0-60 in 3.5, 11.7@123 mph, 70-0 147ft WOW!

"Yessir, Were going to have to change the cpu in the e diff to stop you from doing donuts on the highway. . . do you currently have any 2nd morgages?"

 

Why do you guys find those numbers so unreasonable? A stock viper SRT has run high 11's at over 120's in the quarter and it has 500 hp albeit more torque but also a manual 6 speed. The F430 was tested with the new F1 transmission which in theory is faster than a manual. These numbers are close to what I would expect from this car. Consider the Ford GT puts down similar numbers, actually faster with only 500 hp.

 

We're thinking summer 2005 I think maybe I miss typed the Murcie is faster at say above 100 below the lightness of the CS and low gearing as on all 360's really seems to have payed off. I'll keep everybody posted for sure I just hope its as reliable as my 360's.

 

The Ford GT did 0-60 in 3.3. Remember 0-60 is measure of grip at launch along with acceleration and gearing. You could never get a rwd car to beat a rear/mid engined car with the same power to weight ratio unless you used slicks. BTW most manufacturers understate the performance of their cars.

 

I honestly want to know how many of you guys are doing 0-60 in under 4 sec in your ferrari 360, 355 or CSs?

 

I don't think anyone is unless the car is heavily modified. Remember the 430 has about 100 more hp and gobs more torque than the 360.

 

I honestly never tried it! I am going to try it as soon as I get one of them gTech Pros!

 

i just got my new motor trend today and they test the 430 and the Gallardo together so ill post their numbers when i read it.

 

WRONG!

From the factory:

In 1993, the Corvette did 60-0 in 125 feet
In 1993, the Viper did 60-0 in 109 feet
In 1993, the Turbo MR2 did 60-0 in 106 feet

An MR2 Turbo won the SCC braking contest on 93 brakes, beating all of their records by stopping 60-0 in 99.29 feet. Beating, by the way, a Viper from the year before with a big brake kit.

http://www.mr2oc.com/showthread.php?t=25810&highlight=braking+distance

It helps that the MR2 isn't carrying around an extra 1000 lbs.

And those are 1993 stop times!

For newer times:

M Roadster 116ft
Z4 109ft
C5 Z06 103-147ft depending on test
SRT-10 122ft
02 NSX 117ft
S2000 118ft
'00 Cobra R 122 ft ( and for good measure, '99 Lotus Elise 119ft )
Boxster S 110ft

So, to put it in context that distance SUCKS! I'd question these numbers. I'd say the braking distance is too high and the acceleration time might be a bit low.

 

Read the post. 70-0 braking not 60-0. BTW Gen I Viper 60-0 in 109 ft, no way! The best I have seen in the magazines for 60-0 have been with the new Vipers. I believe around 99 ft or so. ABS, Big Brakes and Huge Contact Patch.

 

...and still wrong.

We're talking 70-0, not 60-0.

 

...........WOW


I dont know the stats off the top of my head, but doesnt that show up the murci, 575M, Ford GT, etc. etc......

 

Just remember how incredible C&D's numbers were for the Ford GT - I don't think any other magazine approached the same figures. Certainly R&T and Motor Trend were slower. Weren't their 997 road test results somewhat unbelievable also (4.3 0-60, and this is not the S)?

Gary

 

I think you hit the nail. R & T probably has the most reproducible numbers. They also are usually the slowest.

 

I believe these 1/4 mile #'s...IN my NSX on Nitrous I've run a best of 11.7@121, and right around there at high 11's the #'s match up...

 

The Ford GT has what 550hp and it is marginally faster in several tests.(MT with Enzo and CGT, C&D)

Ferrari claimed a 3.95 0-60 without launch control, apparently they were specific about that.

Crazy thing is in terms of up to about 120mph the F430 is plain and simple quicker than an F50 and neck and neck with an F40. Past there the F50 might eventually pull ahead, but it does have that massive wing. The F40 is so much slower to 60 mph that I can only imagine it is really flying at the 1/4 mile to pull off 11.7s. Past there it should take the F430 no problem.

Those are remarkable figures if they are true.

 

Boy..I'd be right pissed if I bought an Enzo...

 

The day any of you can actually reproduce these times is when I'll believe it. I know I can't do it, and I doubt anyone here can either.

With so much marketing emphasis on such silly measurements of performance, it's no wonder you hear one magazine quote 3/10ths of a second lower than the other.

Real world timing will show that no Ford GT can do 0-60 in 3.3, nor can a Stradale or CS do it in sub 4.

Bench racers, bench on...

--Dan

 

The one Ferrari where I'll actually believe the claimed numbers (in part because the numbers quoted back then weren't so ridiculous) is the F40. 2600lbs, nigh on 500 bhp (if you can manage to lay it down), and geared properly.

To assume that a 430 is within that is silly. 650lbs of flab, less tq, smaller gumballs, different gearing and a power band that's anemic below 5k.

--Dan

 

Mako makes reference to the downhill straight at Fiorano on another board.

I wonder if "A life" is going to be available as an option with the new G-Car?

DL

 

No idea who that is, but it would seem to me that you lecturing someone about getting a life while you're busy surfing a website created by "Allan Lame-o" each day seems a bit hypocritical champ...Something to think about.

 

Surprise response!!

DL

 

I think this is more of a case of the Ford GT having 650hp...

 

Not if you've flipped it by now.

 

I offer an olive branch. Give peace a chance Darth, lol.