Originally Posted by bimmerwithholes
1. "1. You will get different results if the track temp is 8C vs 35C. That's the difference between nice Fall weather and nice summer weather. Just because it's not raining or something doesn't mean the weather effects can be ignored."
Now I am jumping ahead that car will be slower with 35C take tire grip out the equaiton.
If you want me to explain every little detail I wrote to you....it's pretty sad. It's common sense that car produces higher dyno during cold weather.
It seems like you didn't think about tire grip....So I commented on tire.
Nevertheless all this should already been controlled by BMW....as they are trying to produce the best time.
2. Your logic make sense in chemistry lab. But in real life, you can't expect everything to be controlled. You are saying If it's not controlled then it's incomparable, because they all run in different day by different driver, so forth
With your logic you can't compare anything....So we gathered senseless data for nothing.
However, if we really want to compare something, we can compare with the best time a team produces. you don't blame anything on weather, driver watever....Because it should already been considered by BMW.....
Only thing we should consider should be: Is it stock VS stock?
1. BMW ran a extra course was just a speculation, nobody knows.
2. I'd love to see you post the same comment when M3 run a 7:50 .....lol
1. It is unclear what BMW was trying to do out there, and if they were even trying to optimize for external variables. So the 8:12 time is probably meaningless to begin with. They were probably just testing and setting up some benchmarks. The lap time can't be official until they have a production car in their hands, which, to the best of my knowledge, they don't at this time.
2. Yes, in real life, you can't control everything, and that's why you document what the external variables were at the time of testing so people can make inferences as to how influential those variables might or might not have been. That allows one to make comparisons to an extent.
3. If the times posted for the other cars were obtained by the manufacturer and not some car mag, I would buy the reasoning that "we can compare with the best time a team produces." A car mag will most likely not go the full distance to do whatever it can to get the fastest time for a car, but the manufacturer will.
4. I don't see how the M3 possibly running 7:50 has anything to do with discussion. I hope that it does so I end up purchasing a higher performing machine.
The above is probably the first sensible post you've produced on this forum. I suggest you keep it up, and tone the language down.