Whats with Ferrari and bogus HP numbers?

I didn't want to bring anything up although it would be justified to do so but in actuality, I think those who doubted the OP or took an opportunity to prematurely rip on him most likely regret that decision. If not, that's fine too. Let's move on

 

Ferrari held the max top speed in quite a few decades 60's Daytona 174,70's BB 175, 80's F40 202.

They seem to have lost that ability since then,maybe they don't care,or maybe they just can't do it?Maybe a hyper car towards the end of the 10's?

 

That is a commonly used number but it is pretty much pulled out of thin air with current cars. To make matters worse the efficiency of the drivetrain will change with vehicle speed, engine speed, and current power. If the drivetrain was constantly eating up 15% of a 500 hp vehicle it would melt pretty quickly. Even assuming more realistic average numbers temperature changes in the drivetrain will influence efficiency.

 

Well put and it's sad when supposildy an f1 at its DNA inspired brand doesn't even make great track cars. Fact is most Ferrari customers don't really track their cars anway, so you can't blame Ferrari for making luxury street performance cars.

 

Right on. I'll look into it further but I'm sure someone around here has a better number.

Btw, if you think of drivetrain losses in reverse, then you can get an idea of how high they actually are. Think about pushing a stalled vehicle in first gear. Would that be a good analogy?

Edit:
IDK the algorithm behind this calculator

http://www.mk5cortinaestate.co.uk/calculator4.php

 

Yeah.

One reason why manufacturers stick with crack power is that it is the only place that gives you a simple number for each rpm point.

If manufacturers were to give wheel power then that had to specify at least which gear the car is in, they would have to have a standard temperature for all the components. And it would unrealistically disadvantage 4wd vehicles, and on top of that they would have to give all these numbers for different values of front-rear power distribution.

I would really like to have those numbers, too. I think the torque curve at the crank and one power curve at the wheels should be standard spec published for all vehicles, by the manufacturer so that you know the numbers do match somewhat.

Most dyno numbers I have to consider somewhat problematic anyway.

• In a turbo car with intercooler you really need proper airflow to get a realistic power reading. If the dyno just has some lameass fan in front of it the intercooling does not run at realistic levels and the power reading comes up short.
• In a naturally aspirated car you need at least air density (or altitude) of the measurement. And airflow can matter, too, because a high power engine sucking lots of air can reduce air pressure around the intake significantly. Compare that to the air pressure you can feel with your hand when sticking it out the window at high speed.

I just saw a dyno setup that somebody made by putting a wind tunnel fan in front. They don't do aerodynamics measurements, it's just to have proper airflow. Thumbs up.

 

So if dyno tests are not standardized and each OEM would optimize their own set up to achieve the best "marketable" results, then a 5-6 % margin of error does not seem so much.

 

What a thread. Seems like 'good2go' still needs to donate $500 to a children's charity in MN. If nothing else it brought light of these types of events to some members and I plan to run the next 1/2 mile event in GA. Not sure what I'll run, but more than likely my tuned s600 first, then maybe the 360. If they allow bikes I'd like to take my k1300s as well.

 

Yea ...
25 pages and 483 posts, glad my brain said "don't even think about it"

 

Maybe they settled things privately ..... or not.

 

I'm happy to donate money to a charity MN. You must have more information than I do. Did 04g produce proof to you that he owned a Ferrari 458? I have kept contact with the person that was asked to moderate this ridicules transaction. I have made it clear to him I would be happy to donate money, and I would be happy to apologize. No proof has been sent to him. I sure don't care. I have not pushed the topic at all. So either 04g does not care or its not worth his time. Bottom-line I did not attack 04g relentlessly.

If 04g thinks I was attacking him, I apologize for my posts.

I have made my point in this thread, speed is not a way to measure HP. Which has been ignored, which is fine.

Good luck racing your cars/cycle in GA.

 

Can you clarify this point?

 

It's raining. The ground is wet. The ground is wet. It's raining. This is bad logic.

Car A has HP of 650. Car B has HP 740. Car A faster than car B. Car be must be overstating HP. It's bad logic.

I agree car A is faster. But you cannot conclude car B is lying about HP.

There is a formula for HP. Speed is not part of the formula.

Why does car A get more speed out of 650 HP then car B with 740 HP. There are a lot of reasons.

I think the conversation has been interesting. People can come to any conclusion they want.

Why can it go from 0 to 60 in 'x' seconds, but it takes longer to go from 60 to 120? Same HP. Rolling resistance and air are the biggest resistance.

So maybe car A has less rolling resistance, and less wind drag than car B. Maybe car A gets to peak performance faster.

It really does not matter. But if the ground is wet, we cannot conclude its raining.

 

I agree with good2go here as far as *his* wager is concerned. My final parameters were much more lenient. The stipulations of my wager were also more stringent at the start, but at a certain point, I just wanted to move on. Good2Go was very clear on the requirements of his wager. Proof of ownership still has not technically been fulfilled for the 458. So while I am satisfied with the evidence, good2go has kept his word as well as no title or bill of sale ever presented.

Why continue to entertain this 'male member measurement contest' some will ask? I believe the root is many folks (I must admit myself in this group) find it hard to fathom the tone of the criticism from an actual owner. The challenges seemed to many as more in-line with a (fill in your brand here) Fanboi. It's rare to see somebody so vehemently insult something they own and love themselves. To go as far as say Ferrari is all about "B.S. marketing" while still loving and buying them was just unique and uncharacteristic.

I think people just want to know if the questions are made from a position of good faith and sincerity.

These factors threw me and many off.

I would argue nine out ten times it *is* non-owners taking such positions from a position of trolling which made this thread all the more educational to me. In the end I believe 04g's claims.

Be well all.

 

Does this also happen on a dyno? If so, then the explanation may very well be that peak torque can NOT be hit in higher gears (60-120) as easy as it can at lower gears due to the resistance to turning on the engine from the higher gear ratios.

In the explanation above, the cars inertia and wind resistance play no role during the cars acceleration.

As I'm typing this I trying to think how a dyno actually operates so I need someone's expertise answering the following questions:

Is there a constant resistance applied to the tyres during the dyno test?
If not, when is the resistance (dyno brake) at the tyres applied?

 

Depends on the Dyno. Inertia dynos are simply big ass drums that get spun up by the vehicles wheels. Now one would think it's a simple calc' to get HP as we know the mass of the drum and we can measure the acceleration rate of it as well, but there are lots of little fiddly bits that get in the way in the real world and some 'factors' get tossed into the equation.
Eddy current dynos use an external force and measure the force feedback. Those are the simple explanations.

However most all dynomometers all suffer one very big issue, lack of actual real world air resistance. BMW for example has a wind tunnel for their tuning, if you try and dyno test a new model it won't match factory spec, the front sensors will not read the proper air pressure and detune the engine, thermal exchange from the air will also be lacking and once again the ECU will throttle back the tune to keep the engine from damage.

Dyno numbers either on a engine dyno or chassis dyno are purely masturbatory and pointless for just about anything these days. Vehicles are so highly tuned with integration into external sensor data that on-road test-track tuning is what needs to be done.

 

That doesn't explain why you think that speed will not tell one the accurate HP of a vehicle. I honestly do not care one bit what a dyno sheet says, trap speed is going to be the most accurate measure of a vehicles power. The engine alone can not race down the road, it needs a gearbox, a chassis a driver etc... all culminating into a vehicle. Now if you want to parse down why vehicle A is faster then vehicle B, that's a different thing. Maybe this is a semantics thing, but vehicle power is not the same as engine power. The engine may be able to produce 'X' amount of power when tested all by itself, drop it into the chassis, add a gearbox and suddenly it's down to 'X' minus (losses) power.
Engine HP = "X"
Vehicle HP = "X - (losses)"
The trap speed of a vehicle will get one the vehicle HP, what that engine&chassis combination is capable of.

Oh and quibbley bit,

HP=(FxD)/dt

Speed=d/dt

Yeah, speed is in fact part of the HP equation.

 

You lost me.

So if a vehicle can go 1/2 mile and hits a speed a 165. What is the vehicles HP?

 

It's getting all technical.

Here is the real world:

I have a 740 HP car. Outside of a hyper car if I need to show an exhibition of speed then I'm fully expecting to come out on top.

Canyon run - I better be able to pass an uncooperative mclaren, huracan, aventador.

Shift sector - I should be able to trap higher then the above mentioned cars

Rally - I want to make sure that I can pull on other cars and have a big smile on my face while I do so.

Unfortunately - I cannot do the above mentioned things.

 

speed = distant over time.

What is your HP formula?

When Ferrari claims 740 HP are they stating Engine HP or something else? I have assumed they are stating engine HP. I could easily be wrong.

I really don't care but your "Oh and quibble bit", just seem to come across negatively. I don't know what F equals, D equals, or DT in your formula.

I sure don't know where your two formulas come together. But if you really want to explain it I'm willing to try and learn.

ADDED: FYI - F12 measures SAE NET

 

I think paulchua was very gracious in accepting the partial proof provided. There was no definitive proof of ownership of the 458 nor the Bentley Continental. As a matter of fact, not even enough proof was provided to join the FChat Owners Forum!

 

Not sure if this is meant to be a little humorous or if you are pissed. I would not expect a car with the highest HP engine to be the fastest vehicle.

I do wish I owned a Ferrari F12.

 

The thread distilled

 

I think the latter, Agreed that more HP definitely does not equate to more speed as a rule. I can understand though that based on he and friends' actual experience, the F12 doesn't seem to match the competition.

Exoticcarchaser, do you plan to acquire a TDF? Perhaps they 'ironed' out some of the real life criticisms in the F12 you and other owners mentioned?

Now *THAT* would be fascinating to me!!!!

I wish you both well.

 

Humorous.

It didn't make me question the horsepower of the f12. I just wondered why it wasn't faster then the other cars. I probably know about 11 other f12 owners (most of them own multiple exotic cars). They didn't necessarily buy it for it's speed performance or track ability. It was definitely a discussion between a few of us when we get together.