PropaGanda

No, I am not hung up on the title of the test as much as I am the content. Why even have a competition entitled USCC unless it encompasses the cream of the crop? A 350Z with that set up is not the cream of the crop. A stock 360 Modena is not the cream of the crop. This test is supposed to showcase the best that the import and compact car market have to offer. Lately, it is also showing that these cars can compete against big block V-8s and V-10 engined cars. This is wonderful and I am all for it. I am not for the manner in which the test is run if a low horse Z can trounce the competition. THAT is the whole point of this thread. I am debating the fact that a low horse Z can run away with an USCC title. You stated that everyone will have their own opinion on what makes a USC. I agree with you 100% but did you notice that you didn't mention one thing about gas mileage or stereo equipment? You typed: "...each person will have their own opinions on what makes the best street car - is it 1/4 mile time, looks, horsepower, handling, braking?" Those are the qualities that these cars should be awarded the most points for. The gas mileage, car show, and ride quality issues are still valid. They should not, however, be worth so many points that it causes a car like the Z to win. I am just stating that this competition needs an overhaul. It is too biased on the minor things that aren't as important as the performance aspects.

BTW, the Z didn't blow up for the obvious reasons. It isn't pushing 800 horsepower nor is it routing massive amounts of power through an AWD set-up. The ultimate street car is a ride that pushes everything to the limits. The Z in that competition is a turtle in a pack of rabbits. But I guess the childs story is true, slow and steady...

kaikara

What are you talking about..... ??? a turtle in a pack of rabbits??..... it was 2nd in the road course test - only 3/4 of a second behind the first place car and 8-9 seconds faster then the "rabbit" that was the 850 HP viper. Proving the HP and 1/4 mile numbers aren't everything.

And the fact that it didn't blow up is a point unto itself. I could have went up against the viper or the skyline in a 80HP KIA but if it is going to blow up then i am going to win. hahaha. Of the 10 cars that tested 2 did not finish and one other had major problems - pretty hard to be the ultimate anything if you are sitting on the side of the road with chunks of engine under your car.

And as for the quote i also said somewhere else "A car that can go out and looks good, runs fast in a striaght line, can take corners, can brake well, has low emissions, is comfortable, etc" I think that all the tests are meaningful because you are trying to emcompass everything...some people go only for show, for comfort, for stereo equipment, for straight speed, for road track speed or for a combination of those things.

In the end if the viper was a well balanced as the Z it would have won but it wasn't and thats the point of the tests. If the skyline hadn't blown up it would have won. To say that the z had a cake walk and shouldn't have been there is also not fair. In the context of the testing it won pure and simple. If what you are debating is that the testing and criteria should be changed or the cars should be changed that that is cool - you should write SCC and tell them your suggestions...who knows they might implement them next year.

PropaGanda

And this is my point. Why on earth would an 850 hp Viper follow 9 seconds behind a 350 hp Z? If this Viper would have been the one that won the competition before then it would have been no contest. They are allowing these pitiful examples into the contest. I know the people vote but there should be something to better explain each car so that this won't be allowed again.

Quote:

And the fact that it didn't blow up is a point unto itself. I could have went up against the viper or the skyline in a 80HP KIA but if it is going to blow up then i am going to win. hahaha.

And you would probably think your Kia was the ultimate street car at that point.

Quote:

In the end if the viper was a well balanced as the Z it would have won but it wasn't and thats the point of the tests. If the skyline hadn't blown up it would have won. To say that the z had a cake walk and shouldn't have been there is also not fair. In the context of the testing it won pure and simple. If what you are debating is that the testing and criteria should be changed or the cars should be changed that that is cool - you should write SCC and tell them your suggestions...who knows they might implement them next year.

In the end you have your opinion and I have mine. Also, this contest is a decent measuring tool for all types of cars and it is definitely fun to watch it all go down. I still do not think this Z is the ultimate street car by any means and I still think they need to change the contest some to better portray the true street machines. Nice debating with you!

kaikara

yeah it was cool.... and of course i don't think that the 350z that won is the ultimate street car. It just won those tests. but in comparison to some of the testing methods of some other magazines i think they do a pretty good job but your right some of the cars could have been better.

oh and the kia wouldn't be the ultimate it would just win that particular race or test. hehehe. oh and don't worry i don't actually have a kia. haha

350zdanny

Well that was actually some interesting reading. Propaganda, I think you're still getting caught up on terminology you don't agree with, but you make some good points. They should call it the Ultimate SCC Car Test, because when it all boils down to it, there's always going to be a better street car somewhere.

Most of those cars were built to win the competition. Each one took a different strategy, whether it was the skyline, the ultima, the viper, or the Z. I think that James Chen didn't have the best car in the competition, I agree, but he understood the competition and out-strategized the other martians in that competition with a good car. The ultimate street car doesn't just build itself.

Ultimately, I think that the guys in the viper, skyline, ultimate, etc. over-engineered their cars to beat each other with brute HP numbers, but in the end they pushed each other past the line.

Oh and I have no excuse for why the Viper was 9 seconds behind, but take note that the Ultima (that sick kit car) was piloted through the road coarse by its owner, not a professional driver. I think all the other ones were professionals. In the hands of a professional, that car would have probably shaved a few seconds. Cheers.

dan

JFritz

Wow, well atleast you guys calmed down.

I don't know why you guys are so dissapointed with the 1/4 mile times for the 350Z. If you would have spent the time reading the magazine instead of looking at the pretty pictures, you would have noticed it said that Chen purposely did not launch the car and drove it conservatively down the 1/4 mile because he knew he was already ahead in the points standing.

350zdanny

Yea, file that under the strategy section. He couldn't have beat the heavy hitters if God himself was driving the car.

Dan

kaikara

Actually that was pointed out earlier. Why beat on car and risk damaging it if it would have probably come last or near last anyways. the car cannot go up against a 850HP viper in the 1.4 - makes sense to me.

I agree with the test....you can take a car and build it to win by being the most reliable balanced etc. but that is the same for any test or compitition that has rules. If you enter a linebacker that weighs 350 pounds in a marathon he is going to lose. you have to use strategy to win and that is what Chen did.

I think the best way to look at the tests is to pick the ones that you think make a car great - look at those and make your own decision. Thier decision is just based on the rules they laid out.