LocostUSA.com

The single huge variable that isn't being accounted for is driver skill... and daring. Put a really good driver in any Locost and it'll go faster. So what changed? Tire compound? Camber curves? Power to weight? CG location? No - nothing that defines a Locost has changed, yet it goes faster. The point is, any This vs That thread is useless other than bragging about how awesome one car is, focusing on its successes and ignoring failures. Unless it's backed up with the two cars at the same track, on the same day, with the same tires, the same engine, and driven by the same driver, it's pointless. Saying that a 400 hp-powered Locost is faster than the entry-level Caterham means what exactly? Nothing. Like Junior points out, it's easy for Locost builders to drop in a bad-ass engine, sufficient to beat any Caterham in a straight line, but that slides right back into what happens in the turns. How many turns? How long are the straightaways? What tire compounds are being used? And once again, what is the driver skill in the equation? The answer is that it's ignored when the Locost wins...

Pretty much every X vs. Y thread I've ever seen is completely pointless for coming to any sort of conclusion. If someone says that Car X is faster, then Car Y owners will simply change the rules, saying that it's only because of the money, or the driver, or the tires... and on and on.