KresoF1 said:
JohnJohn said:
I would say that you cannot attribute the difference in test results to "the health" of the test cars only, while it certainly does play a role. The other reason why we see different test results from different magazines is because they use different methods of testing, drivers, surfaces, the weather conditions differ, etc.

I agree with you. Just difference bigger then 1s in 0-200km/h is pretty big one. We are talking here about 1.7s of difference...

It could be the result of a combination of many things. Also, some magazines allow the test drivers to build the revs on cars with automatic gearboxes before launching because they feel it better represents what the car is capable of, while others don't build the revs because they feel it better reflects what the car will do in "real world conditions".

Anyhow, I say that acceleration times, both those measured by magazines and those stated by the manufacturer, should only be seen as an indication and nothing more. Because even with the same driver and the same conditions you won't get the exact same result two or three times in a row. Measuring acceleration of a car IRL isn't that an exact science.

I hope I didn't crush anyone's illusions.