Quote:
Originally Posted by footie
I don't need a simulation program to know a rough estimated speed, that is called experience what some here can call upon. In fact even without your simulator I knew your data on the 60~130mph comparison between the DCT and manual was off and gave the exact estimate for that comparison. Something I might add you got hugely and spectacularly wrong, even when all the data was plain in front of your nose. So who's estimates are more right.
It's simple logic is one car (ZR1) reaches a point ahead of another (GTR) and it posts a certain speed than the other car is slower. It my educated guess on the speed that this GTR did at each of these points and remember you aren't that great at read data so my estimate is probably more correct than your own.
|
It seems I have to repeat and repeat myself about my own mistakes. Absolutely typical of what is required to debate with you. Yes I make them, no I am not perfect (I know hard to believe), yes I admit them graciously and move along. You can not argue that I can not be trusted nor correct on all issues when incorrect on one. That is a classic logical fallacy. And I will remind you that brain farts such as that one from me are few and far between. That is more than I can say for the frequency of yours. Lastly my "data" was not off, half of my analysis was incorrect. You really need to learn the difference between data and analysis. It is really a key point. Data are often simply observed numbers that go into a calculation (an analysis) that likely contains certain assumptions.
If you honestly believe you can make an "educated guess" on a single top speed at an unknown single marker and compare that to two other cases where we have speed vs. distance at a variety of
DIFFERENT markers and times vs. distance at the same multiple markers for another car and then make power comparisons among the three cars then I'll simply call our "debate" over. As well I keep pointing out your flawed data in your original post #68 and my reply in #75.
YOUR INPUT "DATA" to your "educated guess" ARE FLAT OUT INCORRECT. Please go read my corrections again in #75.
I presented a detailed accounting and analysis of a bunch of this data for the ZR1 vs. GT-R in the other thread and the only points you could really criticize were the GT-R corner exit speed estimates and a possible tail wind helping it out. That analysis stood extensive scrutiny and still stands now.
How about I just say every car that is faster than any other car around the Ring is faster at every single point and therefore has more power? How about I just say that I "estimated" the E92 M3 reached 190 mph at some point on its 8:05 Ring lap. How about I say I have a frickin flying pig as a pet? Your statement of an "educated guess" is just about on an equitable level of quality and accuracy as these statements.
By the way I'm glad we have got to the point that the GT-Rs 7:29 time is possible with:
1. +50hp (and nearly the same + torque advantage)
2. The better of two tire possibilities
3. A serious Ace driver
4. Perfect weather and track conditions
5. A factory tuned/tweaked/modified suspension
We finally agree, I just think it had a bit more power than that.