Quote:
Originally Posted by ACEV
Further, A-B-A testing is questionable because of such little difference between that and A-B. Why not A-B-A-B..... to infinity? Would that help? At what point do we say that the improvement is real? Or even good enough?
|
A-B testing is flawed simply because you can get hiccups either way. That's why world speed records require back-to-back runs in opposite directions. That's why when we do acceleration tests, we do sets of three or four.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConnClark
Arguments about things warming up are mitigated to some degree by the fact the car was allowed to cool down while they added the dimples.
Cruise control was used on both runs.
|
A cooled car is different from a cold car. The residual heat in the radiator and transmission is still there hours later. The huge time interval between runs is also a big factor when you consider the effects of external air pressure and temperature on the way an EFI engine runs and rolling resistance.
This is why I feel they should have done the test with fiberglass panels or inserts, quick-swapped in just minutes between the runs. That would enable you to do three back-to-back runs over the course of the morning.
-
The fact that there was a result is interesting. The fact that there was no verification of the result by re-testing is frustrating. You can have a lot of errors and miss a lot of things working to a deadline like the Mythbusters do. And more than once they've had to revisit a "Myth" and change their verdict because of some flaw in their methodology.