Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

lieven, stop changing the rules all the time

918 sets a record laptime in a magazine non-comparison:
"it wasn't on the same day and condition so it's invalid"

P1 sets a lap record at a track:
"faster than the 918 on a different day and condition but it's still valid"

sometimes you just avoid direct comparison all together in order to pull numbers out of thin air (SV vs 675lt)

 

Looking at your car collection you seem to be a real expert! Especially the S550 must give you a high everyday. And stop making comments about cars you don't own and have never driven before.

This whole discussion over the last days is just totally stupid and ignorant. And leave me out of this. It is just pathetic.

 

The sarcasm didn't come through? I figured my four posts in a row on the matter made it pretty apparent.

Oh and I do like my s550 ��

 

There are shortcomings when it comes to text based exchange. I did pick up on your sarcasm, but I can see how someone else might not.

 

Scuderia,
Lieven isn't another troll; he is THE only troll-just new account. Lieven, Mycroft, Lmao, sroser, WBarnes...��

 

LOL, 4mph dude, 4mph in peak speed on straights less than a quarter mile long is not a small difference.

So where did the acceleration/power difference come from then? Efficiency savings? Isn't that what politicians always say when they don't want to tell you that they're going to raise taxes?

Increased electric power utilisation = increased battery discharge rate, hence shorter battery life. This is 1+1 stuff. The 918 that lapped Laguna is not the same 918 that lapped the Nordschleife, it has a higher battery discharge rate in HL mode and hence was faster over 2 minute stretches.

 

I never said any times were invalid. At worst all I've done is question whether the Grand Tour laps were really from a standing start, or whether he really drifted the P1 around 2 bends in the middle of a hot lap for that matter. The evidence is a little thin to say the least.

Unfortunately these indirect comparisons are very telling. Two seconds faster on 7 minute lap than LP750-4. Second slower than Huracan on Balocco (2:40 lap). These inconsistencies need explaining.

 

Here you go Lieven. A couple of links to the Bugatti lap times of the 918 and Radical and Lambo SV. We breathlessly await your expert analysis of why the 918 sucks so much, and/or how horrible the driver is.

VIDEO RECORD DU TOUR PORSCHE 918 SPYDER AU MANS

PERFORMANCES RADICAL RXC TURBO 500 EN VIDEO

SUPERTEST SPORT AUTO : LAMBORGHINI AVENTADOR SV (2016) SUR LE CIRCUIT DU MANS

 

5 Second difference. I don't know how lambo pulled that N'Ring time off.

 

It is about Viper ACR vs (theoretically) 488GTB, but if someone likes such debates - here it is, by Engineering Explained:
The science behind the record-breaking Dodge Viper ACR

 

Your hypothesis is non sequitur. Your conclusion is derived from two videos which are not controlled studies with random variables contributing differently in each video. For a comparative analysis, each car would need to be tested side by side under the same variables. Furthermore, you have not submitted any evidence from Porsche or any other credible authority to DOCUMENT a change in the Electric Programming for the 918. So with questionable data and lack of verification, the assertions are baseless.

 

You are pathetic. The gains seen on customer cars is not from increased discharge rate, but rather further optimized e-motor performance. Also, the refined systems integration allowed the battery discharging to find even more efficiency. The car actually got faster without any appreciable decrease in battery life due to refined algorithms.

 

such an individual is severely lacking in life, thus necessitating an odd cyclical expenditure of time and energy on a car forum on the intuhnet, in order to 'prove' that he is correct - in that 918 is a crappy machine.

 

how did you miss the sarcasm?

 

Driver needs to drive the Radical faster. If it can beat moto GP bikes on Silverstone GP and get within 20s of F1 cars on Barcelona Catalunya, it can certainly destroy a 918 if driven properly. Again, you clearly don't understand how fast the RXCs are. Jeez dude, here's a non-pro customer in less powerful RXC Turbo (460ps) with a passenger equalling the 918's Auto Zeitung time on Hockenheim GP.

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

Don't make me laugh.

 

Competent driver with more time to familiarise themselves with the car. There's no way an SV should be 5s behind a 918. 2s maybe, 5s no way.

It's important to apply a certain amount of quality control when looking at times, which is something Westview doesn't understand. A 918 beating a Radical RXC 500 at Le Mans Bugatti is like a BMW 135i beating a 675LT at Sonoma. Sure it happened, but one car was being driven far closer to its limit.

Another case in point, Sport Auto got 1:09 on Hockenheim Short with the SV, Auto Zeitung got 1:07.8. Sport Auto ran 1:08.3 with the 488 first time out and 1:07.0 the second time. Some magazine drivers just aren't consistent.

 

Aero does not explain why it could pull 1.6g on 40mph hairpins at Laguna. I'm afraid the real explanation is that it has tyres with an outer layer that have a UTQG treadwear rating of 20. The MkIV ACR had a similar aero package and was 5.3s slower on Cups. Now, a few suspension teaks and a little extra hp gives you a second at best. So explain where the other 4.3s came from.

Laguna Seca (post 1988) lap times - FastestLaps.com

 

Sure, it was the weather than gave it an extra 4mph on straights. There was an invisible hurricane during the 918vsP1 test that was altering directions so that it was pointing down every straight which allowed the 918 to lap 1.1s faster.

The 918 with its e-motor/battery depletion rate calibrated for the N'ring lap ran 1:30.97 on Laguna. A 918 with a much quicker battery depletion rate that couldn't run a 6:57 N'ring lap lapped Laguna in 1:29.89.

 

Sure and I'm going to improve public services and reduce the deficit with efficiency improvements, said the politician.

One guy goes with weather as the explanation and another goes with efficiency improvements.

Assuming this to be true, explain why it was slower than a Huracan on Balocco.

Balocco lap times - FastestLaps.com

 

That's your rebuttal? Good Lord.

 

I don't think any sane person really believes a 918 is faster than a Radical RXC 500. It doesn't even require a rebuttal. The RXC 500's exploits elsewhere are more than enough evidence.

1. Slower RXC V8 Spyder beats Moto GP bikes on Silverstone GP.

2. 500R just 20s slower than F1 cars on Barcelona Catalunya.

3. Non-pro customer beats Koenigsegg One on Spa through traffic with slower V8 version (450hp).

4. Slow RXC Turbo driven by non-pro with passenger beats Auto Zeitung's 918 time on Hockenheim GP.

Jeez, the fact I even need to argue this point with somebody in ridiculous. Next somebody will claim a Ferrari California is faster than a 918, in fact even that would be more sensible than claiming a 918 is faster than an RXC 500.

LOL, Radical SR3 RS with 210hp and 1.3L engine makes 2:13 on COTA:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjRiaWKjR6E

But 918 is faster than 3.5L RXC 500 with 530hp.

918 whooped by 2s on a 1 minute lap, with more time to come.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnefvOnI4M

 

Again your conclusions have no fundamental or supporting basis. Submitting a random video with unspecified variables as evidence for a statement about technological parameters ( ie. electrical power consumption) is ridiculous especially when that parameter is not even being specifically isolated in the test situation. Being a person that has to read research and understand the limitations of a study, I really can not derive a supportable conclusion in anything you have presented. Your position is essentially that of "one throwing mud on the wall and seeing what sticks".

 

The fundamental basis is that the 918 is 4 mph faster on every single straight in the second test. This represents a power hike and that obviously comes at a cost.

And this is probably why the battery charge % is omitted from the dash display in the second test, because that would have been a smoking gun. See just above centre console.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vg1fY1fVYNk

This time it's vanished.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fnTZKvX5jg&t=522s

If there are boot prints in the snow, whilst it could have been a dog walking on its hind legs wearing boots, it probably isn't.

 

Considering your arguments (your opinions) and the facts you site (random YouTube videos) I'd expect such an answer. You disregard or discredit any post, despite the evidence they offer, ie video/vbox/real owner testimony, because it doesn't fit the narrative you've laid out for this situation. The legal term for this is insane delusion. It applies when a person holds onto a false concept of reality against all reason or evidence to the contrary. I'd imagine this type of behavior applies to other parts of your life as well.

 

Ya I was pretty surprised when I read his response, I didn't think I could have made it any more sarcastic. Oh well.