Quote:
Originally Posted by bimmerwithholes
hey maybe you should become a BMW analyst....
they need you to improve their time for sure 
that's a stretch...you should just e-mail BMW and tell them that
they haven't think throughly and should take all these variables you are talking about into consideration
when did I say anything about they warm up the tire before they run the track
man you need to learn how to read |
Your response to my point about track temp affecting performance:
"1. tires needs to be hot..."
Your words not mine. Post #37 on that thread. Again, I had never said anything about tires at that point; I was only talking about track temp.
You still don't get it. I did not necessarily question if the so-called BMW time was the best they could get (although that is also under question: read the other posts on that thread). I am questioning the point of comparing that time with 40 other times on that list, and arriving at conclusions. The only two things on that list are the make of the car and time. Nothing else. How does that allow you to say anything meaningful about how the posted times relate to each other? How do you know what the weather conditions were, what part of the track was used exactly (read the rest of that post for discussion on that), who the driver was (again, read the rest of that post for discussion on that), etc., for all the other runs? And in the absence of that information, how can you argue that a 10-15 second difference between any of those two times is significant? Let me guess: a) you were there in person for all those runs; b) you own the track; c) you were the one in front of the wheel posting the times; d) you don't know what you're talking about, but keep on talking anyway, which you are entitled to do I guess. I'd say d...It's interesting how you respond to reason by laughing out loud in front of your computer by yourself by the way.
