52 Car pages and model names

Fastestlaps.com has been around since 2007 but there still is no strict rule in "Site Rules" that would govern when a new carpage should be added and what should be the format for car model names.

I propose to add the following rule to "Site Rules" section #3 regarding submission of new car pages:

"Car can be added only if there is not already a car in fastestlaps database that has the same or nearly identical body, chassis, suspension and engine, except when peak power output varies by no less than 2% or total weight varies by no less than 1.5% percent."

Such rule would also eliminate duplicate cars caused by multiple brands (no use to have a page for Vauxhall Astra if there already is Opel Astra).

Also, there should be a common standard that would dictate how to define model names so that it would possible to distinguish precisely what car it is just
by looking at the model name.

I can think of six components - "make", "model", "generation name", "revision(facelift) number", "package name" and "market scope". For the latest M3 with Competition Package these components would read: "BMW", "M3", "E92", "1", "Competition Package" with the last one (market scope) having no value because this car is sold with the same specification globally.

It should not be mandatory to indclude all five or six components for every model - only the least amount that uniquly define a car.

I have not yet decided in what order to list those components and how they should be formated - that is debatable. The main goal is to eliminate situation when in a dropdown car model selection box there are two or more rows that read exactly the same model name, leaving the user terribly confused having to guess which is which.

9y ago by FastestLaps
User avatar

User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

I have renamed all (hopefully all) cars according to make + model + hint scheme. No more "Porsche 997 Turbo" etc.


User avatar

E  9y ago

IMHO, keep the tires based on whatever comes on the car from the factory. That's how the magazines test them.

Agreed.


User avatar

NIN  9y ago

I agree with Viking as far as the tires. Coming from a motorcycle racing backround, I know most bike magazines will use a spec tire when testing multiple bikes at the track (since OEM times usually depend on which tire company gets the contract). It makes things "fair" in that case but for this site which usually relies on stock tires tested by magazines, allowing some times from "aftermarket" tires would cause more trouble than it would be worth.

For example, one guy with a stock ZR1 can put DOT legal tires on and get a great 1/4 mile time, then another stock ZR1 can put totally different tires on and get a great laptime. The tires that gave the great 1/4 mile time wouldn't give a great laptime but the site would list the best times submitted.

IMHO, keep the tires based on whatever comes on the car from the factory. That's how the magazines test them.


User avatar

Viking  9y ago

@FastestLaps I don't think any "street legal" tire should be allowed. When I competed in SCCA Solo II in "Stock" class we were permitted to use any DOT legal tire. With my first race car, a 1995 Neon ACR, I used BFG R1 street legal tires. On the original tires with from the factory alignment it would pull 0.81 g on the skidpad. Car and Driver tested a completely stock Neon ACR in 1997 and found that with the stock alignment, but with BF Goodrich R1 street legal tires it pulled 1.01 g on the skidpad. With custom alignment it pulled 1.03 g on the skidpad. Non factory "street legal" tires can really skew track results in my opinion.


User avatar

Viking  9y ago

Even though I was the one who added the Mustang RTR, this train of discussion makes me wonder if it requires a separate page from the Mustang GT 5.0. A body kit, different tires, and different mufflers pretty much is what makes it a dealer variant of the standard GT. Just another judgement call I guess.


User avatar

gt  9y ago

then we move the lap times if porsche would've done that its far better than describing each lap time with the tires difference on the same page

i agree that tires are made by different manufactures and are separated from the car but performance is the issue here and tires can make huge difference they can even be more bad than good on wet conditions..

you would know the performance gape between offroad tires and semi slicks on a track like nordschleife right? that's not likely to happen but there is a concept..


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

But what if the Black Edition had Pilot Sport as well as some other tyre brand available for buyer to choose... or suddenly Porsche decided to offer Pilot Sport for standard Carrera for next year (with no other changes)?

In my opinion tyres should be completely taken out of the equation and any aftermarket tyres for any car should be allowed as long as they are street legal. Because tyres are frequently changed consumables and not really a part of the car just like fuel or windscreen washer fluids aren't. Different octane fuel or different brand windscreen washer fluid are not modifications on the car.


User avatar

gt  9y ago

what i mean is its ok if the tires are optional but if the car car comes with different name and changes we should have separate page..

the black edition porsche you deleted for example you shouldn't have to delete it if it did have Michelin cup tires as long as the standard carrera doesn't..


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

@gt Can't have separate pages for different tyre brands, tyre types and tyre sizes...


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

For car names I propose a very simple 3 part scheme where car name consists of:

Manufacturer's name
Model name (manufacturer's published model name)
Model name hint

Model name hint would include extra info such as:

Manufacturer's internal model designation ("E92", "R35" etc.)
Generation and revision number(s) ("Mk 3", "Mk 3 facelift" etc.)
Engine power output (for same models with different engine power rating)
Market scope ("Japanese version", "US spec." etc.)
Anything else that is not officially a part of model name but helps to identify specific model versions.


User avatar

gt  9y ago

i agree to all these factors except "Tyre options".. it should be a separate factor if moving from say average summer tyres to semi slicks or extreme.. in alot of situations those improve times more than slight power can..

since we are more concerned about track/handling performance than strait line i think curb weight and acceleration data should be ok to some degree if the differences are minimal on most cars like up to 25/30 kg or 1 tenth or more of a second 1/4mile run improvement..


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

I am now leaning more towards not having separate carpages for separate gearbox options (as before).

Gearbox can have serious effect on performance - it can have effect on acceleration, top speed, vehicle curb weight and, to some degree - to laptimes.

However - it still remains just device that converts the rpm and does nothing else. With the advent of electric propulsion, gearboxes will became less relevant and more obscure.

Carpages will always represent model range and not an entirely specific model. And curb weight as well as acceleration varies due to other weight adding options, not just gearbox, and therefore will never be entirely accurate.

My latest proposal is to separate car pages based on:

Body (aerodynamic properties, major weight differences)
Powerplant (combined power, major torque curve differences - different engine)
Driven wheels (front, rear, all wheel drive)
Suspension (major changes in suspension)

But not based on:

Gearbox options
Brake options
Tyre options
Interior options (obviously)

But what about curb weight and acceleration data?

I propose to use minimal manufacturers published curb weight (that still adheres to "common sense" definition of curb weight) and the best acceleration and top speed figures (as before).


User avatar

gt  9y ago

i don't know about those autocar laptimes since i cant see the source but logically those fast laptimes coming from the slow cars belongs to the handling circuit see if you can confirm

you need to remove wet from the laps here except n20
http://www.fastestlaps.com/tracks/rockingham-international-super-sportscar


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

I moved a bunch but some still look suspicious, which ones have I missed?

I have to say, Rockingham track page was/is a mess! And I am not surprised since it has 13 different layouts...


User avatar

gt  9y ago

you are right.. 3.1 km is the length of International Super Sportscar Circuit

http://www.rockingham.co.uk/about/rockingham-circuits.php

this video proves that car magazine do the laps on that config not International 2.4 mile
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_m5YkIGiWPA

so rename to International Super Sportscar Circuit and move the laps from the standard.. all the laps in my last post are done by carmagazine on International Super Sportscar config..


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

the config 2 should now be refereed to as International Circuit 2.44 miles

But why is the length of it 3.1 km when International 2.4 mile is 3.9 km?


User avatar

gt  9y ago

btw if any of you have time you can add those times to Rockingham (Conf 2)

Noble M600 1:30.64 Lambo LP670 1:31.74 Corvette ZR-1 1:32.40 Audi R8 V10 1:33.34 Lambo Gallardo Balboni 1:34.28 Ferrari California 1:34.67 Aston Martin V12 Vantage 1:34.82 Mercedes E63 AMG 1:36.22 Mitsu Evo FQ400 1:36.64 Porsche Panamera Turbo 1:36.83 Porsche Cayman S 1:37.07 Audi TT-RS 1:37.79 Lotus Evora 1:37.94 Nissan 370Z 1:38.65 Cadillac CTS-V 1:38.85 Audi S4 1:39.07 Jaguar XFR 1:39.37 Honda Civic Type R 1:39.48 Subaru Impreza 330S 1:39.51 BMW Z4 1:39.92 Ford Focus RS 1:40.09 Vauxhall Insignia VXR 1:41.53 Mazda 3 MPS 1:42.00 VW Golf GTI 1:42.85 Infiniti G37 1:43.78 Mazda MX-5 1:44.25 Renault Clio Cup 1:44.29 Fiat 500 Abarth Esseesse 1:46.29 Seat Ibiza Cupra 1:46.69 Renault Twingo Cup 1:47.38

proofs are here.. http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/CAR-Features-2009/Performance-Car-of-The-Year-2009/


User avatar

gt  9y ago

lap times starting n68 till 88 in here
http://www.fastestlaps.com/tracks/rockingham-national should all be moved to config 2
except 69 70 72 73 75

also remove wet from all except 85 i have watched the event on their site there was no damp road..
but leave wet for 85 as it wasn't tested by carmagazine..

the config 2 should now be refereed to as

International Circuit 2.44 miles

http://www.rockingham.co.uk/about/circuits/intshort.png

containing 24 laptime + i will add the zr1 lap time for a total of 25 valid lap time on the International Circuit

that's half the work !


User avatar

FastestLaps  9y ago

We actually have two configurations of Rockingham at the moment. The other one has cryptic and not very helpful name "Conf 2".

If you could post a comment on each laptime that needs to be moved, that would help a great deal.

I'll attack the issue tomorrow. It's now 1:11 past midnight :D


User avatar

gt  9y ago

carmagazine seem to use international Circuit lately and the pic's doesn't appear because of the white nature of the background..