Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron

Your analysis looks good, but I'd be wary of the C&D data...

They're also including a 2-3 and 3-4 shift. I only have a 3-4 shift. Regardless, F40 LeMans' F40 appears significantly faster than a US F40.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Thanks!

This is the reason why on these last 30 pages and that day at Mugello I was not smoked.

 

Zero to 60 mph: 3.3 seconds.
Quarter-mile run: 11.1 sec. at 133.0 mph.

Unbelievable.

The Enzo has just recorded the best Road & Track acceleration run ever for a road car. Its 0-60-mph run equals the fastest time logged just a month ago by the all-American Saleen S7. And its quarter-mile time and speed pulverize the mighty McLaren F1's numbers of 11.6 sec. traveling at a mere 125 mph past the quarter-mile mark. Wow!

When the time comes to stop — by the end of the acceleration run the Enzo is racing down the track at about 150 mph — the ample 15.0-in. vented carbon-ceramic discs slow the car with authority. There is never any hint of fade. The brake pedal travel is confidently short and actuation effort is firm. Panic stops from 60 and 80 mph show the Enzo needing only an excellent 109 and 188 ft., respectively, to come to a complete halt. Of note, the 188 ft. is another record, shared with the 360 Modena.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-reviews/page-4---2003-ferrari-enzo?click=main_sr

 

I will ask to F40LM the distance after 5.9 seconds.

 

It seems I was just 3 feet back that Enzo after 7.8 seconds in my F40. Starting from 60 mph.

808 ft

 

There is a little discrepancy from calculated data and their data. Yes the early F40 is still very fast.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Agreed. I think the F40's traded off downforce for much higher top speed and acceleration, and the non-cat F40s much more HP, less turbo lag and/or flatter torque curve.

 

Guys, I'd like to point out this thing. How is incompatible the 60-130 result with the distance.

2011 Ferrari 458 60-130 MPH VBOX Scan, Screen Shot - DragTimes.com

Stock 458 Italia
60-130 mph 7"74
Distance 1129 ft

In my 7"92 run with my F40, I was 1145 ft at exactly 7"74. This tell us that we must just look at the effective distance, comparing 60-130 times are often misleading.

 

I think the reason is the torque and the light weight. I don't think it will be the reason of something like 570 hp... Mark Hales agreed with the fact that Ferrari were not completely honest about the power, sure more than 500... but I don't think they claimed 100 hp less their engines.

 

I checked that data again. C&D did 1334 calculated ft at 11.2 seconds = 1181 ft in 7.9 seconds when starting from 60 mph.

Regardless, F40LM was there.. 1181 ft in 7.92 seconds. His F40 is costantly in the Enzo's region!

 

Yes his F40 is very fast. Many thanks to F40 LeMans for proving that. Now we just need a photo of his car with the Racelogic box inside!

 

Yes I forgot to post a picture with the Performance Box fitted in the car. Tomorrow I will post it.. I'm out for the weekend at the moment.

I will send some other runs in future, now that I own the box. I'm sure the car should be faster. Warm temperature and lower octane gas than required are not ideal for engine combustion to get the best power possible out of the car.

 

Many thanks to you too, Bill. For opened this thread few years ago. I think the early non cat F40 need to be considered as it is. Amazing for a 26 years old car.

 

Thanks for posting! I think many were looking forward to you posting the data for your F40. This device is wonderful to allow us to compare our cars over large distances. It's great to resurrect these tests 26 years later! I look forward to more postings with different conditions.

 

Yes it's a great game! However it is more accurate to compare looking to accumulated distance than 60-130 figures. The F40 with high 7 seconds can match on the distance the Enzo with low 7... this is because of their different gearing.

 

Agreed, although some people may care how long it takes to go from 60 to 130 regardless of the distance. But if we're racing virtually, distance is the parameter to use.

 

Right! This is because Enzo and early F40 has different gearing. The 4th gear in the Enzo help the car to achieve 130 faster, but the longer 2nd and 3rd in the F40 allow quickly to accumulate road. Looking at the performance average in the Enzo, it can achieve 130 quicker than a Euro F40 but the latter has prior accumulated so much asphalt that it remain at the side of the Enzo.
This is what happened at Mugello straight for a couple of runs when starting from low speed. I was at his side. The Enzo seemed to react every gear, but its gears always ended before mine, situation was "elastic" and I remained costantly at his side up to 150 mph.
Easiest thing happened vs a black CGT on highway during a supercar meeting many years ago. I was behind the Porsche. Starting from low speed I always gained meters during the pair of acceleration runs we did. One run I was behind the car but at the side and I was able to run alongside the Porsche.
All this to say that I was sure what I was saying. Anyway, Performance Box has really been helpful, because I know this car was fast, but I know how really is fast now (to better compare with VBox owners and magazines data as well). Thanks for the advice.

Have you never tried the "power mode" in your Performance Box? Is that mode enough accurate? It would be interesting to see, setting right weight parameters, how our devices will say about our F40 engine power... It could be the only way to "estimate" our difference in power.

 

I haven't tried it because I'm not sure what I'd do with the results. It's just another number derived from the time and distance measurements. I think it has more meaning to "race" the cars the way we are now.

 

I think there are about 40 horses of difference from the specs. Their gearing differs by 6.3% = 2.9/2.727 and it is faster the one fitted with the longer ratio.

 

Bill,

Can you the me the time your car did from 95,6 to 122,5 mph in the 60-130 mph 8.6s run? Please. I would like to compare it with Carmack times in his US F40.

 

Not exactly relevant but I thought it might be interesting anyhow.

I've attached a vbox graph of my Twin Turbo Lamborghini Gallardo on 93 octane complete street car on 20" wheels here.

60mph-130mph was 4.02 seconds in FL 80 degree weather. On race gas it still has a lot more left in it. It blows my mind that my car is so much faster than a Veyron with an engine much larger and 4 turbos!
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wow, that is absolutely incredible! Have you had any problems with the car? How often do you accelerate like this? Just curious on the reliability with such large boost.

 

Sure, 3.99 sec...
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Thanks! He did 4.03 sec at Texas dragstrip the April 2, 1998, and his F40 was dynoed 393 RWHP on Dynojet the 12 December, 1997. Your engine is there.. Carmack's F50 did 387 RWHP tested on the same dyno. The 458 Italia shows 450's figures there. It seems the US F40 overstated the 513 hp F50 in power and my engine to be closer to 550 hp.

 

F40 LeMans, you have a 540 hp engine.