Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron

Try the chart with their torque...and their weight.

 

Ok, here you are the data you want for the HP vs vehicle speed chart of the RS Koenig 935. You have the gearing.

Then, the RS Koenig has a top HP figures of 520 bhp, so it generate less HP at all speed than the Carrera GT (85 HP less at the top).

Then, after shown your chart... I want to explain me WHY the RS Koenig was so faster than the CGT. We are really waiting you to prove that! About HP vs vehicle speed!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I just added an Ariel Atom to my collection, and can say I've been very impressed with the acceleration. Weight really is everything.

 

Always with pre concepts.

If you don't know the History of RS Tuning, they are rated 580 bhp their engines in 1990 only, so they are surely with a lower engine development (520 bhp) in the World Fastest Cars test of R&T in 1987.

Your chart (HP vs veicle speed) not make sense if you don't include any weight data or torque figures. And this is basically for an engineer.

RS koenig example is the only good way to understand how a low weight or strong engines are importants without any high HP rated, being sure that these engines are so far from the 600+ bhp rated for the modern cars.

Euro F40s are 2773 lbs, like your thread for the weight are shown.

 

Bill I think that is dry weight off the production line with no passengers or equipment, a number often parroted by the press without verification.

 

Bill:

Here are all the basic differences between USA F40s and Eu/ROW cars. John Amette who as you know helped develop the USA F40 helped me put this together a few years ago.


Supplied by Ferrari North America/John Amette:

1. USA production spanned from early 1990 to late 1992. Chassis numbers to follow (European production started late 1987).
2. USA F40s weigh in at 2878 lbs dry. Actual USA F40s weighed by FNA with all fluids and half-a-tank of gas weighed in at 2969 lbs (European cars are stated at 2717 lbs dry).
3. USA F40s have aluminum gas tanks with twin fuel pumps mounted within the tanks ( European cars have rubber fuel cells which require replacement each 7 years with externally located fuel pumps ).
4. USA F40s have twist-off gas caps (European cars have the locking items).
5. USA F40s were all supplied with the variable ride height system deleted (some European cars were thus supplied).
6. USA F40s have 2-peice seats with reclining backs and a passive restraint system (European cars have single-peice seats with 3-point seat belts).
7. USA F40s have their tow-hook attachment mounted directly into the chassis (European cars attach to the front body).
8. USA F40s have a final drive ratio of 10-29 (European cars are rated at 11-30).
9. USA F40s acheive maximum torque of 58.8 kgm/427 ft lbs at 4300 rpm (European cars acheive this same torque at 4000 rpm).
10. USA F40s are rated "at or above 500 bhp" @ 7000 rpm (European cars are rated at 478 bhp at same rpm).
11. USA F40s were the first car to utilize metallic (titanium) based catalysts to allow faster warm up and greater resilience.
12. USA F40s have a 'secondary air injection' for emissions that can be heard at each start up.
13. USA F40s had to pass DOT front, rear & side impact tests. These include the 2.5 mph front and rear tests. Accordingly the bodywork is strengthened.
14. USA F40s have a drag co-efficient of 0.34CX including the rear wing (European F40s are rated the same).

With respect to the gear ratios, please note the following:

First gear - 1:10.707 (USA), 1:10.069 (Euro)
Second gear - 1:6.628 (USA), 1:6.262 (Euro)
Third gear - 1:4.745 (USA), 1:4.463 (Euro)
Fourth gear - 1:3.724 (USA), 1:3.501 (Euro)
Fifth gear - 1:2.965 (USA), 1:2.787 (Euro)

Hope some of this helps!

 

I think the engine power curves will have something to do with it, and I will try and get John to weigh in here as he is the only one intimately aware of the original specs of both. That, combined with different gearing will surely affect straight-line acceleration. I also think (according to a USA journalist friend) that USA cars are not wrung out to the very last hp unlike the cars provided for the Eu tests. So too, some of the Eu cars come from Ferrari 'sporting' VIP customers with cars that are routinely supplied to them by Ferrari with blueprinted engines.

The making of a car like the F40 for the USA was a post-war automotive miracle, because by 1990, DOT & EPA mandates all but meant that such a car would be impossible to homologate it for the USA. That to me is one of the reasons the USA F40 is so special.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

http://www.thebestemployee.com/forum/showpost.php?p=138917811&postcount=239

2773 lbs was with full of tank

I agree with the last point of Joe, are 25 pages I'm try to say that.

I don't understand why, a 520 bhp RS Koenig 930 Turbo with a weight of 2800 lbs is able to overtake an Enzo, and a full 500 bhp Euro F40 with 2770 lbs of weigth was not able of run so fast.

There are just 20-30 bhp of difference, same weight of the RS Koenig, same period, same 201 mph top speed, 5 gears.
The RS Koenig was able to fly, the Euro F40 for you is still a mistake! Incredible!

According with the tolerance of engine production of +5%, from 478 bhp rated, there are possible some full 500 bhp engines product for Euro F40s, being not blueprinted engines.

And Nick Mason's car was fast, but not particulary fast or fast as the RS Koenig.

 

We have to assume that's full tank, but that's very light. I guess the weight makes the difference.

 

haha. I like that intricate role of words.

The slowest CGT is fast as the fastest F40 because these are the only two examples with the same method tested with two passengers. And the fastest CGT is tested with driver only!

I think this is the 5th time I'm saying that, but probably is not the last one yet.


As Joe is saying (I'm trying from 25 pages).

1.

2.

 

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/1356444-post39.html

A few more from the 1988 Road & Track "World's Fastest Cars".

0-60..... 4.0 sec
0-100....7.3 sec
Standing 1/4 mile.... 11.7 @ 133.5

Ruf CTR Yellow Bird #001

CURB WEIGHT 2530 lbs
POWER 469 BHP

Just 469 bhp, 2530 lbs, 60 - 133.5 mph 7"7.

This data is absolutely fast with just 469 bhp and the its lightness! How a very light body was able of, with just little over 450 bhp engine.

 

Bill S will not believe this, because power figures is not enough for a performance like that, for him.

This is why he don't believe that Euro F40s with no cats, being even close 500 bhp, are able of very fast times from 60 to 130 mph, being even very light. Competitive times, even with 600+ bhp modern cars.

It seems POWER is everything, for him.... ignoring any other factors like lightness or something others regarding differences in "engine" curves.

60-130 mph in less than 8 secs is not the only one case for the Euro no cats F40s, even Ruf CTRs and some other tuned Porsches were able of times like that in early 1987.

So, the particular case for fast, is not for the only F40's engine, but even the flat-6 cylinders 3.4 L Ruf or RS Tuning at that period of no cats engines COMBINED with body lightness.

Take a look at the recent test of Ruf RT12 by Road&track compared to the old Ruf CTR World Fastest Cars. 650 bhp for the RT12 were able of 60 - 127.2 mph 7.8s.... the old 469 bhp Ruf were able of 60 - 133.5 mph in 7.7s with over 150 bhp less into the engine.

That is so incredible, we are writing here from 25 pages for explain that (simple) point about lightness!

 

Yes please do. I think it will cast meaningful light upon the debate because I dont know anyone else who has knowledge of the mechanical specs of BOTH the USA and Eu cars. After all he is one of the men who helped engineer the USA car based on the Eu car.

 

A few things to consider:

The Germans are known for being very conservative with HP ratings, the Italians generous. It all comes out in the trap----and that trap with that weight does NOT tell me 469 crank HP. Would be interesting to see SAE RWHP.

The engine really hangs over the rear tires on the 911 for max traction and the Yellow Bird's engine is probably less peaky than the F40.

The Yellow Bird is a narrow body 911, quite a small car with minimal downforce/frontal area.

The Yellow Bird is also apparently magical or something......what a beast!!

 

The Yellow Bird #001 was recently 470 bhp @ 1.1 bar dyno tested and just completed at that period. Just boosted the top available to 1.2 bar for the event. Was not a joke, was the only one setting of the 3 available. Even was written in the recent last articles of the YB.

 

Read here:
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/8657/016qn.jpg
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/4637/022rg.jpg
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/2515/033le.jpg
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/1010/041ls.jpg
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/1039/051db.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3172/064gh.jpg
http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/4682/071hf.jpg
http://img481.imageshack.us/img481/7427/086jh.jpg
http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/254/093yv.jpg
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/2922/103di.jpg
http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/2523/115fz.jpg
http://img157.imageshack.us/img157/9291/126nm.jpg
http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/4377/134nz.jpg
http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/422/149hl.jpg

If the Ruf YB had 0.95 bar, 1.1 bar and the last top 1.2 bar (the last one was the setting for the World Fastest Cars event, full 500 hp), not seems the same about a particular boost knob for the F40 of FL, the Mason's car. Was written in the 0-100-0 Autocar test that Mason's car was completely stock, modified for the posterior windscreen only (if you want I can scan the section of the article).

This is good for the theory, how a light body with 500 bhp is able, anyway we are waiting about Euro F40's mystery... if mystery, for something about different engine curves, it should be called!

 

I think we should all understand that any speed tests involving this particular F40 will be exceptional.

So too, what effect on power and the power curve does 'blueprinting' by the works have? A fair few Eu cars have blueprinted engines.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Joe,

Bill has tested his car before the runs with 1/4 of tank, and he achieved his best 60 - 130 mph 8.6s (little bit faster than C&D data)

Mason's car achieved 60 - 130 mph 8.3s.... and we are talked about approx 3,073 lbs, with two passengers

Bill's car 3,113 lbs (driver only + 1/4 tank) 60-130 mph 8.6s
Mason's car 3,073 lbs (driver + passenger) 60-130 mph 8.3s


How is really the engine difference from Bill's car to Mason's car?
Bill's engine is about exactly the same engine of Mason's car looking the performance with "approximately" the same weight tested. But, Mason's car is sure lighter, being tested with two passengers.

Are you so sure it (F40 NPG) have blueprinted engines?