Just to clarify. C32 times at Hockenheim vs. old and new contenders via

Closed Thread Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Rate Thread

Sep 17, 2005 | 02:45 AM

AMGod

Thread Starter

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 2,392

Likes: 0

Just to clarify. C32 times at Hockenheim vs. old and new contenders via

AMS.

C32=1.20,6 min.

C55=1.18,6

E46 M3=1.17,6

old RS4=1.18,2

new RS4=1.15,8

Hope this pure data helps put things in perspective. Can't wait for the Ring times. People should pay more attention to elasticity acceleration figures, IMHO.

Sep 17, 2005 | 07:46 AM

M&M

Super Member

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 723

Likes: 0

I rate one should use the fastest times achieved for each car, else you will have to post the 2 min times.

M3 got 1:16.3 by Sport Auto in 2003
M3 CSL got 1:12.8.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Sep 17, 2005 | 01:20 PM

AMGod

Thread Starter

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 2,392

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M

I rate one should use the fastest times achieved for each car, else you will have to post the 2 min times.

M3 got 1:16.3 by Sport Auto in 2003
M3 CSL got 1:12.8.

Don't shoot the messenger.

I think the real question is why doesn't the messenger shoot himself and do the internet forum world a favor. The data is from the same source at the same track of cars available in ALL global markets.

Sep 17, 2005 | 01:39 PM

Kenzmbz

Super Member

Joined: Apr 2005

Posts: 803

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M

I rate one should use the fastest times achieved for each car, else you will have to post the 2 min times.

M3 got 1:16.3 by Sport Auto in 2003
M3 CSL got 1:12.8.

Don't shoot the messenger.

M&M nice Sig. Who won that day? You or the C55?

Sep 17, 2005 | 02:05 PM

Vomit

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 1,645

Likes: 2

From: San Diego

2002 C32 Black/Charcoal

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenzmbz

M&M nice Sig. Who won that day? You or the C55?

You must be a newbie. Everyone knows that M&M does not put anything on MBWorld (or on his other trollgrounds) unless the M-car comes out on top. Some have speculated that he is a paid promotional agent for BMW. In any case, given that it is M&M that we are talking about, your question is self-answering.

Sep 17, 2005 | 03:04 PM

Improviz

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 3,679

Likes: 0

CLS55 AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M

I rate one should use the fastest times achieved for each car, else you will have to post the 2 min times.

Yawn, here we go again....we've been through this before, dude, and nothing changes: you continue to cherry-pick the best times for the M3. As a supposed engineer, you should have had an introductory statistics course, and thus should know that a sample size of one is not as meaningful as a larger sample size. So, rather than your single, cherry-picked fastest example, here are all of the tests around Hockenheim for the M3 from track-challenge.com. Each link is denoted with the date and the actual lap time the cars got:

E46 M3 coupe, 12/2000: Hockehheim time: 1'17.6"
http://www.track-challenge.com/main_...1_e.asp?Car=30

E46 M3 coupe, 7/2003: 1'17.6" Hockehheim time: 1'17.6":
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=245

Your perennially cherry-picked example, E46 M3 coupe, 3/2003: 1'16.3"
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=236

E46 M3 coupe, 1/2005: Hockehheim time: 1'16.9"
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=335

E46 M3 coupe, 6/2001: Hockehheim time: 1'17.8"
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=145

Average = (77.6 + 77.6 + 76.3 + 77.8 + 76.9)/5 = 77.24 = 1'17.24. Clearly, your cherry-picked favorite was a fluke.

But you already knew this, didn't you: I presented it to you, here. So why dishonestly keep presenting only the fastest example as though it is representative?

Here are the cabrios in case one is interested:
E46 M3 Cabrio: Hockehheim time: 1'18.4":
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=163

E46 M3 Cabrio: Hockehheim time: 1'19.4":
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=258

E46 M3 Cabrio: Hockehheim time: 1'17.2":
http://www.track-challenge.com/tracktest2_e.asp?Car=157

Sep 17, 2005 | 04:14 PM

FrankW

MBworld Guru

Joined: Apr 2002

Posts: 22,058

Likes: 18

From: Diamond Bar, CA

W206 PHEV AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenzmbz

M&M nice Sig. Who won that day? You or the C55?

rofl...he and his no-passenger seat-race fuel-M3 won and claimed he was stock...

6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)

Verdad Gallardo

Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun

Verdad Gallardo

Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren

Verdad Gallardo

8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine

Verdad Gallardo

Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction

Verdad Gallardo

Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know

Verdad Gallardo

Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know

Verdad Gallardo

5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve

Verdad Gallardo

Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping

Verdad Gallardo

10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used

Verdad Gallardo

Sep 17, 2005 | 07:32 PM

Vomit

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 1,645

Likes: 2

From: San Diego

2002 C32 Black/Charcoal

I think that it is safe to say that you will find many of the members here getting less and less friendly as they get more and more tired of your skewed B.S.

Sep 17, 2005 | 07:38 PM

#10

Trekman

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Feb 2005

Posts: 1,193

Likes: 0

From: Bay Area SF

Silver 2002 C32, Silver 2006 CLK 350

i think he will find ricks shoes up where the sun dont shine soon if he does not quit this crap!

Sep 17, 2005 | 09:07 PM

#11

reggid

Senior Member

Joined: Jun 2004

Posts: 403

Likes: 0

From: .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improviz

the spread of results show that the cars must be tested at the same time for it to be valid comparison and in most cases they are not.

Sep 17, 2005 | 09:33 PM

#12

Jon200

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,112

Likes: 0

From: MB - World

Quote:

Originally Posted by reggid

the spread of results show that the cars must be tested at the same time for it to be valid comparison and in most cases they are not.

Thanks for your contribution

the list is for a range of times, cherry-picking the fastest time isn't going to help

How do you expect the cars to be tested at the same time

Last edited by Jon200; Sep 17, 2005 at 09:38 PM.

Sep 17, 2005 | 09:40 PM

#13

Jon200

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,112

Likes: 0

From: MB - World

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankW

rofl...he and his no-passenger seat-race fuel-M3 won and claimed he was stock...

NO Frank, he ran a dead 13 when he was stock remember? I think if you do a search you will he said he did a 12s somewhere when he was stock :p

Sep 17, 2005 | 09:44 PM

#14

vraa

Out Of Control!!

Joined: Jul 2002

Posts: 28,933

Likes: 12

You should 'cherry pick' when it's a test during the same day in the same conditions.

AMGod, were those times from AMS done on the same day?

Sep 17, 2005 | 09:46 PM

#15

Jon200

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Apr 2003

Posts: 1,112

Likes: 0

From: MB - World

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vomit

I think that it is safe to say that you will find many of the members here getting less and less friendly as they get more and more tired of your skewed B.S.

He has made heaps of friends on Audiworld.com and RS6.com as well

I think people on these boards are aware of who this troll is , I hope he trolls on the Ferrari and Porsche forums too

Sep 17, 2005 | 10:28 PM

#16

AMGod

Thread Starter

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Mar 2005

Posts: 2,392

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricky.agrawal

You should 'cherry pick' when it's a test during the same day in the same conditions.

AMGod, were those times from AMS done on the same day?

No. That is the variable of difference open to conjecture. It is the closest to irreputable data I could come up with.

Sep 18, 2005 | 12:27 AM

#17

Improviz

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Sep 2002

Posts: 3,679

Likes: 0

CLS55 AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M

WOW! IMPROVIZ! I actually said a few posts before you that we should use the fastest times for each car.

And who named you the local God of what we should, and should not, use in comparing automobile performance? I sure as hell didn't, and I doubt you'll find other forum members lining up in droves to do so, particularly when you're attempting to use a time for the M3 which was clearly a fluke, as the data I posted shows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M

ARE YOU DUMB? Where's the cherry picking when I said use the fastest times?

Someone here is dumb, but it isn't me. Please cite any statistics text which states that a sample two standard deviations below the mean value is representative of what one would expect from any given sample. The purpose of stats is to analyze what the *normal*, or *typical* car, and trying to pass off one which is over a full second faster than average as representative of what all can do is a silly argument on its face, which I'm sure you know, but after all you're not here for honest debate, but to market BMWs, and so you as usual present your relentless massaging of facts and spin to try and fool the unwary.

You know that we're wise to you, it's the stragglers you're trying to catch. But you won't, because each and every time you pull it, I'm right here, in your face, correcting your blatant anti-Mercedes, pro-BMW spin. And it very obviously annoys you, so you as usual resort to personal attacks rather than address the obvious question, which is: why should we use as representative a time which is clearly well below the average time?

Answer the question.

Last edited by Improviz; Sep 18, 2005 at 12:32 AM.

Sep 18, 2005 | 02:08 AM

#18

M&M

Super Member

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 723

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improviz

But you won't, because each and every time you pull it, I'm right here, in your face, correcting your blatant anti-Mercedes, pro-BMW spin. And it very obviously annoys you, so you as usual resort to personal attacks rather than address the obvious question, which is: why should we use as representative a time which is clearly well below the average time?

Answer the question.

Because you used the fastest C32 time & then the slowest M3 time.

You know what? I'm getting sick of this. I see this topic & add my contribution which was to point out that Sport Auto also got 1:16.3 for the M3. That's not a lie, it's not a cherry-pick & it's on topic. Why can't everyone just stay on the topic & leave me out of this? Improviz, everyone already knows me so there's no needt keep posting the same bull.

Anyway, I think you should use the fastest time for each car 'COS THAT'S THE NORM. It's not cause I said so. If Sport Auto tests a car in the rain are you going to use that? A lap record is usually the fastest time for a particular car. Whether it's above the average or not is irrelevant. The car DID go around in that time on that day whether you like it or not. Unless the sore loser excuse that the magazine was rigged pops up. There are lots of options for the M3. An SMG with 19"s & lots of options might be a bit slower than an 18" shod 6MT with no moonroof, etc.

If you can't understand that then you have issues. If you want, you can average the runs & would be the more scientific thing to do but you do not have a sufficient sample data for the other cars as they've mostly been tested only once. I think all you guys know what the results are gonna' be anyway.

Last edited by M&M; Sep 18, 2005 at 02:10 AM.

Sep 18, 2005 | 02:22 AM

#19

M&M

Super Member

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 723

Likes: 0

Impro, I'm afraid you just went & lost the argument. It seems Sport Auto agrees with me & this is their official list of times. You see, it may be hard to you to comprehend but if they test a car more than once they will post the FASTEST time, not the slowest time. Maybe you should write a letter to the editor & ask him to explain slowly why they do that.

I think this pic should be usefull info for this thread which is about Hockenheim times. Great to finally have some tangible evidence so we.can dicsuss this. Impr try to stay on the topic bud, if you can.

Sep 18, 2005 | 02:36 AM

#20

skratch77

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Nov 2004

Posts: 6,697

Likes: 381

2005 E55

how can you guys say he cherry picked the m3 times when the first poster cherry picked the c32 and c55 times and used the a ****ty time for the m3

he posted the fastest times those cars have ever gone around that track in any condition period

he used there fastest times and you all get pissed when someone says to do the same with the m3

Last edited by skratch77; Sep 18, 2005 at 02:40 AM.

Sep 18, 2005 | 02:39 AM

#21

vraa

Out Of Control!!

Joined: Jul 2002

Posts: 28,933

Likes: 12

And another thread spirals out of control.

I am disappointed in you guys, you want to know why? Because all of you guys, especially you BMW / Audi guys need to grow up.

On an Audi forum, the Audi is the fastest. On an BMW forum, the BMW is the fastest. Here, the true king reigns. Debating won't do anything to change that fact, the sooner you guys realize that, the sooner I can get back to my post whoring.