The author is overly self-congratulatory I think. An article three years ago (Even though the byline date is more recent. A database update that didn't preserve timestamps? Or sneaky SEO to make it appear more relevant?) says much the same thing with more details about how the testing is done. http://www.racecar-engineering.com/articles/nascar/the-secre...
Considering the breadcrumbs that the author admitted to finding online, I'm realizing that the state of investigative reporting is much worse off than I previously assumed.
