Quote:
Originally Posted by Addicted2Boost
Like i mentioned before or have u just decided to disregard... im not denying those factors having an advantage. What im saying is that these factors become more apparent in very high end of the performance envelope in which cars like F1 etc can utilize. For mere road going sports cars where some are built with more focused in its objective, car makers have used these layouts, but why do they seem to trail behind some examples that are not configured the same way? By cars that are areodyamically disadvantaged, less powered, etc.... Im saying that in the boundaries that road going cars are explored at, these factors although still playing its part, are not as great as you are pointing it out to be..... HENCE we see examples of cars that are quicker like you have already stated in differnt configs. So the LIMIT it seems as far as road going sports cars are concenred, those factors are not the ULTIMATE deciding factors in a cars performance, like ive been going on about in my initial post.
|
What you are doing is dismissing performance aspects of a superior car simply because you never find yourself in a situation where it will be useful.
Just because *you* personally will never want to dance a car around a tight low speed corner, or overtake a car at 150 MPH in a sweeping cambered bend on a track that doesnt mean that it is redundant or that someone else wont find this useful.
Quote:
It just seems like u cant accept the fact that a car without ur usual exotic super car layout or cost have achieved similar performance figures and even going far as to say its my opinion that is mis-informed? You also seem to think that becuase of a $650K price tag, no japanese so called ricer made availble relatively cheaply would have a remote chance in matching its performance. What am i mis-informed about? I think the numbers prove themselves. Obviously not to someone like urself who just simply deny it. Im not claiming the R35 GTR is end of all in search of performance. What im stating is that it is still possible to push those LIMITs challanging the best that exotics have to offer, despite disadvantages in weight, layout and power.
|
What "similar performance figures" are you talking about here? The only figures you keep falling back on is manufacturer claimed lap times based on test pre-production cars at the nordschleife, and comparing them to some private 3rd party tests on some supercars that were never developed for the best time on that course!
This is why you are mis-informed, you are falling for manufacturer propaganda . But being a biased Skyline fan, you will have problems not believing anything you want to hear!
The only tests I seen outside of Nissan, I have seen that the new GTR has trouble against front engined Corvettes and Vipers, but this is no surprise considering they are cost around the same and are in the same class.
Quote:
So by simply you stating something becomes fact? You seem to be the kind of person that ur so self obsessed that ur opinion becomes fact. The R33 GTR posting that sub 8min time was NOT by Gan San like you said. Like i said, the first to record that sub 8min time, was for Autocar UK in 97. Found out that the driver was: Dirk Schoymans.
|
You are wrong, the sub-8 minute laptime was claimed in 1994 during the pre-production stage. I even have the magazine printed in 1994 that has an article claiming that lap time.
Nevertheless, there is no proof the car was a full production model - another fact is the R34 which is supposed to be faster than the R33 could not get anywhere near sub-8 minutes either.
Quote:
About the Carrera GT, again your main point seemed to lean on that it was due to its mid engined layout that it acheived what it has. OK, so it posted a 7.28 around the ring. What im saying is, with the same mid engine layout, but 100hp down on power and add another 100kg to match with the 911 turbo, would it be really still that much faster around the ring? Because according to you, it shud be becuase of its mid-engine layout.
|
Again, you keep referring to nordschleife. Newflash: nordschleife is not the definitive way to determine a car's performance. Different roads and tracks will mask or accentuate a car's performance and characteristics. Nordschleife consists of many high speed, cambered and undulated bends, with few low speed corners. Mid-engined cars arent fully utlised on this type of track as the benefits suit low speed corners, the more there are, the faster these cars will lap. Despite this, the Carerra GT will still lap many tracks quickly thanks to its excellent brakes, balance and the amazing accerelation also helps.
If you really want to speculate, a Carerra GT will still outlap a 911 Turbo even with a 100 HP 100 KG handycap. The overall package is much much more efficient than the 911 is. It would be outbraked, out maneuvered, and out dragged at higherspeeds, especially around the faster bends.
As I mentioned in the beginning paragraph of this post, you seem to dismiss aspects of performance of cars that you will unlikely ever find yourself using, but its amusing you use the nordschleife to rate cars even though you're 95% unlikely to have ever raced or driven on there! lol
Quote:
Like i said, there is no denying that those layouts do have an advantage in a cars ability. But in a practical daily ROAD going sports car, does that really show in terms of performace?
|
Yes it does, otherwise a FWD Civic is every bit as viable as a GTR as a "daily ROAD going sports car".
Linear Mode
