I've completed a list of lap times complete by British magazine EVO at the Bedford Autodrome, west circuit.



New list:

1.23:10 - Porsche 997 GT3

Old List:

1:17.10 - Radical SR3 1300
1:19.00 - Caterham R500 EVO
1:19.60 - Ariel Atom Supercharged
1:19.60 - Caterham CS6 260
1:19.62 - Caterham Evolution
1:19.70 - Dax Rush MC
1:19.70 - Porsche Carrera GT
1:20.20 - Porsche Carrera GT (2nd attempt)
1:21.00 - Caterham CSR 260
1:21.20 - McLaren F1
1:21.30 - Ferrari Enzo
1:21:85 - Ariel Atom
1:21.85 - Caterham CSR 260 Superlight
1:22.25 - Litchfield Type-25
1:22.30 - * Damp -Koenigsegg CCX
1:22.40 - Lotus Exige S
1:22.40 - Lingenfelter Corvette Z06
1:22.75 - Ford GT
1:22.80 - Lamborghini Gallardo MK2
1:23.00 - Molser MT900
1:23.10 - Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano
1:23.20 - Ascari KZ1
1:23.55 - Porsche 997 Turbo
1:23.85 - Porsche 996 GT3RS
1:23.90 - Lamborghini Gallardo MK1
1:24.20 - Ferrari F430
1:24.45 - Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
1:24.55 - Mitsubishi EVO IX FQ340
1:24.60 - Porsche 997 Carrera S Sport
1:24.95 - TVR T350C
1:25.75 - Porsche 997 Carrera 4
1:25.85 - Bovingdon Ring M3
1:25.95 - Ferrari 612 Scaglietti
1:26.00 - Porsche 996 Turbo
1:26.10 - Mitsubishi EVO IX 320
1:26.40 - Subaru Impreza WRX STI
1:26.40 - BMW M6
1:26.75 - Aston Martin V8 Vantage
1:26.85 - Porsche Cayman S
1:26.95 - Nissan 350Z GT-S
1:27.10 - BMW Z4M Coupe
1:27.40 - Aston Martin Vanquish
1:28.20 - Aston Martin DB9 Manual
1:28.20 - Hartage H1
1:28.25 - Audi RS4
1:28.35 - Maserati Quattroporte
1:28.65 - Rage R130 Buggy
1:28.50 - Roush Mustang 420RE
1:28.55 - Porsche 987 Boxster S
1:28.60 - Audi B7 RS4 -First Attempt
1:28.70 * Damp - Lamborghini Murcielago:
1:28.85 - Porsche 997 Carrera
1:28.90 - Porsche Cayman S:
1:29.20 * Damp - Lotus Elise 111R
1:29.30 - Mercedes-Benz SLK55 AMG:
1:29.80 - BMW M3 CS
1:29.95 - BMW E60 M5
1:29.95 - Mercedes-Benz SL600
1:30.00 - Marcos TSO GT2, SPKG
1:20.00 - BMW 330I M Sport
1:30.05 - Mercedes-Benz SL55 AMG
1:30.05 - MG SV-R
1:30.10 - Alpina B5
1:30.10 - Lotus Europa S
1:30.11 - Mercedes-Benz C55 AMG
1:30.55 - Ford Mustang GT
1:31.05 * Damp - Mitsubishi EVO 260
1:31.55 - Vauxhall Vectra VXR
1:31.65 - Cadillac CTS-V
1:31.70 - Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG (2007)
1:31.75 - 06 Jaguar XK8
1:32.05- Nissan 350Z
1:32.25 - Bentley Continental GT
1:32.55 - Volkswagen R32
1:32.70 - Mazda RX8
1:32.80 - Dodge Ram SRT-10
1:33.05 - Bentley Continental GT DS
1:33.10 - Renault Clio 182 Cup
1:33.15 - Vauxhall Astra VXR
1:33.35 - Renault Megane Trophy
1:33.55 - BMW 130i M Sport
1:33.55 * Damp - Vauxhall Monaro VXR
1:33.55 - Seat Leon Cupra R:
1:33.65 * Damp - Porsche Cayenne Turbo
1:33.75 - Volkswagen Golf GTI MK2
1:33.75 - Renault Clio Trophy
1:33.90 - Ford Focus ST
1:34.60 - Chrysler 300C 5.7
1:34.60 - Mini Cooper S
1:35.20 - Alfa GT V6
1:35.30 - Volkswagen Polo GTI
1:35.50 *Damp - Mercedes-Benz CLS55 AMG
1:36.05 - MG ZT 260
1:36.15 - Ford Fiesta ST
1:36.20 - Vauxhall Astra 200
1:36.25 - Citroen C2 VTS
1:37.45 - Seat Ibiza FR
1:38.25 - BMW 120i
1:43.20 - Mercedes-Benz 450 SEL 6.9
1:43.50 - Ford Focus MK2 1.6
1:45.85 * Damp - Ford Focus MK1 1.6

I like Evo and their use of the 1.8 mile Bedford Autodrome Circuit as a "benchmark" for performance. However, they report times to the 2nd decimal place......is that really necesssary? I've already made a post questioning the "error bars" associated with laptimes like these, and I doubt they are in the range of 1/100th of a second.

They've tested the RS4 twice at Evo. The first time, they did it in a direct head-to-head competition between the M3 CS and C55 AMG. The times they got were the following:
RS4: 1.28.60
M3 CS: 1.29.80
C55 AMG: 1.30.11

Then they tested the RS4 later on another day and got 1.28.25 (which is what is listed on this thread). That's a 0.35 difference for the same car. Perhaps this gives an estmate about what the potential "error" can be in Evo's hands on this particular track.

Having said that, some of the time differences are very slim between cars, sometimes to the 2nd decimal place in some instances.

Here is an example from that list of some cars which are favourites of discussion on this board and extrememly close in their laptimes. The difference between the fastest and slowest of these cars is 0.31 seconds. Can we conclude that the M3 CS significantly outhandles the C55 on this track?? With the different times they got for the RS4, I don't know.....

1:29.80 - BMW M3 CS
1:29.95 - BMW E60 M5
1:29.95 - Mercedes-Benz SL600
1:30.00 - Marcos TSO GT2, SPKG
1:30.00 - BMW 330I M Sport
1:30.05 - Mercedes-Benz SL55 AMG
1:30.05 - MG SV-R
1:30.10 - Alpina B5
1:30.11 - Mercedes-Benz C55 AMG

I would agree with pretty much all you've said and i'd agree the M3CS is more sporty than the C55 AMG.

I think the best answer for this track is that EVO's drivers are not true professionalls like Sport Auto's.

Oh you can be quite certain that EVO's drivers are up there with the best automotive journalists in the world. Dickie Meaden, John Barker and all have a long history in the game and hundreds of hours of track time at all but the highest level of motorsport. They've got so much time on that Autodrome track that driver influence is negligible on the outcome of a performance evaluation. They know those lines to within a few centimetres I'm sure...

Actually, the best answer is that ambient conditions (temperature, atmospheric pressure) and the car itself (engine outputs can vary by as much as 10% across identical models) are the most likely variables in accounting for the difference.

I'm a big EVO reader but did not know Barker or Meaden had top racing experience, if so i retract my comment. I didn't mean to sound ignorant if i did

I'm more of a "Mr. Sport Auto"


Agreed 100%. Track tempature can obviously vary times by much. EVO did say the Koenigsegg CCX was run in damp tempatures so that slowed it down. I will add something stating it was.

RS4 been tested two times. The RS4 have the option for sportchassi, ceramic brakes and semi R-tires for an extra cost. A guy I know own a RS4 without these three things.
I assume those tests with the RS4 were done with sportchassi, ceramic brakes and semi R-tires and the other time they tested the RS4 then it was without this three things?

I also remember EVO said the tires were brand new (or something) on the M3 which affected the laptime when they tested against C55 and RS4.

Yeah i know the options, the RS4 that Sport Auto got had all three.


I've just looked through the C55/M3/RS4 test and it doesn't say wether the RS4 was using these options.. I'll see what i can find out though.

What about the other test?

Cermaic brakes, sportchassi and the tires obviolsy play a part. In this Italian carmag the RS4 were tested without this things and this is what happen

- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

Not ignorant at all - they're not professional racers after all... However, both Barker and Meaden have just completed some serious events, Barker at a sportscar series in Spa-Francochamps (they came 2nd, if I recall) behind the wheel of a Caterham 260 and Meaden at the Nurburgring 24 Hrs behind the wheel of a works drive (not too shabby for a little moto-journo eh?) Maserati Gransport Tropheo. No, these guys are in the Horst von Saurma league as the pinnacle of motoring journos. Only Tiff and Stevo Sutcliff rate higher in my opinion.

More that just track temperature, 7.3 AMG, but air temperature, humidity and atmospheric pressure have a significant influence on an engine's performance - especially naturally aspirated (as in the case of the RS4) engines.

For sure, i see the M3 beat the RS4 in that Italian test, so yes those are very important options.

I'm looking for the other test right now.