Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron

Graphs don't tell much though. Was this RWHP? Corrected or uncorrected? What they think the crankshaft horsepower is?

If that USA cars 468 is RWHP, corrected or not, that is well over 500 at the crankshaft. Even if that is their calculations for flywheel horsepower that is right on the money given % of error.

 

Really? I never would have believed that? Maybe it's trying to run from it's uglyness LOL?

 

RWHP? Carobu had removed the engine and was tested on a test bench room as-is from the car. So surely at crankshaft and I think true for the careful procedure they had.

The problem could be bigger with the DK figures (although I think accurate enough). Yes. That's a flywheels calculation from the RWHP. Even if that is their calculations for flywheel horsepower that is right on the money given % of error. I know that too.
But I think that is the shorter way for an idea, anyway. TQ figures are approximately the same. Not for the HP.

 

I thought as you. The US I thought was more powerful as written in the R&T article. Could be possible, BUT..
Here, the C&D article shown compared to FL figures, that US-spec car is really slower than the EU-spec in every speed result, but even greater at higher speeds.
If US-spec was more powerful, would not have been so slow, especially from 100 to 170 mph.
I have an other 1/4 mile result of J.Carmack US F40, and is the same result as C&D, so. That's the US car.
J.Carmack car was dynoed (compared a Tuned Porsche 944) 393 RWHP in stock form, a tuned Carobu chipped US F40 with TubiStyle LM exhaust was 455 bhp RWHP.
http://www.***************.com/forum/multimedia/6901-forza-ferrari-magazine-scan-f40.html
So, my conclusion is that.
A Carobu Razzo Rosso chipped engine is approx. 510-520 hp and able to 455 RWHP dynoed. J.Carmack car would be in 450-470 hp range. All that Carobu found for *average engine*. J.Carmack car shown the same results of C&D car, little better.
How can we conclude that US car could be so powerful? IMHO no.
When I found DK figures for the EU-spec was further confirmed. Ok there colud be % of error, but TQ is anyway in 380-390 lb-ft range both (casually) and the HP is 6% greater. This prove is overwhelming for 100-170 mph results.
Is all too suspiciously confirmed, I think.

 

C&D somehow offers the fastest times. Both cars are very evenly matched.

Top gear video Lamborghini vs slr wins and Jeremy Clarkson gives his views.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/jeremy_clarkson/article480909.ece
http://www.topgear.com/uk/videos/carrera-gt-v-slr

"After a quarter of a mile there was absolutely nothing in it. two cars were still absolutely neck and neck and there they stayed until we crossed the line doing 180. An examination of some film footage later in the day revealed the Merc had actually won by a bumper."

Autobuid.de posted faster times in the CGC at all tracks including Nordschleife.
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/porsche-carrera-gt-mercedes-slr-mclaren_45763.html

 

Thanks a lot!

3018 lb are 1369 KGs

AMS was 1254 KGs

That's 115 KGs more = 253 lb

 

http://www.einszweidrei.de/ferrari/f40sp1989-1.htm

My car is 1145 KGs dry (2523 lb dry).

http://www.dkeng.co.uk/media/19976/60yearsferrari.pdf

Here you are 1157 KGs, but mine is a plexi.
From here you have to put fluids.

 

Here the dry weight from Auto and Quattroruote.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

God that must be the worst F40 test I have ever seen....
Road & Tracks two tests were much better....in all aspects.

 

Sounds right, always thought the Euro cars were about 250 pounds lighter.

 

I do have it (in a storage container in the attic LOL). The times you quoted are correct for the one, the other was 0-60 in 3.8 and 1/4 mile in 11.8. I think Automobile also got a 3.8. Not sure if Motor Trend ever tested one? Car and Driver''s 1/4 mile time is horrible. Road & Track got a 11.7 to their 12.1, 4 tenths is alot in the 1/4 mile....

 

The next time I go into that bin I'll pull it out to scan.
I agree the Euro F40 is a little quicker then the USA ones.

But I do think a well driven, even stock, USA F40 can get into the 11's. I actually saw it with my own eyes about 5 years ago at Raceway Park in NJ. Ran 11.80's....all stock.

 

Yes Ryan, I think you are correct. I also think that you have good eyes and they did not deceive you that day.

Please bear with me whilst I present my case...

At 4:03 pm on the 2nd of April 1998, one John Carmack drove his bone-stock 8-year old USA Ferrari F40 down the lane at Texas Motorplex.

Unfortunately, his reaction time to the lights was was almost a second (0.942 of a second if you wish to get technical).

His F40 covered the first 60 feet in 2.142 seconds, the first 1/8th of a mile in 7.953 seconds, and rolled past the first 1/4 mile in 11.984 seconds.

Given his reaction time, and considering other factors such as adverse wind conditions, tire pressures, state of tune of John's particular F40 (developing full boost? many dont), mechanical sympathy, driver competence, absolute gradient, fuel type used, track temperature, tire type, etc etc ad nauseum, I would venture to say that the launch-control free USA F40 is an 11-second quarter miler under optimum conditions.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I think are possible 11.6s times on the 1/4 mile for a bone stock EU F40, here in Europe.

This measure may encourage a car more than another. Enzo is 7.0s and 7.2s the Mecca. Take a look from 1st gear.

 

Seems Enzo faster looking 60-130 mph. BUT...In the real world:

Enzo 30-136 mph: 9.7 seconds
F1 30-138 mph: 9.3 seconds
CGT 30-132 mph: 9.7 seconds

F1 is faster than the Enzo in growing speed from 1st gear. CGT is a bit slower than Enzo.

 

Anyway here you are the R&T F40 data panel.
It's seems a bit quicker than C&D car.

R&T 30-124.5 mph 10.2 seconds
C&D 30-122 mph 10.3 seconds

But I'm thinking a gearshift difference between them.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Bill

I think you really need to trade your Porsche CGT towards a 917-30. They're now over 25 years old so bringing one isn't an issue.

0-62 mph 1.9 Seconds
0-100 mph 3.9 Seconds
0-200 mph 10.9 Seconds
VMAX 260 MPH