We got you to chime in, I'd love to hear your opinion on the subject. :unibrow:

I like the Super Chevy testing format as it has a lot of the elements we see on the street and on the tracks. It also provides feedback and advice for people that want to improve their existing suspensions but may not want to autocross or track their cars. No, it's not perfect but it's workable.

My "perfect" would be for the suspension companies to give me one car with their product on it. All cars would be the same, i.e. the proverbial and ever present '69 Camaro. All tires would be the same. Brake friction material would be the same. The steering wheel and seat would be the same and also be adjustable. The Stig for a day would be the same.

Each company could practice the day before the actual testing and fine tune their systems for the track surface and conditions. The course would be similar to what I set up for the 2011 Super Chevy testing as it had almost every element you'd see for street driving and for an autocross. It was also low-speed enough that it didn't reward the high-horsepower cars and penalize the ones that didn't bring the ponies. That course was fun and several of the sections were very fast. They tested adhesion and balance, and also how a car accepted pressure. I'm not a huge fan of doing this sort of testing on an actual racetrack as if the suspension has an evil side, having it slap me upside the face at 100+ mph wouldn't be good. If a car can handle well at an autocross with its slower speeds and transitions, it should work at track days. Times are secondary to the testing. I've driven some very evil cars that turned very quick times ...

And it would be expensive to do unless a tire company sponsored it. Nitto does with the Super Chevy day but the suspension manufacturers and car owners have an out if Nitto doesn't make a tire that the car can use.

Mary Pozzi

Super Chevy article for reference:
http://www.superchevy.com/events/suc...nge/index.html

I agree with Mary about all variables being the same. Tires are the biggest factor IMO- even if two different tires have similar treadwear ratings, that doesn't make them equal. You can't compare a Mich PS2 to a Nitto Invo, they just aren't similar at all in terms of traction.

To give you an idea, my own car tested 1.0g with BFG KDW2 tires and around 0.95 with the Nitto Invos - the tires being the only change.

And while performance numbers are easy to compare and great to read, I wish more emphasis was placed on drivability. Not from Super Chevy's perspective, but from the customers. I always try to tell people that ultimate traction is great, but you really want the car to drive nice on the street. That's what made European cars stand out, easy to drive fast yet great for long distances as well. Getting a car to grip is easy, but combining grip with comfort and driving ease is another story.

EXACTLY!
Ive always mentioned that when people bring up the debate between staying with a modded stock sub and leafs compared to a link type rear and an aftermarket sub. sure you can get your car to perform exceptionally well in a racing applications with a "primitive" setup but your ride quality will suffer greatly... "cant have your cake and eat it too" (unless you spend the dough on a sub and rear suspension system. lol)