Hopefully so. We already pretty much know the Motor Trend test car used software that was not yet released at the time of publication (it had launch mode when no one else had it yet).
MT probably used that grandmother from Jay Leno's Garage show that blew off his 427 Cobra :smile:...must have used a professional driver
Reading their correction factor article, the correction factor here likely was zero or close to zero. For hybrids and turbo cars it seems the correction factor is minimal (they do not use the same formula as a naturally aspirated car which has significant engine power loss at higher elevations).
The specific test quoted for the Subaru was done at ~1100 ft above sea level judging from the stats posted. The correction was insignificant however.
Wasn't the best run 11.2x after the launch mode, and 11.3x before? Getting closer but still a ways off. The trap speed Motor Trend supposedly got is the biggest difference however.
The SAE J1349 standard uses 99 kPA which is 29.32 in-HG at their 77F / 25C test temperature. They did not make any simple math errors.
1-foot rollout is standard procedure for all the 1/4 mile times you see in car magazines because that figure is only relevant in relation to drag strips (where as explained above by others, all drag strips will have this factored in because of how staging beams work). Even Edmunds which insists on not using rollout for their 0-60 numbers, still uses it for the 1/4 mile number.
The whole horsepower formula is something people can input as a formula in vbox tools, but not what the vbox actually outputs from the data.
Motor Trend is aware of that, but they use that standard as a basis for their correction formula because they found that works out way better than the correction formula they were using previously. This is all detailed in the article I linked.
The vbox units used by car magazines have a 100hz sampling rate. They are $10k+ units, not the consumer models that cost less than $1k.
