Evo this month
- Thread starter dcw@pr
- Start date
"perhaps Reno have made claims that were not true..."
my bet.....
my bet.....
It's not blatent proof of which is faster then the other, there's a load of factors that contribute to a lap time. Weather, driver, tyre pressures etc
Just got my copy of this month's Evo through the post, and after checking out their figures for the Trophy, my engine excuse has been blown out of the water as they recorded better 0-60 and 0-100 figures for the Trophy than they have for the Cup (in brackets) - 0-60 = 6.6 (6.7) and 0-100 = 17.25 (17.7).
So this means I have got to come up with another excuse! :wink:
At the end of the day there are loads of variables that can determine how quick a car can lap a particular track, the only way to compare the two cars with complete accuracy would have been to test the cars on the same day, with the same tyres (tread depth and pressure), with the same fuel and the same driver.
Evo comment that the Trophy feels too firm around Bedford, giving weight to Day's reasoning that Bedford may suit a car with softer suspension...
I am really gutted though, I know I am going to take a ribbing from my mates at work about this one!
So this means I have got to come up with another excuse! :wink:
At the end of the day there are loads of variables that can determine how quick a car can lap a particular track, the only way to compare the two cars with complete accuracy would have been to test the cars on the same day, with the same tyres (tread depth and pressure), with the same fuel and the same driver.
Evo comment that the Trophy feels too firm around Bedford, giving weight to Day's reasoning that Bedford may suit a car with softer suspension...
I am really gutted though, I know I am going to take a ribbing from my mates at work about this one!
have read the article, but was the same driver in both cars?
Comparing something to 6 months ago is crazy. Your going to get no proper comparrison. For all we know it could have been sheet ice one day and blazing hot the next
It does indeed work both ways, that's why I'm gutted about the time the Trophy got.
I remember when I was at Bedford in Feb, there was a 182 Cup (pretty sure it was std) who I followed briefly during a couple of sessions and there was pretty much no difference - I just could not catch him! At the time I put it down to the fact that it was my first time at Bedford and that maybe he was a better driver, but now I just think that we were of a pretty similar standard, and that at Bedford there is not a lot of difference between a Trophy and a Cup.
On the road (or at a track like the Nurburgring) where there are more bumps, cambers etc I still believe the Trophy would out handle a Cup, and that if you are a regular trackdayer then the Sachs units will produce the goods for a much longer life span than the std units.
I remember when I was at Bedford in Feb, there was a 182 Cup (pretty sure it was std) who I followed briefly during a couple of sessions and there was pretty much no difference - I just could not catch him! At the time I put it down to the fact that it was my first time at Bedford and that maybe he was a better driver, but now I just think that we were of a pretty similar standard, and that at Bedford there is not a lot of difference between a Trophy and a Cup.
On the road (or at a track like the Nurburgring) where there are more bumps, cambers etc I still believe the Trophy would out handle a Cup, and that if you are a regular trackdayer then the Sachs units will produce the goods for a much longer life span than the std units.
We have nicer seats! we win damnit! 
Didn't the article mention glazed brake pads? I've never been on a track day but wouldn't this have an impact on your lap time? I suspect that the previous 182 was a Renault press car and therefore would have been subject to a bit of TLC prior to Evo getting hold of it. The Trophy may have belonged to an individual, not Renault? It's not a current model so I can't see Renault having one on the press fleet anymore? Just speculating.
At the end of the day I think most of us like our cars irrespective of what Evo say, isn't that what matters?
At the end of the day I think most of us like our cars irrespective of what Evo say, isn't that what matters?
Same brake set up on the Trophy and Cup, so I would expect the glaze issue to be the same for both cars, and the Trophy Evo used was an ex press car that the Editiorial Director Harry Metcalfe bought direct from Reno!
You are right though, I am still happier to have my Trophy than a Cup, despite the lap times that Evo have recorded, it is more exclusive which for me is a big part of what makes the Trophy special!
All of us use our Trophy's more on the road than on track, and at the end of the day I think this is where the Trophy's suspension really excels, Reno may have claimed a great on track advantage, but at a flat track like Bedford it seems like there really is little difference between the two...
You are right though, I am still happier to have my Trophy than a Cup, despite the lap times that Evo have recorded, it is more exclusive which for me is a big part of what makes the Trophy special!
All of us use our Trophy's more on the road than on track, and at the end of the day I think this is where the Trophy's suspension really excels, Reno may have claimed a great on track advantage, but at a flat track like Bedford it seems like there really is little difference between the two...
OliS said:...it is more exclusive which for me is a big part of what makes the Trophy special!
I'm willing to wager that there are fewer inferno 182 cups with recaros than Trophies on the road... Still my wheels aren't as nice and my spoiler isn't as big. Love both cars, think the Trophy suspension will be best on broken roads by a fair bit.
I'll try and shed some light on why the Trophy appears slower than a Cup in this month's Fast Club feature;
First off it was an extremely cold day when we did the lapping so that was part of the reason why the Trophy went slower as cold tarmac and coldish tyres isn't the best combination for fast times.
Overlaying the data of the two laps in the office we can see the Trophy was better at putting its power down out of the corners but slightly worse on the brakes. Again, cold tarmac could be the reason, or perhaps the stiffer springs on the Trophy don't allow as much weight transfer to the front tyres so the brakes don't work quite as well.
The big difference was through the Pif-Paf chicane where the Trophy arrives 4.5mph faster than the Cup (around a second quicker too) but its speed through the slowest part of the chicane was 8.5mph lower than the Cup. The Trophy's lap time never recovers the time lost at this point, although it did make up a lot of ground at the finish to end up 0.6secs behind.
To us it looks as if the driver (different drivers as well to further complicate matters) ) in the Cup dramatically cut the corner (which is only marked with cones) as being 8.5mph faster at this point is too big a difference to explain otherwise, hence the slower time for the Trophy in the article.
This is why it's always tricky comparing lap times set 6 months apart this these were.
Re-match needed.
First off it was an extremely cold day when we did the lapping so that was part of the reason why the Trophy went slower as cold tarmac and coldish tyres isn't the best combination for fast times.
Overlaying the data of the two laps in the office we can see the Trophy was better at putting its power down out of the corners but slightly worse on the brakes. Again, cold tarmac could be the reason, or perhaps the stiffer springs on the Trophy don't allow as much weight transfer to the front tyres so the brakes don't work quite as well.
The big difference was through the Pif-Paf chicane where the Trophy arrives 4.5mph faster than the Cup (around a second quicker too) but its speed through the slowest part of the chicane was 8.5mph lower than the Cup. The Trophy's lap time never recovers the time lost at this point, although it did make up a lot of ground at the finish to end up 0.6secs behind.
To us it looks as if the driver (different drivers as well to further complicate matters) ) in the Cup dramatically cut the corner (which is only marked with cones) as being 8.5mph faster at this point is too big a difference to explain otherwise, hence the slower time for the Trophy in the article.
This is why it's always tricky comparing lap times set 6 months apart this these were.
Re-match needed.