Originally Posted by
MadRussian
My "statement" is actually the test results from Extreme Rc Magazine, which does the most extensive performance tests of all the rc car magazines.
Have you been on their forums and asked about their tests and how they try to provide standard comparisons? And read their answers?
What
Extreme R/C's test results do prove, is that despite costing almost 3x as much, a 4 g heavier, less hp Z-Car smoked it in the 0-60ft time, which they try to do with as close as possible standards.
I would say that would speak volumes...at least if you are capable of understanding what the test results show.
Same as I answered (you know,
not spouting 
, but trying to explain, rude boy) on the other forum...
I agree there are far more considerations than just 0-60 ft times. However that was not the point I was making, please try and keep up, ok...
Durability?? LOL the Z-Car is the only rc car ever tested to get a 10+ in durability.
No need to get your panties all in a bunch...
How many sponsored Kyosho drivers of the MP9s have you personally talked to?
In detail?
Thanks for playing
I believe anyone who bases his car purchase based solely on a 0-60ft is STUPID!!
I don't care what magazine did the test, I'm sure most people on this forum would agree that there are many considerations to choose a buggy other than a dumb 0-60ft time. I don't consider that an "extensive" test at all. There are things like the way a buggy handles, the fit/finish of the parts, parts availability at the track that people consider when they buy an RC product.
As for variations, how do we know the engine wasn't tuned right in the test? Or what about gearing? Same wheels/tires?
I don't need to talk to MP9 drivers to call BS on you. How about I grab the cheapest 1/8th buggy I can find, trim all the plastic and remove some metal parts. Then put it in a 0-60ft drag race?! Now I'll have a buggy that is half the price of the SH Z buggy, and is lighter and smokes it in a straightline for half the cost! By your logic, it should be better!
