My whole thing on the racing industry is this:
How can you honestly say whose better when both parties have a year or more to revamp their platforms and come back stronger. What Im saying is the M5 was top dog for YEARS, which means GM had YEARS to perfect their cadillac and develop it to purposely beat the M. Then BMW had a year or two to revamp and figure out what they needed to do to edge out their competition and the vicious cycle continues on.
This method does not prove, at least in my opinion, the better platform. This only proves that both companies R&D Departments are earning their money.
We have seen this same situation happening for the last couple of years with the GTR and the ZR1. GTR comes out and breaks Records, GM goes to the drawing board and comes back in a year with a machine PURPOSELY built to beat the GTR and it goes on and on. This is what is happening and will continue to happen.
Want to really impress people? Give the automotive companies a category to research and build upon, give them resources they need but do not allow them to communicate in any way, the give them all the same budget and time... Lets say 2-3 years... And have them meet on the same track with same conditions. The same tires, same drivers, everything and then crown a winner. Only then can it be said who is champion.
This way there is no way to know what your opponents are bringing to the table thus making it impossible for each other to know what the opposing sides strengths and weaknesses will be.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Bimmer App