The article presents one of the worst comparisons ever. Basically, they go out and get a show car, track it against a track car and we are all supposed to be surprised by the result. Huh?

The equivalent would be taking a track car out to HIN side by side with the show car and then scratching your head in disbelief when the show car wins the show.

Then let's post the comparison in the Audio Interior Exterior section of the forum and get a bunch of posts about how crappy looking those lightweight wheels are, about how you should have something to cover the bare metal in the interior, and 18" wheels just don't cut it in the show circuit.

 

Yet...

Plenty of guys will tune their cars with Show bits, firmly believing it's good for performance. I've yet to see a track guy having any delusions of winning a ShownShine contest with his track car.

Big wheels? Big brake kits? Funky coil overs? Wider stance? CAI? All things that are not always appropriate for the best lap time.

It was a fun article.

 

Correct, some of the mods are appropriate for a comparison. It's just the method of comparison that was flawed. As someone posted earlier, the correct way would be to start with a baseline, add your mods, track and get differences. Even that comparison would have variables that could affect the performance and outcome.

My experience is that most from the show crowd want the looks and some performance to go with it. I have yet to meet any that believe they can outperform at the track, especially with an extra few hundred pounds of a/v equipment and some nice heavy 3 piece wheels.

The point is that each car has different objectives.

 

Here is the best part, in the latest issue, the new editor said they lost tow advertisers, one who disagreed with the twin tube shock article and another who disagreed with the "Truth" article.

We need more magazines like this, if those two advertisers had a leg to stand on in their arguments, they could have written a letter explaining why SCC is incorrect, it's obvious they didn't have a leg to stand.

As for the comparison, I think if you want a mag to tell you how cool your show car is, you need to read Modified or one of the other "show" mags.

Chris

 

completely agree

sportcompactcar magazine has that slight edge that is centered on performance more than rice. let the ricer go advertise somewhere else

SCCM really has grown on me in recent years, and I buy it just as religiously as GRM. (the two only magazines I actually buy... GRM I actually have subscription). I'd hate to see it turned in a rice fest, there is no reason to justify the appalling performance of the orange 350z. Can't care less how many DB it puts out, or how many LCD screens it has. They clearly say it at the end... both car accomplish different things, spectucular in their own right maybe, but if they had to chose they would take the white one.

Nothing against people who prefer show to go. There are some amazing cars that can't care less about go. But I'd like SCCM to remain biased toward performance.

 

Right now Bubble is in complete denial.

 

I don't need any mag to tell me anything about my car. Again, it was not a good comparison whether you're into show or go. If my objective is a great track car, I certainly don't want to compare it to a show car. I want to compare it to other track cars with other performance mods and evaluate on that basis. Not trying to start any flame war here between show and go.

Some guys like fat chicks that bang like rabbits and some guys like eye candy that are yawners in the sack. Personally I want the show and definitely the go. I don't believe they are always mutually exclusive.

Ron

 

They should of put Mike Cronin's Z against 350ZNV's fully built track car. That would of been a better comparison.

 

I think the article accomplished what it set out to do, to dispell some myths regarding performance. I still cant believe the number of people that I meet at car shows, that if you asked them what car was faster would have pointed towards the Show car. Hopefully it will educate some in the Import crowd.

 

No contest. My G was on the track the same day as the test runs were made for that article, and was a full second faster than Mike Cronin's car, and that was with a bad front left damper. 350ZNV's car is a couple of hundred pounds lighter, runs the same JWT TT set up, but with even more power than my G. At least a three second per lap advantage to 350ZNV would be my estimate. And on the big track where the hp can really work, it would be even more.

 

That was a pretty bold and welcome move for a new editor.

I also liked the exploration of whether or not the new Honda Turbo motor would be easily swapped into Civics and the like. It was the first thing I thought of when I read about the RDX concept and here they are covering it.

Bottom line, SCC thinks like enthusiasts do.