Dirty-EB-Chicago
V.I.P Member
ChevyTrend doubles down.
http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecob...id=740585435185831936&adbpl=tw&adbpr=25383000
Continuing on the recent discussions we've been having over in the mustang versus section of the forum, motortrend had the aduacity to publish this article. Take a good read keeping in mind that MT tested the 2.3 mustang using 87 octane gas which all of us know makes it slower. Significantly. Despite the mustang beating the camaro in every other aspect of the testing, MT spun the language to favor the camaro.http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56069
The last section of the article compares the mustang as it was against the camaro with heavily upgraded tires, suggesting that the only thing holding the Camaro back was the tires. Personally my mustang still stock and auto pulls to 60 in 5.3. So the way I see it the only category in which the camaro did "win" was rigged at the start. In the article they also claim they tested both cars with premium fuel, and the edited article on the comparison test indicates they used premium fuel on both, after they revised the article. The initial article stated correctly that 87 octane fuel was used in the mustang and was later edited out of the reading entirely.
I used to love MT, but now I'm done, never again. Above all that is the idea of comparison testing not being conducted under and sort of scientific or factual reasoning, and deception to indicate that it was used in conducting these tests. Kinda blown away by the bias.
Thoughts?
http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecob...id=740585435185831936&adbpl=tw&adbpr=25383000
Continuing on the recent discussions we've been having over in the mustang versus section of the forum, motortrend had the aduacity to publish this article. Take a good read keeping in mind that MT tested the 2.3 mustang using 87 octane gas which all of us know makes it slower. Significantly. Despite the mustang beating the camaro in every other aspect of the testing, MT spun the language to favor the camaro.http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56069
The last section of the article compares the mustang as it was against the camaro with heavily upgraded tires, suggesting that the only thing holding the Camaro back was the tires. Personally my mustang still stock and auto pulls to 60 in 5.3. So the way I see it the only category in which the camaro did "win" was rigged at the start. In the article they also claim they tested both cars with premium fuel, and the edited article on the comparison test indicates they used premium fuel on both, after they revised the article. The initial article stated correctly that 87 octane fuel was used in the mustang and was later edited out of the reading entirely.
I used to love MT, but now I'm done, never again. Above all that is the idea of comparison testing not being conducted under and sort of scientific or factual reasoning, and deception to indicate that it was used in conducting these tests. Kinda blown away by the bias.
Thoughts?
Sponsored
Last edited:
