4get it, he's in love with the Enzo.
I think that's quite a stretch. But, with all the restrictions imposed on the teams every year would the FIA be happy if other forms of racecars eventually could lap the circuits faster than the "most technologically advanced 4 wheelers"? Their rules would then ultimately cause the demise of their most precious race series.
Petrol is stock aprox 97% the rest , it`s Merlin`s job E-diff BMW M5 , really ? The FIRST car in the world with an E-diff it`s the Ferrari 430. They try to minimise the downforce(by regulation) but the engineers are up to the task and quickly get the real solution to maximise downforce About aero , i,ve told you before , in F1 there`s a saying : minimise drag while maximising down force , the drag of the car can vary from race to race , the tracks are the ones that are making the difference , for example you need a lot of downforce on a track like Imola and you also get a high drag , but on Monza you must set your car for high speeeds so drag it`s less and so downforce is less. The front and rear wings can make a big difference depending on their configuration . I`ve said it`s a fighter jet TURNED UPSIDE DOWN , make this difference. Jet`s generate lift , an F1 car generates the opposite . ABS ? are kiddin` me? You have an electronic gadget when braking , I know for sure. ''TC exists in car since ages'' , yes but only the principles remain the same , there`s a huge difference between the TC of a road and the one in F1 , because the last one may be more complex than an entire road car . ''Sequential gboxes is as old as gearboxes are '' really ? Are you kind enough to mention the first F1 one car with this kind of gearbox ? I`am curious ! Oh , no the launch control it`s not allowed.......well if you are Renault you can brake the rules and have this wonderfull gadget on your car.
On 360cs and cgt they are applied , only the scale is different. On Elise to apply what ? Do you know what kind of engine the Elise has ? On Mini ? yeap right , imagine only the cost of the conrods based on titanium alloy.Probably more expensive than the whole engine put now on the mini. Tha last one was a really stupid joke , indeed i`ve heard that the boxster managed a better time around Monza than F2005.
I have arguments ! What do you have ? BTW , if you were that good in your job , you would probably be a member of the F1 team , there at MB.
First these are not arguments, it's based on stupid stuff you read in magazines, and you already think you know it all. a. Go study mechanical engineering in a country that builds other cars than outdated renaults even brazil doesn't want. b. After having worked at MB, i knew the engineering world was not my business at all, and again, this simply shows you have no knowledge at all on what software engineering is (same for cars by the way, but i don't blame you) c. I honestly hope for you you will be as good and successful in your future life than i have been so far. d. Sadly for you, the M5 or M3 has an E diff, you don't have Manetino to tune it, and it's not called like that, but it still exists. e. Even if you turn a plane upside down, the Cx will will remain the same, for pretty obvious reasons. f. I really doubt the TC in F1 cars is that complex. Tracks are much smoother than roads for instance, and it rarely snows during races. And anyway, forget the whole point, it's just that you are stubborn. Alas for you, it's true, the Boxster does slalom quicker than an Enzo, and i'm pretty sure on any curveous montain road, an Enzo will never be able to overtake a well driven Boxster (S...), by the way, a "low key" porsche GT2 and even a kit car (Ultima) does the skidpad faster than an Enzo... And relax with all your crap of titanium conrods etc. They don't make such a difference after all, look at some old tuned US lumps, they bring the same HP/litre as an Enzo, without 4 valves, titanium crap etc etc. (http://www.amerspeed.com/), and i guess a single engine costs less than the first service on an Enzo, but that's a different story
Stupid stuff that i read in the magazines ? Really we should listen to you mister expert , because all those editors are imbecils , hail the great gougoul ! Man sometimes i wonder (you know too much) why aren`t working in an F1 team ? I mean titanium it`s crap , alloys based on carbon are crap , hey you`re the man all those guys are imbecils (including RUF with their tuned porsches) why don`t you show them how to do it correctly ? READ , gougoul , it`s my advice , maybe it`s crap in a german based magazine (sometimes) , but not the french , italian , britsh or american. You`ll undestand then , oh and by the way being stubborn it`s your quality .
Now you run out of arguments I don't say i do it better, but i just say most of the crap is plain overkill in a roadcar, where needs are different anyway. I haven't heard (bar the superbike powered catherhams et al.) of a roadcar revving to 18000 Umin, with a usable powerband starting at 7000 umin. There are different ways to achieve similar (enzo) performance at a fraction of the price. Also, the press is mainly printing the press reports, and they just all write the same stuff. Lastly for you advice i read 100 USds of car mags each week, on top of real litterature, so thanks for the advice, but keep it for yourself.
I didn`t run out of arguments , i`am just bored , i`ve tryed to explain you a simple thing (i gave you examples), but appears that you`re way too ''smart'' so... take care
I think you try to explain this to quite a bunch of guys, but none of them is really ok with you. Anyway, i don't want to spoil your day !
This is just an example of your naive fanboy-colored vision of the world. FYI, Porsche 959 had an active differential (which the e-diff really is) more than 15 years ago. Subaru, VW, Honda, Nissan, they ALL had active diffs way before F430, so how is that the FIRST car in the world? I don't have a problem with you loving the Enzo. I just think it's stupid to call it 'the supercar that makes all others look dated by a couple generations'. It's fast, very fast, but there are faster cars at 1/10th of it's price. And btw, the 959 really was in a class of it's own in technical achievements, but that didn't stop it from being slower than the F40. (It didn't have the same hardcore focus)
You are not alone. Quite the argument you guys had going there but I decided not to step my foot in due to my lack in depth of knowledge on the subject. I think the overall vibe of the argument has made Ulmis think that we are necessarily attacking the Enzo. Certainly not, the point is well taken that the Enzo is quite a performer with some of the best available road technology, however the Enzo remains a fair distance from any true race car. Technology enabling real race cars to perform at their peak would not be streetable by any means. Most of us know this. I am a true fan of the Enzo myself, however as much as I love the car it is evident that I must accept the fact that it is NOT a race car and shares little with TRUE race cars. Indeed there are components inspired by race technology, as would any car designed for high performance use. On the sunny side of things, when it comes to streetable performance, the Enzo is definitely riding among the top of performers. This is something to be proud of, having top tier performance in both race and street vehicles, but I would like to stress the importance of keeping these two terms separate because they truly can never connect. Furthermore, as hard as it may be for f-car addicts/fanboys/etc. to admit, there certainly is a handful of competition in both fields. I would NEVER say the Enzo is leading the supercar field by leaps and bounds... there are PLENTY of other vehicles right up there with it, given they may or may not surpass it's physical numbers. With that said, I give the Enzo a repsectable pat on the back whilst keeping my eyes on whats around it.
i know that motor trend got the enzo up to 211 MPH (342 KPH) at Ford's proving grounds in Arizona (they also got the carrera gt to 201.5 and the ford gt to 200) but as you can see in the graph here (http://motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0410_lemansintro/index4.html) there was still some juice left in the enzo when the driver had to brake to (only) 180 MPH. In my opinion, it looks like it would have gone up to about 230 MPH (273 KPH). But with thinner air, maybe it could go faster.
ARRFFF...the pic... http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=175425&stc=1 Image Unavailable, Please Login
That's really cool and everything but I think the point has to be stressed that at those kind of speeds, the accuracy of the calculations made via tire rotation are NOT going to be accurate. I'm not sure exactly how far off but some have suggested upwards of 30mph or so.
it s completly amezing, this race is a shame in Europe, thoses people don't have any laws on highway, they drive as far as possible...
