Acceleration: F40, F50, Enzo, CGT & Veyron | Page 17 | 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. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    Can you tell me the km/h at 7,700 rpm for the Euro car for the 1-2, 2-3 and 3-4 shift points?
     
  2. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #402 Bill S, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    It seems like there's a lot of "magic" going on when comparing the US F40 vs the Euro F40. See below for the facts. As you can see, the Euro F40 and US F40 are basically the same from 100 to 220 km/h (62.1 to 136.7 mph), especially when you consider my leisurely shifts.

    This is consistent with all the magazine tests, my own GPS tests, and the fact that a Ferrari engineer who worked at the factory during the F40 development told me that the US F40 has more HP than the Euro F40. This was an expected performance improvement during the very expensive effort to make the US car pass US emissions. US cars are typically all rated above 500 HP, and this explains why they are so close with the 200 lbs+ weight difference.

    You may dig up a few fast F40s that don't match any other test, and my own GPS tests even had a very fast run. But I didn't use it because it was so far off from the other 5 runs I did.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  3. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #403 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    You can calculate the speeds from the final ratio. 2.9:1 the US car, 2.727:1 for the Euro

    Sorry, but how can you say that US cars are fast as the Euro cars? that's incredible... :)
    We all knows that they are not. You are saying yes now.

    US car is really 60 - 140 mph 10.1s able? :)

    At the facts there are some like 1 or 2 seconds difference in km/h or mph data we have, and we all are able to see that.
     
  4. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    I assume you're kidding with me now. I'm just going by the data that YOU provided. See the above data for 100 to 220 km/h. All magazines indicate that the US and Euro cars are the same. I can show you a very fast US F40 GPS run that was slightly downhill, but I don't think that's a fair representation of how fast the F40 really is. The US F40 makes up the weight difference with lower gearing and more horsepower. I think Ferrari was very proud that the US car was not slower than the Euro car, other than in top speed. After all, it cost over $20 Million USD to develop the US car, which was a lot of money in 1990 for just a few hundred cars! Maybe that's why they cost so much.
     
  5. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #405 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    I don't know how you are really going to explain. We all have read how the US car can do.

    I'm kidding with you? Are you always mentioning my tests as the slowest ones in the data you want for slowest at the moment, and NEVER about as quickest I have sent. Your 60-140 mph US data are showing a 12.3 seconds when my best EU data (we have read) is 10.1s for fastest, and wich data you are referring? not the fastest EU data for my fastest, trying to explain something.
    Then, always the fastest about Carrera GT for fastest test (ignoring the slower ones). Now you are saying me I'm kidding you..?
    Sorry, not a problem but, that is.
     
  6. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #406 Bill S, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    OK, here's my fastest GPS test with pretty ordinary shifts. I didn't want to use it because it was only 1 run in 6. It was slightly downhill in the beginning but uphill most of the way.

    Averaging many results and leaving out 1 or 2 very fast ones seems like a better way to compare the cars. But I'm OK using the fastest ones if some people like that better.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  7. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #407 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    So, at that point, you are always ignoring my best data I have sent for fastest when YOU are able these data with your US car.
    Some EU car data we have are quicker than these. Btw..

    Second point, why FastLane data for the EU cars are so mysterious to mention looking that? Why the fastest test of EU F40 could not to be fast as the fast CGT test for fastest?
    Don't tell me about 605 German HP as absolute motivation... is not the point. :)

    Are other, the points...
     
  8. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    Bring your car to Laguna Seca, CA on August 16. Then we can see if we match these results.

    But don't modify your car!
     
  9. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #409 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    eheh. I like to come..

    BillS don't worry about no-cats spec version ;)
     
  10. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #410 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    Look at that. Your data are almost little bit slower than C&D was able to do with the Carrera GT. And these data are referring for the fastest Carrera GT data.
     
  11. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #411 Bill S, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Actually, 1 second difference in 60 to 130 is pretty noticeable. The CGT is much faster than the F40. I have both and the CGT will kill the F40.

    Here's a 7.6 second GPS 60 to 130 in the CGT. I can do these all day. I think I have one 60 to 130 in the CGT that's 7.1 seconds! But I could not repeat it.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  12. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #412 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    BillS, the CGT will kill the USA F40, for the last time. You have not data for explain that about EU F40.
    I have try the Carrera GT last year and I think is fast, but not as fast to conclude for surely faster.

    We have numbers and data, good for conclude the EU F40 fast as the CGT in the average of the data we have.
    Some data are better for the Porsche, other data are better for the old Ferrari, but I repeat, nothing to conclude.

    As for your 60 - 130 mph referiment, yes, the Porsche is really able it in low 7 seconds (7.3- 7.6 the average) but that is not "the" point to conclude faster FOR THE DIFFERENT engine/gearing ratio of these cars both, during that segment.

    Take the 60-110 mph of your cars in your hands. The CGT is able to 4.5-4.6 seconds Vs the 4.9-5s of your US F40.
    How think about EU F40?

    Take an other look about 60 - 140 if your US car is "only" 1/2 second slower than the Porsche? and the EU car?

    So, I repeat for the last time about 60-130mph is not a point...
     
  13. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #413 Bill S, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 7, 2017
    Here's a CGT 60 to 140 mph GPS in 9.3 seconds without really trying hard. I can also do these all day. It would be faster on the track with a professional driver.
    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  14. F40 LeMans

    F40 LeMans Formula Junior

    Nov 23, 2009
    826
    #414 F40 LeMans, Apr 26, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2010
    If your car did 10.3s we are well inside to know that the EU car could go well down 10.1s, even 9.5 range looking how it improve the data during all the FL tests.
     
  15. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    This is a great thread no doubt, BUT we have to remember, and not knocking you Bill this is just one mans data. You admit to not shifting the F40 too hard, which is fine. But we all have to remember this really is not scientific even with the GPS considering different days, different weather, different locations. Which is hard to do in the first place. There are CGT and F40 tests all over the place, and owners of both who might say he thinks the CGT is quicker (BillS) and another owner who says his F40 (RufMD) is quicker. Honestly, who cares? They are both fast, great cars and this back and forth between you guys will never end LOL!
     
  16. malebomb01

    malebomb01 Formula Junior

    Mar 10, 2010
    707
    Big D
    Whatever you think, 2.9l does not equate to 2936cc it is simple math... Go to any college math professor and ask him/her if 2.9L=2936cc and see how stupid you look... You just like to argue and hate when you are wrong. MB, oh yeah WOW lol
     
  17. RICE RACING

    RICE RACING Rookie

    Apr 20, 2010
    38
    Australia
    Full Name:
    Peter Giljevic
    Hey Bill, I'd love it if you can send me some F40 race logic files please :) to [email protected]

    I will run the power calculation onto these files and resend back to you so you can look at the result in your performance tools software.
     
  18. malebomb01

    malebomb01 Formula Junior

    Mar 10, 2010
    707
    Big D
    It is so funny that you have both cars and people still doubt you. The CGT should be faster it is a much newer car. Thanks for posting the data it is a great read.
     
  19. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    #419 SSNISTR, Apr 27, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2010
    By your logic you think going to a college math professor and asking him if 2936cc equals 3.0L, not 2.9L is going to get you the answer you want to hear? Technically 2936cc equals 2936cc. We are talking about rounding up or down for engine displacement sizes. For an engine to be 3.0L it needs to be 2950cc or higher. 2949cc and lower is 2.9L. Do some research on how engine displacement sizes work and you will see I am right. If you would like to think 2936cc rounds up to 3.0L, be my guest....I'm done.
     
  20. SSNISTR

    SSNISTR F1 Veteran

    Feb 13, 2004
    8,046
    SFL
    Newer has nothing to do with it, and nobody is doubting him. Other owners and tests have just shown different results. He has said himself he hasn't shifted the F40 too hard....
     
  21. technom3

    technom3 F1 World Champ
    Rossa Subscribed

    Mar 29, 2007
    18,586
    Phoenix AZ
    Full Name:
    Justin
    wow... wrong side of the bed huh?

    You have managed to be both completely right and completely wrong all at the same time. I LOVE THE INTERNET.

    SSinsters point is 100% valid and correct. as he stated IN THE AUTOMOTIVE world it would be rounded to a 2.9L. So he is correct as he stated in the automotive world.

    your point of 2.9L does not equal 2936cc is correct. However, until your post, I wouldn't think anyone on this website would need that clarification... It is blatantly obvious especially if you realize SSinsters level of knowledge that he clearly knows that. You need to spend less time running to college professors and asking them to check your math and have them focus on your reading comprehension and life application.


    (sorry if this comes across as rude...I have been hanging out on the Viper msg boards and anyone who has been there will understand! hahahahaha)
     
  22. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    #422 Bill S, Apr 27, 2010
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2010
    True. But if I race them side-by-side from a roll with drivers of similar skill, the CGT will win 9 times out of 10 by a huge margin. You need to take the CGT to redline and many owners don't like to do that. There's a pretty noticeable difference between a car that can do 60-130 in 7-8 seconds when compared to one in the 8.5-9.5 second range.

    Honestly, it's crazy to say an F40 is faster than a CGT (at least from 60-130) and none of the GPS data or published data indicates that. BUT, the F40 is VERY impressive for a 20 year old car!!!

    BTW, I suspect you might get the F40's 60 to 130 down to 8.5 seconds on a flat surface if you are really good. But then you can probably get the CGT down to 7 seconds or better.

    Having both cars, the real difference is how fast the CGT's engine revs with no turbo lag. It also has over 100 HP more than the F40 and only weighs 271 lbs more. But this weight difference doesn't matter as much when you're doing 60-130 tests. Weight to power is 5.13 in the CGT and 5.92 in the F40. That's a big difference (13%).

    I started this thread to present the best acceleration data I could on these cars. I love the F40, maybe even more than the CGT. But it is not nearly as fast. The CGT is best compared with an Enzo, not an F40. But, I should also add that we are talking seconds here, so you really need to race both cars for some distance to see the CGT pull the F40. Short races of only a few seconds will make the two cars seem nearly the same.
     
  23. RufMD

    RufMD F1 Rookie
    Owner

    Jan 31, 2004
    3,246
    USA
    Full Name:
    Jas
    Bill, I think your last sentence explains my results...in short sprints, rolling side by side, 2nd gear pulls, it seemed surprisingly even to me (CGT vs F40). I suspect if the distance is extended, your conclusion would certainly be seen. I was just shocked the F40 hung with it and even nudged ahead a couple of times....but we are talking 1/4 mile rolling starts not full on 60-140mph runs :)

    Like you say, pretty impressive for a 20 yr old car !
     
  24. Bill S

    Bill S Formula 3

    Oct 2, 2004
    1,995
    Yes, VERY impressive. Thanks for the input!
     
  25. malebomb01

    malebomb01 Formula Junior

    Mar 10, 2010
    707
    Big D

    "For an engine to be 3.0L it needs to be 2950cc or higher. 2949cc and lower is 2.9L. Do some research on how engine displacement sizes work and you will see I am right."

    You mean like how Mercedes calls its 6208cc AMG cars 6.3? Read this link below and the editors note at the bottom. LOL I guess you're more of an authority than the German goverment!


    http://www.worldcarfans.com/109033118324/2010-mercedes-e63-amg-unleashed


    "If you would like to think 2936cc rounds up to 3.0L, be my guest....I'm done"

    Please point out where I said it should round up to 3.0... and your done LOL, you could argue about the color of saran wrap...

    Like I said before 2936cc is 2936cc and not 2.9l or 3.0l...
     

Share This Page