Corvette Z06 Forum banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
142 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
0-60 4.2 sec
0-100 9.0 sec
1/4 12.3 @116.6


What is up with that?? C&D gets 3.6 seconds to 60 and does the quarter at 11.7 and almost 9 mph faster. Motor Trend gets 3.7 to 60 and 11.5 @ 127 in the 1/4.

Did Road and Track get a dud, or was the test driver a dud?

It sure seemed like they enjoyed mentioning how the Viper was faster. :puke:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,756 Posts
Maybe R&T was testing a C5 Z :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
603 Posts
What gave it away(that they don't know how to really GET IT!) was the line something to the effect of: ..and the Z06 nearly reaches that 0-60 time in first gear...

Hello, it hasn't reached its redline yet :eyes:

They must've been shifting the car well under redline/optimum shift point.
They really need some competent test drivers & should be ashamed they were 1/2 second & abt 9-10 mph shy of M&T & C&D :eek2:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
717 Posts
MSiska said:
They like Yuropeee-n vehicles....:yeadog:
That's right...they had the VW Jetta beating Viper/Vette etc. some articles back...
Good ol' "Road & Crap"... :puke:

Andy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Guys,

I have met the test drivers for road and track. It actually seems to be a very small magazine operation. They don't get anyone special to drive these cars, these are just regular guys. Patrick Hong or Wang or whatever one of the drivers lastnames is told me he drives a minivan for his normal car. Has never spent time driving anything fast. He just gets in a new car every couple of days he says. Patrick also writes articles for them. This probably explains R&T ridiculously slow times. I'm not sure if motortrend and car and driver do but obviously the guys at road and track don't care about getting the best out of the cars for their articles. Kind of sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
603 Posts
427l said:
Guys,

I have met the test drivers for road and track. It actually seems to be a very small magazine operation. They don't get anyone special to drive these cars, these are just regular guys. Patrick Hong or Wang or whatever one of the drivers lastnames is told me he drives a minivan for his normal car. Has never spent time driving anything fast. He just gets in a new car every couple of days he says. Patrick also writes articles for them. This probably explains R&T ridiculously slow times. I'm not sure if motortrend and car and driver do but obviously the guys at road and track don't care about getting the best out of the cars for their articles. Kind of sad.
Larry Webster(C&D) & Chris Walton(MT) are decent hotshoes that both race competitively & pride themselves in extracting as much as they can from these cars when testing.

Kim Wolfkill w/ R&T races, but I'm not sure if he tests the cars in the quarter(or if he's good @ driving in a straight line).
As I stated before R&T s/b ashamed of themselves for such piss-poor numbers on the same car(most likely), test track(Milford) & weather conditions(same day)...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,276 Posts
Focker said:
0-60 4.2 sec
0-100 9.0 sec
1/4 12.3 @116.6


What is up with that?? C&D gets 3.6 seconds to 60 and does the quarter at 11.7 and almost 9 mph faster. Motor Trend gets 3.7 to 60 and 11.5 @ 127 in the 1/4.

Did Road and Track get a dud, or was the test driver a dud?

It sure seemed like they enjoyed mentioning how the Viper was faster. :puke:

Uhm - has anyone told them that's what a 2001 385hp C5 Z would do on a bad day?

Would they not even quesiton such low numbers? and then maybe try again???

427l said:
Guys,

I have met the test drivers for road and track. It actually seems to be a very small magazine operation. They don't get anyone special to drive these cars, these are just regular guys. Patrick Hong or Wang or whatever one of the drivers lastnames is told me he drives a minivan for his normal car. Has never spent time driving anything fast. He just gets in a new car every couple of days he says. Patrick also writes articles for them. This probably explains R&T ridiculously slow times. I'm not sure if motortrend and car and driver do but obviously the guys at road and track don't care about getting the best out of the cars for their articles. Kind of sad.
But whats the problem? We are just regular guys - and also drive others cars at times - it would seem that if you are a motoring journalist, you should be a car enthusiast as well...

I mean it's as stupid as having a land lubber from Wyoming write for the a Carribean Sailing magazine.

And if you have half an ounce of potential you could only get better as you tried more different cars.

*shrug*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
From a Road and Track a couple months back they tested about 8-10 cars including a C6 corvette in a series of different performance tests. The Stock C6 came in last every single time for most of the tests. The test that sticks out in my mind is the standing mile. What ticked me off about the article was that some of the cars they had participating were modified. A new mustang GT had a vortec supercharger and beat the C6 in the standing mile test. (not by much) But my point is, why would road and track test and compare a supercharged GT and a stock C6. Give the C6 a magnuson and see what happens in the standing mile road and track.

And a 12.3 at 116 with a "underrated" 505HP car is piss poor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
Road & Track historically and consistently has the slowest times of near about all of the automotive press rags.
I give them no credence
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,276 Posts
If the title of the Magazine was Road & Carpool I could possibly understand why they are such dimwits... perhaps the Track in the title Road & Track refers to Horse Track... ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,152 Posts
RC45 said:
If the title of the Magazine was Road & Carpool I could possibly understand why they are such dimwits... perhaps the Track in the title Road & Track refers to Horse Track... ?
:rofl:

What do they know! They couldn't tell the difference between a C5 convertible and a C6Z!

:lol: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
RC45 said:
Uhm - has anyone told them that's what a 2001 385hp C5 Z would do on a bad day?

Would they not even quesiton such low numbers? and then maybe try again???



But whats the problem? We are just regular guys - and also drive others cars at times - it would seem that if you are a motoring journalist, you should be a car enthusiast as well...

I mean it's as stupid as having a land lubber from Wyoming write for the a Carribean Sailing magazine.

And if you have half an ounce of potential you could only get better as you tried more different cars.

*shrug*
and the bizarre thing is that they have "track" in the title of their magazine.. car and driver, motor trend, autoweek, automobile magazine, dont even have a hint of racing in their names.. road and TRACK is the only one.. yet they drive like this??? doesnt make sense.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top