View Single Post
      10-26-2007, 02:12 PM   #97
gbb357
Captain
24
Rep
707
Posts

 
Drives: IS300
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New York

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keto View Post
No. When a predicted outcome is wrong, either the model is wrong or the variables put into the model are wrong. At this point, we are debating the variables, given that the model has been accurate for other vehicles, and you are complaining that we are even trying to predict outcomes in the first place.

You continue to miss the point. We have *one* actual result that doesn't make sense given the specs of the car and yet you want us to trust the magic stuff inside the box and not open the hood? Please. Don't you ever ask "why" or did you go to school where that wasn't allowed?
That "one" result that is in question is not far from the other result that is not being questioned. The M3 did 4.4 and ISF did 4.2. M3 is 3650 or 3675lbs and the ISF is 3800lbs. The difference is ISF has 50 or 60 more lbs of torque. The 150lbs is not much of an advantage and should equalized the two with the ISF's torque advantage. Hence, those numbers are not so controversial since they are so close. I have no problem of asking "why", my problem is the foregone conclusion that is the ISF is under rating their HP base on the results and Swamp's calculation.