Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron | Page 13 | FerrariChat

Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron

Discussion in '288GTO/F40/F50/Enzo/LaFerrari/F80' started by Bill S, Aug 30, 2009.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #301 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009
    I don't understand some points.

    FL F40 with its 60 in 3"9 and 100 in 7"4 was the fastest F40 until yesterday.
    Now is immediately slower. The slowest ;)

    The other point, is that we are talking about on rolling start performance.
    That's seems immediately overshadowed at the moment.

    I think drag races are not really the performance point for these supercars. For greater standing start difficulty for some cars.
    Being all owners, I think you understand what I mean...

    Drag races are not really the point, because in real world thare are some situations that not affect the point.
    If we are looking about some 1/4 mile times even the Gallardo 500 hp tested by AutoCar could be quicker than some tests of the older Ferrari F40...
    http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsData/Lamborghini-Gallardo-5.0-V10/205852/
    But/so you are thinking that's really the point, yet? :)
     
  2. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #302 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009
    great video

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAg52_ji4aU


    Knowing that FL car is really a fast car, it run 30 in 2.3 seconds, and 170 in 22.3 seconds,
    I think that's the point is the high-band performance like J.Clarkson is saying, is really the speed crescendo, and not the meaning behind a 1/4 mile time or a side by side standing start drag race.
     
  3. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #303 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009
    Guys, not for a party pooper... ;)

    The truth is really not behind a quarter mile time, alone, or behind a standing start acceleration time.
    Look at the video, above. J.Clarkson is consciously in their times, all both, he knows their 1/4 miles, BUT...
    is not the point...

    Is its high band violence, and its lightness, the point.
     
  4. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    Great F40 video! No facts, but still a good video!

    But videos like this make people think the cars are faster then they really are. The numbers here are what they really do. That was the point of this thread. We will start another thread about "feel" from the owners.

    Would you like me to race the cars from 30 mph to 130 mph? Or something else?
     
  5. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    Where we have the 30-130 mph time to conclude that FL car is slower?
     
  6. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    What race would you like to see?
     
  7. joe sackey

    joe sackey Five Time F1 World Champ

    May 23, 2006
    57,525
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Joe Sackey
    You can select from numbers data to tell you whatever you want.

    Bill: this is a great thread. But, there are some valid points being made.

    What is the point of racing an Enzo with a 20-year-old car? Why not race the Enzo against the CGT, Veyron, Koenigsegg etc, cars of its era? The thread has become a bit like racing a Miurielago SV against a car from a much earlier era, a Miura SV. Pretty pointless, I think.

    Also, I think the point of this thread has simply become to prove that the Enzo is the fastest Ferrari Supercar. Is that saying anything at all? Surely that's a given, because it ought to be, since its the latest & greatest? Till the next Supercar comes along anyway.

    Lastly, I have long since drowned in a sea of numbers, but just before I did, I noticed lots of real world variables that are not being mentioned, noted, taken account of, such as those pointed put by Ryan.

    Again, not to be a party pooper, but just sharing some valid points.
     
  8. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #308 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009
    We are talking about the best CGT test comparing all the F40's test, but excluding the F40 fastest test.

    I think is not the point.

    We have many slower test of CGT, but still not mentioning the old Ferrari fastest test. Anyway that test shows 30-60 mph, 30-100 mph, 30-170 mph times faster than the best test of the Porsche. This is nothing? I think not, is enough!

    We don't have the 130 mph time, but take a look about 100-126.5 mph of Euro F40 with cats car. Its time is 4 seconds, so FL car should be faster.
    Even if the F40 achive only 129 mph (assuming that), in the same time CGT achive 130 mph helped for the better gearing point, how we can conclude faster if the Porsche is slower at higher speeds, like 30 mph to 160 or 170 mph time?

    Take a look at older 60-100 mph (or 100-160 kph) grafs we have. The Porsche is always faster, but anyway later, the F40 is faster in higher speeds.. So, this depends by the TQ on the gearing.. BUT is not for conclude the FastLane F40 is slower.
     
  9. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    I'm not sure why everyone's calling themselves a party pooper. This thread, like the weight thread I started earlier, is simply to gather the real-world acceleration numbers for the Ferrari Super Cars. We added a few cars, like the CGT, Veyron and McLaren F1, because some people wanted to see those. I'd be happy to add a few more. Like the weight thread, It's definitely not a "better" or "worse" thread. It's just factual real-world data based on magazine tests and GPS data provided to me.

    I didn't want to get into Euro cars, but there seemed to be some interest in the Euro F40, and F40 LeMans was kind enough to post the real-world data we needed.

    Joe, is there something missing in this thread that I need to include to make you and others feel more comfortable with the contents? Maybe some type of disclaimer?
     
  10. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #310 Bill S, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Can you re-post the fastest F40 test? I may be using the wrong one. I though it was this one. I apologize if I picked the wrong one.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  11. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #311 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009

    Bill, this is the Auto Motor und Sport test, that is fast for their 100-200 kph figures, but not so fast for the traction consideration.
    This test shows the same figures of SportAuto test. But these are not really the fastest tests.

    The fastest test is the FAST LANE test, or the first complete article I've sent you. This article shows only 5 times. Figures from 30, to 60, then 100, 160 and 170 mph. And are really VERY FAST.
    These figures are faster than the CGT comparo figures, from 30 mph to exactly the same speeds.


    Ok, we don't have the 130 mph time, but considering my point above, we don't have nothing to conclude about this time the FastLane F40 is slower than the CGT, from 30 mph to 60 mph, 100, 160, 170 and so on.

    Now, your most recent grafs are never mentioning these Fast Lane figures.
     
  12. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #312 F40 LeMans, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2009
    Sure. But I think if a 20-year-old car can match the Enzo for a good part of its performance, it really has a sense. Which other supercar could be fast as the younger car, till today?

    Miura SV or the 25th Anniversary Countach compared to the new SV Murcièlago?
    The 959 compared to the Carrera GT?
    A Maserati Ghibli or Barchetta compared to the MC12?
    Not. I think they are only bad examples.

    The EURO F40 after 22 years after its launch, is fast as the Enzo about some part of straight performance.
    Ok not about traction, or not about extreme high speeds, but anyway the older could run 30 to 170 mph in very close times.
    Just. Nothing of this before.
     
  13. joe sackey

    joe sackey Five Time F1 World Champ

    May 23, 2006
    57,525
    Southern California
    Full Name:
    Joe Sackey
    Understood.
     
  14. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #314 Bill S, Dec 21, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Sorry about that! I see these numbers in the first FL article:

    0-30: 2.3
    0-60: 3.9
    0-100: 7.4
    0-160: 19.0
    0-170: 22.3

    There's not enough data points between 100 and 160 to calculate an accurate distance. But if you race to 100 mph, the Euro F40 (FL) will be 5 feet behind the Euro F40 (Auto). So it's about the same.

    Remember that all of these cars have traction problems, including the F50, CGT and Enzo. Only the 4WD Veyron does not.

    Here's the updated chart with the Euro F40 (FL):
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  15. TurboFreak650

    TurboFreak650 Formula 3

    Jul 10, 2004
    2,419
    Atlanta, GA
    I have a detailed article on the Count's 917. It was a modified 1971 917K (the 30th produced, although the car was NOT a 917-30 model) short-tail retired from Le Mans with the non-turbo 4.9 F-12 making 600 HP. The Count intentionally chose a final drive ratio that would limit the car's top speed to a mere 169 mph at redline (8400 rpm), although it could have been returned to Le Mans gearing for 240+ mph if desired. Either way, it would have absolutely brutal acceleration (single digit 1/4 mile times), enough to devour anything up to its top speed.

    The unbelievable 917-30 Can-Am 5.4 twin-turbo is the one that could threaten 260 mph in 1100+ HP race trim, as documented by my childhood 1983 Guiness Book of World Records, which I still have. No one has ever converted one of these for the street to my knowledge, although there have been numerous Porsche 962s legalized.
     
  16. TurboFreak650

    TurboFreak650 Formula 3

    Jul 10, 2004
    2,419
    Atlanta, GA
    #316 TurboFreak650, Feb 21, 2010
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2010
    Oh, come on now, we're getting a free physics lecture here. :D

    It's rather amusing to see all the effort with the various homemade charts regarding the best and worst stock F40 tests of 20 years ago, etc, but in reality, it would be a cinch to modify a F40 to suddenly become VERY relevant when compared against today's best supercars in a straight line.

    With a turbo car, free-flowing catless exhaust and intake upgrades along with slightly increased boost and race gas can give a massive increase in power. A comparable increase in highly stressed F50 V-12 for example would be a huge undertaking. And the F40 has the gift that keeps on giving------light weight!!! I haven't seen independent test numbers (please post them if you have them!) but I would think a well upgraded F40 in GTE spec would make toast of almost anything short of a Veyron-level car. Turbo cars fare very well at high speed since the increased load on the turbos results in more output as speed increases and more considerably more HP is generated in the higher gears to the rear wheels, as proven on a dyno. And of course, they respond incredibly well to high octane, which should always be on hand when you're racing, anyway.
     
  17. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    As far as I know, in a straight line the LM was actually a little quicker then the GTE. The LM had an optional high boost setting and a wing with less drag. As far as I know there has never been an actual test of either though. But Michelotto did release some numbers in '89. 0-60 in 3.1 seconds, and a top speed of 229 mph. With all that downforce they added too. Amazing, especially in '89.
     
  18. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #318 F40 LeMans, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2010
    I have read it again.
    I think you are mistaken the distances.
    US F40 are standing km (0-1000mt) 21.4s able
    EU F40 is 20.8s able

    0.6s on the standing Km trap ARE NOT 43 feet (2624 feet vs 2581 feet), but @ 160 mph are approx 140 feet

    So, when the US F40s are 2581 feet the EU version is well over 2730 feet (and that's is not the fastest EU F40)
     
  19. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    1 km = 3,281 feet. The US F40 reaches this in 21.4 sec at about 160 mph. The Auto Motor Sport F40 is 21.0 sec. So that's about 92 feet.

    After racing for 18.3 seconds (151 mph vs. 156 mph) they are 45 feet apart.

    What happened in the last 3 seconds? Probably a slow shift from 4-5 in the US car at 157 mph. I believe the Euro F40 shifts from 4-5 after the km is over.
     
  20. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #320 F40 LeMans, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Yes, but AUTO reaches it in 20.8 sec, so much more feet apart. And, Auto is still not the fastest or fast as how FastLane should be able.
    Auto Motor und Sport reaches it in 21.0 sec because shifts from 4-5 @ 255 km/h or 158 mph (you can see it in the speed gears chart).

    The point is that AUTO, how many feet over the US C&D car is after racing for 18.3 seconds? I remenber they are 0.6 seconds apart the 0-1000mt with a top speed trap from 160 to 163.7 mph. Over 140+ feet apart on the 1000 mt trap.

    45 feet? Auto is only 2626 feet when C&D car is 2581 feet after 18.3 secs? :( I think not.... AUTO reaches 2407 feet (733 mt) in 16.5 seconds and 3175 feet (968 mt) in 20.0 sec on the speed/time/distance chart.

    Bill S,

    that's well over 2700+ feet after 18.3 seconds I think. Or 120+ feet apart than C&D car.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  21. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #321 F40 LeMans, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    I should be much more correct; about 2780 feet after 18.3 seconds. That should be 200 feet far from the US car and only about 60 feet behind the C&D Carrera GT.

    During the runs AUTO F40 is only a bit slower on the distance than the C&D CGT, and that's is available looking from 59 feet to 1240 feet.

    But FastLane's F40 is even faster.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  22. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #322 F40 LeMans, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2010
    AUTO F40 should be about 80 feet behind FasteLane's F40 on the 1/4 mile being only 60 feet behind C&D CGT after racing 18.3 seconds. LOL.
    FL F40 should be ahead the C&D CGT after 18 seconds! with a higher 0-60..
     
  23. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #323 Bill S, Mar 29, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    I know it would be exciting to see a 20 year old car as fast as this, but unfortunately it's not. The published magazine distance data is in error. See the chart below for the estimated error. Something happened after 200 kph!

    When I get a chance, I'll race my CGT against my F40. You'll see that the race will match what I show here.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  24. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    F40 LeMans has uber data!
     
  25. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    lol. You should compare it, on-rolling start runs, with a European no-cats F40 anyway. There may be 4s during the 0-170 runs compared to the US-spec
     

Share This Page