Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron | Page 5 | FerrariChat
Buy

Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron

Discussion in '288GTO/F40/F50/Enzo/LaFerrari/F80' started by Bill S, Aug 30, 2009.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Page 5 of 33
  1. 246tasman

    246tasman Formula 3

    Jun 21, 2007
    1,446
    UK
    Full Name:
    Will Tomkins
    #101 246tasman, Sep 10, 2009
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2009
    Bill

    So the 917 actually is on your chart, just off the end of the screen somewhere in my bookcase....

    Will
     
  2. willcrook

    willcrook F1 Rookie
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 3, 2009
    2,554
    UK
    #102 willcrook, Sep 10, 2009
    That road registered 917 looks something special indeed!
     
  3. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #103 F40 LeMans, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017

    EU-version stock customers F40 is much more quicker than the US, because not catalytic.
    0-170 mph 22"3 compared to 26"3 to the US version.
    Fast Lane F40's article show 30-170 time in 20 seconds.

    On rolling start, the EU F40 is quicker than any Carrera GT, Zondas or F50 etc.
    Is 250 lbs lighter than the US and its TwinTurbo is little bit powerful.

    Here we have stock customers CGT 0-170 mph 25"4 able... so.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  4. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #104 F40 LeMans, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
    http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/cargrouptests/200788/porsche_911_turbo_v_porsche_carrera_gt_v_mitsubishi_evo_ix.html

    Here you are the EVO's article where the Carrera GT run 0-150 mph 17"3 and 0-170 mph no better than 25"4 at Bruntingthorpe airport straight. And that is all from a stock UK customer CGT, anyway, not the same as a "factory press" car.

    The FastLane stock UK F40 was owned by Nick Mason and was only 15000 miles on the tacho at time of that test.
    So 22"3 came out of a customers car.
    I think if US F40s are slower, that's not really the point. And factory cars or customers cars tested too.
     
  5. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #105 F40 LeMans, Dec 5, 2009
  6. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #106 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    Sorry, but the data you posted is not factual (i.e., the video does not show a race and the acceleration numbers have no reference or GPS backing). If you have real European F40 acceleration numbers measured by GPS we can compare them.

    Here is a real race of a CGT against a Scuderia at 2600' to 180 mph at the Mohave Air and Space Port in California:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhRNSO05TsU
     
  7. Ferrari 360 CS

    Ferrari 360 CS F1 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2004
    6,851
    Cape Town,SA
    Full Name:
    Jacques
    #107 Ferrari 360 CS, Dec 5, 2009
    This interesting thread has highlighted a few issues, one being that there is no escapting the fact that times have changed since the F40, but I would guess an incon like the F40 is about more than just numbers.

    The other point is cars of today are faster and they should be, to say the F40 could ever be quicker then a CGT is missing the fact that 478 bhp cannot compete with over 600bhp.

    Lastly we need to think, do we enjoy these cars for the numbers they can do or for the driving experience they provide.

    Nevertheless this thread has been very interesting to follow.
     
  8. Alex1015

    Alex1015 Formula Junior

    Sep 1, 2005
    949
    USA
    #108 Alex1015, Dec 5, 2009
    BillS,

    Interesting set up in Excel. Are you using Dyno graphs and gear ratios or just the published acceleration numbers? In my brief experience working with a similar simulation, the hardest thing to get nailed down is the initial acceleration from a dig. Even if you static/kinetic friction is modeled correctly there's so much going on that it's never accurate.

    I'm guessing if you use the accel numbers from magazines you don't have to worry about it?

    Cool stuff.
     
  9. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #109 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    That's right. When you use actual acceleration numbers you don't need to worry about all that stuff. For the faster races with the CGT and Enzo, I used actual GPS data I had as well as GPS data sent to me from several people around the world. Couldn't do that just a few years ago!

    We also used several magazines and threw away data that was questionable, like the C&D Enzo test where they admitted extrapolating data at higher speeds.
     
  10. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #110 SSNISTR, Dec 5, 2009
    Guess you never heard of weight? Ruf MD has run his F40 against his CGT and the F40 stays with it or pulls ahead.
     
  11. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #111 SSNISTR, Dec 5, 2009
    I agree, the Euro F40 is a little quicker then the USA F40. But that is common knowledge due to the Euro's lower weight and in some years no cats....

    I don't think Bill's keeping track of non USA spec cars though?
     
  12. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #112 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    I'm not sure that race was done very carefully. In my own experience, my 490 HP Ruf Turbo R is slighty faster than an F40 below 130 mph. That's consistent with the US F40 data published by the magazines. It's very important to shift the CGT at redline. That's less important in the F40.

    Under 130 mph, the CGT is much faster than an F40, as it should be. It only weighs 258 lbs more and has 127 more HP. The CGT is .19 HP/lb. The US F40 is .16 HP/lb. The US F40 would need 570 HP to match it. That's almost 100 HP more than it's rated at.

    I don't have GPS data for a stock European F40. Maybe someone can provide that.

    Here is the power a CGT puts out when shifted to redline...
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  13. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #113 F40 LeMans, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
    I think here someone not really knows the real differences between them.

    The F40 engine is able to coming out 478 bhp and 425 lb-ft af torque with a boost of 1,1 bar (16,1 psi)
    but in the real world the overboost action is able to achive 1.5 bar (22 psi) of max boost.

    The engine of EU F40 with no catalytic converters is really able to achive 515 bhp, also written in the R&T article.
    These are the figures coming out of stock EU F40's engine. I think the torque curve could be estimated of over 480 lb-ft compared to 425 declared.
    The US engine catalytic converted is surely strangled and unladed fuels don't help an engine for its best performance.
    Nothing about weight?
    250 lbs less for no US bumpers, doors, glass windows, cats, seats, etc.

    I think you change your opinion if you would have driven one.

    I still insist. I hope you are talking about US F40.

    Search the FL article. Is all well written above. There are 0-30, 0-60, 0-100, 0-160, 0-170 times, numbers of attempts and and how to obtain it.
     
  14. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #114 SSNISTR, Dec 5, 2009
    If I recall he did it about three times. Not 100% positive though....

    It isn't just about power/weight. It is also the way it puts power down, gearing etc....

    I have been racing since I was 17 and can attest to "underdogs" beating others.

    I had a older Camaro with 342 rwhp (about 400 at the crank) that ran 11.20's. Car was stripped down and had some 4.10 gears and so on. Power wise it was "average" but it ran some good ET's and surprised many with much, much more power. :)
     
  15. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #115 SSNISTR, Dec 5, 2009
    I surely agree the Euro cars are a little quicker then the USA cars due to less weight and maybe some of them not having cats.

    BUT....

    I have read that the USA cars had a little more power to try to over come the added weight. It was never official, but it is talked about alot. Joe Sackey has mentioned it too. Even with that "secret" possible added power the Euro cars are still quicker.

    I'd love to see some hardcore numbers for an LM too. I have read they do 0-60 mph in only 3.1 seconds and will easily hit 229 mph, even with all that added downforce they had compared to the street F40s.
     
  16. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #116 F40 LeMans, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
    Yes I know. But here in Europe and Japan are dynoed well over 490-500 bhp for no cats version too.
    But the point is not really the max power but the torque, combined with its lightness.

    I remember a 17"8 see on the web for the standing km of the LM. But I don't really know its specs. LOL
     
  17. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #117 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    Horsepower and Torque essential mean the same thing:

    Horsepower = (Torque x RPM) / 5,252

    As SSNISTR points out, it's all about gearing, HP vs RPM, and aerodynamics. Weight does not matter much for accerelation after 60 mph or so.

    If you can post proven GPS acceleration times for the European F40 for 0-30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110,120 and 130 mph we can check it out.

    As I mentioned, a US F40 would need about 570 HP to stay with a CGT.
     
  18. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #118 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    Here's a CGT racing a Saleen S7 Twin Turbo 750 HP race car to about 100 mph. Both cars were nearly at sea level with 100 octane in the CGT. The Saleen only pulled about one car on the CGT. The CGT could be very fast as seen here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wpYKdQDapws

    BTW, this is the first time this video was ever published!
     
  19. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #119 SSNISTR, Dec 5, 2009
    I guess RufMD's has a magic extra 92 HP then. :)

    Not trying to knock the CGT at all, but I think you are thinking it is a little more then it is.
    Or that the F40 (USA spec) is a little less.

    Different drivers can make a big difference too.

    I have read on many boards, including this one about owners who own/have owned both.
    They all seem to think the F40 is a match to the CGT, and they also seem to prefer it.

    Agree to disagree I guess.
     
  20. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #120 Bill S, Dec 5, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
    No problem and yes about the drivers. I own a CGT and two of my local friends own F40s and we've driven together a few times. We're all pretty clear that the CGT is much faster than the F40, at least below 130 mph. We haven't raced higher than that. The key is you need to shift the CGT at redline. Some CGT drivers don't.

    Preference is, of course, a different subject.
     
  21. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #121 F40 LeMans, Dec 6, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2009
    And yes, but NO. Horsepower and Torque are in relationship between them.
    But not are the same thing. It's all TORQUE gearing.

    If you mentioned an US F40 about 570 HP to stay with a CGT, could be not the same for an EU F40. You know?
    You think an healthy 510 bhp are not enough for it, being 250 lbs lighter?

    And now. I don't have the GPS data, BUT I think even a child extrapolate huge difference between FL (EU) and C&D (US) times.
    Are .4s to 60, .9 to 100 and 4 SECONDS to 170 mph. That's half way from US F40 and the F1.

    Anyway... No problem :)
     
  22. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #122 F40 LeMans, Dec 6, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    cats or no cats seems nothing?

    The point is that in ralationship you can have same HP cars with different TQ levels.
    (Torque x RPM docet).

    Here the article.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  23. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #123 F40 LeMans, Dec 6, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
  24. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    823
    #124 F40 LeMans, Dec 6, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2009
    So, we have only 5 acceleration times from 30 to 170 mph for FL F40 (we do it with those):

    0-30 2"3
    0-60 3"9
    0-100 7"4
    0-160 19"0
    0-170 22"3

    On rolling start from 30 mph in 1st gear to 170 mph in 5th gear:

    30-60 1"6
    30-100 5"1
    30-160 16"7
    30-170 20"0



    The C&D Carrera GT (as you said):

    0-30 1"5
    0-60 3"5
    0-100 6"8
    0-160 18"3
    0-170 22"4

    On rolling start from 30 mph in 1st gear to 170 mph in 5th gear:

    30-60 2"0
    30-100 5"3
    30-160 16"8
    30-170 20"9

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQZU-vR2Asg

    so with the same start mode of the video, tell me when the CGT is faster?
    :)
     
  25. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #125 Bill S, Dec 6, 2009
    Thanks for posting the article. I really can't do much with the data because I would be guessing the other times needed to accurately race the cars.

    But 60 to 100 is 3.3 sec in the CGT (one shift @ 82 mph) and 3.5 in this particular European F40 (one shift at 88 mph).

    In the US F40, 60 to 100 is 4.1 seconds, so there does appear to be a huge HP and/or weight difference between this European F40 and a US F40.

    Note that the F40 redline is 7,750 rpm. The CGT redline is 8,400 rpm. You need to use that extra rpm in the CGT to see the full performance.
     
Page 5 of 33

Share This Page