-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
He should have stopped at "Am I being needless pedantic? Probably."
A better answer would have been "yes."
While "fastest" car is often used to refer to the "highest top speed" that is not the only way it is used. It is ambiguous and sometimes is used to refer to the highest top speed and sometimes to the fastest accelerating car -- a few examples are below.
I am pretty sure that no one with any common sense reading the articles he complains about thought "fastest" meant "highest top speed" especially since the P100D is limited to 155 mph. So yes, he is being needlessly pedantic.
I do agree it would be better to use "quickest" instead of "fastest." That way, instead of arguing about the meaning of "fastest," we can argue about whether "quickest" means fastest 0-60 time, fastest quarter mile, fastest 0-200 mph or whatever.
Fastest Cars 0-60 Times | 0 to 60 & Quarter Mile Specs for the Fastest Cars in the World
List of fastest production cars by acceleration - Wikipedia
Where does Tesla’s new Model S P100D rank among the world’s fastest cars?
Top 10 fastest production cars from zero to 60 mph
Top 50 Supercars Listed by 0-60 mph Runs - Supercars.net
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
I read the article.
I don't think it's anti-Tesla, and certainly not anti-P100DL. Yes it smells a bit of "ICEs are still the fastest, na-na-na-na boo boo", but I expect that from Road and Track. Almost all of what they said is valid. They're primarily criticizing the media for failing to understand the difference between fast and quick. Which matters to some of those gearheads (I guess because that's pretty much all they have left to cling to--that and some loud noise. I dunno, we hate everything else that makes a loud noise, yet for some reason it's desirable in a car? I dunno...that's not my thing).
Is it pedantic? Yes.
Do gearheads overestimate the "importance" of fast? Absolutely. Quick is *way* more useful in the real world, and WAY more fun in the real world...unless you like losing your license for the rest of your life or dying in a horrific crash while killing others as well.
I have a friend who briefly thought about a Tesla a few years back, but bought a Porsche so he could "track it". He said "Teslas are great in a straight line, but they don't do well on the track". Mostly true.
But....
He's owned the car for 2 years now. He's taken it to the track exactly once.
So he's enjoyed the "track-iness" of his Porsche purchase once. I enjoy the quickness of my Tesla every time I drive it.
I know which one of us made the right decision.
I don't think it's anti-Tesla, and certainly not anti-P100DL. Yes it smells a bit of "ICEs are still the fastest, na-na-na-na boo boo", but I expect that from Road and Track. Almost all of what they said is valid. They're primarily criticizing the media for failing to understand the difference between fast and quick. Which matters to some of those gearheads (I guess because that's pretty much all they have left to cling to--that and some loud noise. I dunno, we hate everything else that makes a loud noise, yet for some reason it's desirable in a car? I dunno...that's not my thing).
Is it pedantic? Yes.
Do gearheads overestimate the "importance" of fast? Absolutely. Quick is *way* more useful in the real world, and WAY more fun in the real world...unless you like losing your license for the rest of your life or dying in a horrific crash while killing others as well.
I have a friend who briefly thought about a Tesla a few years back, but bought a Porsche so he could "track it". He said "Teslas are great in a straight line, but they don't do well on the track". Mostly true.
But....
He's owned the car for 2 years now. He's taken it to the track exactly once.
So he's enjoyed the "track-iness" of his Porsche purchase once. I enjoy the quickness of my Tesla every time I drive it.
I know which one of us made the right decision.
Automotive technology has reached a point where it's diverging between actual cars, and things that are so impractical they might as well be fighter jets. They are both awesome, but comparing the "selling points" across categories is kind of weird.
If I was trying to sell someone a P100D, I would just say look, you are never going to the Nurburgring and you will never hit 270mph. But you can do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds on your way to work.
There is a natural tension in how R&T reacts to this divergence, because not everyone in their audience wants the same things. You can really see it in how defensive this article is.
If I was trying to sell someone a P100D, I would just say look, you are never going to the Nurburgring and you will never hit 270mph. But you can do 0-60 in 2.5 seconds on your way to work.
There is a natural tension in how R&T reacts to this divergence, because not everyone in their audience wants the same things. You can really see it in how defensive this article is.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Just a quick off topic post on the idea of tracking a street car.....
I was at a track event with a street car and an acquaintance came up to me and made a few observations. Given his history in racing, I listened and found the comments useful.
(1)
Your insurance does not cover you on the track (for almost every street car) so any oops is on you.
(2)
If I ripped a corner off what I was driving, it would cost me $40K to fix, six months to get it fixed and my car would be worth 2/3rds its value on the other side with a perfect repair. Hmmm I said.
(3)
I could get around the track WAY faster in a ten year old Formula Atlantic. If I ripped a corner off, it would cost me $5k and I'd be back on the track in the afternoon. Oh, and the value of the car would not be altered.
Now this was the start of my heading down a very expensive path but the initial advice was helpful
Back to your regularly scheduled thread and sorry for the deviation.
I was at a track event with a street car and an acquaintance came up to me and made a few observations. Given his history in racing, I listened and found the comments useful.
(1)
Your insurance does not cover you on the track (for almost every street car) so any oops is on you.
(2)
If I ripped a corner off what I was driving, it would cost me $40K to fix, six months to get it fixed and my car would be worth 2/3rds its value on the other side with a perfect repair. Hmmm I said.
(3)
I could get around the track WAY faster in a ten year old Formula Atlantic. If I ripped a corner off, it would cost me $5k and I'd be back on the track in the afternoon. Oh, and the value of the car would not be altered.
Now this was the start of my heading down a very expensive path but the initial advice was helpful
Back to your regularly scheduled thread and sorry for the deviation.
Model S M.D.
Ludicrous Radiologist
I definitely enjoy the quickness of my car EVERY time I drive it. I have a good friend who bought a brand new Z06, who commented that my car is only good in a straight line. Don't we all accelerate in straight lines everyday? Who accelerates in curves in normal driving? I don't feel like getting into a car accident...
Model S M.D.
Ludicrous Radiologist
Jalopnuk is onboard with Telsa in this article: http://jalopnik.com/the-tesla-model-x-is-the-best-minivan-150-000-can-buy-1788281178
Some highlights:
"Foot all the way down and you’re just launched. All of that torque arrives instantaneously, and it’s like the massive fist of God himself is trying to make your face one with the headrest behind you. It’s intoxicating.
I did it again and again."
Some highlights:
"Foot all the way down and you’re just launched. All of that torque arrives instantaneously, and it’s like the massive fist of God himself is trying to make your face one with the headrest behind you. It’s intoxicating.
I did it again and again."
Similar threads
