Quote:
Originally Posted by Addicted2Boost
It seems Sidious and Rob_Sydney, you have this idea or seem to come across like exotics are end all of the solution of having a car that excels at all levels. Why are they exotics? For the fact they are rare and the cost of them by the way they are manufactured keeps them that way. Performance wise, it isnt that clear...
I was going to write something in line with what kismetcaptian, but Im not intelligent enough to come across as good as what kismetcapitan has already said  |
Well I dont know what kismet has been saying as I blocked him, but it sounds like he's rambling when he should be reading.
Where rules allow, the fastest configuration is a mid-engined, RWD or even 4WD layout, with the lowest possible centre of gravity and much of the mass centroid packaged between the 2 axles.
Unfortunately in the real world there are always rules and constraints. Cost, passenger needs, practicality and safety will mean most performance vehicles that drivers with modest budgets can afford will be standard unit steel or space frame tubed chassis, with sensible ground clearance, and seats atleast 2 passengers with reasonable personal space. Because of this, the engineer has limitations on how low he/she can set the centre of gravity height and location, and the weight targets tend to be higher than that of a supercar.
With larger performance engines that are mounted at the front, this causes overhang of mass at the front axle, (if you do not know the implications of this problem, then I think you should think twice about hitting the reply button) ... Some vehicles like the S2000 or RX-7 FD3S package the engine behind the front axle line, creating a front-mid layout, which is an improvement but not quite the same as a true mid engine car. Even Nissan have conceded to this with their modern performance cars, they have forsaken some of the GT-R heritage of an inline-6 for a shorter V6 to package the mass better for better ultimate performance.
Now since we are talking about the past 3 generations of factory GTRs vs an Enzo here, the difference in potential is huge, stock GTR vs stock Enzo, the Enzo will be faster in 9/10 categories, and so it should be considering how much is costs. If you are an experienced racing engineer or receive the right advise and know how to analyse a car's all round performance (most members on here do not) you can uprate to the correct parts, tune the suspension and chassis on a GTR to go faster on some aspects such as straight line, peak cornering G in certain bends, but it will still fail on areas where a mid-engined car would excel on, or where at high speeds that "aerodynamic" stability and management of lift forces are on a modern top end supercar is in a different league to the relatively primative and high-drag rear wing and front air dam set up in a typical stock or tuned GTR.
Quote:
GTR dreamers on here you say Sidious? About aerodynamics, Mid engine solution? again you seem to point to the classic layout of your typical italian super car..... Yeah with its terriable aerodynamics and heavy front weighted 1560kg pig was the fastest production car around the ring back in 96 with the R33 GTR, unmodified. You mention the times are posted by test beds that usually dont filter down to production cars? I think you will find that the time people ARE referring to, in order to get a proper comparison, are from the times done from prodction cars and not development ones.
|
You have no proof of this was a bonafide production specification car. Also that no one was able to replicate the sub-8 minute lap time on a production GT-R since.
The nordschleife lap times claimed by manufacturers mean nothing in the real world, it is powerful marketing trick that works on many people who have a blind belief that the car that acheived the ultimate best lap out of a thousand laps on nordschleife is the actual street specification car. This is entirely not true in many examples as the lap times are never matched by 3rd party testers on the real production cars.
The Enzo was never "developed" on nordschleife, thats why you wont see outrageous claims from them about how fast it can lap under testing conditions - why should they? This is not Ferrari's philosophy to build single course cars, they build REAL racing cars at the top level, win races and sell road cars based on that sucess.
Quote:
|
I saw a clip not too long ago, from the late mid-late 90s of a clip with Richard Burns and Jeremy Clarckson testing 10 cars around a racing track to see the best handling, and R33GTR came out top against ferraris/porsche etc, of being their best, not to mention fastest track times. And again with the R35, a heavy 1700+kg front heavy pig has proven itself. As important as those factors maybe, they factor in where very very high speed is in the equation, life F1.
|
No one here called the GTR a pig, it is a fast car for a saloon/coupe/GT class and has in many categories beaten other unit steel mass produced cars in its class such as the 911, BMW M3, M6, etc - but ultimately there is so much you can do that a much simpler, lower, lighter mid-engined RWD car will be faster.
Porsche has had amazing success with rear-engined cars, but even they concede that the fastest car is a mid-engined RWD car, and hence the Carerra GT.
Quote:
An evo 9 with its huge high wing and with the roof vortex which helps in more downforce only generates 30KG of downforce at 160km/h. The spare tire in the back with a 12inch speaker would probably be as heavy! Whats the average pace around the ring for a typical sports car/super car, or a lap of your typical racetrack for that matter? I dont see any production car that has posted times on the ring faster than 180km/h average. Period. With its all important aerodynamics and huge downforce they generate and mid engine formular, with super wide tires u find on a damn drag car, so typical of super cars, and its low weight with more powerful engines, why is it that they have not posted as faster times that say a GTR? A block like an EVO FQ400 wud beat most.
|
As I said before, if you know what you are doing (Mitsubishi/Rally art does) cars can be tuned to be faster on some categories, as for a start the Evolution 9 has clever differentials which gives it world class out-of-corner exit speeds, in all other departments it is average and can be matched by any car with suitable suspension tuning. Only tracks and courses with difficult and tight corners, or wet weather does the Evolution become a formidable car.
But that said, the NSX-R with its 18 year old chassis design has beaten many Evolution and Impreza models (including the Spec C and MR models) in mild-damp conditions at Tsukuba
2 bars boost and a 9000rpm redline, I expect to do well against the Carrera GT however - provided I don't drive ham-fisted and with two left feet!!
) who tested all the R32 and R33, even so there is no proof that the car he drove was a road spec production model. Gan-San is often asked by manufacturers to test their development cars on nordschleife for his invaluable feedback.
Linear Mode
