wtf is car and driver smoking

[Black_Bullit]

14.1 is probably an accurate estimate for a typical amateur driver in street trim. Say what you want about the current GT running 13.9 to 14.1, but that simply isn't TYPICAL. I have seen a Mach1 break into the 13's ONCE, more typical is mid-14's. And I've seen so many 99+ GT's running in the low 15's it's laughable. It's all about the driver, and 95% of all amateur drag racers will be lucky to see 13's in any stock non-Cobra Mustang. Even '03 Cobras typically only see low-mid 13's for most folks until drag radials come into play.

Dave

Either your track is at a high elevation, is greasy, or drivers in the N.W. are terrible!

The only time I haven't been able to run mid 13s with my Mach was the time there was water on the starting line.

I've only raced one other manual car before my Mach so I'm no expert. Also the last time I went another Macher ran a 13.20. He's 100% stock and guess what? It was his first time ever at a track.

The track only had about 50 cars there that day so he was able to hot lap it.

 

[RICKS]

Good grief, what a bunch of chicken littling over data that is most likely just a regurgitation of what FORD provided to C&D as 2005 stats. You don't actually think that C&D's staff puts together all this data on all those cars, do you? Until you see a real full-duty road test, there's nothing worth looking at, they're just reprinting factory specs. I don't think there's any prejudice within C&D, and I've been a subscriber since the mid-70's. I think the prejudice is much more prevelent in the readers who refuse to even consider the notion that another country may be producing a superior execution of engineering and assembly. Readers that would ignore the fact that the Factory 5 Cobra is a death-trap, hackneyed, parts-bin kit car with hideous driving dynamics that has the complexity and refinement of a rough-cut 2 X 4, but thinks it should be ranked higher because it LOOKS like a Cobra and would win in a drag race. I own only U.S. made cars. But I know good engineering and good execution when I see it and drive it. I'm glad that the foreign competition has been so good and worthy, causing the U.S. manufacturers to build their cars better. Without the competition consistently setting the bar higher, the U.S. cars I would have to choose from would be total junk. And now I finally begin to see that the U.S. makers may be actually taking the upper hand in some areas, and maybe Germany and Japan will have to start playing catch-up. I'm not so blindly loyal to Fords that I lose my mind when they lose a comparison test. Usually, the magazines are exactly right, and the shortcomings that they make note of in the articles are the EXACT shortcomings I find in my own car, if I own one of the vehicles they are examining. Be honest with yourself, be objective instead of emotional, and the magazines won't look as slanted as you think they are.

 

[RICKS]

What gets me is when they test a car. Then despite it losing in most of the catagories. They give it the number 1 position in the "Challenge"

Sometimes they choose winners based on intangibles that don't show up on the data, but I can understand that. In the 90's, an F-body compared to a Mustang "on paper" looked like a slam-dunk for the F-body. But when you put down the stats and really looked at the cars as a whole, the Mustang was the car most people preferred to own. C&D plainly states that their comparisons included TONS of categories and rankings that they don't bother to print for reasons of space and potential reader boredom, and the fact is that what they show in those comparison ranking tables is only a small snapshot of the real evaluation, and may not show the "full picture" of how they came to their conclusions. I agree that there's more to a car than just the raw data. Not everybody is going to like the same mix of attributes. Just because a car wins a comparo, doesn't mean it's necessarily the right car for you. On paper the new Nissan Titan appears to be a superior truck. In reality, the F-150 won MT truck of the year for a whole lot of reasons that don't show on a scorecard. I think MT got it right, which is another example of where winning the scorecards doesn't necessarily lock you in for the win.

 

[SVTdriver]

Ok first let me say. I didn't expect the cobra replica to win. Didn't even really care if it won or not. I actually thought the lotus was a better car. But it lost 3 of the 4 catagories and only won the intangibles catagory. Which to me calls to question fairness. Granted I am biased against the imports.

 

[80deathtrap]

You my friend are completely wrong. The Focus is arguably not an American car, other than names sake.

I have one thing to say about the origins of the Focus, it is an updated Escort. Which means its American. One of my Mechanical Engineering instructors was working at Ford at the time and mentioned this when she was talking about the work she did on impact test modelling. She also said she wouldn't drive a Focus because of its Escort basis and poor impact characteristics.

 

[foghorn67]

I have one thing to say about the origins of the Focus, it is an updated Escort. Which means its American. One of my Mechanical Engineering instructors was working at Ford at the time and mentioned this when she was talking about the work she did on impact test modelling. She also said she wouldn't drive a Focus because of its Escort basis and poor impact characteristics.

was she comparing it to an m1 abrams?

 

[80deathtrap]

Ford Taurus, which coincidentally has nearly the same impact zone design as the Toyota Camry and there was a lawsuit over it.

The stuff with the Abrams would be a different professor.

 

[Rootus]

Either your track is at a high elevation, is greasy, or drivers in the N.W. are terrible!

THe track is at sea level, but the drivers probably do suck . I've run a best of 13.4 @ 105, spinning down the first few hundred feet of track. I'm part of the group of drivers that suck...

Don't get me wrong, though, I'm not trying to dig on the Mach, I think it's a great car -- just what my observations have been. Like I said, a typical '03/04 Cobra only runs low 13's here .

Also the last time I went another Macher ran a 13.20. He's 100% stock and guess what? It was his first time ever at a track.

Some people are just naturals .

Dave

 

[Cook89Notch]

You have to remember that "Car and Driver" can only make a BMW go fast and they simply don't like American cars... They had nothing good to say about the Mach-1 when it was introduced. Their magazine is full of and that is why I ended my subscription LONG ago.

This is soooooooo true. I too canceled my subscription because C&D SUCKS! The should call it BMW and Driver.

Brock Yates = Homo

Matt.

 

[RICKS]

Whatever. I say they call 'em as they see 'em. When they criticize an american car, it's because the american car DESERVES the criticism. You just don't like the outcome, don't accept the reality, and allow emotion to overrule objectivity. When any U.S. automaker hits a homerun with a car, C&D has always given credit where credit is due. As for Brock Yates...Any guy who chooses an early 70's Dodge Challenger to run the Cannonball run in (and keeps that car in his garage to this very day) is hardly a guy who "doesn't like American cars". That's ludicrous. If you really love American cars, then you let the U.S. automakers know when they're shoveling crap at you. You don't just give them blind loyalty, and drive around in a flexy, rattly, ill-fitting and dinosaur-engineered tub of $hit while people in beautifully engineered and built foreign cars breeze past you. You challenge the U.S. automakers to compete head to head, so that we can buy American and not have to sacrifice quality by doing so. Pull your head out of the sand. When a U.S. automaker launches a new car that doesn't make the grade in any respect, I WANT the magazines to call them out on it. And lately C&D has been calling out BMW for building new models that are overly computer-controlled, and lack the intuitive feel of earlier models. They've also come right out and called many of Chris Bangle's designs flat-out ugly. BMW & Driver??? Yeah, right... But to sum it up, it causes the big-3 to give us better quality products, and improves the driving experience. What BMW and Porsche has taught the rest of the automotive world on steering and road feel alone is worthy of a thankyou, not hatred. Unless you can't really tell the fact that the steering on a fox-chassis or SN-95 Mustang is about as accurate as a dump truck up until recent improvements from the Bullitt cars on up.

 

[foghorn67]

Ford Taurus, which coincidentally has nearly the same impact zone design as the Toyota Camry and there was a lawsuit over it.

The stuff with the Abrams would be a different professor.

are you sure she wasn't talking about the European Escort? which has always been different then the american one?

 

[scottie1113]

RICKS, somehow you always beat me to the punch with your articulate replies. You are right on target, as usual, with your last comment on Car & Driver. Thanks.

 

[WindveilGT]

RICKS, I agree totally with the point you are trying to get across (maybe not the tone). Constructive criticism is mostly well taken. The US automakers, I believe are struggling to make good cars but are troubled by price comparisons. US Union autoworkers command higher wages than foriegn employment. There are also way too many "fat cats" high on the food chain of US manufacturers to feed.
Read: "All Corvettes are Red" sometime. That is the most in depth behind the scenes liturature I've ever read.

 

[63_Fairlane]

Good grief, what a bunch of chicken littling over data that is most likely just a regurgitation of what FORD provided to C&D as 2005 stats. You don't actually think that C&D's staff puts together all this data on all those cars, do you? Until you see a real full-duty road test, there's nothing worth looking at, they're just reprinting factory specs. I don't think there's any prejudice within C&D, and I've been a subscriber since the mid-70's. I think the prejudice is much more prevelent in the readers who refuse to even consider the notion that another country may be producing a superior execution of engineering and assembly. Readers that would ignore the fact that the Factory 5 Cobra is a death-trap, hackneyed, parts-bin kit car with hideous driving dynamics that has the complexity and refinement of a rough-cut 2 X 4, but thinks it should be ranked higher because it LOOKS like a Cobra and would win in a drag race. I own only U.S. made cars. But I know good engineering and good execution when I see it and drive it. I'm glad that the foreign competition has been so good and worthy, causing the U.S. manufacturers to build their cars better. Without the competition consistently setting the bar higher, the U.S. cars I would have to choose from would be total junk. And now I finally begin to see that the U.S. makers may be actually taking the upper hand in some areas, and maybe Germany and Japan will have to start playing catch-up. I'm not so blindly loyal to Fords that I lose my mind when they lose a comparison test. Usually, the magazines are exactly right, and the shortcomings that they make note of in the articles are the EXACT shortcomings I find in my own car, if I own one of the vehicles they are examining. Be honest with yourself, be objective instead of emotional, and the magazines won't look as slanted as you think they are.

It's funny. They tested a factory five cobra a year or two ago and raved about how solid it was, and how it didn't feel like a kit car. People race these cars. The kits are well made. I believe the setup of the particular car in this feature was screwed up by the owner. He simply made the suspension too damn tight which made the car squirely.

They also used its lack of comfort and inability to be a daily driver as their reason for slamming it. (Note: They were driving these cars in the rain on an extremely cold day, which is an assinine way to test sports cars and probably effected their judgement.)If comfort was their major concern, then the miata wins hands down, followed closely by the Honda. If that is not a major consideration, then the Cobra is the most powerful car in the group and will be the fastest with proper setup.

 

[63_Fairlane]

One other thing, I am a subscriber to C&D. I don't agree with every article, but they are usually honest in their reporting.

As for the tire sizes on the 05, with a 53/47 weight distribution, it should need less rear tire than the current cars.

 

[scottie1113]

I am also a C&D subscriber. I only wish they had chosen to test a Cobra replicar from Superformance. Those are the best built replicars on the market and it might have changed their minds a little.

Oh well.

While I certainly don't agree with them on everything, I like their independent attitude towards cars.

That's why I also subscribe to Motor Trend and and Automobile. Road & Track is too stodgy for me.

 

[blazinsteed]

its also the same company that would grade a pinto better than an 03 cobra if the pinto had better seats. They only look for certain qualities and are extremely biased. They become more so in the last few years.... keep comparing a 50k vehicle to a mid 20's vehicle and keep feeding them money..... Ever notice their ads always feature foreign cars.

 

[foghorn67]

its also the same company that would grade a pinto better than an 03 cobra if the pinto had better seats. They only look for certain qualities and are extremely biased. They become more so in the last few years.... keep comparing a 50k vehicle to a mid 20's vehicle and keep feeding them money..... Ever notice their ads always feature foreign cars.

you should read RICKS post above, it's clear that your biases are geting in the way. and ads go to the highest bidder..yeah I can picture somebody from their advertising agency (in ann arbor, MICHIGAN) calling up GM or Ford and saying 'you'll have to pay twice as much as the foreign companies.'

 

[scottie1113]

Yep. Have you ever considered the fact that there are more foreign car manufacturers than we have here?

I grabbed a July Car And Driver from a pile of magazines and leafed through it.
There were ads for Chevy, Cadillac, Chrysler, Dodge, and there were three Ford ads--one for the Focus, one for the Mustang, and one for the GT.

They also did a review of the Aussie Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo.

When are you guys ever going to give up your bias against any mag that doesn't get a better 1/4 mile time than MM&F? Never. In the real world cars are about overall everyday performance. How often do you go to the track anyway?

Get over it, and realize that there are a lot of darned good cars in the world that don't have a Mustang badge on them. Many of them better, by the way.

My guess it that the Mustang will get better over the years because of comments from guys in the mag trade. IRS will be the first option, followed by a manumatic. Most of you won't opt for it. Many others will. That's what choices are all about.

If you know anyone in the magazine business, you'll know that advertising doesn't influence what they write. Look at all the ads for tires, aftermarket parts, etc. True, ads pay the bills, but I can't recall many instances where an unfavorable review caused anyone to yank its ad. Why do you think the majors have been around for so long?

Quit bleeding Ford Blue and become a car enthusiast. Those guys at all the mags are, and that's what makes the automotive world better for all of us.

 

[WhiteDevil]

I think it was Car and Driver tht put the 03 cobra vs 350Z vs G35 article out. The 03 was better in so many catigories and it got last place. I wanted to vomit.