If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed, registering will remove the in post advertisements. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
This means you should apply for your renewal now to avoid any disruptions to your membership whilst the renewal process is taking place! NOTE: If you have an auto renewing subscription this will happen automatically.
Motoring journalist acceleration times are notoriously easy to beat.
When I had my Fiesta Zetec a few years ago, the best times around were 17.75 from Motor, can't remember what Wheels got. Anyway, I took it to the strip for fun, first time there, on my 2nd run, 17.252 @ 77.98mph. Blew the local mags into the weeds.
But what I was getting at was that I managed to beat the time of the site you used, not the Wheels mag one...You said the Wheels one was inaccurate, and now you are saying your own car site is "notoriously inaccurate" too.
Which one should I believe, the inaccurate Wheels one, or your inaccurate site info?
Is this not just pretty much a rewording of what I said anyway?
Don't worry Trent, basically everyone who has a Polo GTI has said this in this thread(including myself).
I bet that most people in the market when they bought their Polo GTI drove the XR4(including myself and Rhys). If we didn't like it, we didn't like it. I don't know why someone has to continually keep dragging up stats that even he has said can be beaten after he uses them as proofs to back himself...
My biggest factor in not getting it was the lack of full size spare, and lack of cruise control, then interior quality and size, in that order.
Please Mods, before I slit my wrists, put a bullet in the head of this thread, and bury it an unmarked grave, never to be spoken of again...
"If can't get behind your troops, feel free to stand in front of them..."
Please Mods, before I slit my wrists, put a bullet in the head of this thread, and bury it an unmarked grave, never to be spoken of again...
i would have to say thats a fair call. i don't see this thread possibly progressing any more. all points have been addressed and all opinions have been clearly spoken.
i just hope there are no hard feelings from any members involved in this 'debate'.
But what I was getting at was that I managed to beat the time of the site you used, not the Wheels mag one...You said the Wheels one was inaccurate, and now you are saying your own car site is "notoriously inaccurate" too.
Which one should I believe, the inaccurate Wheels one, or your inaccurate site info?
The site I posted did not give inaccurate info. You did your 15.42 at a drag strip, correct? Therefore, it will always give a faster time then a vbox acquired time like on fastestlaps, because of the 1' rollout. 15.42 at the strip to 15.6 on a vbox is pretty much the same time, one with rollout, one without.
The site I posted did not give inaccurate info. You did your 15.42 at a drag strip, correct? Therefore, it will always give a faster time then a vbox acquired time like on fastestlaps, because of the 1' rollout. 15.42 at the strip to 15.6 on a vbox is pretty much the same time, one with rollout, one without.
(Dashes out to get Vbox)...I'm ready when you are...But wait, I'm out of excuses...
"If can't get behind your troops, feel free to stand in front of them..."
Tweet
Comment