Many magazine tests but not many cars. Manufacturers have small press fleets
and each magazine/newspaper takes it turn in testing the same car or very
small number of cars. The press car might be a good one or a car built on a
Friday - the tests are not conducted to the accuracy of land speed records
with runs averaged from opposite directions and wind measurement.
With the 1275 v 1500 the differences are so small I would say that they are
within the realms of error though the UK 1500 does seem to have a marginally
higher top speed due to a slightly higher power output. The acceleration of
the 1500 is only neglibily quicker than the 1275 to the point where the bulk
of the engine's power is working against aerodynamic drag rather than power
to weight and the additional power of the 1500 engine starts to count.
In the UK at least it is a rare sight to see a modified 1500 on the road or
track whereas most 1275s will be running K&N air filters and maybe an LCB
which more than takes them past the power of a stock 1500.
Daniel1312
In a message dated 24/09/00 07:48:10 GMT Daylight Time, tboicey@brit.ca
writes:
<< Well, your points are well made, but you still seem to
be saying "oh, forget magazine numbers".
The Brooklands Gold portfolio has DOZENS of tests, from
all sorts of magazines, compiled over decades, many in
excruciating detail with pages of graphs, test data,
and so on.
Very importantly, the measurements of all the tests are
slightly different, indicating that this wasn't one test
copied among a dozen magazines, but many independent
tests.
The results are indeed variable as you say, for example
"Autocar" squeezed an 11.9 second 0-60 out of a 1500 in
a test versus the spit 1500. (which notched a 11.8. Anecdotally,
the magazine preferred the spit but a lot of the reasoning
was interior trim and having an overdrive. I have an
overdrive in my 1500, I guess I need a spit dash! ;> )
Eventually, you have to observe that there are dozens and
dozens of road tests, all saying basically the same thing
by different people in different decades. Both in numbers
and in words, the reporters say the 1500 is faster.
You simply have to admit that the chances of ALL of the
magazine reviews being wrong are basically zero.
>>
|