Better than Corvette C6 Z06?

[Guibo]

not always.
I did NOT say all the others counted too.
All the bits YOU describe is "bad driving" what I was describing was the contrl in "good driving".
You clearly dont' know the difference

Err...do you mean "I did NOT say all the others don't count too"? Because your statement "EVERY time you see a driver in a professional race spin off in a corner then it's down to throttle control" says something else entirely.
Sorry, if you get thrown in a corner due to lack of proper throttle control, then that's not "good driving", that's shite driving.

not always.
So and NOW you are makign statements AGREEIGN with what I said.

"NOW"?
Did you forget to read my comment in #112?:
"The way you're describing it, it seems like the Z06 is the one that requires more to tame and that may very well be true." How the feck do you conclude I'm saying there's NO difference in technique required?? To say that there is no difference (or to say that torque makes it easier), is really the only way to disagree. No, we're only disagreeing on the what's the ultimate determinant in whether a car is controllable through a corner: the torque (more specifically, the delivery of the torque) or the driver. You seem to think it's the former that makes the difference.

Correct as it was in amongst so much BS I missed it.

Uh...you "missed it" at least three times. In any event "yeah I'm not a fan of the Nobles in wet" is a pretty crappy explanation.

( As an interesting aside the "Stig" once was lambasted by muscle-lovers for supposedly not knowing how to drive a corvette. WOudl those arguments be valid here ? )

And did you see me lambasting the Stig for not knowing how to drive a Corvette?
Let me get this straight:
Out of all of the cars driven by Autocar (of which there were nineteen), many which you'd suspect to be very fast in the wet (the FWD and AWD cars, particularly the Evo with its tricky diffs), Autocar were only able to drive properly the Ford GT and the Corvette? LMFAO!!

Without seeing corner speed it may well be that they entered corner better due to their balance.

WTF? How is the Ford GT anymore well balanced than the Noble? How is the Corvette anymore balanced than the V8 Vantage, 350Z, Evo, etc? If anything, there is at most crap for difference between them, except the GT and Corvette are vastly handicapped (according to your theory) because they have so much more torque, thus making them "nightmares" to control.

More likely ( as I've expereienced this one ) is that EVERYBODY is as slow as shit roudn the corners but once on to the straight the torquier car delivered it faster and made up much more time.

Or...maybe torque doesn't doesn't make you spin out in a wet corner, assuming you know what you're doing. In any case, enough already: torque doesn't make you faster.
Considering Autocar has this opportunity to test so many cars in wet conditions, and thus trying to determine Britain's Best Driver's call in more than one condition, I have a hard time beleiving they wouldn't take each car to the limits in the wet. If they had wanted to see the effect of torque, then why not simply do straightline acceleration runs?

Some cars handle better in the dry than the wet ( my A610 for one and mates GT40 rep too - go do searches you'll find numerous vids and pics I've posted on UCP of both )

Haha, and of the nineteen cars tested, only the Corvette and Ford GT handle better in the wet than in the dry (relative to the competition)...due to their lack of torque. Oh, waitaminute...

Did you READ the bit abotu "few mms" ?

Yeah, I did. Did you read the part where I said one shouldn't apply those "few mms" if the car can't take it?

And make mninor inputs to keep it right there, so each time a littel loss is detected in front wash out or rear step then you counteract with steering and throttle input.

But you do it with enough steering and throttle input. Not excessively so.
And sloppy steering input (or failure to accurately read what your vehicle is doing by (mis)reading the signals, some of which come through the steering wheel) is yet another reason for going off. It's not all down to throttle control, as you explicitly stated.

You're LYING about talking to peoplr about driving fast on track or it woudlnt' even have needed saying.

Since when did I say I talked to them? I read what they write after having trackday experiences. Who's lying?

ALL I EVER SAID was that with LOTS of torque then control of IT becomes a major factor.

And then it comes down to the driver's skill (or lack thereof) to control the torque. The fact that so many high-torque cars don't spin out (not to mention the fact that even cars with relatively low torque do spin out) tells us it's down to the driver. Not the amount of torque. Most cars nowadays, being what they are, have throttles that can be adjusted nearly infinitely and incrementally. You don't have to dump on all the torque at once.

My local track with friends GT40 rep. Rover V8 putting out about 380hp. In the wet. DIRECT experience http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum...gt40+knockhill

And did you spin it? Even if you had, that doesn't prove anything.

Other folsk on UCP are lloking for my time on MUCH more inportant issues.

Then get to it.

[Matra et Alpine]

Guibo, you have repeated a whole load of rubbish again twisting and spinning so much you've got yourself confused.

"nearly infinitively and incrementally" -- yeah at the ENGINEERING level but at the REAL WORLD PRACTICAL it's controlled by a foot !!!!! Feet arent' THAT sensitive and takes a lot of training and experience to build it. Your feet aren't your fingers !!!

Love how you decide that first hand experience "doesn't prove anything" and the mags you wank over "prove" things they dont' actually make any statement about -- ie that throttle control with a VERY torquey engine is more difficult.

AND if YOU think that rear end breakaway isn't down to throttle control then you dont' even know the basics of handling

Dont' let your hand get too tired as you continue your fantasies

[CdocZ]

Now I am really back at UCP, as I now have seen Matra at the pwnage-factory again...

Say "EGNEINERING" aloud....it sounds weird...

[aNOBLEman]

Now I am really back at UCP, as I now have seen Matra at the pwnage-factory again...

Say "EGNEINERING" aloud....it sounds weird...

Nice to have you back. As for this discussion/heated arguement I think I will stay out of it.

[Matra et Alpine]

Say "EGNEINERING" aloud....it sounds weird...

daaaaaaaaaaaaaaammnmnnnnnn
too much beer !!!!!!

[Guibo]

Feet arent' THAT sensitive and takes a lot of training and experience to build it. Your feet aren't your fingers !!!

They don't have to be fingers, in order to be able to control torque. Well, maybe in your case, you should be using your fingers...

Love how you decide that first hand experience "doesn't prove anything" and the mags you wank over "prove" things they dont' actually make any statement about -- ie that throttle control with a VERY torquey engine is more difficult.

Uhhrr...didn't bother to read my comment in #112, I see:
"The way you're describing it, it seems like the Z06 is the one that requires more to tame and that may very well be true." How the feck do you conclude I'm saying that there's no difference in technique required??

If I have first hand experience in some car, and then claim it's the best car ever (or that it's even merely good), does that really prove anything? By the same token, just because you've had some experience in the wet with high-torque cars, that doesn't really prove anything either. You could be a shite driver, or maybe you're just not accustomed to it.
So why don't you tell me how many times you spun out that GT40?

It's funny...you bring up how bad torque is in the wet, how it makes you spin out (as if that's a far greater determinant than your own experience or skill), and then when I mention how the Noble got crushed in the wet by cars with more torque (one of them with significantly more torque), all you could say was, well, yeah Nobles aren't my thing. That's pretty damn pathetic. And now, miraculously, big-torque American cars are adept at wet handling. WTF?

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

the soles of ur feet are one of the most sensitive places on ur body dumb shit ...

dude, next time u feel the urge to argue something ... one make sure ur right, then second when you're convinced ur right, stick ur head down a toilet and give urself a swirly

[Matra et Alpine]

They don't have to be fingers, in order to be able to control torque. Well, maybe in your case, you should be using your fingers...

You are now offically inducted into the Matra et Alpine hall of idiots.

THAT has to have been the WORST attempt to avoid realising you were owned

So why don't you tell me how many times you spun out that GT40?

Didn't, because not my car and not a race. It was a fun trackday.
SO, the cornering speed was WAY down.

Ah, NOW that might explain why you dont' comprehend any of it.
IF you drive like a granny and take a corner with the engine in gear and revs to be away from teh torque band then you can behave liek a dummy on teh throttle and make movements of inches and it wont' "spin out".

But I assumed ( and maybe my error ) that were talking about DRIVING and in comparing handling then talking about PERFORMANCE DRIVING.



Now if you wanted to know how often I've spun front engine FWD, front engine RWD, mid engien RWD, rear engien RWD and front engine AWD then I'm afraid I stopped counting after the first hundred. I've raced and rallied for 30 years now. In my first 3-5 years of competition I went off some BIG style - including a very destructive off in a Mk1 Escort Twin Cam in a Scottish forest All taught me something along the way and I've never hidden from the learning experience -- so much so pictures of some of them have even appeared on UCP AND shared advice to UCPers starting out on teh mental side of things that I wish I'd had when I started )

It's funny...you bring up how bad torque is in the wet, how it makes you spin out

If you dont' drive to accomodate it you ploker !!
Any driver who drives to spin doesn't get past their 3rd club race before the marhslals hanve their race license removied
[quote] (as if that's a far greater determinant than your own experience or skill)[/quote{
Hullavo lot more relavant than your one handed reading

, and then when I mention how the Noble got crushed in the wet by cars with more torque (one of them with significantly more torque), all you could say was, well, yeah Nobles aren't my thing. That's pretty damn pathetic. And now, miraculously, big-torque American cars are adept at wet handling. WTF?

not pathetic at all.
Just you dont' yet have enough knowledge to know the difference in the way cars handle.
The Noble is an agitated little beast going into corners and to me is reminiscent of 911s 10 years ago.
You ALSO prove you didnt' read.
ON wet the BIG advanatge big torque cars have is once everything is straig and true. Less gear changes meas less gear-change-wheel-spin control needed and so better in teh strigh line.
Coem back once you've grown up enought o actually have DRIVEN different cars and you can have a more realistic conversation. Or jstu enough to comprehend ENGLISH and logic
It's gotten irritating explaing to someone who's got a sticky playboy what a woman is like

So take it to "Guibo World" thread if you want to continue.


.......getting back to the THREAD title ....

FactoryFives GTR ???

[PerfAdv]

Is the Corvette a bad handler or a extremely difficult car to handle? No!! But can it be conceived that "at the very limit of adhesion", a car with less initial torque during acceleration has a better chance of maintaining control. This doesn't mean that a Corvette cannot go quickly around a challenging (for powerful RWD cars) road course. It's just that it'll have a tendency to break traction more easily, possibly resulting in loss of control.

Another example: In modern turboed cars they've learned that large and instantaneous delivery of power to the wheels is a recipe for disaster and have either just a low pressure turbo or a twin-turbo arrangement to bring on the power more gradually. Turbo kick is probably more unsettling than the initial unsettling effect of a large dose of torque from a N/A V8. Still, there is no argument that if a turbo kicks in mid-corner what the result might be? In the same way, not rolling through Napa valley, but in the heat of competition on a track that favors agility over power, that a Corvette (or other big engined RWD car) might have trouble putting down the power and in an attempt to keep pace loose control.

...............

The same sensation of instantaneous acceleration that's so favored by drivers who prefer a torque rich engine can have a downside on a low traction surface. Why is this so difficult to realize?