Comments by "Golden Croc" (@GoldenCroc) on "TFLclassics" channel.

  1. Very expected results, though it has to be said driving that short of a distance means the margins of error get a lot larger as a percentage. So its really more of a novelty test. Still, not bad.
    1
  2. I think you will find the opinions of the owner are suspiciously aligned with what those same people think about the car... just a hunch. But I have seen it hundreds of times by now.
    1
  3.  @C12AZY3Y3S  You just dont like the car, and decided to take it out on the owner in the comment section. You are as transparent as a pane of glass. But still, what has a tourag ever done to you?
    1
  4.  @leviheim  Well, the 400hp from 8 liters wasnt, but the horsepower figure itself was indeed very good compared to most cars, if not amazing.
    1
  5.  @Blas4ublasphemy  Obviously he meant it in relation to the post he answered, the torque numbers one....
    1
  6. Heard it just fine on my end? Maybe get some louder speakers/headphones?
    1
  7. As a european I am baffled by your drivning, and not in a good way... Is it striclty illegal to keep to the right without stopping, or why didnt you do it? Seems like plenty of space and good visual conditions, isnt the driver trusted to make those judgements for himself? Secondly, that snowy hill driving... Ah well, makes for a good video, but would be nice if you were a bit serious.
    1
  8. What C4 and what GTi? Tons of different power levels availible in both...
    1
  9. Yes, the altitude, surface and the also driver skill is whats horribly wrong.
    1
  10.  @316Autos  Those things I listed are in relation to the factory times you listed which obviously arent at altitude. Discounting that, there the two other factors left. I dont think it pulled timing and I dont think he fiddled around with the button either. He simply gives sort of full throttle from a standstill, which as you may know costs a lot of time comparing to launching at higher rpm, especially when the car is already so down on power.
    1
  11.  @316Autos  No, I am not missing your point at all, I get what you mean exactly. You seem to be missing my point though, probably because I made an effort not to be rude to the C5 driver. Thats why I listed all of the reasons the C5 was slower compared to the factory listed times as you wrote above, and didnt list them in the order of what difference they made. But ok, if I must I will say it like it is: Its the driver. And not in the forgetting/not knowing to set up the driving modes correctly. He simply isnt using full throttle from the launch in the way one would expect when setting as fast times as possible. I thought the "He simply gives sort of full throttle from a standstill, which as you may know costs a lot of time" I posted above was pretty clear but... Look at the video as well as others he drives, there are no ifs and buts about it. Doesnt make him a bad guy, but when comparing acceleration times that are set by drivers doing their best and used to doing acceleration runs, its glaring. That is what makes the difference in times.
    1
  12. If it can take rain, it can take snow. Same thing after all. Its often the salt thats a killer.
    1
  13. Seems to have a fake carbon covering put on. That is whats bubbling I think.
    1
  14. All cars have good brakes for a single or a couple stops these days, corvette wont outbrake anything on similarly grippy tires by much margin to speak of, including 10 grand economy cars. So it really isnt all that much of a surprise when it comes to braking.
    1
  15. 2000m elevation is quite a bit though.
    1
  16. Imagine seriously thinking this.... wow. Even better: Writing it so everybody can see it. Double wow.
    1
  17. Yeah it was likely a bit more slippery and/or steep where they tried the revese driving.
    1
  18. Not really, considering the nature of the test. It pales into total insignificance compared to the driver skill.
    1
  19. Seems like around 300hp with that trap speed? Perhaps a bit less? Top speed seem to indicate not much more than 250hp though, perhaps its a bit of a draggy car though, I havent got the aero drag spec. I guess that top speed still wasnt too bad back in the day compared to many other cars. So split the difference and say 280-ish hp? Of course, in all the examples above, weather is extremely important for the figures, as I am sure you are well aware. Cheers.
    1
  20.  @TexasPatriotOffRoadAndOutdoors  I still got a reasonably similar weight car, of another brand, maybe a bit heavier. Does about 107 trap speed, just 50-ish temps though. Dynoed to about 330-340 at the crank currently. Yours wasnt bad for a 5.0. Quite a bit more top speed in mine though, 177mph. I am actually looking to switch to a 2.60 rear end from a 2.89 if its possible to fit. Its not a drag car at all and I need the taller gearing for more top speed when I tune it a bit more, the revlimit is just 4750rpm. Cheers mate.
    1
  21.  @itshiho  Fair enough, but enough to overcome the lighter weight of the corvette (unless thats also inaccurate in comparison to the Z28)? I find that hard to believe given the marketing and history of the corvette in the lineup.
    1
  22.  @jessicabecause3717  Excuse, me, what exactly are you replying to? I dont see how any of it pertains to what I have posted, really. To be frank, the words in your post as they are written doesnt make much sense. "Your youbers video" <- Who? And leave who alone, and how? Where there perhaps a bit of intoxication going on while you wrote your post? It happens, I guess... But as it stands, I honestly dont get it, so you will have to get back to me if you want to communicate something.
    1
  23. Dont know about the new one, but the old one had a ridiculously small battery compared to any EV, like not much bigger capacity than an ordinary 12v starter battery.
    1
  24. And ground clearance... its terrible these days. 3 inches or so less than a 70s (debut) car like the Volvo they got. Also, modern summer tires got much less diagonal thread than most old tires.
    1