Updated: Motor Trend Best Driver's Car

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by TSM330i

Laguna Seca lap times:
BMW M4GTS - 1:37.66
Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11
Camaro 1LE - 1:37.78
Merc GT-S - 1:35.30
AM V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77
Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23
Acura NSX - 1:36.36
McLaren 570S - 1:34.58
Porsche 911S - 1:36.44
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58
Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08
Jaguar F-Type SVR AWD - 1:38.75

Part One:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/merce...-ford-mclaren/
Part Two:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/chevr...et-audi-acura/
Part Three:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/dodge...orsche-nissan/

Considering the Camaro 1LE costs a whopping $45K, it is a stellar track car even at that bargain price point. The Shelby GT350R is a great track/performance car too.

No surprise here, the Viper just crushes everything else in terms of lap time. Who will with the BDC Award?

911S is quicker than M4GTS? Something just isn't adding up. I would have thought the M4GTS would have been quicker than it was. Maybe they'll retest it like they did the Z06.

Again, this is not the fastest lap time, it's the best overall driver's car.

ACR was absurd!

And as for the 911S vs the m4 GTS that's right. Every test they've been tested against one another the 911 has been as fast or faster despite being on a street tire (the Ring and hockenheim on sport auto, Laguna seca, VIR). I bet if you put MPSC2 on the 911S and even out the tires it would be low 1:35s. They really have done wonderful things with the turbo 911 especially considering its a GT car.

[gtron]

Why don't people notice the Dodge Viper ACR more? Fuck, I love that damn thing!

[FogCityM3]

Major underperformance by the M4 GTS compared to the American competition and a stock Porsche. The M4 is basically a roll-caged track car with turbo and water injection trickery probably dynoing around 540 bhp, full coil-overs and being one of the lighter cars gets its head handed to it from normally aspirated GT350R (here and at VIR) and other American cars. Also, props to Porsche for building such a capable street car.

BMW needs to step up their game, big time, considering the obscene cost of the GTS.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by FogCityM3

Major underperformance by the M4 GTS compared to the American competition and a stock Porsche. The M4 is basically a roll-caged track car with turbo and water injection trickery probably dynoing around 540 bhp, full coil-overs and being one of the lighter cars gets its head handed to it from normally aspirated GT350R (here and at VIR) and other American cars. Also, props to Porsche for building such a capable street car.

BMW needs to step up their game, big time, considering the obscene cost of the GTS.

True, but the BMW is a family sedan adapted for it's role. It's true you can make it fast with enough chassis reinforcement, wide rubber, engine, and all the fixings, but the Porsche is purpose built as a sports car, abeit with the engine in a funny place, so it's got it's own demons, but in many of those cases the chassis are very purpose built. Even though the GM Alpha is shared between 3 or so cars, it was intended to be very performance orientated as well. I'm not too surprised by the BMW, it's probably rocking that 493 or whatever HP directly at the wheels, given how they usually measure their HP, but the further your car is from a purpose designed sports car, the harder it is to make it go fast, especially around corners.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

True, but the BMW is a family sedan adapted for it's role. It's true you can make it fast with enough chassis reinforcement, wide rubber, engine, and all the fixings, but the Porsche is purpose built as a sports car, abeit with the engine in a funny place, so it's got it's own demons, but in many of those cases the chassis are very purpose built. Even though the GM Alpha is shared between 3 or so cars, it was intended to be very performance orientated as well. I'm not too surprised by the BMW, it's probably rocking that 493 or whatever HP directly at the wheels, given how they usually measure their HP, but the further your car is from a purpose designed sports car, the harder it is to make it go fast, especially around corners.

That all gets thrown out the window when your charge $135k for a car.

The Alpha chassis is no more performance oriented than the F32/F82 chassis. It too is a chassis developed for cheap sedans like the ATS 2.0T and built up for use in cars like the ATS-V, Camaro, etc... GM just built a better chassis this time around, you better believe they used trips/tricks from the Germans to get where they are now. Kudos to GM for building a world class chassis and being the leader in developing magnetic ride suspensions.

[tranquility]

I needed to fix this:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58
Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23
McLaren 570S - 1:34.58
Merc GT-S - 1:35.30
Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11
Acura NSX - 1:36.36
Porsche 911S - 1:36.44
Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08
BMW M4GTS - 1:37.66
Camaro 1LE - 1:37.78
Jaguar F-Type SVR AWD - 1:38.75
AM V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by tranquility

I needed to fix this:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58
Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23
McLaren 570S - 1:34.58
Merc GT-S - 1:35.30
Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11
Acura NSX - 1:36.36
Porsche 911S - 1:36.44
Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08
BMW M4GTS - 1:37.66
Camaro 1LE - 1:37.78
Jaguar F-Type SVR AWD - 1:38.75
AM V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77

Done

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by tranquility

I needed to fix this:
Dodge Viper ACR - 1:31.58
Audi R8 V10 Plus - 1:34.23
McLaren 570S - 1:34.58
Merc GT-S - 1:35.30
Shelby GT350R - 1:36.11
Acura NSX - 1:36.36
Porsche 911S - 1:36.44
Nissan GT-R - 1:37.08
BMW M4GTS - 1:37.66
Camaro 1LE - 1:37.78
Jaguar F-Type SVR AWD - 1:38.75
AM V12 Vantage S - 1:41.77

Can you also denote what kind of tire each was wearing as to not think the comparison is totally apple to apples? I would simply note whether each was wearing summer or cup tires as it certainly makes a difference and would be good to know. For example, the 911 has summer tires vs the Gt350R on cup tires. Think it's meaningful given cups are worth probably 1.5 seconds over summer tires on this length course.

[TSM330i]

We Have A Winner - See First Post

[quagmire]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Can you also denote what kind of tire each was wearing as to not think the comparison is totally apple to apples? I would simply note whether each was wearing summer or cup tires as it certainly makes a difference and would be good to know. For example, the 911 has summer tires vs the Gt350R on cup tires. Think it's meaningful given cups are worth probably 1.5 seconds over summer tires on this length course.

While tires do play a role in track times, I am tired of people using the tire excuse as a way to justify why their preferred car lost in a comparison, race, whatever. The comparison is apples vs apples because that is how these cars came from the factory. If one car had the better tire, that's because the manufacture decided to equip it with that better tire where the other one decided to compromise on something( cost, ride quality, etc) by not putting that same tire on their car.

Let's say MT puts every car on the same tire and your preferred car still loses... What's your next excuse? Whether the car MT received had magnetic dampers vs fixed?

Results are as expected with maybe the 1LE being 3rd instead of 4th given how much they hyped it up. I knew the GT350R would be either 1st or 2nd after how Pobst had very little to complain about the GT350R after driving it on that lap. The GT350 would be the only Mustang that I would consider owning, but sadly outside my budget. Not a fan of how the GT( even with the PP) drove and will probably pick up the Camaro SS. If I could afford the GT350, it may have pulled me away from the Camaro.

Good times we live in right now with all these great cars to choose from.

[WhatsADSM]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

That all gets thrown out the window when your charge $135k for a car.

The Alpha chassis is no more performance oriented than the F32/F82 chassis. It too is a chassis developed for cheap sedans like the ATS 2.0T and built up for use in cars like the ATS-V, Camaro, etc... GM just built a better chassis this time around, you better believe they used trips/tricks from the Germans to get where they are now. Kudos to GM for building a world class chassis and being the leader in developing magnetic ride suspensions.

Agreed... GM is in the same boat as BMW in terms of chassis. They are both based on a relatively cheap passenger sedan/coupe that has been upgraded to make it what it is. Yet GM did a MUCH better job for performance. Again the BMW has a half cage, r comps, 40 more horsepower, at least 300 pounds (!) less weight, carbon ceramic brakes, a bunch of aero, a dual clutch auto, and of course costs well over 2 times the money. Ultimately that makes it essentially identical in terms of performance around a track compared to a ~$40k Chevy.

Seems embarrassing to me. I really did expect the GTS to be much faster than it is. I would have expected it to beat many of the cars on that list (Camaro and 911s included).

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by quagmire

While tires do play a role in track times, I am tired of people using the tire excuse as a way to justify why their preferred car lost in a comparison, race, whatever. The comparison is apples vs apples because that is how these cars came from the factory. If one car had the better tire, that's because the manufacture decided to equip it with that better tire where the other one decided to compromise on something( cost, ride quality, etc) by not putting that same tire on their car.

Let's say MT puts every car on the same tire and your preferred car still loses... What's your next excuse? Whether the car MT received had magnetic dampers vs fixed?

Results are as expected with maybe the 1LE being 3rd instead of 4th given how much they hyped it up. I knew the GT350R would be either 1st or 2nd after how Pobst had very little to complain about the GT350R after driving it on that lap. The GT350 would be the only Mustang that I would consider owning, but sadly outside my budget. Not a fan of how the GT( even with the PP) drove and will probably pick up the Camaro SS. If I could afford the GT350, it may have pulled me away from the Camaro.

Good times we live in right now with all these great cars to choose from.

I completely agree with the tire discussion. It's been beaten to death and back again whenever one of these tests come up.
As you have stated, it's what the factory provided with the car. When GM supplied the Z/28 with Trofeo R tires and the ZR1/Z06 with the PS Cup, everyone called foul. Now other manufacturers are supplying cars with the same aggressive tire.

Imagine how quick the 570S would have been with a proper aggressive tire along with a "track package" with wider rubber. McLaren has billed the 570S as a true "street" car and not a track rat. It's purposely under-tired to get a more organic feel and has the ability to slide around. Does that make it fast? No. Does it give a more rewarding driving experience? Apparently. Hence, why it won the competition.

In the end, it's "you run what you brung."

[Motorsportenterprise]

Originally Posted by TSM330i

I completely agree with the tire discussion. It's been beaten to death and back again whenever one of these tests come up.
As you have stated, it's what the factory provided with the car. When GM supplied the Z/28 with Trofeo R tires and the ZR1/Z06 with the PS Cup, everyone called foul. Now other manufacturers are supplying cars with the same aggressive tire.

Imagine how quick the 570S would have been with a proper aggressive tire along with a "track package" with wider rubber. McLaren has billed the 570S as a true "street" car and not a track rat. It's purposely under-tired to get a more organic feel and has the ability to slide around. Does that make it fast? No. Does it give a more rewarding driving experience? Apparently. Hence, why it won the competition.

In the end, it's "you run what you brung."

The 570S comes with a p zero corsa tire which has a tread wear of 60 (vs the pirellis on the 911 which are 220). It is by all accounts as good as any other cup tire or streetable or track/completion tire if not better. So it's tires were plenty aggressive and overall as aggressive as anything in the test sans the ACR.

[Viffermike]

Originally Posted by gtron

Why don't people notice the Dodge Viper ACR more? Fuck, I love that damn thing!

Two words: Lame duck.

Two more: Last hurrah.

And three more: Quit while ahead.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

The 570S comes with a p zero corsa tire which has a tread wear of 60 (vs the pirellis on the 911 which are 220). It is by all accounts as good as any other cup tire or streetable or track/completion tire if not better. So it's tires were plenty aggressive and overall as aggressive as anything in the test sans the ACR.

Those Kumho's on the ACR have insane grip.

Kumho said in testing the Viper edition V720 were 1.5 seconds quicker around Buttonwillow than a Hoosier R6(slick tire).

ACR takes no prisoners when it comes to any component on that car.

[DieGrüneHölle]

So I guess this ends the GM conspiracy theories I have seen on various forums saying the 1LE was already picked as BDC winner before the comp even started.

[tranquility]

Agree w/ the BMW sentiments, if you're gonna charge crazy $$$$, at least beat the competition, even if slightly. It just fails and is not usable as a road car, much like I assume the Viper, what's w/ the inefficient massive 10,000,000 litre engine and 5,353,535 cylinders (hyperboles) yet cranking out that relatively low power? Same goes for the Aston, just underwhelming, 12 cylinders and only 5xx hp? Acura is disappointing as well but what did you expect w/ such a confused development and repeatedly-delayed launch? Just a mess and major fail to the prestige amassed by the original NSX. GTR's old so no biggie. Yankees are pretty impressive given the $ factor. Meh for F-Type and same goes for the Porsche. If I had a bigger wallet, the Audi, McLaren and Merc would be the finalists but never did like the looks of the R8 and it's the little bro of the Huracan, and the Merc, while sexy, is just hard to compare to the mid-engined Brit. Good choice as 1st place.

[lowbudgethero]

Originally Posted by Questofthetune

Call me crazy but my 1le just didn't inspire the confidence I see talked about all over the inter webs. Maybe since mine was a 2013 with no mag ride? It just felt very heavy and wallowed in tight corners on the track.

different chassis too, less power, etc

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

Can you also denote what kind of tire each was wearing as to not think the comparison is totally apple to apples? I would simply note whether each was wearing summer or cup tires as it certainly makes a difference and would be good to know. For example, the 911 has summer tires vs the Gt350R on cup tires. Think it's meaningful given cups are worth probably 1.5 seconds over summer tires on this length course.

All the did was put the results in order, how did you come to the conclusion I'm some sorta expert?

Better ask the more-informed ppl ITF.

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by Motorsportenterprise

The 570S comes with a p zero corsa tire which has a tread wear of 60 (vs the pirellis on the 911 which are 220). It is by all accounts as good as any other cup tire or streetable or track/completion tire if not better. So it's tires were plenty aggressive and overall as aggressive as anything in the test sans the ACR.

The tire itself is aggressive, the sizes are puny in comparison to what other cars are running, especially with that much HP and TQ.

Fronts are only 225/35-19. The rears are only 285/30-20.
What I was referring to was going a bit wider both front and rear to get a more organic grip from wider tires. Yes, they are corsa tires, but very narrow nonetheless.
For comparison, the Camaro 1LE has a 285/30-20 front and 305/30-20 rear.

Again, I'm just pointing out that this car laid down a stellar lap on relatively small rubber.

To that end: I've said this from the beginning, the NSX has lost its soul. It is complicated to be complicated and in the end, it doesn't fair very well as a "drivers car." It has similar HP figures as the McLaren and has all the fancy hybrid/electric motor drivetrain and still can't hang with the McLaren in terms of shear pace. Yes, the NSX weighs more because of all the tech, but in the end - is it necessary? What if Honda would have got rid of all the electronic drivetrain and AWD and left it just as a normal RWD and a TT-V6? It would have lost several hundred pounds and possibly had been a more rewarding car along with possibly a quicker car. It would have cost a lot less too. I know, there are a lot of "possibly's" there, but you can't help but notice how similar the 570S is to the NSX when you peel back all the tech.

It's like Porsche making the statement that the GT3/RS cars will only be offered with a PDK transmission because it's the fastest way around the track. They never asked if the enthusiasts who actually buy the car even care about the "ultimate" track time and are more worried about driver involvement. Hence, the 911R selling out almost instantly and now changing hands for many hundreds of thousands of dollars above MSRP and Porsche going back on their word and will be offering a GT3/RS with a manual in the future. In the end, it's much easier for Porsche to develop a manual transmission and offer it in these cars than it is for Honda to re-engineer the entire car to get rid of all the hybrid-drivetrain.

I know that hybrids and electric cars are the future, but it just doesn't seem to work here.

[pgviper]

Originally Posted by Questofthetune

Call me crazy but my 1le just didn't inspire the confidence I see talked about all over the inter webs. Maybe since mine was a 2013 with no mag ride? It just felt very heavy and wallowed in tight corners on the track.

Um... 2017 model is different EVERYTHING.

[FriskyDingo]

M4 GTS is a joke, lol.