[CSBM5]

Originally Posted by CSBM5

It's hilarious that C&D titled their test like that. I assume they're laughing at threads like these where nobody bothered to fact check their own numbers.

From their own published test data for the M2 vs the M2C:

0-100mph 10.2, 9.1 seconds
0-130mph 19.1, 15.9 seconds
60-130mph 15.0, 11.9 seconds

Of course it's not the least bit surprising the 0-60 times are very close as that is so much dependent on hooking up the tires, and the M2C has a ton of torque and it's pretty hard to hook the tires cleanly (from personal experience) as it comes on so hard.

So their own test data show the M2C to be significantly faster. The M2C will open up an ever increasing gap that becomes huge.

Looking further at C&D's own test data, specifically at the 1/4 mile data also shows the M2C to be significantly faster, so the title of their road test is profoundly misleading when their own test data shows otherwise.

1/4 mile data from C&D for M2 and M2C:

12.7@110mph, 12.4@116mph

That 6mph difference in trap speed is indicative of the substantial increase in power/weight ratio as is the 3/10ths quicker ET. Of course ET is far more dependent on the 60' time (how well you can launch the car and hook the tires in that first 1.8 seconds or so...unfortunately, they don't provide 60' times, so we can't evaluate their launch).