# Car Forums > Automotive News >  2022 C&D Lightning Lap

## dirtsniffer

https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...ning-lap-2022/

----------


## heavyD

The Ford Mustang Mach 1 sticks out to me as I realize the Cup 2 tires are worth a few seconds of lap time but it's impressive that it came out faster than a GT350R.

----------


## 90_Shelby

It's too bad that the Panamera, 5-V Blackwing and M5 didn't all have similar tires. Tough to beat a car when it's the only one running Cup 2's but, it's all within the rules. 

Any road course guys know how much of an advantage the cup tires gave the Porsche? My gut says that even the M5 would have beat it if it was running 4S's.

It's also too bad they crashed the 4-V Blackwing, and therefore didn't get a good comparison vs the M3. That would have been a good matchup.


If only a guy could actually get a Blackwing allocation these days.

----------


## Buster

> If only a guy could actually get a Blackwing allocation these days.



What did the cadillac dealer say? Did you ask them about 5 and the 4?

----------


## Twin_Cam_Turbo

> It's too bad that the Panamera, 5-V Blackwing and M5 didn't all have similar tires. Tough to beat a car when it's the only one running Cup 2's but, it's all within the rules. 
> 
> Any road course guys know how much of an advantage the cup tires gave the Porsche? My gut says that even the M5 would have beat it if it was running 4S's.
> 
> It's also too bad they crashed the 4-V Blackwing, and therefore didn't get a good comparison vs the M3. That would have been a good matchup.
> 
> 
> If only a guy could actually get a Blackwing allocation these days.



Hard to say what Cup2 are worth, but I’d say at least 3 seconds.

----------


## heavyD

> It's also too bad they crashed the 4-V Blackwing, and therefore didn't get a good comparison vs the M3. That would have been a good matchup.



They did get a good comparison as GM had a replacement CT4-V sent over within hours of them crashing the first one.

----------


## 90_Shelby

> They did get a good comparison as GM had a replacement CT4-V sent over within hours of them crashing the first one.



I read this statement in that they didn’t get everything out of the car that it was capable of, like they were spooked after the crash. “ But that's not the car's problem. Even with a second driver behind the wheel, we couldn't commit to taking the Esses the way Cadillac assured us was possible.”  :dunno: 





> What did the cadillac dealer say? Did you ask them about 5 and the 4?



I only inquired about the 5.


3 seconds is a massive difference for Cup 2’s and although I glazed over it initially, the Mach 1 also puts down impressive numbers despite the tires.

----------


## heavyD

> I read this statement in that they didn’t get everything out of the car that it was capable of, like they were spooked after the crash. “ But that's not the car's problem. Even with a second driver behind the wheel, we couldn't commit to taking the Esses the way Cadillac assured us was possible.”






> Sharper on turn-in than the Caddy, the BMW moves with slightly more confidence. The steering only whispers what the front tires are up to, while the Cadillac's steering never stops crying "Hear ye, hear ye!" Call it a wash on braking feel and strength, and we're back to power. BMW's six delivers near supercar numbers, while the Cadillac musters sports-car speeds. Judged solely on times, the BMW is the winner.



I would say it's the car's problem if drivers aren't confident taking it near its limits. At the end of the day the M3 has better steering, handling and has a better engine.

----------


## rage2

> I would say it's the car's problem if drivers aren't confident taking it near its limits. At the end of the day the M3 has better steering, handling and has a better engine.



If you're going for laptimes on a track, you absolutely want a car that's boring and predictable so drivers are confident in driving at the limit.

For the street, it's the other way around. You want a car that'll be lively since you're never at the limit, and it's way more fun, so the CT4-V is probably more of a fun car to drive. I've never really liked the handling of the new M3/4's, it's just not a fun street car because it's such a good track car.

The CT5-V sounds like a fucking blast to drive around. Found the first sentence in the review hilarious:




> Fast laps come one of two ways: clean or ugly. The 2:49.4 we managed in the CT5-V Blackwing unquestionably falls under the latter classification.

----------


## Buster

> If you're going for laptimes on a track, you absolutely want a car that's boring and predictable so drivers are confident in driving at the limit.
> 
> For the street, it's the other way around. You want a car that'll be lively since you're never at the limit, and it's way more fun, so the CT4-V is probably more of a fun car to drive. I've never really liked the handling of the new M3/4's, it's just not a fun street car because it's such a good track car.
> 
> The CT5-V sounds like a fucking blast to drive around. Found the first sentence in the review hilarious:



That's why AMG has been eating M's lunch for the last decade or more. They prioritized fun (and cool) on the street over track performance.

----------


## 90_Shelby

> I would say it's the car's problem if drivers aren't confident taking it near its limits. At the end of the day the M3 has better steering, handling and has a better engine.



You could be right about the 4-V Blackwing, I’m just happy that’s not the case for the 5-V Blackwing in comparison to the M5 CS.

Cadillac for the win.

----------


## killramos

> That's why AMG has been eating M's lunch for the last decade or more. They prioritized fun (and cool) on the street over track performance.



I think it was clarkson that lamented that the problem with the GTR is they made it too good rather than being a normal bonkers AMG.

----------


## Buster

> I think it was clarkson that lamented that the problem with the GTR is they made it too good rather than being a normal bonkers AMG.



ya...and the usual decline in design language in order to make it look more aggressive.

----------


## dirtsniffer

I hope they extend the production on the 2 blackwings for a few years so we can get some allocations

----------


## killramos

To the sandy vagina who was triggered about me talking about a GTR and neg repped me for it. 1:10

My bad, it was Matt Leblanc not Clarkson.

Anyways back to the domestic circle jerk.

----------


## 90_Shelby

> I hope they extend the production on the 2 blackwings for a few years so we can get some allocations



Have they stated how long they will be in production? I haven't seen anything personally, with the exception that there was an initial run of 250 each, but nothing stating that was all they would make. I would think that they'll be in production for at least a few years and I can't see them actually limiting production if there is demand.

----------


## 94boosted

> Hard to say what Cup2 are worth, but I’d say at least 3 seconds.



 :Werd!:  Agreed. 




> At the end of the day the M3 has better steering, *handling* and has a better engine.



That's quite subjective. Just look at the results of the other GM Alpha Chassis cars on the list, they punch way above their price point. Alpha Chassis + Gen 4 Magnetomagical Shocks, this thing should be very good on the track. Also worth mentioning that a driver that isn't scared of the car did a 2:52.5 (a second faster than the M3 & 3 seconds faster than what C&D could manage).

https://media.cadillac.com/media/us/...blackwing.html

----------


## ThePenIsMightier

Sounds like the is500 was a bit of a turkey in the short article I read.

----------


## 90_Shelby

> Agreed. 
> 
> 
> 
> That's quite subjective. Just look at the results of the other GM Alpha Chassis cars on the list, they punch way above their price point. Alpha Chassis + Gen 4 Magnetomagical Shocks, this thing should be very good on the track. Also worth mentioning that a driver that isn't scared of the car did a 2:52.5 (a second faster than the M3).
> 
> https://media.cadillac.com/media/us/...blackwing.html



Boom goes the dynamite!

----------


## npham

> Also worth mentioning that a driver that isn't scared of the car did a 2:52.5 (a second faster than the M3 & 3 seconds faster than what C&D could manage).



Which makes the Cayenne Turbo GT lap time of 2:52.6 look even more silly. That SUV is bonkers.

----------


## 94boosted

> Which makes the Cayenne Turbo GT lap time of 2:52.6 look even more silly. That SUV is bonkers.



Yah that's bats**t crazy for an SUV. Granted it did come on Pirelli Corsa PZC4's which were heat cycled to boot. An SUV on track specific tires is such an oxymoron  :ROFL!:

----------


## richardchan2002

> Sounds like the is500 was a bit of a turkey in the short article I read.



Can’t really expect too much with an old chassis and old engine. Doesn’t seem that Lexus intended the car to be a track car as evidenced by the sudden addition of track pads as a dealer available option. Transmission burping out fluid was unexpected.

Also unexpected (at least to me) that the GR86 and BRZ couldn’t go a single lap without changing brake fluid.

----------


## Buster

Track performance is critical. Especially in Calgary

----------


## Twin_Cam_Turbo

> Can’t really expect too much with an old chassis and old engine. Doesn’t seem that Lexus intended the car to be a track car as evidenced by the sudden addition of track pads as a dealer available option. Transmission burping out fluid was unexpected.
> 
> Also unexpected (at least to me) that the GR86 and BRZ couldn’t go a single lap without changing brake fluid.



Not unexpected on a lap that long. The calipers and rotors are identical on the new car, but with significantly more power.

----------


## heavyD

> Agreed. 
> 
> 
> 
> That's quite subjective. Just look at the results of the other GM Alpha Chassis cars on the list, they punch way above their price point. Alpha Chassis + Gen 4 Magnetomagical Shocks, this thing should be very good on the track. Also worth mentioning that a driver that isn't scared of the car did a 2:52.5 (a second faster than the M3 & 3 seconds faster than what C&D could manage).
> 
> https://media.cadillac.com/media/us/...blackwing.html



Meh. All we can compare is how fast they were with the same drivers on the same days which is the idea behind the Lightning Lap. I never trust manufacturer times on Nurburgring or any other track as they are usually track prepped with different rubber or pre-production (not stock) cars.

----------


## 94boosted

> Meh. All we can compare is how fast they were with the same drivers on the same days which is the idea behind the Lightning Lap. I never trust manufacturer times on Nurburgring or any other track as they are usually track prepped with different rubber or pre-production (not stock) cars.



True, but for some additional perspective keep in mind that the C&D guys were actually slightly faster in the CT5-V Blackwing than the GM factory drivers. So it seems to be they were just being timid in the CT4-V after their little incident.

----------


## ThePenIsMightier

> Cant really expect too much with an old chassis and old engine. Doesnt seem that Lexus intended the car to be a track car as evidenced by the sudden addition of track pads as a dealer available option. Transmission burping out fluid was unexpected.
> 
> Also unexpected (at least to me) that the GR86 and BRZ couldnt go a single lap without changing brake fluid.



It's complete craziness. Ok, it's "a tough track" but it's not a 24hr endurance race. My last 20yo car can do better than boiling brake fluid or melting brakes on _one_ lap. 
Ridiculous.

----------


## bjstare

> It's complete craziness. Ok, it's "a tough track" but it's not a 24hr endurance race. My last 20yo car can do better than boiling brake fluid or melting brakes on _one_ lap. 
> Ridiculous.



 :dunno:  that car is never intended to go anywhere near a track. It's supposed to be a fun daily driver. I'm a Lexus fanboy, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think Rage's opinion applies in this context as well. A car doesn't have to be designed for lapping/track days to be fun.

----------


## ThePenIsMightier

> that car is never intended to go anywhere near a track. It's supposed to be a fun daily driver. I'm a Lexus fanboy, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think Rage's opinion applies in this context as well. A car doesn't have to be designed for lapping/track days to be fun.



I'm totally with both Rage and you on that.
However, I still strongly feel that virtually _any_ vehicle sold in 2022 should easily be able to do a couple of laps without something so significant failing that it becomes undrivable. While that statement may be controversial, seeing any vehicle that they've stuffed >450hp into fail after a few hard braking events is getting close to negligent. And a Toyota product doing this??! "Great jorb guizz! You sure spent money wisely having your team "optimize" those brakes down to go-cart quality before you attached the rocket boosters..."

Of course we shouldn't expect them to operate smoothly over tens of laps getting absolutely bagged, but that's not what happened, here.

*Don't forget TPiM Luvs Lexus fo-eva as well...

----------


## BerserkerCatSplat

> The Ford Mustang Mach 1 sticks out to me as I realize the Cup 2 tires are worth a few seconds of lap time but it's impressive that it came out faster than a GT350R.



Yeah the Mach 1 really stood out, that's a lot of fast for the dollar. I haven't really kept up with Mustangs recently, didn't realize the Mach had so many GT350 bits, cool package.

----------


## killramos

A buddy of mine picked one up as a daily and he’s been really impressed.

----------


## dimi

is500 was a flop from the day it was announced. Old engine, old chassis, old transmission, dated interior. Toyota threw a bunch of leftover parts together, and priced it higher than vehicles that blow it out of the water. 

"Prototype pads sold as an accessory"  :ROFL!:

----------


## richardchan2002

> is500 was a flop from the day it was announced. Old engine, old chassis, old transmission, dated interior. Toyota threw a bunch of leftover parts together, and priced it higher than vehicles that blow it out of the water. 
> 
> "Prototype pads sold as an accessory"



Yup, it’s like Lexus didn’t even try on this one, and that’s saying something because Toyota/Lexus is behind the competition on a normal day. Technology is usually dated and they let their chassis and drivetrains age way more than most before updating them. That’s probably a big reason why perceived reliability is better.

I say perceived reliability because I currently own a Lexus and my experience has been that Lexus products aren’t always what their reputation suggests. They have just as many design flaws as others.

----------


## heavyD

> Yup, it’s like Lexus didn’t even try on this one, and that’s saying something because Toyota/Lexus is behind the competition on a normal day. Technology is usually dated and they let their chassis and drivetrains age way more than most before updating them. That’s probably a big reason why perceived reliability is better.
> 
> I say perceived reliability because I currently own a Lexus and my experience has been that Lexus products aren’t always what their reputation suggests. They have just as many design flaws as others.



Seeing I have money down on a GR Corolla I'm on a Toyota forum and I see plenty of threads regarding issues with Corollas so their vehicles certainly aren't perfect. I still think they build a pretty reliable vehicle but like Honda they have cut costs over the decades and have been kicking and screaming forced to adopt newer technologies that reduced their advantage of using carryover drivetrains and are no longer heads and shoulders more reliable than some other brands that have picked up their game over the decades.

----------


## rage2

> Seeing I have money down on a GR Corolla I'm on a Toyota forum and I see plenty of threads regarding issues with Corollas so their vehicles certainly aren't perfect. I still think they build a pretty reliable vehicle but like Honda they have cut costs over the decades and have been kicking and screaming forced to adopt newer technologies that reduced their advantage of using carryover drivetrains and are no longer heads and shoulders more reliable than some other brands that have picked up their game over the decades.



Wonder if this has anything to do with it.

https://www.autoblog.com/2021/12/07/...rs-acceptable/

Or is this with older cars prior to chip shortages?

----------


## heavyD

No idea but this whole parts shortage thing is getting really old. Car prices are out of whack, deliveries are crazy long, cars lacking features, etc. Worst of times for a car guy like me that likes to change vehicles every two years. I think you have the right idea with driving a cheap beater while you wait for the car you want. That's what I should do so I can sell my X3MC while the used market is still hot. It's just hard to find a beater that doesn't need work put into it.

----------


## rage2

Mine…. Needed work.  :ROFL!: 



It sounded like a race car, worked out well.

----------


## heavyD

What year is that? That's a lot of corrosion as the exhaust flange looks like it has rotted into a single piece.

----------


## rage2

> What year is that? That's a lot of corrosion as the exhaust flange looks like it has rotted into a single piece.



03. My uncles car. Sat for years outside since he’s too old to drive. He wanted me to take it to the junkyard. It still drove. I’m spending $500 fixing the small shit so it doesn’t sound like a junker. Engine, suspension, transmission solid. That’s all that matters. Even has 2 sets of wheels, although the winter tires suck.

----------


## 94boosted

I put some F-Sport springs on a buddies 2013 GS 350 and it didn't look a whole lot better than that  :ROFL!:

----------


## richardchan2002

> Seeing I have money down on a GR Corolla I'm on a Toyota forum and I see plenty of threads regarding issues with Corollas so their vehicles certainly aren't perfect. I still think they build a pretty reliable vehicle but like Honda they have cut costs over the decades and have been kicking and screaming forced to adopt newer technologies that reduced their advantage of using carryover drivetrains and are no longer heads and shoulders more reliable than some other brands that have picked up their game over the decades.



I agree with all this. It will be really interesting to see how the new Korean cars fare in terms of reliability. They are certainly starting to price their cars upmarket, not sure if it’s warranted but time will tell.

On another note, from a M2 to an X3MC to a Corolla GR?

- - - Updated - - -




> I put some F-Sport springs on a buddies 2013 GS 350 and it didn't look a whole lot better than that



Alberta cars used to be more desirable because we used less salt. The city must have really upped their pickle and salt game. Or cars are getting worse. Or both.

----------


## heavyD

> I agree with all this. It will be really interesting to see how the new Korean cars fare in terms of reliability. They are certainly starting to price their cars upmarket, not sure if its warranted but time will tell.
> 
> On another note, from a M2 to an X3MC to a Corolla GR?



We cancelled our Bronco order (was probably not going to be delivered until 2023) and ordered a GV70 for my wife as she fell in love with it after a test drive so it will be our first Korean vehicle. There appears to be some teething issues with these but hopefully the 2023 models have less bugs.

I love cars and fortunately have never been attached to brands so I've always been all over the map as I like to try everything regardless of the badge. If by chance Toyota dumbs down the GR Corolla for the North American market and doesn't give us the front and rear differentials from the GR Yaris circuit pack I will probably bail and maybe get into a Model 3 Performance.




> Alberta cars used to be more desirable because we used less salt. The city must have really upped their pickle and salt game. Or cars are getting worse. Or both.



The city of Calgary is considerably more salt and brine now compared to a decade ago. I recall seeing a lot of white roads out east in the winter due to all the salt they use but now Calgary roads have the white dust all over them. You really have to keep on top of rust now which is something we never had to worry about.

----------


## richardchan2002

@heavyD
 Did Toyota give you a price for the GR? Seems like Golf R and Sti finally have some competition. A 6 speed AWD 260-300hp car would be a good daily (better than CTR or Supra in Calgary). Given resale on the Golf R and Sti, I can see a very low TCO for the GR. If you don’t have a lead foot, the 1.6L will probably have better fuel economy to boot.

Good choice on the GV70. styling is head turning and performance is comparable to Macan, SQ5, etc. It’s nice to have some alternative in the sporty luxury SUV space that is not German (the Japanese makers don’t seem to want to compete in this space). We considered a GV70 last summer but the wait times were too long and we needed something immediately.

----------


## shakalaka

Drove my cousin's GV70 yesterday and quite enjoyed it. Good choice on that. The quality overall and tech also seems great, so it's an awesome option.

----------


## heavyD

> @heavyD
>  Did Toyota give you a price for the GR? Seems like Golf R and Sti finally have some competition. A 6 speed AWD 260-300hp car would be a good daily (better than CTR or Supra in Calgary). Given resale on the Golf R and Sti, I can see a very low TCO for the GR. If you don’t have a lead foot, the 1.6L will probably have better fuel economy to boot.
> 
> Good choice on the GV70. styling is head turning and performance is comparable to Macan, SQ5, etc. It’s nice to have some alternative in the sporty luxury SUV space that is not German (the Japanese makers don’t seem to want to compete in this space). We considered a GV70 last summer but the wait times were too long and we needed something immediately.



Since the car hasn't been announced there's no pricing to be had. I would expect mid 40's at the very least which is a lot for a Corolla but in the ballpark of CTR, Golf R, STI, etc. Our GV70 is scheduled to be build in May so not likely going to receive it until summer.




> Drove my cousin's GV70 yesterday and quite enjoyed it. Good choice on that. The quality overall and tech also seems great, so it's an awesome option.



For the price the interior is so much nicer than anything near the price range and it has a fairly sporty drive for an SUV.

----------


## Buster

I'd get a GV70 in a second if the interior was suitable for a bigger family.

Edit: I was thinking the GV80

----------


## Toms-SC

> Yeah the Mach 1 really stood out, that's a lot of fast for the dollar. I haven't really kept up with Mustangs recently, didn't realize the Mach had so many GT350 bits, cool package.



Bits from the GT500 as well. I think the sweet spot for the Mach 1 is just getting a base unit.

----------


## BerserkerCatSplat

> Bits from the GT500 as well. I think the sweet spot for the Mach 1 is just getting a base unit.



That's a great breakdown! The base really does have a ton of Shelby goodies, I didn't expect that - looks like the Handling Pack is mostly a tire package and a splitter/spoiler.

----------

