I honestly can't beleive that the Supra fared soooooo poorly in the USCC, even the dyno...?  

I agree. The pre-USCC issue said it made 650hp. What happened? And with the lateral g-loads that thing was pulling, i would have expected it to do at least a LITTLE better on the racetrack.

By the way, is it just me, or do the SCC guys ALLWAYS pick a dragstrip that strongly favors AWD? I remember one year when the track had just been re-paved, and NOBODY could hook up. That was the time when the Eclipse was leaking oil all the way down the track.  

Isn't it just that they always do the drag testing at LACR?

Oh, and a few more graphics woulda been nice - to see exactly how broad the torque curve on that Audi TT was would have been pretty cool.

While we're at it, I think it would be pretty cool to see what the tested cars' Vmax were - probably necessitating holding the competition near the salt flats or a high speed testing facility, but... *shrug*  

Vmax would be interesting... as would the 1/4 mile times on a track all the cars could hook up on.  

yeah i would love to see top speed run but did you see what happened to that 350z from options auto magazine during its high speed run, it blew a tire and rolled, i really doubt that they want to destroy any of the cars.  

it hurt me to see a supra basically lose to an integra  

Yeah, no doubt a result of poor tuning, poor materials, or a nasty combination of the two. I'm not surpised to see AWD cars make is as top 3, and quite sad to see one of the EVO's give up the ghost like that.

The Skiyline's victory is no suprise, and I am actually suprised more at the fact that a Skyline hadn;t brought home the trophy until now.  

The Supra lost because of something I'm sure we're all intimately acquainted with: Bad luck. It wasn't making the power, it wasn't handling...it wasn't working right. Personally, I would have really liked to know what kind of ambient temperatures and air pressure the car was built and tuned at. Is it a Cali car? If not, that might explain quite a bit. Also, there's Coleman's "devious/dipshit/both" dyno operator explanation.

But...for every time I got owned by some pinhead who happened to have the chips to buy a Supra...lol, YOU SUCK! God, that felt good...  

Like that said. "Don't tell they guys at MKIV.com"

HAAAHAHAHAHAhahahahaa!!!  

Re-reading some of the tests done in the last USCC I had to take offense at some of the things they did..

The worst was using Joh Huffman to do the drivability tests. The poor guy was too big to even get into the MR2. I hardly call that a fair test of how well the car drives. It was more like a blatant way to make sure an MR2 does not win twice in a row.

Also, why use LA County Raceway for the 1/4 mile. This is a clearly unfair test for anything with less than 4 driven wheels. With it's dusty, bumpy, and less than straight track, two wheel drive cars are clearly outclassed.

Another nitpick: The brake testing. The way they test does not take into consideration the reasons most people put larger rotors on.. brake reserve. They Run several tests on each car.. giving ample oppertunity for the brakes to cool down between each test. Why not go for a three hard stops in a row AND THEN the test to see how they do when glowing hot?  

Yeah, some of the tests seemed a little odd - honestly, I'd rather see a little more performance thrown into the mixture, such as 0-160-0 (kph) test, as well as some rolling acceleration tests - a simple 30-100kph or 80-120 test would be nice, just to see how well sorted the cars are, when not drag launched. Plus, the in gear tests would minimize the effect that drive wheels and available grip would have on the numbers.

And for the love of all that keeps petrol in my car, can they run the bloody test with some high end exotica as a baseline? Heck, they could just impose the results from Chen's 360 into the test, and not even have to retest anything.

*grumble*  

ABSOLUTELY the most embarassing display of a highly modded Supra, I have seen!!!