|
I enjoyed it. What they lacked in accuracy they made up for in number of different methods that all seemed to confirm the same conclusion. I despise their fuel measuring method and their data variance suggested it's a worthless method, but they keep going back to it rather than something more reliable, like a scangauge and longer test. Never the less, the coast down was the key method and confirmed all the other data.
Does it mean anything in the big picture? Heck no, but it was entertaining. I just wish they'd buy a scangauge, start doing some longer tests, and revisit the golfball theory. That was one of the more entertaining one's to date and despite all the arguments in opposition (followed that thread to its death), the data seemed significant enough to warrant a redo.
|