I will be needing help building the database

[nthfinity]

:arrow: http://www.jabbasworld.net/viewforum.php?f=197

There is simply so much information out there; and that has already been posted, that it is a lot of work for one person to go through it all, and search it just myself. I am really hoping that the JW members will help get the ball rolling to have the most complete information ANYWHERE!

so; if there is a topic in the scans section, message me a link to it and the tell me the data that is in it, so i dont have to read the whole thing to get something that may or may not be in there. Also, quote your source of the data to keep us all honest... and use a scanner/photo if it is not online.


For now, this isn't about comparing these cars vs. any other cars... but just themselves. However, they can help people realize that some of the greatest cars in the world do indeed come from America It isn't all about straight line speed

The topics will be updated with the stats posted by other members, and myself. If there are other technical aspects that i might be missing, feel free to post them. However, while posting, ----------------------------------------------
Please PM me additional information, and resources here http://www.jabbasworld.net/privmsg.php?mode=post&u=6079
----------------------------------------------
I will edit all the data into the first post to make it all as easy to find when referencing the info in the future.

I hope everybody finds these topis useful, and informative!

[666fast]

I'm kind of confused LOL. If I have more info that I feel is relevent, am I suppose to add it to the thread myself, or PM you with the details so you can add it?

EDIT- I'm dumb. Add it myself, send you the proof.

[DeMoN]

The only problem here is that there is no ONE universal true data. Every car mag that tries the car, ends up with different numbers. Might be a good idea posting any amount of info found and saying what car-mag did that time.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by DeMoN The only problem here is that there is no ONE universal true data. Every car mag that tries the car, ends up with different numbers. Might be a good idea posting any amount of info found and saying what car-mag did that time.

I see NO problems.

perhaps you didn't even read what I wrote? Each Magazine has published thier data as accurate as they recorded it. Hogwash stays out.

If you are suggesting that the stats will be anything but bulletproof accurate, then you are mistaken.... so what if a few .1 of a second is different here and there. It's called testing conditions.

Good racing drivers will be extremely close to each others' lap times. It's good..... no, its damn good comparison.

[DeMoN]

.1 of a difference is very small I agree, but not all mags have error that small. Take the Lotus Elise's times for example. I've seen as much as .4 seconds apart.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by DeMoN .1 of a difference is very small I agree, but not all mags have error that small. Take the Lotus Elise's times for example. I've seen as much as .4 seconds apart.

.4 of a second... so now it either goes 0-60 in 5, or 4.6 seconds? that accounts for weather conditions, what kind of pavement... whether or not the optional tires/light weight wheels were used... for such a car, .4 of a second isn't much in my educated opinion.

its still a fast car for all of 1rst, and pretty handy in 2nd gear too. but we dont discuss those cars here

[DeMoN]

In my educated opinion... when comparing two cars, if you accept .4 of a difference to 60, then you suffer much more to 100.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by DeMoN In my educated opinion... when comparing two cars, if you accept .4 of a difference to 60, then you suffer much more to 100.

except thats far from true. Once the car has traction, it's distance will be parralell to the car that got off the line better. the only thing that will come into play is this: How cold is it, what is the barometric pressure, and how mcuh does the driver weigh?

[DeMoN]

I wrote, "when compairing two cars" so gear ratio, hp, lightnes, bla bla bla count. Im saying that a car that can do 5 secs vs one that does 5.5 secs to 60 are close till 60, but then the gap widens.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by DeMoN I wrote, "when compairing two cars" so gear ratio, hp, lightnes, bla bla bla count. Im saying that a car that can do 5 secs vs one that does 5.5 secs to 60 are close till 60, but then the gap widens.

and your point? thats why i'm including 0-100's, 1/4 mile etc. it makes judging accelleration much easier... on street tires; its extremely hard to break 4 seconds to 60.

of course the gap widens for the superior car. who ever said that all cars are equal? i think you are reading something that isn't there in what i said...

i had though your "comparing two cars" meant comparing two identical cars in two magazines... since that is all i am doing... i'm not comparing different cars stats, just one at a time

with all the data i expect to come in; such variances wont even come close to mattering.

I'm sure that you took chemistry, and learned the difference between "precice" and "accurate"

[DeMoN]

I learnt preciSe and accurate in Biology before Chem. The point I was trying to make is that adding (beside or on top of the time) which mag published what.

[nthfinity]

Originally Posted by DeMoN I learnt preciSe and accurate in Biology before Chem. The point I was trying to make is that adding (beside or on top of the time) which mag published what.

if you dont want to help, you could just say so...

the opposite extreme of his logic then is that no car has validated performance achievements recorded...this in turn means he has no basis for questioning the superiority of one car over the other

[DeMoN]

I WAS trying to help by pointing out it would be a good idea to add the friggin name of the magazine where the numbers are being obtained. It was you who deviated from the theme by saying "perhaps you didn't even read what I wrote?" Shees dood, you dont have to follow RC45's position "literally."

[yg60m]

It's started very hard !! Is it a battle of opinions again ?

What I understood is that we should post the reference of times posted, which is normal.
For the difference of times recorded (or did I understand ? ) , everybody already note that it can change ( a lot ? ) depending on magazines and cars tested so no need to argue on it IMO ...

[nthfinity]

^^^
the magazine will be mentioned, in some lower post.

the numbers are going to be extremely similar, and again; we get to exactly what i had posted earlier.

as accelleration gets past teh "initial" grip arena, the accelleration is going to be parallel for the SAME car.

for the C6 Z, the "slowest time i've seen is 4.0... the quickest was 3.5. and i've also seen 3.7, and 3.8. ... but 0-100 mph have almost all been that .3-.4 off as they were initially... they are the same friggin engines.

your arguement is lacking... and trying to suggest that the different magazines will actually get different results. the only thing that wont be weather, and launch technique accounted different is opinion.

oh, and if anybody wanted to "research" where that data came from... its not hard to read down below the first post.