brand loyal either, I've had a boat load of GM products and I love the FORD GT as well.

 

[wallbanger]

NO kidding... the driver doesn't look like a viper guy anyways

 

[Warfang]

I've said all along... these mags CANNOT lie about the results, but they sure can move the target around. They do it to appease their advertisers. They declare the loser the winner and let the numbers speak for themselves. It's like a footrace and you declare the loser of the race the winner because he wore better shoes.

 

[Chuck 98 RT/10]

Quick count... how many Audi/GM/Nissan/Infiniti ads are there compared to Chrysler in that issue?

That's it. Like you said, they can't about the lap times and that is all that matters.

In fact, I laugh when they award points for daily driver or trunk space. Seriously no problem, I'll concede those. That's like giving somebody a win because they have matching purse and shoes.

 

[j-rho]

Carmag politics notwithstanding how does that 1:35 lap by the ACR at Laguna sound to the resident hotshoes?

It's a pretty quick time - when PMUM won at Laguna in '03, his quick race lap was a 1:34.2. In the time since, they have modified the track to make it a couple/few seconds quicker, depending on who you talk to. The quick SWC GT guys have dipped into the 1:29s there, though there have been other changes to potentially speed the cars up that clouds things. The quick Viper in qualifying at their last race there (2007) was Jeff Altenburg with a 1:30.6.

It's certain Pobst had to be leaving a second or two on the table vs. a full qualifying effort; viewed in that light, the car's performance is pretty amazing.

 

[VAViper]

I've said all along... these mags CANNOT lie about the results, but they sure can move the target around. They do it to appease their advertisers. They declare the loser the winner and let the numbers speak for themselves. It's like a footrace and you declare the loser of the race the winner because he wore better shoes.

That's a great analogy. This is the reason I no longer subscribe.

 

[HI-NOS-Viper]

Does not suprise me at all. You know I use to buy the MT magazine out here in Baghdad in the PX. We didnt have many choices to pick from. They use to be ok. Use to give fair comparisons. Its like they just cant accept the fact the ACR is such a dominating car. There has to be a conspiracy against the ACR. It could have to do with politics and them trying to get away from the gas guzzling, more geared towards track cars, they want the more all around everyday driver efficient cars. The politics maybe are forcing them to use other standards when rating these vehicles other than just track times. Lets face it alot of people read these magazines, and I am sure alot of people base purchasing decisions on ratings according to these mags, the ones that dont see the full picture.

Its ok though we all know who dominates, who crushes everything that trys to compete against it. None of the Nanny having, trunk space, spare tire, cup holding cars can touch the ACR. A true work of engineering art. To those of us that do know what matters, that is all that matters. To the rest of them, let them have there slower nanny having cars and think they rank higher than the dominating ACR. But if you are going to send them to a track in a magazine for the rest of the world to see, use ONE rating. Track time.

 

[viperbilliam]

Thing is, when it's such a terrific car, you want to take it with you more. That's when those nanny things matter more. Still, the article was a load of crap.

 

[viperrt]

Only two magazines come here: Mopar Muscle and Viper!