Ferrari LaFerrari vs Mclaren P1 vs Porsche 918

The F1 was tested in the earlier track configuration, like in 1988.

All the other points are explained above

I'm the first to say that g force are not speed corners, but for the same reason the map speed you posted are not prove nothing that funny speeds similar as the Radical.

 

Great summary Westview. Nailed all major points except for the crying that it is all so unfair.

 

Then the map must probably be wrong like they had with virginia track configuration in road and track here
Watch the 2015 Corvette Z06 Absolutely Destroy VIR ?*News ?*Car and Driver | Car and Driver Blog

Because in 1994 chicanes were added and it was blocked by tires,also I have read that article about the date which was in 1994.I have official source as proof and also had posted videos from 1994 to prove the configuration.See my previous posts.Also the corner before chicane can't be taken at 120kph in 1993 configuration,it was more like 110kph from the videos.

It isn't like there can't be an error crept in magazine like this article on F1 LM if you read it carefully at paragraph 13.
McLarenF1 LM: King Of The Super Cars - German Car - Motor Trend Magazine

I think I told about it SC.net.That being said Japanese being biased against japanese cars doesn't apply to European cars and fact that F1 is faster than F50 at tsukuba is a fact,it is faster than 430 Scuderia in similar conditions and similar amount of laps is also a fact.Also I can also claim that F1 wasn't pushed as hard if you claim other cars weren't pushed hard.And then the drivers are also JGTC drivers,so you can't tell that they are bad drivers.

Else how will F1 (32.3s vs 33.65) be faster in second sector.(from curva VIP to orelha) if it is too slow in corners.I have read the issue of ZR1 lap time also,time was done by Tiago.And also I am not trying to defend F1 as I am just telling what I think is correct.And I also showed that Estoril has lesser grip than other track based on GT3 laps.

Now coming to Bedford lap,if you see the video carefully he didn't maintain racing line at chicanes and lost some time drifting also F1 was on same tires as Enzo.And now about alignment,ride height you might visit supercar net forum in one of the tuned F40 threads.We will discuss it there as now we are only discussing about Estoril lap time.If you think F1 is slow in corners then that is your thinking not a fact just your opinion like mine for we haven't driven F1 ourselves.

[[I'm the first to say that g force are not speed corners, but for the same reason the map speed you posted are not prove nothing that funny speeds similar as the Radical. ]]
Well I agree with you on that one but just because a car pulls more lateral g's doesn't mean it is faster in corner as 650S pulling lesser lateral g was able to lap Spa almost as quick as Agera one and Agera One is only 2s faster than Nissan GTR at suzuka inspite of much higher lateral g.

 

you don't need to run slicks on a 458 challange, but even if you don't run it with slick it will NEVER be comparable with the 458 speciale because they're too different

just cough up an interview or an article from its launch that states that the trofeo Rs were an option

 

Except he didn't really, just sparing himself from reprisal, why would you only show the lap on worn tyres? The video is what it is, no better or worse than any other same driver comparison.

 

Well if Ferrari wish to make a road legal version, let them.

I don't need to, it's been stated officially by McLaren. It was stated on Top Gear that Trofeo Rs are options. I don't see anyone addressing the same grievance when Lamborghini and Audi use them on the Huracan and R8.

 

it would be nice if you could provide links

the AMG GTR uses Cup 2s stickier than regular Cup 2s, they even stated so themselves

listen to what i said "it is not as simple as 1+1=2 but it will still have compromises", so it is still a sticky tyre but because the N0 tyres have to be made as an eco-performance tyre that means they would have a compromise on grip, engineering explained made a video on rubber during the shell eco marathon.

 

Sure, and neither was the Nissan GTR that whooped the 911 Turbo. Same old Porsche. Speaking of "roof tops", nothing about the fixed roof on the 918. The 918 was the only car provably not stock during its 'ring lap.

BTW, the Huracan SL has already beaten that time and the AMG GTR beat the 918's time with Sport Auto.

 

Sure you did.

 

He is cleaning now all the poo from yesterday, because his “friends” from McLife let him know a little detail - the video was shot at 44Hz and played at 52Hz, haha

So, once again, he is running in front of the wind…

 

P1 has same tub and chassis as the P1 GTR is what I said.

You're trying to argue that a 875kg LMP1 is based on the same car as a 1680kg 918, even though it looks nothing like it. Whereas I'm saying that a car ~100kg lighter than a P1, and looks almost exactly like it, is based on a P1. Only in your world are they equivalents.

 

I still tend to believe the configuration was the "earlier" because of the short time of the segment between the corners, like the map in the article is showing. There is just 5.5 seconds between both apex. The chicane configuration is more than 175 meters between both apex, and that explain an impossible sector average of over 115 kph because of the lower speed on the chicane.

Because in my opinion the track configuration was the older, then this does explain my early point that the earlier track seemed to be longher but faster than today, as explained by qualifyng lap times in 1988 made by a touring BMW M3 that did similar speed average than a Ferrari 360 NGT in 2003.

We never discuss the alignment point. Was you who posted a conclusion never mentioning something about that alignment, etc.

 

Doesn't change the fact that the P1 was faster on that day.

At least it's a full unedited video, start to finish, without the modern equivalent of the 3 stooges talking in between.

The corrected times are 1:34.25 (P1) and 1:35.5 (918), both 2up.

 

The only clear facts from that amateur video are:

First, you made a clown from yourself, again…

Second, two friends are having fun on a track day…

And third, this video proves once again something, which you refuse to accept – 918 pulls so hard out of the corners that the P1 has to catch up all the time and it’s difficult to see which color is the 918 in several occasions…

But, nevertheless… move on with the free show here… 

 

+1

and he's so delusional that whenever we prove that the P1 LM is an invalid comparison he keeps stating that it is valid, he's in complete denial that he's P1 lost

 

Edo competition - that's the name I could not come up with

So the P1 LM is not crap as a road car then? Just asking, I obviously have no first hand knowledge (seems many people on this thread have an abundance of that, so it does make fascinating reading ...)

 

Actually nope,the time between segment of corners for F1 from orehla to end ie from(32.3-50.5 time) comes to be 18.2 if you happen to find the video of 991 GT3 test by Autofoco it comes at about 17s.If you consider the exit from the chicane from the video it does it in about 5s while if there was no chicane after 120kph corner how can it take around 5.5 seconds to reach the the exit when 991 with lesser speed can do the same or faster with about 50kph.

I also had done some lap times in AC with RUF CTR,it doesn't take 5s to do the same even with 100kph.

Also if you compare the unchanged section time of 2nd sector which doesn't include the chicane part,F1(from 0-32.3 in the map) was around 1s faster than ZR1.Anyway if the configuration was without a chicane then it will be lapping something like 4s faster from orehla to 50.5s place than 991 GT3 ZR1,which it did not.When chicane was added in the circuit,it slowed F1 laps by 9s.And also if you try to make map from the graph there should be 13 corners.And be slower in same sector by more than 4s to be only slightly faster in older circuit which it is not.And infact even official site says that chicane was added in 1994,so I don't know what is your point?

And if the track was slower then you are saying that F1 is slower than a Civic Type R when F1 was faster even at Tsukuba.

 

I don't agree. The time spent in the older apex from the Tanque to the Esses is 9.7s and that explain correctly a distance of about 300 meters between them. The segment between apex including the Gancho chicane is about 420 meters. THIS IN NOT POSSIBLE IN 9.7S!! It's an average of 155 kph!!! Do you understand this?

This does explain the earlier configuration was used.

 

seriously, there have been a few nutters over the years but this dude is so off the rails...it's both sad and funny this 'drive' of his to reshape truths and facts. and he works for Mac? they seriously have such unhinged, irrational people there? is the work there not rewarding enough in and of itself? yikes.

 

Again you're quoting an inconsequential lap time difference to "prove" the P1's superiority. It shows how naive and insecure you really are. Just disregard every test the P1 loses (and there are lots) and hype up even poorly executed amateur tests (or even videos with no context) where the P1 wins as gospel. It must really burn you that, despite its heavier weight and less power, a 918 would cover a half mile quicker than a P1, doesn't it? Must really burn you that it's basically a toss up between the cars on a track? The P1 has lost because it didn't meet its claims. Not because it's not great. It is great. But it will never be the be all and end all you want it to be, and the 918 is far greater than you'll give it credit for. Until you see that, you have zero creditbility.

 

No time spent from orehla to esses was 18.2s and it is clear from the map(32,3-50.5)Porsche 991 GT3 did it in 17s.So that proves that chicanes were there else it would only have taken half that time.And if it is like you say would be lapping in 1:46s.And adding chicane only increased tracklength by 10m so 420m statement is not valid and FYI 991 GT3 did Gancho to Esses in 9s.

And I wasn't talking about gancho to esses.If this was the older circuit it would be way faster than 18s from Orehla to Esses.

And then how do you explain F1 being faster on sector 2 than ZR1?
Here are the top 6 times for 2nd sector which F1 did in 32.3
33.65 - Chevrolet Corvette ZR1
34.39 - Nissan GT-R
35.24 - Mercedes SLS AMG Roadster
35.52 - BMW M5
35.49 - BMW M3
36.26 - Porsche Cayman R

 

Except the P1 got the faster lap, which is basically all these comparisons are about.

 

We've seen even less consequential differences used to prove the opposite, so what fresh hypocrisy is this? JFC, Saladmandrin has been running laps 5s slower than non-pro pace in his test, and the likes of you and boycott have been jumping up and down and screaming from the roof tops about them.

The 918 is great, it moved hybrid tech forwards, but I'd like to see two to three 2-minute laps back-to-back from it before casting a final judgement.

 

Look at the F1 article. The circuit they used in the test was the older because they are publishing corrected times figures compared to the track, looking at the segments distance from the Tanque to the Esses! Have you understood this?

Infact the older track was also faster than the configuration used today, as qualifying lap times were confirmed compared to nowadays. The 2nd sector, if correctly compared, could just explain that the F1 is fast on track portions where the engine is relevant. This does not explain the car was faster if compared today to the ZR1 on the full lap.

I think you arent getting my bad english. Yes the track was just 10m longer, but if you look at the segments form the Tanque to the Esses, the distance is shorter if you get the starting point of the Gancho. So This tell us they were really using the Tanque curve!!

 

You would have to do way better than that to convince me.If you are telling the circuit used was 1993 version,then you are also saying F1 is slower than a hot hatch,I don't think that a Nissan GTR will be 13s faster than F1.Also times I brought up for comparision were done by Auto Foco in sector 2 F1 was clearly the fastest and now I have proof that chicane was inserted in 1994 go watch the formula one videos from 1994 and if they mention Aryton Senna in the lap then you must remember that he died before that race in May 1994 due to accident and also from official website.

And now about second sector.If F1 is 10+s slower than ZR1 like you say, then there are 2 corners where ZR1 should leave F1 behind easily.Also F1 was as fast in last corner as 991 GT3 if you compare the times from 50.3 to 1:04.0 which is 13.7s while 991 GT3 at test did it in 14s.And now considering the main straight F1 covered it in 20.5s while 991 GT3 covered it in 21s because it accelerates faster.

And I also think you haven't read the full article anyway here is the proof that it did it in 1994,read the issue date.
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8473/8371013940_890b1e6707_h.jpg
And as for comparision of 1988 vs GT2 2003 car,GT2 car was only 3s faster at dijon
Dijon 500 Kilometres 1988 - Racing Sports Cars
FFSA GT Championship Dijon 2003 - Racing Sports Cars
And only 5.7s faster at Donington
Donington 500 Kilometres 1988 - Racing Sports Cars
FIA GT Championship Donington 2003 - Racing Sports Cars