Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

lafe 60-100 as fast as Enzo @ nardò

 

Any chance we can see another "customer" owned LAFA run 0-300KPH? Pls

 

Would really love to know as well. 2 secs look like an age to me. I would be incredibly surprised if it is what it is. Any Vmax owners perhaps timed any of their runs?

Edit: This is certainly not accurate, its from Vmax some guy tried to time it and he even stitched the part after 155 mph. But seeing the video, even in this certainly not accurate form and even taking into account just the sprint to 155 mph, I cant help but feel that this LaF on that day was certainly faster than SCD numbers. Hell I will add 2 full seconds on what that Youtube video time shows and that LaF would still be 2+ secs faster than the SCD test...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZROYOq8Y3w

Does the runway used in Vmax involves any inclination that could perhaps explain the numbers?

In any case, like I said, 918 is the faster car by what we have here. But LaF numbers are all over the place and I am really talking about customer car tests here.

 

Persian?! ahah come one man, Persia doesn't exist anymore just like Babylonia. By Persian I think you mean Iraqi or Iranian right?!

 

Not very scientific tests, but here are few I've found on the net

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZROYOq8Y3w
it reaches to 186mph (300kmh) in 17 sec.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iOWDuJwdLI
0-100kmh in 3.0sec
0-200kmh in 7.1sec

 

The SCD times to 189mph, are in keeping with all the others occasion's that I have run along side a P1 and Lafa at the same place....don't forget that you need to take off around 1.5 to 2 secs for the 2% incline at 190, so they seem correct to me.

Why can you not accept that customer cars may not be as fast as the Factory ones, not the 1st time is it?

Also we are talking actual true times, not going off some speedo reading.

At the end of the day at that place on that day with 3 customer cars, just like we can all purchase, they are the times......

 

I do not think anyone has ever suggested that the times in SCD test are not correct or accurate based on that day/car/conditions combination.

Those were the times. Yes. We believe them. There is no reason to respond as if people dont accept these numbers.

Speculation is however quite legitimate because other customer cars have been tested and they tell quite a different story. I dont know why that sounds so strange to you.

These are complex machines as you very well know, there are a lot of factors that could affect the result. And by that I dont mean any short of manipulation to favor one specific car over the other.

LaF on that day and in these conditions seemed quite slower than almost all the other tests that we have seen. 22 secs for 0-300 certainly is way past the factory claimed 15 secs. I can accept that factory numbers are in ideal conditions and i'll even accept some kind of "special tinkering", but hell, you cant advertise your product with an astonishing 7 secs difference... you say 1-2 secs are due to inclination, still 5 secs off your claimed performance is insane. Whether we are talking about a factory car or not. Other Ferraris' performance, certainly aint that insanely off the mark from claimed factory numbers.

So how come this LaF manages to be 5-7 secs slower than what its performance sheet claims, is certainly a legitimate reason to speculate.

 

For these reasons some of us say that that particular LF was a bit off. As fast as the 13 year old Enzo from 60 to 100 mph? Come on!!!

 

Haha. When they're americanized they're called persian

 

Man, there is nothing wrong with the cars. Just look at their trap speeds and 300 times. They just aren't launching well and having the best of traction at lower speeds. So what if in better conditions a Speciale launches in 3-3.4s? A Speciale doesn't even come close to the LF in those other speed intervals.

The P1 and LF just didn't launch great there for whatever reason. That's really all there is to it.

 

60-100 mph:

LF: 2.8s
P1: 2.7s
918: 2.67
Enzo: 3.2 (according to a quick search on Google for these below)
12C: 2.9
Veyron: 3


What's the problem? You guys overestimate just how quick these cars are. There isn't a massive difference between 650hp and 900hp when you're talking about such low speeds and launch control.

 

Exactly, even the 918s 300KPH times are off, when you throw in the 2secs for the 2% incline its about right...

Once again, all 3 cars had recently been checked over......

 

What's that Old saying about Those Who Ignore History Are Doomed To Repeat It!?

Sheesh!

 

Well if the conditions were so bad that resulted in 7 secs off the claimed factory performance numbers (and yes as I said in my previous post I do accept fluctuations to these numbers, just not the kind of 7 secs) then this test sounds pretty insignificant in most ways...

On the other hand though, Apollo has claimed (and I have no reason not to believe his words) that the surface was among the stickiest he has ever seen there.

So, once again, we keep contradicting each other.

I personally dont care much about the end result, all cars are fantastic and 918 looks to be the one to come first in most tests, certainly the winner among the 3.

I am just here for the sake of debate.

 

R&T measured the 60-100 at 2.3s for the LF. Half a second (2.8-2.3) might sound insignificant, but in reality it is a whole 22% more! So unless that LF was still spinning its tyres all the way to 100, it is considerably slower than other LFs tested.

 

Sounds normal to me.

 

I rest my case!

I still don't see what the Brits have to do with it? How is it specifically a 'British' bias? Is it simply because there were people from the UK present?
The Chris Harris test was held in Portimao. Maybe the Portuguese government is behind it, too?

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh48FhOAb50[/ame]

 

Car and Driver review and numbers
Ferrari LaFerrari Hypercar TESTED! ? Review ? Car and Driver

 

R&T analysis of the Hypercar tests
We Still Don't Really Know Which Hypercar Is Fastest on Track

 

Thanks, those were my very same arguments. At any rate, I thought the Chris Harris "test" was brilliant, in spite of niggling limitations*.

*...he could have had all 3 drivers each record their best times for each of the 3 cars each driver starting on separate sets of fresh tires but that would have been very expensive.

 

This should have been the right procedure, the right way to compare them, but as you said, quite expensive!

 

And finally the conclusion is good: take all of them!

 

Ahah that's even worse but I understand that they are not to proud to say that are Iraqi or Iranian specially in the U.S. Still its is a bit silly its like a Swedish saying hes a Viking.

Migration officer at the airport :

Sir whats your name?

Ragnar Lothbrok

Nationality?

Viking!

Reason for your visit?

Raiding and pillaging!

Welcome to the U.S Mr. Lothbrok

 

Viking, hilarious!