|
I have to agree on the Ring, waaaaaay over-rated. First, there is no real governing body to determine how 'honest' the participants actually are so I can more or less work whatever VooDoo I choose if I want to 'win' badly enough. Two, despite the perception that the Ring is somehow the best single indicator of how a car performs in general the truth is that the Ring, like all race tracks, favors certain types of cars.
Example? As a Ford guy I obviously have an affinity for the Shelby Cobra roadsters of the 60's, the 289ci version of which was extremely successful in FIA competition.......everywhere but the Ring. Why? The Ring favors cars which perform well at sustained high speeds......very high speeds. The Cobra's somewhat brick-like aerodynamics rendered the car nearly useless at the Ring despite the genuinely fearsome reputation the car acquired, and deservedly so, elsewhere. If Shelby's rivals had gone to the Ring first and used the performance of cars there as a benchmark for what could be expected elsewhere they would have been extremely disappointed. That said, I have long been surprised that nobody has yet noticed that all the great racers of yore who likely knew the Nurb far better than most folks wheeling cars around that track today never imbued it with such mythical properties. Put simply, there is no magic race track that is somehow a benchmark indication of overall performance.
As for the CTS-V....easily the best car GM has produced since the 63-67 Stingray and without doubt one of the five best cars GM has ever built. As for any comparisons to the Panamera......the difference here is that the Panamera is arguably pretty silly while the Caddy isn't. That said, I still do not understand the lack of a naturally aspirated, LS3 V8 in this car.....huge oversight IMHO.
|