Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

Hi, see here. Ruler and calculator.

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/143766600-post16282.html

 

not got a clue, but I do have it in writing that there is 0 % diff in engine power if the batts are at 20% or 90%...so the lap time will the same lap after lap, all things being equal
Would like to see this telemetry that shows % loss in Bhp in relation to batt loss.....

 

I believe Treynor himself clearly explained why there is a difference in 918 speed, randy was driving one hot lap, than 1-2 recharging laps....

 

And I want to see Treynor's answers of two simple questions regarding these "data".

 

exactly nothing to do with bhp drop off, also my understandings is that there was some tyre pressure adjustment also.....

Also you don't use HL for recharging....this Kids whole case is built around that the 918 loses bhp, in the there is batt drop off, this is simple BS....

 

Small correction.

 

No, no, no! Do not twist facts!

P1 vs 918 - Page 56 - McLaren Life

The driver resorted to running 2 recharging laps between hot laps afterwards as a result of not being able to do 2 hot laps in a row because of charge issues.

Jeez. The telemetry is right there staring you in the face. The P1 has a 6mph variance in cornering speed, but only a 1mph variance in peak speed on the straights. The 918 has a 1mph variance in cornering speed but a 4mph variance in peak speed on the straights. Do you really need to call on my brother Sherlock to help you figure this puzzle out?
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Now Sherlock,

After all day of calculating, please explain how all the fuss about depleting battery of the 918 equals to just 4mph loss on the straights? Just for info these are BOTH electric motors out!

You are going into your own trap, but this was expected.

 

I will just leave this here:


Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

his taking brown stuff, I have it writing from the factory, its complete xxite that there is a drop of in engine power in relation to batt loss,.....

I will forward you the email later......

 

I thought I posted this before here. Anyway, will leave this attachment here.

http://i.imgur.com/AfLmXLf.jpg
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

You do realise that 4mph corresponds to a sizeable difference in hp.

Relationship Between Horsepower Output And Race Performance - Hot Rod

E.g. at 3900lb for a quarter mile.

[(135mph/234)^3] x 3900lb = 749hp

[(131mph/234)^3] x 3900lb = 684hp

Now the distances we're talking about are over less than a quarter mile and slower speeds mean you can brake later on a track, so that mitigates it somewhat, so the HP difference is even higher for 4mph difference in Vmax.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Wow
I wanted this from Treynor, but...

 

Where's this from?

If that was correct, then the difference would be way more than 0.8s.

What you've done is overlay a graph scaled 0-72-144mph onto a graph scaled 0-77-154mph without changing the scale. This may work in Zimbabwe with election results, but sadly it doesn't work here.

That's m'boy, believe anything, question nothing.

 

As stated, but you forgot... it was for most of the day

 

No, see above, he's overlaid without taking into account scaling and the different axis. Note peaks are in same position on graph scaled to 144mph as the one scaled to 154mph for the 918. I.e. it's total bollox.

This is exactly why we stripped him of his Knighthood.

 

He has taken into account different scales, but also not sure how accurate.
That is why I want this from Treynor, but he is silent. When you say A, have to be ready for B...

Nevertheless, how the 918 with only 600+ hp on the third lap is only 4mph slower then 900+ aero monster? Haha

 

No, he hasn't. All the peaks are at exactly the same distance from 154mph as they were form 144mph.

What he needs to do is divide the Y-axis values on the 918 graph by 1.0694 before overlaying. Otherwise he's just saying 72mph = 77mph and 144mph = 154mph.

 

You have email....you see why something does not add up here.....

 

having 15 mins of zimbabvean state time/dollars:

I cut out the two 602 pixels height images of original picture one for p1 the other for 918.
next, the graphs are not the same scale on Y coordinate. one goes from 0 to 144 the other 0 154. No, problem, just scale the bigger one vertically by factor of 154/144. Leaving X scale as is. Now, two graphs are same scale 0 to 154 but one picture is a tad bigger in height. Smaller by following pixel count: 602px-602px*(154/144). And here you scale the smaller pic so that its final height is 602px, keeping the proportions fixed. Now, scale on X axis, so that the vertical lines are same pixel count apart on both layers. Overlay, sync the corners(shift the pic right or left), taking cues from vertical lines. And you get pretty accurate picture, not far from reality. Except for some interpolations. But that does not matter so much.

So, one linear transformation along the Y axis, scaling to same size(another linear transformation along two axes), another linear transformation with following shifting and overlaying.

That is it.

The only assumption here is that the time, the X axis, is same time duration between vertical lines in traynor's pic for both graphs. If you think about it, it is probably the same duration as sw packages plot the data that they get - raw numbers, row for row, and most of the time they use same measuring device that is clocked and read out at the same frequency between each measurement.

Also, braking and acceleration points show that they are pretty close. So, looks like legit overlay


Of course, it shows only half a lap of laguna seca, with most technical sections in it, so p1 might gain a few jiffies it lost in t4-t8.


See, I can do some math. Not only rig elections.

 

now that Thought about it, I should have scaled it down not up so the above is incorrect lol.

 

If you resize the 918 graph vertically from 100% to 93.5%, that should do it.

 

This is the best I could manage in Paint. Top peaks P1, bottom lines 918. Follow the peaks down to the troughs. Difficult to align because the X-axis scaling is different too. Wouldn't pay too much attention to the time axis, it's probably out. I think the P1 graph needs stretching in X-direction.

P1 - higher peaks but lower troughs in T5 and T7-8. Slightly higher in T6.

Scale is 0-72-77-144-154mph.
Image Unavailable, Please Login