Unsolicited unpaid testimonial

I am not disagreeing, but why do corvettes and vipers run such large tires?

I would suspect they were designed to use them from the start.

(JEN LURA) wrote:


>I am not disagreeing, but why do corvettes and vipers run such large tires?
>
>I would suspect they were designed to use them from the start.

I would think so too. To accelerate fast in a straight line with
an oversize engine, a major concern is to keep the tires from
slipping. The first way to squeeze more traction out of rubber
is to increase the contact patch size. That is mainly determined
by reducing tire pressure. I would think that the larger patch
would tend to push you towards larger tires. Something else you
can do is change the patch shape. Making it wider makes the wheel
locally look flatter, reducing curvature effects, and thus making
the contact patch more effective. How do you make the patch
wider? Obviously by making the tire wider.

Ergo, big, heavy tires. Are those heavy monsters with big,
wide-patch, moment arms going to be nimble? I would doubt it.

And what is the fun in going fast in a straight line? Unless
you want to go to jail for it, of course.

Leon

--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

"Leon van Dommelen" > wrote in message
...
> (JEN LURA) wrote:
>
>
>>I am not disagreeing, but why do corvettes and vipers run such large
>>tires?
>>
>>I would suspect they were designed to use them from the start.
>
> I would think so too. To accelerate fast in a straight line with
> an oversize engine, a major concern is to keep the tires from
> slipping. The first way to squeeze more traction out of rubber
> is to increase the contact patch size. That is mainly determined
> by reducing tire pressure. I would think that the larger patch
> would tend to push you towards larger tires. Something else you
> can do is change the patch shape. Making it wider makes the wheel
> locally look flatter, reducing curvature effects, and thus making
> the contact patch more effective. How do you make the patch
> wider? Obviously by making the tire wider.
>
> Ergo, big, heavy tires. Are those heavy monsters with big,
> wide-patch, moment arms going to be nimble? I would doubt it.
>
> And what is the fun in going fast in a straight line? Unless
> you want to go to jail for it, of course.
>
> Leon
>
> --
> Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
> http://www.dommelen.net/miata
> EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

Man, you are so biased it's crazy. I love my Miata to death also, but in no
way has it distorted my view of reality. There is absolutely no way you can
realistically downplay the Corvette's handling abilities to this extent.
While it is probably true a Miata is much more nimble with it's shorter
wheelbase and smaller size, this performance rarely pays off when compared
with the Vette other than in the tightest autocross formations. Not to
mention with triple the torque, it's going to take a little more
concentration to take advantage of the Vette's abilities. Corvettes average
between .89 - .98 lateral g's on the skidpad (Convertible - Z06) while
Miatas register .86 - .92. While many of us have upgraded our suspension
package, the highest (Miata) ever (officially) recorded was a racing beat
Miata with 1.00 g's which set a record in Car and Driver with a 73.6mph
slalom. Now I doubt our cars are not quite to this level, a typical miata
pulls a 66.7 mph slalom which is only marginally better than the previous
model Vette's 66.4 mph. Yeah, yeah what do numbers mean? Well a Corvette
and Miata are in two different leagues and it's completely unfair to test
them head on, but lets just settle that the Corvette is a fine handling car,
especially for American manufacturers.

In article >, "Bryan" > wrote:

>Corvettes average
>between .89 - .98 lateral g's on the skidpad (Convertible - Z06) while
>Miatas register .86 - .92.
[snip]
à–’
>pulls a 66.7 mph slalom which is only marginally better than the previous
>model Vette's 66.4 mph. Yeah, yeah what do numbers mean? Well a Corvette
>and Miata are in two different leagues and it's completely unfair to test
>them head on, but lets just settle that the Corvette is a fine handling car,
>especially for American manufacturers.


Handling is very subjective. Some believe that skidpad and slalom
numbers are the be all and end all. Some think they are at least
indicative, some think meaningless. Me, I subscribe to skidpad
being almost all about the tire, surface and a stiff (not
necessarily "good" suspension. In that order.

While slalom is at least more related to handling, it is far from
a perfect measure. I've read many a time that FWD cars
have a slalom advantage, but almost all say RWD has
inherent "handling" advantages.

Handling is more about how the car behaves closer to its limits,
how it communicates that. And, of course, how high those limits.

I've read many a review that claimed that Vipers are rather evil
handlers. This from the mag editors as well as professionals.
Now in almost all those reviews, it ran the fastest lap times and
put down some of, if not THE, top skidpads and slalom times.

I've read reviews saying the 'Vette is a great handler to cr*p
(the latter from the mags from our Brit friends). Personally, I
go for lightweight, nimble cars, but I'd never call the 'Vette a
bad handler. I'm not expert enough nor do I take cars to their
limit, or beyond, enough. [Nor am I saying the Miata is a better
handler].

In sum: very, very subjective.

"Bryan" > wrote:

>"Leon van Dommelen" > wrote in message
.. .
>> (JEN LURA) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I am not disagreeing, but why do corvettes and vipers run such large
>>>tires?
>>>
>>>I would suspect they were designed to use them from the start.
>>
>> I would think so too. To accelerate fast in a straight line with
>> an oversize engine, a major concern is to keep the tires from
>> slipping. The first way to squeeze more traction out of rubber
>> is to increase the contact patch size. That is mainly determined
>> by reducing tire pressure. I would think that the larger patch
>> would tend to push you towards larger tires. Something else you
>> can do is change the patch shape. Making it wider makes the wheel
>> locally look flatter, reducing curvature effects, and thus making
>> the contact patch more effective. How do you make the patch
>> wider? Obviously by making the tire wider.
>>
>> Ergo, big, heavy tires. Are those heavy monsters with big,
>> wide-patch, moment arms going to be nimble? I would doubt it.
>>
>> And what is the fun in going fast in a straight line? Unless
>> you want to go to jail for it, of course.
>>
>> Leon
>>
>> --
>> Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
>> http://www.dommelen.net/miata
>> EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)
>
>Man, you are so biased it's crazy. I love my Miata to death also, but in no
>way has it distorted my view of reality.

Then again, maybe the excessive price of the corvette has?

> There is absolutely no way you can
>realistically downplay the Corvette's handling abilities to this extent.
>While it is probably true a Miata is much more nimble with it's shorter
>wheelbase and smaller size, this performance rarely pays off

I would call that "handling." I am completely with Dave that this
is all subjective, but I would not equate "handling" with "performance"
at all. And I am not looking for "pay off" (proving anything), just
for fun with a good handling car. I define handling essentially as
"tossability". Will the car do what you want it to do or do you
have to be patient and let the car do what it needs to do?

> when compared
>with the Vette other than in the tightest autocross formations.

Well, I am very far from winning at autocross, and a Corvette
would not help anything. Tight or not. Then again, I do not
really care.

> Not to
>mention with triple the torque, it's going to take a little more
>concentration to take advantage of the Vette's abilities.

Yes, handling problems because of excessive power.

> Corvettes average
>between .89 - .98 lateral g's on the skidpad (Convertible - Z06)

0.89 seems very, very poor? What sort of cheap tires do they put
on this overpriced piece of Detroit junk that is supposed to be
a "sportscar"?

> while
>Miatas register .86 - .92. While many of us have upgraded our suspension
>package, the highest (Miata) ever (officially) recorded was a racing beat
>Miata with 1.00 g's which set a record in Car and Driver with a 73.6mph
>slalom.

Strange that 1.00 g would be the record, when another Racing
Beat Miata in 2000 did an *average* of 1.03 g? That Miata
was apparently on street sways and stock springs too because
ride comfort was a consideration. (Even the Konis were on
full soft, though that should not affect skidpad.) In addition,
it did not have very wide tires either, unlike the S2000 that
it ran against.

http://www.racingbeat.com/four_play.htm

Anyway, as Dave points out, the skidpad is simply a matter of tires,
it has nothing to do with the car (beyond miniscule benefits the
Corvette might conceivably get from a lower cg and stiffer
sway bars.) It certainly has nothing to do with *handling* in
my book. Just another yawn number.

>Now I doubt our cars are not quite to this level, a typical miata
>pulls a 66.7 mph slalom which is only marginally better than the previous
>model Vette's 66.4 mph. Yeah, yeah what do numbers mean?

Nothing to me. I do not define "handling" as slalom times.

> Well a Corvette
>and Miata are in two different leagues

Here we agree. The Corvette is an American muscle car and the Miata is
a Japanese sportscar. The Corvette is a thrill to drive for a week,
and the Miata is fun all the time.

> and it's completely unfair to test
>them head on,

And unnecessary, according to their design. What the heck would you
want to test?

> but lets just settle that the Corvette is a fine handling car,
>especially for American manufacturers.

I do not have any experience with American sportscars, so
I trust you here.

Leon

--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

Few years back, just around the time I bought my 2000 NB, there was a story
in Road&Track or Car&Driver (can't remember which) where they lined up a
bunch of sports cars and a couple of pro drivers on a road race course and
did a stopwatch comparo. Idea was to figure out which car was the fastest,
mixing classes and types of automobiles. Among the contenders were Miata
(of course), Corvette, M3, 911, Elise, S2000, 360 Modena, Viper, etc. Maybe
there were 10 cars? The Elise was supposed to be the "ringer" but it didn't
come out on top. Idea was to allow all of the drivers drive all of the
cars, average their track times and pick the winner. So it wasn't a
raw-numbers thing as far as lateral grip or slalom time, but had to do with
how easy the car is to drive.

Anyway, Miata finished near the top but not absolutely on top, but did
amazingly well considering it had 1/4 the power and 1/8 the pricetag of some
of the cars in the lineup.

Some of the comments about the Miata from the drivers showed the real point.
They said while the Miata had lower limits for absolute cornering than,
say, a Viper, they said it was possible to drive the Miata beyond the
cornering limits... drifting every corner, walking it around corners, etc.
But that going over the limit in a Viper was such a disaster that you had
to drive under the limits all the time. So the measured limits did not
correlate to the performance. Even with a major horsepower and numbers
handicap, Miata performed in the top of the pack because it could be driven
faster around the track, regardless of the limits.

So the ability to drive over the limit, recover, control the car when it's
in a slide, predict the behavior of the car, stability of the car over the
limits, etc., all affects how the car "handles" and also how fast you can
drive it.

For example, I had a VW Jetta GLI 16V with full-blown race suspension (and
street tires) that drove on the street like a go-cart. It was crisp,
nimble, lightweight, would corner VERY fast, had insanely high cornering
limits, etc. Really, below the limit, in an entirely different league from
a Miata. But woe to you if you imbalanced the car in a corner. Lift the
throttle just a LITTLE BIT inside a corner and you were going to very
rapidly swap ends. Brake hard on the way into a corner was a sure fire way
into a spin. You had to throttle through corners and know exactly how and
when to brake, steer, etc. It took a much higher amount of skill, and more
margin, to drive the car. After the rod bearing went out on that car, I
bought my 2000 PEP Miata and even with the factory 14" wheels/tires it would
go through any corner faster than my racer-boy 16V. The reason is because I
could drift controllably around a corner in the Miata, feel it slowly coming
around and bring it in, brake inside a corner, hey, the car's forgiving.
Under the limit, yeah the 16V felt a lot more like a go-cart. However, in
the end, I guarantee my bone-stock Miata is a faster car in the hands of
most drivers. Someone specializing in driving front-drive VW's with
enormous amount of roll stiffness in the rear could probably make the 16V go
faster, but that would take really special skill. Miatas are fun and fast
every day, for any driver.

This is the same thing that made Datsun 240Z's such popular and fun cars for
most people, even though there were certainly faster and more powerful cars
out there, the Z cars dominated on the race track. Balance, poise, ease of
recovery, and predictability are all very important in a sports car. In
fact, I'd say these factors are what separate a "true" sports car from a car
that's just a sporty-styled "fast" car.

josh > wrote:

>Few years back, just around the time I bought my 2000 NB, there was a story
>in Road&Track or Car&Driver (can't remember which) where they lined up a
>bunch of sports cars and a couple of pro drivers on a road race course and
>did a stopwatch comparo. Idea was to figure out which car was the fastest,
>mixing classes and types of automobiles. Among the contenders were Miata
>(of course), Corvette, M3, 911, Elise, S2000, 360 Modena, Viper, etc. Maybe
>there were 10 cars? The Elise was supposed to be the "ringer" but it didn't
>come out on top. Idea was to allow all of the drivers drive all of the
>cars, average their track times and pick the winner. So it wasn't a
>raw-numbers thing as far as lateral grip or slalom time, but had to do with
>how easy the car is to drive.
>
>Anyway, Miata finished near the top but not absolutely on top, but did
>amazingly well considering it had 1/4 the power and 1/8 the pricetag of some
>of the cars in the lineup.
>
>Some of the comments about the Miata from the drivers showed the real point.
> They said while the Miata had lower limits for absolute cornering than,
>say, a Viper, they said it was possible to drive the Miata beyond the
>cornering limits... drifting every corner, walking it around corners, etc.
> But that going over the limit in a Viper was such a disaster that you had
>to drive under the limits all the time. So the measured limits did not
>correlate to the performance. Even with a major horsepower and numbers
>handicap, Miata performed in the top of the pack because it could be driven
>faster around the track, regardless of the limits.
>
>So the ability to drive over the limit, recover, control the car when it's
>in a slide, predict the behavior of the car, stability of the car over the
>limits, etc., all affects how the car "handles" and also how fast you can
>drive it.
>
>For example, I had a VW Jetta GLI 16V with full-blown race suspension (and
>street tires) that drove on the street like a go-cart. It was crisp,
>nimble, lightweight, would corner VERY fast, had insanely high cornering
>limits, etc. Really, below the limit, in an entirely different league from
>a Miata. But woe to you if you imbalanced the car in a corner. Lift the
>throttle just a LITTLE BIT inside a corner and you were going to very
>rapidly swap ends. Brake hard on the way into a corner was a sure fire way
>into a spin. You had to throttle through corners and know exactly how and
>when to brake, steer, etc. It took a much higher amount of skill, and more
>margin, to drive the car. After the rod bearing went out on that car, I
>bought my 2000 PEP Miata and even with the factory 14" wheels/tires it would
>go through any corner faster than my racer-boy 16V. The reason is because I
>could drift controllably around a corner in the Miata, feel it slowly coming
>around and bring it in, brake inside a corner, hey, the car's forgiving.
>Under the limit, yeah the 16V felt a lot more like a go-cart. However, in
>the end, I guarantee my bone-stock Miata is a faster car in the hands of
>most drivers. Someone specializing in driving front-drive VW's with
>enormous amount of roll stiffness in the rear could probably make the 16V go
>faster, but that would take really special skill. Miatas are fun and fast
>every day, for any driver.
>
>This is the same thing that made Datsun 240Z's such popular and fun cars for
>most people, even though there were certainly faster and more powerful cars
>out there, the Z cars dominated on the race track. Balance, poise, ease of
>recovery, and predictability are all very important in a sports car. In
>fact, I'd say these factors are what separate a "true" sports car from a car
>that's just a sporty-styled "fast" car.

This is something I can agree with. You don't think that article
would be online? It would be nice to be able to post the link once
in a while when the need arises.

Leon


--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

"josh" > wrote in message
news:1100797903.215043@sj-nntpcache-5...
> So the ability to drive over the limit, recover, control the car when it's
> in a slide, predict the behavior of the car, stability of the car over the
> limits, etc., all affects how the car "handles" and also how fast you can
> drive it.
So far as I'm concerned all that lot i.e. how the car reacts to the driver's
inputs and how the driver can predict what it's going to do, amounts to the
*definition* of what a cars handling is. I totally agree that a car which
turns round and bites if you treat the slightest bit ham-fistedly is much
less pleasant to drive than one which is more fogiving and predictable, even
if the absolute limits of grip are lower for the latter vehicle, and
therefore likely to be slower from A to B in the real world.

SteveM

Leon van Dommelen wrote:

>
> This is something I can agree with. You don't think that article
> would be online? It would be nice to be able to post the link once
> in a while when the need arises.
>

I looked all over the C/D\R&T web sites and it wasn't there... oldest they
had was 2002 and I am sure it was either late 2000 or 2001 when the article
came out. I did a rather extensive web search to see if it was archived
anywhere and found nothing.

BUT-- it sure would be worthwhile to have because it was a unique report in
that they really didn't dwell on the numbers much at all, and it explained
in a lot of ways why even though some cars (such as Miata) don't dominate
all of the number games, they still show up on the "10 best" list year after
year and are enduring classic sports cars. Most other tests are either too
narrow, focus mostly on numbers/price/etc., or attempt to group like cars
together (Best Roadster, supercar vs. supercar, etc.). This was really a
cross-section of cars that had maybe 11 cars, had a 4-door sedan in there, a
barely-street-legal racing car, a $20K everyman roadster, a $125K exotic,
big American muscle, you name it.

Maybe someone else is a better web searcher than I am and can find it. I
know it was R&T or C&D (probably Car and Driver) and it was between about
July of 2000 and July of 2001. If there was an index of feature articles
from those magazines somewhere for that time period (say, a library?), it
would be easy to locate.

In article <1100877517.132405@sj-nntpcache-5>, josh > wrote:

>I looked all over the C/D\R&T web sites and it wasn't there... oldest they
>had was 2002 and I am sure it was either late 2000 or 2001 when the article
>came out. I did a rather extensive web search to see if it was archived
>anywhere and found nothing.

I've been subscribing for most of the last 5-7 years, and I can't
think of the exact issue you described. One similar was the R&T
"Get a Grip" June '02 feature which the 360 won, followed by
Elise. But they didn't test a Miata, rather they had the FWD Mazda
MP3, and it finished last (though it got many positive comments).

You can check the R&T index library:
http://roadandtrack.com/article.asp?...article_id=161

Perusing there, I did find the "best convertibles" article (July
'01), but it doesn't seem a head to head as you describe:

http://roadandtrack.com/article.
asp?section_id=31&article_id=102&page_number=1&pre view=

I do recall C&D ~1997 having a "best handling car under $30K"
(Prelude 1st, 318ti, then Miata NA), and a follow-on "best
handling car over $30K" (M3 wins over Viper, Vette, F355, etc,
invited Prelude finished better than mid-pack).

I can't think of one where the Miata went against the big boys
head-to-head. And I know in lap times it would get clobbered.

But, as I posted before, I do agree with the rest of your points
on subjective handling. Still, if someone gave me my choice of
keys, Modena all the way, baby!