Top Gear: C6 Corvette video (drag race with NSX)

[Tannim]

This is literally the saddest, most ignorant, statement I've heard on the whole topic.

So Top Gear is involved in a massive conspiracy to make the NSX appear mightier then the Vette?

HAHAHAHAHAHA.. ok... have you EVER seen Top Gear? I watch Top Gear every time I am in the UK and download all the clips. I get the mag as well.

Top Gear dumps all OVER the NSX. Your idiot conspiracy MIGHT make sense if the Porsche were ahead, but with the NSX, you've got NO argument at all.

I think you overlook the fact that The host HATES corvettes. Even went so far as to blow up a C4 as a stunt. As much as you claim he dislikes the NSX, he loathes the vette.

For last years 50th Goodwood ran a Corvette concourse at which Jezza (Ford GT) Clarkson was I believe a judge!!!!! On the TV coverage I remember seeing the interviewer asked Ford GT Clarkson which was his favourite corvette to which his witty response was something in the order of 'That’s like asking me which leg I would prefer to have amputated.''

 

[Tannim]

...Another "conspiracy theory" by a new, "one-post wonder" nonetheless. (Obviously this one hurt the "good-ol" boys were it counts, lol)

I don't see the big deal...big torque, big wheel-spin, big 60ft #'s (meaning slow off the line)

Wrecked the clutch," "wretched the tires" !?!? ROFL...how does one stratigically "wreck" a brand new clutch (possible) or brand new RUN-FLAT tires (practically impossible*) for the drag event. Lets not go overboard here...the new vette lost, live with it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/
Call it a conspiracy if you like, but it's already been reported in another news source (The Telegraph), that Top Gear wrecked the clutch and worn out the tread on the tires. It's not impossible to do, but you have to work at it.

Of course, the fact a reputable news organization reported this won't get in the way of your posturing.

Your "camaro" would of probably lost by even worst (under the same circumstaces, type of launch) Not insenuating the NSX and 911 are *conclusively* faster than the NEW corvettes in the "straight line"...but no "conspiracy" either, LOL. God knows Top gear has NEVER been the biggest fan of the NSX's either...which always threatened their BELOVED 911's.**

Yes, if you burned the clutch out of my Camaro and wore all the tread off it would probably lose too. Especially if your "Pro" driver spent all that time spinning out the wheels.

The facts remain, it wasn't a fair test at all. It was a hatchet job.

 

[Tantheman]

I wished they had that show on SPEED TV. Unlike Motor Trend TV or Car and Driver or MotorWeek.

 

[Mr Payne]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/
Call it a conspiracy if you like, but it's already been reported in another news source (The Telegraph), that Top Gear wrecked the clutch and worn out the tread on the tires. It's not impossible to do, but you have to work at it.

Of course, the fact a reputable news organization reported this won't get in the way of your posturing.



Yes, if you burned the clutch out of my Camaro and wore all the tread off it would probably lose too. Especially if your "Pro" driver spent all that time spinning out the wheels.

The facts remain, it wasn't a fair test at all. It was a hatchet job.

Stop giving them logical arguments and real sources. We all know that Jeremy Clarkson would never lie or anything because he seems like a nice guy on TV. We all know that a 290hp NSX would decisively beat a 400hp C6. We all know that the clutch and tires are perfect in that run and that Top Gear would exercise journalistic integrity.....because they can.

 

[satan_srv]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/
Call it a conspiracy if you like, but it's already been reported in another news source (The Telegraph), that Top Gear wrecked the clutch and worn out the tread on the tires. It's not impossible to do, but you have to work at it.

Of course, the fact a reputable news organization reported this won't get in the way of your posturing.
[

This link doesn't go anywhere..got the actual article?

Anyway the Vette lost to wheelspin as people have said before. Can we stop the whining already?

 

[mlambert890]

Stop giving them logical arguments and real sources. We all know that Jeremy Clarkson would never lie or anything because he seems like a nice guy on TV. We all know that a 290hp NSX would decisively beat a 400hp C6. We all know that the clutch and tires are perfect in that run and that Top Gear would exercise journalistic integrity.....because they can.

Who said this (that Clarkson is some great guy)? I dont see any logical arguments at all. I see the types of arguments that irrational people use to justify conspiracy theory.

No one here likes Clarkson and no one here thinks the NSX is a quicker car than the C6. We've ALL said that the C6 is the quicker car, so drop the idiotic sarcasm.

Point is, if Top Gear were going for a total defamation of the Vette, they would have had the 9 1 1 ahead. Get it?

The NSX is a statistically insignificant car and it costs a ton.

If they really wanted to show Europe "WOW! LOOK WHAT A POS THE VETTE IS! DONT EVER BUY ONE!" then they would have shown the 911 (its most realistic competitor) blasting ahead of it.

If you're manufacturing a scenario, you manufacture a perfect scenario.

The NSX is easy to launch and can do 13.1 in the 1/4. The C6 had wheelspin off the line (obvious in the video) and can do 12.7 in the 1/4.

If you think that wheelspin isnt enough to account for .4, then you're a moron. Hate to get nasty, but thats really the size of it.

You dont need broken body panels, burnt clutches, and abused gear shifts to make a .4 difference. Wheelspin will do that.

 

[mlambert890]

The facts remain, it wasn't a fair test at all. It was a hatchet job.

A hatchet job where the Corvette posted above the 911GT3 on their board.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... ok

More than anything, this shows where the heads of you guys are. The most important stat HERE on NSX Prime (or among Europeans) would be the L A P time.

The fact that you guys are obsessed with the drag race and don't care at all that the C6 posted higher than the GT3 on an actual track with curves says a lot.

If Top Gear wanted the C6 to look bad, they would have NEVER ALLOWED IT TO PERMANENTLY LIVE ABOVE THE GT3 ON THEIR BOARD.

Now go away!

 

[NSXTASY_MD]

Again, bad off the line performance and you have a losing C6 to an NSX....I've dusted MANY cars off the line in the 1/4 mile who "SHOULD" of been quite faster than me...stop whining, it simply LOST the "published race." And like I said before...not to say in another race the C6, with a perfect launch, wouldn't of beat the NSX + 911.


...I think the "bulk" of these ignorant posts are failing to see/mention what a couple of others were saying....that C6 posted LOWER times than the 911 GT3 !!! :THIS IS FOR THE UNINFORMED: That's huge*** A major deal....an amazing upset (get the point?) ...a Porsche 911GT3 is a race bread track car which dominates road courses. That's its specialty. Even in the straight line they've posted 12.3@116+mph times before. This car is actually quicker then the C6 in the striaght-line...and don't get me started on its handling. So now how in the world could the vette post a LOWER (by a good margin I might add) time on the road course (where it really counts) than the GT3 !?!? Only ONE possibly reason...the conditions for the GT3 where way worst...(this is just speculation of course). For IF the vette (not even Z51 i believe) *honestly* beat the 911 GT3 heads up on a ROAD COURSE....you will be hearing A LOT about this car in the press in the future months to come....the performance bar for sportscars world wide will have officially been raised three notches becuase of the C6....IF those results were an accurate depiction of what a C6 can do relative to a GT3 on the track. (Not conclusive yet)

 

[gheba_nsx]

But the GT3 was on the wet track, am I right?

 

[CerberusM5]

But the GT3 was on the wet track, am I right?

Yes, that is correct.

The C6's time was 1:26.8 on a dry track.

The GT3's time was 1:27.2 on a wet track. They generally state that if the track were dry; you can knock off an additional 4 seconds off the wet time. That would give the GT3 an estimated time of approximately 1:23.2

If this is true, the GT3 is a lot faster on their circuit. Three and half seconds on a short road course is an eternity.

Hopefully they will test the new C6 ZO6 when it arrives. That car will definitely approach the GT3's time if not eclipse it.

For its cheap price of admission, the new C6 is very impressive indeed. I think the looks are improved and the interior design looks superior to its predecessor. I am very anxious for the release of the new ZO6. I think it will raise the performance bar once again for inexpensive sports cars and humble lots of the high dollar competition.

 

[Tannim]

This link doesn't go anywhere..got the actual article?

Anyway the Vette lost to wheelspin as people have said before. Can we stop the whining already?

The actual article requires a subscription to see. It's the top link on the page I listed( Little red Corvette), or you can click here:

http://motoring.telegraph.co.uk/mot...31.xml&sSheet=/motoring/2004/07/30/ixmot.html

As for the "drag race" if it's so insignificant, then why did they only use the C6 third place run when they had multiple seconds? They ran that race so many times, with so much induced wheelspin they blew out the clutch on a brand new car. Just to get the result Clarkson wanted.

As for your lap time, I believe it could have been lower. Did you see how slow that guy shifts?

 

[NSXTASY_MD]

Yes, that is correct.

The C6's time was 1:26.8 on a dry track.

The GT3's time was 1:27.2 on a wet track. They generally state that if the track were dry; you can knock off an additional 4 seconds off the wet time. That would give the GT3 an estimated time of approximately 1:23.2

If this is true, the GT3 is a lot faster on their circuit. Three and half seconds on a short road course is an eternity.

OK, now that makes A LOT more sense to me now.

 

[CerberusM5]

The actual article requires a subscription to see. It's the top link on the page I listed( Little red Corvette), or you can click here:

http://motoring.telegraph.co.uk/mot...31.xml&sSheet=/motoring/2004/07/30/ixmot.html

As for the "drag race" if it's so insignificant, then why did they only use the C6 third place run when they had multiple seconds? They ran that race so many times, with so much induced wheelspin they blew out the clutch on a brand new car. Just to get the result Clarkson wanted.

Why do you continue to repost the same thing over and over? The results of that race is probably very representative of what would happen in real life with average drivers behind the wheel. With 400 lb ft of torque available down, it is very easy for a C6 driver to smoke the tires and get dusted out of the hole.

Is the fact that the C6 blew its load at the start really that troubling for you?

To paraphrase a Top Gear quote; "Step away from the NSX and move on".

 

[satan_srv]

As for the "drag race" if it's so insignificant, then why did they only use the C6 third place run when they had multiple seconds? They ran that race so many times, with so much induced wheelspin they blew out the clutch on a brand new car. Just to get the result Clarkson wanted.

As for your lap time, I believe it could have been lower. Did you see how slow that guy shifts?

Haha no pleasing you, the fact that they showed the crappy drag race setup the payoff at the end where the C6 gets an awesome lap time. But apparently that's lost on you but was the entire point of the top gear review. They tried to make fun of it every which way, but in the end it owned the track very well. Make sense now? Probably not

 

[skyguy]

nsx top gear video/review

Does anyone know where I can view the Top Gear video or review of the NSX?

Thank you,

Skyguy

 

[Mr Payne]

Why do you continue to repost the same thing over and over? The results of that race is probably very representative of what would happen in real life with average drivers behind the wheel. And since when do magazines shoot for average times with their cars? With 400 lb ft of torque available down, it is very easy for a C6 driver to smoke the tires and get dusted out of the hole. Yes, but they took multiple takes obviously. A TV show simply doesn't do one take and then stop. And from other information it seems to show that the editors made a call to show the race where the Corvette got 3rd, when apparently it had gotten 2nd many times.

Is the fact that the C6 blew its load at the start really that troubling for you? So when Car & Driver does a magazine test you think they choose a really crappy 1/4 when they print how fast it goes? No, they choose the *best time*. Do you really think that was the best run that they filmed?

To paraphrase a Top Gear quote; "Step away from the NSX and move on".

 

[Mr Payne]

A hatchet job where the Corvette posted above the 911GT3 on their board.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... ok

More than anything, this shows where the heads of you guys are. The most important stat HERE on NSX Prime (or among Europeans) would be the L A P time.

The fact that you guys are obsessed with the drag race and don't care at all that the C6 posted higher than the GT3 on an actual track with curves says a lot.

If Top Gear wanted the C6 to look bad, they would have NEVER ALLOWED IT TO PERMANENTLY LIVE ABOVE THE GT3 ON THEIR BOARD.

Now go away!

I think my problem is just horrible, extremely biased journalism.

 

[NetViper]

Mr Payne... why are you here? Nobody here cares if the C6 might have beat the NSX on a few takes.

 

[satan_srv]

Mr Payne... why are you here? Nobody here cares if the C6 might have beat the NSX on a few takes.

Yeah we not only don't care, but the majority of us agree...go write a letter to England! '

But we will continue to laugh at the frustrated bastards who cannot STAND the nsx being put ahead of the C6 in the video...it's good entertainment ! hahah

 

[Mr Payne]

Who said this (that Clarkson is some great guy)? I dont see any logical arguments at all. I see the types of arguments that irrational people use to justify conspiracy theory.
We all know the C6 is faster than the Corvette. We have other information that the C6 got 2nd place many times. Common decency would have made them show those clips. They didn't.
No one here likes Clarkson and no one here thinks the NSX is a quicker car than the C6. We've ALL said that the C6 is the quicker car, so drop the idiotic sarcasm.

Point is, if Top Gear were going for a total defamation of the Vette, they would have had the 9 1 1 ahead. Get it?
Not if they just wanted the Vette too look bad, as opposed to make the 911 look good. Third place in *that* race is bad enough. The C6 is decisively faster than the NSX.
The NSX is a statistically insignificant car and it costs a ton.

If they really wanted to show Europe "WOW! LOOK WHAT A POS THE VETTE IS! DONT EVER BUY ONE!" then they would have shown the 911 (its most realistic competitor) blasting ahead of it.
Your reading into their motives too hard. I think that they simply don't like the Vette.
If you're manufacturing a scenario, you manufacture a perfect scenario.
Which law is that?
The NSX is easy to launch and can do 13.1 in the 1/4. The C6 had wheelspin off the line (obvious in the video) and can do 12.7 in the 1/4.
I understand that it is possible to make the C6 lose against the NSX. The point is that they did do multiple runs (as they should on a TV show) and they specifically chose a run which was not characteristic of the car. Bad journalism.
If you think that wheelspin isnt enough to account for .4, then you're a moron. Hate to get nasty, but thats really the size of it.
You missed my point completely. What does that make you?
You dont need broken body panels, burnt clutches, and abused gear shifts to make a .4 difference. Wheelspin will do that. And I don't disagree with that, are you still under the assumption that this was the only filming of this scene that they did?

 

[CerberusM5]

Re: nsx top gear video/review

Does anyone know where I can view the Top Gear video or review of the NSX?

Thank you,

Skyguy

I don't know if this link will work, buy give it a try.


http://www.sleepy-fish.com/sleepy/Top_Gear_Honda_Civic_NSX_hi.wmv

 

[NetViper]

Mr. Payne. Now you are getting annoying. Your posts are confusing as hell to read. If you are going to continue to annoy us, at least make your posts make sense. Please learn how to use quotes properly. Better yet, make your way back to the vette forums.

 

[Mr Payne]

Mr. Payne. Now you are getting annoying. Your posts are confusing as hell to read. If you are going to continue to annoy us, at least make your posts make sense. Please learn how to use quotes properly. Better yet, make your way back to the vette forums.

I'm sorry you can't differentiate between bolded and non-bolded. I'm sorry, I don't visit Vette forums.

 

[NetViper]

I'm sorry you can't differentiate between bolded and non-bolded. I'm sorry, I don't visit Vette forums.

Then I ask again, why are you here? It is not because you love the NSX. So why bother????

 

[mlambert890]

I think my problem is just horrible, extremely biased journalism.

No, your problem is that you are 100% convinced that you KNOW what happened at the Top Gear filming and you KNOW that an illuminati level conspiracy is in play to discredit the Corvette.

Where is your proof? I saw one link to a site that requires registration (no thanks!) and I see lots of truly insane and disturbed Corvette fanatics screaming like mental patients on the web.

I will endlessly repeat the same argument until you go away.

If the goal was to discredit the Vette, why post the lap time? Why not keep lapping until the Vette had a shitty time or tell Stig to hold back?

Laptimes are VERY important to Europeans.

You're obsessed with the drag race because you NEED badly to believe in a conspiracy theory for some reason.

If GM and all of these witnesses were there, then where is the statement against Top Gear?

Why isnt GM putting up a strong statement given that their NUMBER ONE goal with the C6 was to increase presence in Europe (a well accepted fact on the Corvette Forum that, for some reason, annoys a lot of Corvette fanatics who wish the USA existed alone on an asteroid somewhere).

If they were going out of their way to make the Corvette look bad, WHY NOT make the 911 look good? Your arguments dont make any more sense or have any more validity than mine do. You just can't see that because you're a fanatic.

You werent there

You dont REALLY know anything

You're making sweeping assumptions indicting the integrity of a well known (not for profit) motoring show that don't hold water

You have no evidence to back any of it up

And at the end of the day, the C6 posted ABOVE THE GT3 ON THE BOARD and that is what will be remembered forever.

The place on the Top Gear board is HUGE. You can't seem to comprehend that. You keep modifying your argument rather than admitting that you're wrong. You're now grasping at the last desperate straw of "proof"; that being the alleged "multiple drag races" which, even if true, don't really prove anything anyhow. If they REALLY had an axe to grind, they would have gimped the C6 on the laps. Euros dont really care about 1/4 mile. Notice that they lined up cars with HUGE disparities in HP and said "all of these cars having about the same HP"???

If they had REALLY wanted to make the Vette look bad in the drag, they would have said "WOW! THE POS NSX THAT WE HATE WITH 290HP BEAT THE 400HP VETTE IN A DRAG! HAHAHAHAHA"

You can't make any argument of why they didnt do that that has any validity because its ALL conjecture. NONE of us will know what happened there unless GM makes a formal complaint. If they dont, its all just people with predetermined opinions puffing their chest out. I will stand by the argument that those whose position is that Top Gear is involved in a massive anti-American conspiracy are the ones with a LOT to prove. Logic is on my side.

BUT MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL... THIS IS NOT THE TOP GEAR EDITORS FEEDBACK FORUM.

Just go away...