The battle of supercars, how far has America come?

[syr74]

Performance*

0 - 60 mph [secs] 3.3
0 - 100 mph [secs] 7.4
1/4 mile [secs at mph] 11.2 at 131.2

Top Speed [mph] 200
Lateral acceleration [g] 0.99

Fuel Economy [City/Hwy in mpg] 14 / 21

Hmm, a list of specs from the site where accleration is the same as MT found, but not skidpad, top speed, or even mpg.

More evidence of the vast conspiracy...lol

[Kurtdg19]

I'm suprised to see nobody took vehicle aerodynamics into consideration. Lets not forget that drag is proportional to the cd, frontal area, and the square of speed. A car going 120mph will have 4 times the drag of a vehicle moving at 60mph. Another factor associated with aerodynamics is lift. Lift results from a negative pressure resulting in the varying speeds of air flowing above and below the vehicle. A good cd will only go so far until you need to compensate for the adding lift at speed. To keep a car 'glued' to the ground you need to create some downforce. Things such as adding a wing help keep the rear end on the ground. You have air dams, ground effects, smoothing of the undertrays, diffusers. These all help smoothen the flow of air producing downforce and limiting lift, but this all comes at a price (usually an increase in overall cd). So to sum it up, trying to achieve the lowest cd possible and maintain highspeed stability will help determine how much hp you will actually need to go a specific speed.

A stock C6 has a cd of .28 vs. the .34 on the Z06. So theoretically the standard C6 has less drag to fight against, but the Z06 upped the cd in order to maintain stability at higher speeds. I tell you its a cat and mouse game!

Things such as weight distribution and layout also change the aeodynamic features of a vehicle. So everything needs to be accounted for when designing the best workable setup. MR, RR cars have more weight in the back giving them an advantage against FR, FM vehicles against rear end lift (which is a serious spot for lift). This only further shows the dynamic differences in different layouts.

This is pretty basic, but I hope it helps anyone out. There are a ton of variables involved so this isn't what I would call concrete and sound (since I am not an engineer).

So, which car will be faster? Heck I don't know? My almighty biased wisdom is telling me it will be the Z06 .

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by syr74

Well, as I was once an English major and can tell you that for them to have "borrowed" this from Motor Trend without proper credit could resort in some very serious legal ramifications for no real gain...well lets just say I am going to give them more credit for being smart than I give you. Secondly, all the results in this are not the same as in Motor Trend so if it is not there own stuff they indeed just "made it up"

Lastly, this was written for New Car Test Drive just as I orginally said that it was and is very easy to find for those with an IQ higher than their shoe size. But, sure I could see how they would give NCTD credit to avoid legal ramifications, but then not give credit to Motor Trend for perfromance numbers they supposedly borrowed, but then misquoted.......roflmao

I can see the vast global conspiracy emerging to prove you wrong, everyone is in on it. Hell, aliens could be doing the testing for all these cars magazines as most times they don't explicitly claim to have tested the car themselves or even on that day. Maybe we should have them all revamp to meet your stingent standards.

You get more out there every time you post. Has it ever occured to you to keep your mouth shut and let other people think you are stupid rather than open it and prove them right?

I'm just pointing out the fact that they never mentioned doing any acceleration tests, and plenty of websites use others publicated tests, sh*t we both are doing that right now. No more arguing, we will see in a couple of months.

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by syr74

Performance*

0 - 60 mph [secs] 3.3
0 - 100 mph [secs] 7.4
1/4 mile [secs at mph] 11.2 at 131.2

Top Speed [mph] 200
Lateral acceleration [g] 0.99

Fuel Economy [City/Hwy in mpg] 14 / 21

Hmm, a list of specs from the site where accleration is the same as MT found, but not skidpad, top speed, or even mpg.

More evidence of the vast conspiracy...lol

Come on dude, your gonna sit here tell me that both Motor Trend and your so called authority on cars web site tested the Ford GT with identical times. Please do not be so ignorant. Go on people, believe this BS if you want, I'm not fooled, and in a couple of months when they start testing the Z06 we will see.

[M3FordBoy]

Originally Posted by syr74

Performance*

0 - 60 mph [secs] 3.3
0 - 100 mph [secs] 7.4
1/4 mile [secs at mph] 11.2 at 131.2

Top Speed [mph] 200
Lateral acceleration [g] 0.99

Fuel Economy [City/Hwy in mpg] 14 / 21

Hmm, a list of specs from the site where accleration is the same as MT found, but not skidpad, top speed, or even mpg.

More evidence of the vast conspiracy...lol

As for the specs not matching up it is a little weird that 0-60 did but noting else, but you have to consider that they are not tested in the same place like skidpad could be efected if it was on fresh concreat for one and old ash fault for another. Wouldn't it be true there would be less grip one the old ash fault? And for top speed also depends on the tracks like a read Jay Leno said he got to test it at the Ford proving grounds and got up to 214Mph (before it was governed) and MT tested it at 200.1Mph (the car is governed at 205Mph). I think that the Ford GT would be a little faster in acceleration if they put a little bit of traction control on it. Or it might not be who knows.

There is alot of inconsistancy between magazines if in the same magazines. Some time they'll same one number and another time they say something else. It probley depends on how much the company give them in advertising.

[M3FordBoy]

And for drag on a car in MT they tested the Enzo, Ford GT, and Carrera GT and at 200Mph the Enzo had 837 lbs of drag. The Ford GT had 874 lbs, and the Carrera GT had 889 lbs of drag. Just some info.

[kman10587]

Which questions of his did you want me to answer, the fact that he is making stuff up and pulling it out of his ass.

He's given two perfectly legit examples in which taller gearing helped a car go faster, but you haven't done anything to defend your side except accuse him of BSing, accusations which he soundly thwarted. I'm only being a "groupie" for him because you're being a rude, arrogant asshole, and I don't like people like that. You started the insults, and then your simple-minded logic got taken apart, so just quit now.

[TatII]

Originally Posted by M3FordBoy

And for drag on a car in MT they tested the Enzo, Ford GT, and Carrera GT and at 200Mph the Enzo had 837 lbs of drag. The Ford GT had 874 lbs, and the Carrera GT had 889 lbs of drag. Just some info.

the reason why the downforce is greater on the GT and the Carrera GT then the Enzo is because the Enzo has a active aero system. the car will adjust its aerodynamics to reduce drag from around 180mph + to achieve a higher top speed. so of course at 200mph it will have less drag. that is also why it has a considerable higher top speed.

[drunken monkey]

jut so you know for future use....

ash fault=asphalt

[M3FordBoy]

^lol ya I had a hard time trying to find how to spell that and never got it right. Darn schools.:lol

[drunken monkey]

...don't worry about it.....
i mean, i got a typo in that post too......
just thought it'd be good to 'correct' you before somone picks on it vindictively.

[3000ways]

Originally Posted by kman10587

He's given two perfectly legit examples in which taller gearing helped a car go faster, but you haven't done anything to defend your side except accuse him of BSing, accusations which he soundly thwarted. I'm only being a "groupie" for him because you're being a rude, arrogant asshole, and I don't like people like that. You started the insults, and then your simple-minded logic got taken apart, so just quit now.

You see that's where you are wrong, yes I did say taller gearing does make a car go faster, but the question was acceleration, and I'm sorry but a 1/4 mile drag race is a test of ACCELERATION. Now that is one example, where is the other? You see it's trouble arguing when people like you and syr74 completely skip the points and go onto something else such as top speed or competely change your stories, or skirt the facts into your favor. You know what, what ever, thank you and syr74 for ruining my thread. In a couple of months we will see, and kman10587 for once in your life be your own man.

[kman10587]

Well, first you said this:

Originally Posted by 3000ways

Third of all I already told you that the Viper has more torque, woopie freakin' doo, are you going to sit on your bias ass and completely ignore power to f*ckin weight, shorter gears, and etc.

And then you said this:

Originally Posted by 3000ways

You see that's where you are wrong, yes I did say taller gearing does make a car go faster, but the question was acceleration, and I'm sorry but a 1/4 mile drag race is a test of ACCELERATION.

You clearly said in the first post that the Viper's torque advantage is offset by the Z06's shorter gearing, and now you're saying that taller gearing will make a car go faster in the quarter mile. Don't accuse syr74 of changing his story when you're doing the exact same thing.

And since when is a quarter mile a test of acceleration? It's a test of how fast you can cover a quarter mile length track, and if you have to compromise acceleration a little bit by lengthening your gears to get down the track faster, so be it. If a quarter mile run was a test of acceleration, then I guess that Supra that syr74 talked about should have started in 1st gear, since it gives better acceleration than starting in 2nd gear...wait a second, that didn't help him at all, it slowed him down because he was smoking his ass off.

[youngvr4]

i see you guys calmed down a bit
lets not get to out of hand


and i thought they ran the ford gt at the fastest 11.6?

i need to catch up on the super car scene

[syr74]

Originally Posted by 3000ways

You see that's where you are wrong, yes I did say taller gearing does make a car go faster, but the question was acceleration, and I'm sorry but a 1/4 mile drag race is a test of ACCELERATION. Now that is one example, where is the other? You see it's trouble arguing when people like you and syr74 completely skip the points and go onto something else such as top speed or competely change your stories, or skirt the facts into your favor. You know what, what ever, thank you and syr74 for ruining my thread. In a couple of months we will see, and kman10587 for once in your life be your own man.

You really just don't get it do you. The Supra I mentioned has to start shifting out of first gear before the sixty foot mark if that is the gear you start it in....well before actually. And, most of first gear is spent either smoking, or on a good running just hazing the tires. When you are smoking the hides that is forward motion wasted.

First gear is a shorter gear than second is in every car I know of, that is a fact. If acceleration always improves with shorter gearing then this car should be faster when launched in first. However, shorter gears don't do a damned thing to help acceleration if you are producing so much torque that you have to shift out of the gear before you even hook up in it! If you had done some drag racing instead of drag reading then you would know this.

Very torquey cars like the Viper and the GT likely cannot use a shorter gear to their advantage because they are just gonna smoke the hell out of the hides instead of getting any faster. Add that into the extra shifting you will liekloy have to do so that you could get those "deeper" gears and you can see where this takes you.

The Vette could make use of shorter gearing due to it's relatively high/peaky torque curve. But, to act like this would be a huge advantage for the Vette is ridiculous. To think that then you have to assume that the Viper and GT would also benefit from having lower gears than they do, and the manner in which their motors deliver that power makes that unlikely especially on street tires.

And, your comment that we were "discussing top speed" further shows that you do not understand what torque is, or how it is related to acceleration and hp. Torque is an engines ability to work, hp is an engines ability to do work over time. It might be easier to think of it like this..... imagine torque is how hard you punch, and hp is how many times you can throw a punch in an hour. That is essentially how hp and tq are related.

That said, I have never changed my story. It has remained the same since I began posting in this thread. Likely, you thinking I changed my story has more to dso with the fact that you simply do not understand what I am saying than anything else. The fact that you did not know that top speed in a gear can be calculated by using tire daimeter, axle ratio, and the gear ratio is kind of surprising. It's nothing more than basic Algebra. Half the guys on the forum can do the same thing I did.

I also don't have time to argue with you over topics you don't yet understand as classes started for me today. If you want to choose to continue to be ignorant and call everyone who proves you wrong or embarasses you because you are ignorant on a particular issue a liar then you are likely to have a good long life picking up cans on the side of the road. If you decide to open you mouth less, and your ears a lot more, you just might learn something.

And actually, as for the "deeper gearing" argument we were both wrong. I was wrong about what top speed was in each gear because Chevy changed the gearing for the Z06 which has not been in any press realeases that I have seen. You were wrong about the Z06 having significantly deeper gears, because again Chevy is not using the same tranny gear-ratios in the Z06 that they used in the standard C6. Or, at least it would appear they are not doing so because I stumbled accross a press release that noted a much higher first gear ratio than the standard C6 has. That said, by the time you factor this in with the axle ratio the drive-ratio in first gear works out to be about what the Viper's is.

Did you pull the Z06's supposedly shorter gearing out of your ass? It's apparently not actually the case, so can we assume now that you just made this up and are full of warm, brown, squishy stuff? The differene between the above statement and mine is I brought evidence of my statement that you chose not to believe. Lets see evidence of the Z06's significantly shorter gearing there slick. Show me anything on it. But remember, we need to see transmission ratios and axle ratio as this is what determines the real gear ratio and wether or not the car has steeper gears.

And now that I think of it, if lower gear ratios would absolutely make the car accelerate faster why on earth would Chevy change them out for higher ratios? Surely they would not do something to make the C6 accelerate slower would they? And, increased top speed is not the answer as this body and this motor are going to run into drag related problems up there before they seriously get hampered by gearing. Just some food for thought there.