German Car Zone

In the current issue of Evo, the reporter tries to no avail to make a Porsche representative talk about laptimes. The only thing the representative said was something along the line of endurance of tyres and brakes.

Evo, rethorically, asks whether it is time to start making the laps in sets of four to reflect the endurance of the car.

Any thaughts?

I dont understand. What do they mean`?

Good question. While endurance is always good, you have to wonder how relevant 4 laps around the ring is to any real world situation. Even for track days, you would have to do 20+ laps continuously around a typical track to do the same distance and unless you are seriously into endurance racing, I doubt you will be doing that. And before you ask, what is the relevance of single lap around the ring is to real world, it is a good summary of the car's handling prowess's in the real world. All the cars that do well around the ring, GT3, GTR, CSL are all hailed as great driver's car.

4+ laps might be feasible for thoroughbred sports cars (GT3RS,Superleggera,etc), however 4 laps of the ring on cars such as the E90 M3, Panamera, etc would be a tad too strenuous IMO, and could possibly actually lead to deteriorating lap times.

With regards to the M3 alone, there has been lots of negative criticism about the brakes, cant really handle much of a track pounding.

GCZ track bashers, AdvEvo and PCValkyrie's insight in this matter would also be helpful.

I think their point was that it is easier to build a car that can barely hold its poise for a lap of the green hell than to make one that can actually be used there.

A couple years ago, we did extensive on-rack testing of the M3 vs the IS F and found that, over a long duration, that the IS F held up much better than the M3. In fact, the M3 exhibited some serious shortcomings.

But ultimately, what does this matter unless you're planning on tracking the car? I understand the implied bragging rights of driving a true thoroughbred that can hold up lap after lap, but I don't see how it's of any relevance unless we're talking about cars that are actually bought for their track abilities.

Cars like the M3, Panamera, IS F, etc. are bought as road cars. When we think about times around the 'ring, we're using that as a yardstick of overall dynamic prowess, not a performance stress test.

And I think it is implied that the difference should be shown.

If the IS-F is a much better track tool than the M3, I think it would have been interesting to show that to the world in a test.

Naturally, there's lots of hand-wringing and hard choices to make when you're a newcomer to the market and are sniping at an established, and very revered, competitor.

AMG, M and now Lexus F don't have anything to gain by getting in a catfight. The last thing you want to look like is the cheap-shot johnny come lately.

Anyways, comparative testing isn't always done for marketing purposes. Often a manufacturer wants to know where they stand against the class standard, and sometimes the information informally flows down into the retail channel.

I think 4 laps would be too much for many cars. But performance cars should be taken round for 2 laps imo.