Hey guys. He means models like his mini me. Or, do I just not know that you know.
[/quote]
You didn't knows that I knows what he knows (now I'm confused)
I especially like the 911 Turbo. It will look great next to my 1/18 scale 959.

OK, that's enough votes. B32 is now in the lead. Has anyone actually seen the mag yet?
[/quote]
Not that particular mag, however, there's a very, VERY popular one here in the states called Motor & Track which very explicitly lists the time as: 4.4, 12.4 @ 117mph.

 

Hey guys. He means models like his mini me. Or, do I just not know that you know.
[/quote]
You didn't knows that I knows what he knows (now I'm confused)
I especially like the 911 Turbo. It will look great next to my 1/18 scale 959.

OK, that's enough votes. B32 is now in the lead. Has anyone actually seen the mag yet?
[/quote]
Not that particular mag, however, there's a very, VERY popular one here in the states called Motor & Track which very explicitly lists the time as: 4.4, 12.4 @ 117mph.
[/quote]
Thanks. That's interesting. I don't even know that mag. I think I would have done slightly better using it so maybe I'll do better when the rest of the big 3 report. On the other hand, R&T is still to come, and I think its figures tend to be more optimistic than the other two.

Hey guys. He means models like his mini me. Or, do I just not know that you know.

 

I started feeling something tugging on my leg. You clever . You're starting to look like Pinnochio. And, the nose knows if I don't know that you know your think you know something that I don't know. Sort of like the Shadow knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to fool you. I tried to make it sarcastic enough by combining the names of the two remaining mags we are waiting for.
Alas, you were able to smell the BS.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to fool you. I tried to make it sarcastic enough by combining the names of the two remaining mags we are waiting for.
Alas, you were able to smell the BS.
[/quote]It was funny. I sarted thinking "Motor and Track?" "How would I not know about this very popular mag." And, then duh hit me. I searched on Motor and Track. Quess what I didn't find. The clincher, of course, was that the data you gave were exactly the same as from Motor and Track. Hook, line, and sinker for a short while. Good one.

 

All kidding aside, I have not come across C&D's February '06 issue so can't confirm the numbers.

I thought it was interesting that the M5 was at least on par with the E55, if not slightly quicker, looking at C&D's results.

 

Right, and R&T may be a bit more optimistic than C&D in general (not sure though--I'll look at some data and get back to you).

E55 AMG R&T 6/03 4.2 12.4 116.40
C&D M5 4.2 12.5 118
E55 AMG C&D 6/04 4.3 12.5

 

Right, and R&T may be a bit more optimistic than C&D in general (not sure though--I'll look at some data and get back to you).

E55 AMG R&T 6/03 4.2 12.4 116.40
C&D M5 4.2 12.5 118
E55 AMG C&D 6/04 4.3 12.5
[/quote]
I don't see anything below that suggests that R&T is out of line. Maybe some other mag is out of line. I'll add some more data and do a bit of analysis as time allows. I think it would at least be interesting to know the percentages of times the various mags are the "fastest," etc.

E55 AMG R&T 6/03 4.2 12.4 116.40
E55 AMG C&D 6/04 4.3 12.5

Lamborghini Gallardo R&T 3/04 4.0 9 12.3 117.40
Lamborghini Gallardo C&D 2/04 4.1 12.4
Lamborghini Gallardo MT 8/04 4.3 12.5 116.70

C6 Corvette Z51 C&D 12/04 4.1 12.6
C6 Corvette Z51 MT 9/05 4.4 12.6 113.20
C6 Corvette R&T 3/05 4.5 12.8 114.50 (may not be a Z51)

911 Carerra S Coupe R&T 3/05 3.9 12.3 114.80
05 911 Carerra S Coupe MT 1/05 4.2 12.6 111.10
911 Carerra S Coupe C&D 8/04 4.1 12.6

SLK55 AMG MT 4/05 4.5 12.8 109.20
SLK55 AMG R&T 5/05 4.5 10.6 12.9 109.80

My Personal Favorite:
BMW 545i R&T 6/05 5.2 13.7 104.0
BMW 545i MT 8/04 5.4 13.7 102.1
BMW 545i MT11/05 5.5 13.8 102.8

Cadillac CTS-V MT 2/05 4.7 13.1 109.8
Cadillac CTS-V C&D 11/04 4.8 13.2
Cadillac CTS-V R&T 2/04 5.0 13.4 109.0

Lamborghini Gallardo R&T 3/04 4.0 9.1 12.3 117.40
Lamborghini Gallardo C&D 2/04 4.1 12.4
Lamborghini Gallardo MT 8/04 4.3 12.5 116.70

SLK55 AMG MT 4/05 4.5 12.8 109.20
SLK55 AMG R&T 5/05 4.5 10.6 12.9 109.80

Chrysler SRT-8 C&D 6/07 4.7 13.2 109.0
Chrysler SRT-8 R&T 3/0 4.9 13.3 108.2
Chrysler SRT-8 MT 2/05 4.9 13.2 108.1

Ford Mustang GT Conv C&D 6/05 5.0 13.7 103.0
Ford Mustang GT C&D 1/05 5.1 13.8 103.0
Ford Mustang GT R&T 12/04 5.3 13.9 101.4

Infinity M45 R&T 6/05 5.3 13.8 101.4
Infinity M45 C&D 5/05 5.5 14.2 100.0
Infinity M45 MT 5/04 5.7 14.1 98.8

Lotus Elise C&D 7/04 4.4 13.2 104.0
Lotus Elise R&T 3/05 4.6 13.3 103.1
Lotus Elise Sport MT 1/05 4.8 13.3 102.9
Lotus Elise Touring MT 8/04 5.1 13.5 102.9

Mercedes AMG C55 C&D 11/04 4.7 13.3
Mercedes AMG C55 MT 11/04 4.9 13.2 107.3
Mercedes AMG C55 R&T 11/04 5.0 13.5 106.6

 

Hey guys. He means models like his mini me. Or, do I just not know that you know.
[/quote]

You'll know what I know when I take some pics and post to this same tread. BTW, the Lambo is a Murcielago orange. I sold my Ferrari Modena awhile back, but I still have a red Porsche GT3 :thumbsdown: and the Turbo

 

I did not calculate the percentages mentioned above. Instead, I did some match-pairs, one-tailed t-tests (except one test was two tailed). Here are the results:

1. For 21 matched pairs, the 0-60 means for R&T, C&D, and MT were 4.962, 4.905, and 5.033, respectively.

Null: R&T mean <= C&D mean/rejected at only 0.09 level. Thus, accept R&T mean > C&D mean with caution.
Null: MT mean <= R&T mean/rejected at the 0.05 level. Thus, accept MT mean > R&T mean.
Null: MT mean <= C&D mean/rejected at the 0.0016 level. Thus, accept MT mean > C&D mean.


2. For 21 matched pairs, the 1/4 ET means for R&T, C&D, and MT were 13.429, 13.452, and 13.429, respectively.

Null: C&D mean <= R&T mean/P = 0.30. Thus, can't conclude C&D mean > R&T mean.
Null: MT mean not = R&T mean/P = 1.0. Thus, conclude MT mean = R&T mean.
Null: C&D mean <= MT mean/p = 0.27. Thus, can't conclude C&D mean > MT mean.

Insufficient data to do similar anlaysis for 1/4 mi. speed.

Predictions/Conclusions:

For M5 0-60 time:
a. M5 0-60 value reported by MT probably will be slower than the C&D value already reported.
b. M5 0-60 value reported by R&T somewhat likely to be slower than the C&D value already reported.
c. M5 0-60 value reported by MT probably will be slower than the R&T value already reported.
d. Those predicting relatively slower M5 0-60 times will improve in the next set of rankings.


For M5 1/4 mi. time:
While the important probabilities are insignificant, they favor the idea that those who predicted lower M5 1/4 mi. times will improve in the next set of rankings.

But, the improvement from the 0-60 predictions should outweigh any improvement from the 1/4 mi. predictions. OK, I expect to move up in the rankings next time for this reason and because I can't imagine higher 1/4 mi. speeds than 118 mph being reported. We shall see.