Car and Driver Feb 2010 comparison

[MoPho]

Thanks Nicholas! 


[quote="Nicholas"]

He also did a great job keeping up with us, even if we did have an unfair advantage (like our better looks!)
[/quote]


You got me there   I did also have to wait for those pesky slow Lotus drivers so they didn't get lost, so spent most of the day having to catch up

[dp35]

[quote="MoPho"]
As a matter of fact, I once worked on a track test with C/D ...[/quote]

Of course I'm biased and not trying to hide it.  Now we know where your bias comes from, which explains why you've come here to defend the magazine and its test driver (IMO).  Perhaps both of us are too biased to judge this situation objectively.  But one of us has driven the car in question and one has not.

[MoPho]

[quote="dp35"]
[quote="MoPho"]
As a matter of fact, I once worked on a track test with C/D ...[/quote]

Of course I'm biased and not trying to hide it.  Now we know where your bias comes from, which explains why you've come here to defend the magazine and its test driver (IMO).  Perhaps both of us are too biased to judge this situation objectively.  But one of us has driven the car in question and one has not.
[/quote]


Well then, perhaps you should try driving one, you might like it


You really should stop making assumptions

[dp35]

[quote="MoPho"]
Ok, but where did anyone suggest that by being scary it sucks? Is when you say it's scary and a journalists says it's scary two different meanings now?[/quote]

The magazine used the term "scary" to describe the Atom in a deragatory way.

[quote="MoPho"]
the tester got a handful of laps, plus had to adapt to all the other cars and on a track that they only use once a year[/quote]

I have zero sympathy for a guy that's paid to drive 20 great cars on a track.  If that wasn't enough time to be accurate, they should've taken more.  They did the test on their time frame, not mine. 

I remember a similar test a couple years ago, with Randy Pobst driving various cars at Laguna Seca.  I clearly remember the article said he did the fastest laps in most of the cars on his 2nd lap in the car.  That's what a real pro does.  Let's have RP drive an Atom, and see how "scared" he gets. 

[quote="MoPho"]
First off, the magazines never claims any of the writers are the ultimate in pro drivers

Second, a "real pro" driver may be able to jump in and turn a faster lap than you can, but that pro would also be able to turn faster laps in all the other cars too, so it wouldn't likely change the results, only move the bar.
What you are suggesting is that they hire someone who can drive in a way that will mask the issues with the car, it wouldn't tell us anything about the car, just make you feel better about your purchase.
IMO, what a pro driver can do in a car has little relevance to what the car will be like for me to drive[/quote]

This is where we disagree.  IMO a better driver would improve the Atom's times relative to the other cars, because he would not be scared of it.  This driver would also report the characteristics of each car, good or bad.  I wouldn't expect the Atom to get a perfect score, but there's no way it would be slower than the XBow, especially not by that margin.  This was supposed to be a test of the cars, not drivers.  The ideal test would have several drivers of various skill levels.

I'm not asking for the "ultimate in pro drivers".  There are hundreds of drivers capable of this job. 

[quote="MoPho"]
I disagree, what the test proved is that the Atom is not an easy car to just jump in and go flat out (neither is my car), you guys confirm that. Nothing it says in the article isn't true and they praised how much fun the car is.[/quote]

The results of the test, the lap times, were not accurate.  If the car's difficult to jump in & drive fast, then say so, but don't report that its not capable of a lap time when it is.

[quote="MoPho"]
What this thread proves is that you are so blinded by your bias that you are unwilling to accept the truth, it's the same kind of nonsense on every car brand forum, people get all butthurt when their car doesn't win. As a matter of fact, didn't I have this same exact discussion with you over on the lotus forum?[/quote]

This is the part where you're becoming an internet troll.  Do you talk to people like this in person?  Is this how you talked to Pete & Nick?  I doubt it. 

My bias is obvious, I own an Atom and know what its capable of.  You're a magazine test driver guy, who likes to drive on the track for "the experience but not lap times", and now you've got your feelings hurt.  At this point there's only a few of us reading this thread, and none know who you are, so relax.

No, I don't post on any Lotus forums, and haven't had this argument anywhere but here.  There must be another crazy person on the internet that doesn't understand the magazine business.

[quote="MoPho"]
And as I mentioned, the driver vintage races open cockpit vintage formula cars, he is well versed in driving cars without nannies, so stop making the assumption that he was out of his comfort zone because the Atom doesn't haven such things [/quote]

Watch the video, listen to his words, then tell me he wasn't out of his comfort zone.  Or just poke your head over the cubicle and ask him.

[MoPho]

The magazine used the term "scary" to describe the Atom in a deragatory way.

No he doesn't, as a matter of fact I just watched it again and he didn't even call the car scary, he said he would have scared himself to take that one section flat in the car.

If that wasn't enough time to be accurate, they should've taken more.  They did the test on their time frame, not mine. 

It doesn't work that way, they don't have the luxury of an unlimited time frame. They are limited by schedules, budget, track time and availability of the cars.

I remember a similar test a couple years ago, with Randy Pobst driving various cars at Laguna Seca.  I clearly remember the article said he did the fastest laps in most of the cars on his 2nd lap in the car.  That's what a real pro does.  Let's have RP drive an Atom, and see how "scared" he gets. 

yeah and? 2nd lap of how many? Could he have gone faster if he had all day, or all week to drive the car? Your statement doesn't change my point. The mag tester may have turned his fastest time on the second lap for all we know

IMO a better driver would improve the Atom's times relative to the other cars, because he would not be scared of it.  This driver would also report the characteristics of each car, good or bad. 

again, that would just move the bar on all the cars, and how do you know he too wouldn't find the car "scary" and not have the confidence to push it to the absolute limit without more seat time?
IMO the all the cars had a pretty fair shake, and if certain cars are engineered in such a way that makes them easier to go fast right away, that is an advantage they bring to the table, doesn't necessarily make them better.

I wouldn't expect the Atom to get a perfect score, but there's no way it would be slower than the XBow, especially not by that margin.

Have you driven an XBow? I haven't, and while I am a little surprised that it was faster than the Atom, it does make sense given the conditions of the test and comments they made

If the car's difficult to jump in & drive fast, then say so, but don't report that its not capable of a lap time when it is.

where did they say it is not capable of going faster? They did report that it is difficult to drive fast. They also reported that it is loads of fun.

This is the part where you're becoming an internet troll.  Do you talk to people like this in person?

You mean as opposed to how I was talked to by MadMax?  Sorry, but I called it how I see it and don't think that was particularly rude at all, but I am sorry if I hurt your feelings

At this point there's only a few of us reading this thread, and none know who you are, so relax.

I am relaxed, you're the one who seems bent out of shape. You don't have to reply to me you know...

My bias is obvious, I own an Atom and know what its capable of.  You're a magazine test driver guy, who likes to drive on the track for "the experience but not lap times", and now you've got your feelings hurt. 

Again, you make assumptions! No where did I say I was a test driver and no, I don't have my feelings hurt. My bias may be in that I know the folks at the magazine personally, but I also like the atom and know what it is capable of (so I am also biased towards the Atom) and have friends who own them too ( I regularly defend the Atom on other forums).
I am merely providing some first hand experience that debunks your armchair quarterbacking, I am sorry you are unwilling to accept it

Watch the video, listen to his words, then tell me he wasn't out of his comfort zone.

Maybe you're watching a different video than I am, but he didn't seem all that uncomfortable to me, as a matter of fact, I was impressed at how calm he was talking considering the speed and effort

Or just poke your head over the cubicle and ask him.

That would be difficult, the office is 2300 miles away and as I said earlier, I don't work there

[Bruce Fielding]

Having not read the article I can't comment on it specifically, but there are thoughts that no one is debating here.

1. The Atom is a great car to drive whether you want to go fast or hoon

2. If you want to hoon it'll go slower, but be more fun

3. If you aren't used to it, you can't drive it as fast as quickly as a car with more aids

4. Practice makes perfect, and the more time you spend in an Atom, the faster you'll go

5. Hastily put together magazine articles are an utterly pointless measuring stick when it comes to real world performance

6. Oh, and all muttering rotters are driving legends in their own minds.

[Bruce Fielding]

Ah hah...

Having now watched the driver on his laps, I can see why Mark Gillies wasn't getting the best out of the car.

I appreciate that he might be a racer, but his technique looks matched to that of an older, heavier vehicle. Also, his footwork was awful in that clip, almost as though he wasn't trying very hard - which, as he admits, he wasn't - because he felt uncomfortable without a race suit on in the Atom. I'll bet that even he would admit that he wasn't trying.

Also to see the Atom (and some other cars on that list) do such unusual times in comparison to their peers simply isn't realistic.

Basically, it's bollocks. But it sells mags and gets people chatting, and that's good for the publishing industry at a time when it needs all the help it can get....

[dp35]

Sorry Bruce, but you're clearly wrong. 

Why?  Because some internet troll magazine test driver who knows (is?) Mark Gillies says so, and that's the end of the debate.

Besides, he wasn't given enough time to do an accurate test, because he was hard at work driving a bunch of great cars on a fantastic track, so have some pity on the poor guy.  If he blames your car for his results being wrong, and you don't like it, that's because you're just "butt hurt".

[Heywood-Yablowme]

Those who can,do..those who can't,take pictures.. 

 

[MoPho]

[quote="dp35"]
Sorry Bruce, but you're clearly wrong. 

Why?  Because some internet troll magazine test driver who knows (is?) Mark Gillies says so, and that's the end of the debate.

Besides, he wasn't given enough time to do an accurate test, because he was hard at work driving a bunch of great cars on a fantastic track, so have some pity on the poor guy.  If he blames your car for his results being wrong, and you don't like it, that's because you're just "butt hurt".
[/quote]

Wow, aren't you acting like a douche... Are you even old enough to drive?

Sorry you don't like the truth, the Atom is well known to be difficult to drive and in need of set up changes, you all even admit it yourselves and my friends who own them concur, but it seems you are only interested in hearing information that fits nicely into your little narrow minded box. All I've seen from you some of you guys is assumptions and innuendo's, I mean really, comments like "they gave it a bad time because they're jealous", you've got to be kidding me! At least a couple here can see through your BS.

And you really can't tell crap from that video. Bad footwork?!  you can't even see the track the camera is so low, and we don't even know if that is the lap they used for the time ( I can barely read the lap timer, but it doesn't appear to conform with the time), which is more than likely that it's not, since he is talking throughout the whole thing.

You know, I met a few nice guys from your group yesterday and thought it would be fun to join and offer some insight and have a discussion, but instead I get sh1t on by a bunch of know it all's who are only interested in a witch hunt. Well have at it, but I suggest in the future you stop reading magazines, because clearly you know better than they do.




Pete and Nick, hope to see you again in the canyons soon....

[Terry Kennedy]

[quote="MoPho"]
Sorry you don't like the truth, the Atom is well known to be difficult to drive and in need of set up changes, you all even admit it yourselves and my friends who own them concur, but it seems you are only interested in hearing information that fits nicely into your little narrow minded box. All I've seen from you some of you guys is assumptions and innuendo's, I mean really, comments like "they gave it a bad time because they're jealous", you've got to be kidding me! At least a couple here can see through your BS.[/quote]

This seems to have degenerated into some sort of bar fight. In the hope of getting this back on track (no pun intended)...

1) I freely admit I'm rubbish at driving on the track. But I enjoy it. Enough that a bunch of us (including Pete who you've met and Darrin who you've sniped at) rented the track the day before AtomFest II for ourselves to have fun.

2) When I picked up my US Atom in 2006 (which was at a different factory, so apples and oranges), I took it on a 500 mile shakedown and came back to the factory for scheduled adjustments to get the car set the way I wanted. Tom and Dan spent more than half a day tweaking everything to exactly how I wanted it - everything from re-doing the seat padding to adjusting the tillt and rake of each pedal and changing the suspension setup. When I left the factory that second time, I was more than comfortable enough to put 7000+ miles on the car in the next month. You can see some of that at the link at the bottom of each of my posts if you like. While I'd heard that "the first you'll know you've lost it is when the back of the car passes you going the other way", I found the Atom (post-setup-change) to be very well mannered. I managed to get it to break loose at around 6000 miles, but it was very controlled and the back just did 3 short hops and stayed within a foot of the line it was on. Since then, I have a total of 27000+ miles on my Atom.

3) Many of the other cars in this test don't have the setup flexibility that the Atom chassis gives you, but do have various electronic nannies that keep a driver from getting into too much trouble. Some cars are easier to get into for the first time and take to 9/10ths. I'd agree that the Atom isn't one of those. But I've personally seen people get that last 1/10th out of an Atom. Some of them have posted in this topic; some haven't.

4) Everybody here is familiar with the Atom's performance on the Top Gear track, and I'd bet that many are also familiar with the Autocar 0-100-0 test. The C & D results just seem inconsistent with those results. Since most of the folks here actually have actually owned an Atom (or several) and are very familiar with the car, the obvious conclusion is to blame the driver. As I mentioned in my reply way up near the top of this topic, I'd like to see what sort of time one of the TMI drivers could achieve in the same car on the same track configuration. However, I do understand that this is probably outside the scope of what was possible for the article, particularly if each manufacturer had the opportunity to do the same.

Having said all that, I'll just do what statisticians do when encountering a value far outside the norm - I'll ignore it

[Heywood-Yablowme]

Read C&D? Are you kidding? That rag ain't fit to line a parakeets cage! Never has been. Never! 

[dp35]

[quote="MoPho"]
Wow, aren't you acting like a douche... Are you even old enough to drive?

Sorry you don't like the truth, the Atom is well known to be difficult to drive and in need of set up changes, you all even admit it yourselves and my friends who own them concur, but it seems you are only interested in hearing information that fits nicely into your little narrow minded box. All I've seen from you some of you guys is assumptions and innuendo's, I mean really, comments like "they gave it a bad time because they're jealous", you've got to be kidding me! At least a couple here can see through your BS.
[/quote]

Said the Pot to the Kettle. 

I never said anyone was jealous.  My opinion is that C&D reported the fastest lap THEY were capable of driving the Atom, and that they gave it a poor review because it didn't work well given their driving skills, that's all.  It was an honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.  Other tests have shown pretty consistent results of how the Atom compares to other cars, but this test had a different conclusion, along with a very revealing video.  If that video was not their fastest or a similar lap, then it wasn't real smart of them to post it.

[quote="MoPho"]
You know, I met a few nice guys from your group yesterday and thought it would be fun to join and offer some insight and have a discussion, but instead I get sh1t on by a bunch of know it all's who are only interested in a witch hunt. Well have at it, but I suggest in the future you stop reading magazines, because clearly you know better than they do. [/quote]

Really?  I don't think so. 

[quote="MoPho"]
Yup, I am a troll, here to wind you up, you fell for it hook line and sinker[/quote]

I think you came here because you heard we were ripping magazine test drivers, which hit close to home.  You came to enlighten us with your inside magazine test driver knowledge.  That's why 100% of your posts have been within this thread, each one full of your passionate defense of your former (current?) employer, Car & Driver magazine.

There are hundreds of other threads you could've chosen to "join and offer some insight and have a discussion", but you came straight to this one, for obvious reasons.  Now that you've failed to change our opinions, you're mad.  Welcome to the internet.

If you want to find people that agree with you on this topic, you'll probably have to go elsewhere.  If you sincerely want to have some friendly insight & discussions here, there's plenty of that going on in nearly every thread but this one.  Apparently you're not an a-hole in person, so I'm willing to take your written comments here with a grain of salt.

[MoPho]

[quote="MadMaxAtom and company"]
Those who can,do..those who can't,take pictures.. 

 
[/quote]

Or become car dealers 

[MoPho]

I never said anyone was jealous

I didn't say you did, someone else made that ridiculous post

My opinion is that C&D reported the fastest lap THEY were capable of driving the Atom, and that they gave it a poor review because it didn't work well given their driving skills, that's all.  It was an honest mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.

It's really amazing how you can read something and then interpret it in some inverted way, is your reading comprehension that bad or do you just decide to make stuff up so you can argue? How did you conclude that they gave it a poor review? They gave it a pretty good but honest review, saying the car is a blast to drive is a huge complement. And where did they say that it was the fastest lap they are capable of? You don't know the parameters of the test, you are just making assumptions. Sometimes on these tests they just do three laps, one warm up, one timed and a cool down sometimes it 's 4-5 laps, regardless, that is not going to produce the ultimate lap time, but it will produce results that are comparable to the other cars given they get the same routine. There is only so many laps and so much time to get the job done, I am sure they could keep trying to go faster if they had all day to test the one car, but that is just not possible.

If it didn't work well with their driving skills, yet other cars did, well that reflects on the design of the car

 If that video was not their fastest or a similar lap, then it wasn't real smart of them to post it.

Or perhaps you should realize that by him talking through the whole lap that he couldn't possibly be putting all his concentration into the driving.
(Oh, and in case you thought those top gear laps are the real, they only have one or two camera men who shoot it and then move around for each lap and then they put it all together to make it look like one lap. You see, video's are not always what they appear)

Other tests have shown pretty consistent results of how the Atom compares to other cars, but this test had a different conclusion

Really? what other tests? because I have seen a few where cars with far less power than the atom turned faster lap times. Terry brings up Top Gear, well the Caterham with 40hp less smoked the Atom, so by your argument, I guess the stig doesn't know how to drive either right?
Drivers Republic, both the Caterham and the Lotus 211 (with merely 220hp) turned faster times than the Atom but I am sure they don't know how to drive  ::)
It seems you are only willing to accept results where your car wins  

No one is saying that the Atom isn't capable of going fast, but it is well documented that it is hard to drive without a lot of seat time and set up, that is not necessarily a bad thing

And BTW In reality, you can call into question the lap times of Top Gear too. They never test under the same conditions, we don't know who the driver is or if he is even the same driver, not to mention that is a track that can favor some cars and not others (as is the same of all tracks)

You have to take all this stuff with a grain of salt, it is absolutely impossible to do a test that can truly show a cars absolute ability without question, there are far too many variables. Even all things being the same, one car may fit a drivers style more than another giving him more confidence to faster. (and that's not to bring up variations in manufacturing, etc...)

I think you came here because you heard we were ripping magazine test drivers, which hit close to home.  You came to enlighten us with your inside magazine test driver knowledge.  That's why 100% of your posts have been within this thread, each one full of your passionate defense of your former (current?) employer, Car & Driver magazine.

There are hundreds of other threads you could've chosen to "join and offer some insight and have a discussion", but you came straight to this one, for obvious reasons.  Now that you've failed to change our opinions, you're mad.  Welcome to the internet.

If you want to find people that agree with you on this topic, you'll probably have to go elsewhere.  If you sincerely want to have some friendly insight & discussions here, there's plenty of that going on in nearly every thread but this one.  Apparently you're not an a-hole in person, so I'm willing to take your written comments here with a grain of salt.

Again, you are making crap up

Excuse me for choosing a topic that I have some first hand experience on, and how could I have time to even look at any of the other posts here, I've spent most of my day fighting off your attacks?  ::)

And really, I came here with the intention of participating in other threads, but after my first encounter with the dp35 and the atomicmaxipad welcoming committee, I really have no desire to be a part of this group anymore. But thanks anyway

Apparently you're not an a-hole in person, so I'm willing to take your written comments here with a grain of salt.

Right back at ya, although you may be an a-hole in person too, no one has said otherwise