[eddiehaskell]

Originally Posted by wjones14

fdjizm, you might be wasting your breath, er typing, trying to debate something with eddiehaskell. He doesn't really listen to anything other than his own preconceived notions.

I will correct your misinformation one time and one time only. I'm not trying to be mean or or snarky, but it's kind of getting tiring.

There's another thread where he's discounting Road & Track's slalom and skidpad test on the Camaro SS, because R&T said the Camaro's results were a "far cry" from the 2010 track pack-equipped Mustang GT.

I didn't discount them because the Mustang put up a better number. As I told you - different day, different temps, different driver, different surface conditions, different day, etc etc. There is no way to standardize test with so many varibales.

And then when I asked why, he told me that I was doing too much "magazine racing"... which is exactly what he's doing here, btw.

You were. I'm comparing MPH - an objective piece of data. You could argue that temperature could've affected the Mustang's MPH, but I don't think it could make up 3 mph in equal conditions. Regardless, what I'm doing is showing people what it might take to out MPH a Camaro SS.

Then he went on to explain that skidpad and slalom are not true indicators of handling and to argue his point,

Commonly known truths.

he claimed that the Mazda Miata is an excellent handling car (I agree)

As you should.

and yet it gets crappy skidpad and slalom numbers (I don't think that part is really true, and he never provided any numbers,

You want numbers? I've got numbers:

Car and Driver: http://www.caranddriver.com/buying_g...cs+page-2.html

0.89g

Edmunds: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...ticleId=114886

0.88g

Autoweek: http://www.mazdas247.com/forum/showt...hp?t=123618013

0.88g

Using your logic, the Mustang and Camaro outhandle the Miata.

but nonetheless, that was his argument). He said the true test of a car's handling is on a road course.

This is where critical reading skills are crucial.

Here is what I said:

Skidpad and slalom numbers are just that...numbers. Handling is better scored while transitioning around a road or track.

So yes, on a road or road course is where you can see how a car handles. Going in a circle and measuring g force means nothing. Transitioning around a back road or around a road course is where a car's handling can be put to the test and you can get an idea of how the car handles. When you drive a great handling car, do you venture out to a parking lot and see how fast you can drive in a circle?

So then I showed him Car & Driver's "Lightning Lap" results from the past 3 years, where annually they take a bunch of cars to Virginia International Raceway's 4.2 mile road course and compare the lap times. Guess which car came in dead last out of 50 cars? .... yep, the Mazda Miata.

You didn't show me anything. I'm fully aware of C&D's results. What you did do is prove my point that handling CANNOT be objectified. You can't say car X pulled more g's therefore it handles better than car Y. That's silly. It's silly to say the Mustang handles better because it pulled more g's (in a seperate test). What you would need to do is take both cars to the road course or on a back road. You error is that you believe there is a magic number that quantifies handling. That number doesn't exist.

He finally said you can't judge a car's handling by any objective measurement

I never said you could. What I did say is that the Camaro will be faster around the road course.

road course lap times, skidpad numbers, and slalom numbers are all useless.

You aren't exactly correct on the first one. The road course is the culmination of braking, power, handling, balance and other factors. One could argue that the road course is where a car puts together everything that people look for in a car. If a car handles bad - track times will suffer. If it has bad brakes - track times will suffer. If it doesn't have enough power, track times will suffer.

Have a good night.