|
| Search | Car Forums | Gallery | Articles | Helper | Air Dried Fresh Beef Dog Food | IgorSushko.com | Corporate |
|
|||||||
 |
 Show Printable Version | 
Subscribe to this Thread
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#1
06-11-2003, 03:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Saleen S7 quicker than the Mclaren F1!!
0-60 in 3.3 seconds! I didn't believe it when I saw it, but it's true!
 If anyone has info on this (Because I just read it in a magazine), then please share. I wanna know a deeper comparison of the two if possible. I'll try to do some research.
|
|
#2
06-11-2003, 04:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
yeah i read that. but the f1 will beat in top speed, braking, handling, build quality, rarity and basically everthing else. you see, the s7 is too long for its own good, the f1 is just the right length and has the perfect wheelbase for the job. look at the new veyron, it goes like 250 or whatever, but thats the only thing that is "good" about it. where are you going to reach 250? Besides, it took 4 turbos to beat the f1 and the f1 was n/a.
|
|
#5
06-11-2003, 06:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
i don't know which magazine you got this from(R&T or C&D), but those guys don't know how to drive the McLaren to its full potential. the F1 is capable of a 0-60 run in 3.2 seconds. those two magazines could only muster a 3.4 second run. still ridiculously fast, but not as fast as they could have. but anyways, the F1 is still a far sexier car, IMO.
__________________
 Please impede from anathematizing me just because I elocute loquacious locutions more Brobdingnaging than one could elucidate with a perspicacity as Lilliputian as your own.
|
|
#6
06-11-2003, 08:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
its because they tested carl beals AMERITECH mclaren f1, to make it legal in the us, some performance has been sacrificed, it even said it in the article i believe
|
|
#7
06-11-2003, 11:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Please impede from anathematizing me just because I elocute loquacious locutions more Brobdingnaging than one could elucidate with a perspicacity as Lilliputian as your own.
|
|
#8
06-16-2003, 02:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
plus you have to chANGE the tires on the bugatti when you think ur gonna go over 200 (wtf??)
|
|
#9
06-25-2003, 01:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
the quickest some 0 to 60 was 2.9 i remenber reading from somewhere. and enzo can do 3.15..... pretty impressive..... i guess a lot of factors contributes to the 0 to 60 thing..
|
|
#10
06-26-2003, 05:23 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
woop dee doo...and a brand new S7 beat a decade-old supercar
 ...but the fact is that it didnt. as stated before the F1 0-60 is 3.2 sec not 3.4. 3.4 is what R&T got when the tested an AmeriTech McLaren, a detuned model that was redesigned to be able to sell on the US market. notice how in an earlier issue, R&T also got the 231mph top speed. this shows that they have never tested all categories and just took passed down information. an AmeriTech McLaren would never be able to reach 231 if it tried. according to R&T standards, the S7 is faster, cuz thats how they tested the F1 and S7. =========================== mini magic: u r severly mistaken about the F1 handling/braking being superior to the S7. the fact is that the S7 is more of a track car. the S7 brakes better comming in at 60-0 111ft beating the F1 127ft. ur also very wrong about handling. the S7 pulls .99G compared to the F1 .86G. the F1 has the "infamous" softer suspension than the S7. the F1 is more of a road car while the S7 is leans towards a track car. despite the S7 longer body and wheelbase, is does the slalom over 70mph. the F1 is slower at 64.5 due to its soft suspension. the F1 may have a shorter wheelbase, but it wont help too much if its has more bodyroll than the S7
|
|
#11
06-27-2003, 05:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Also, the Enzo's 3.15 was done on the straight of Ferrari's test track which is apparently slightly downhill. The best genuine times I have seen for both cars are: F1 - 3.2s (source Autocar Magazine) Enzo - 3.3s (source Road & Track magazine) Both are still very quick cars, and the F1 still the quickest! 
__________________
Caleb 91 Silvia Ks
|
|
#12
06-27-2003, 11:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
!?
|
|
#13
06-28-2003, 09:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hahaha... there have been some funny replies on this one
 Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Please impede from anathematizing me just because I elocute loquacious locutions more Brobdingnaging than one could elucidate with a perspicacity as Lilliputian as your own.
|
|
#14
06-28-2003, 10:47 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I probably could have worded that better. I'll try again:I'm pretty sure that the 2.9s you're talking about is a widely spread misquote of the 3.9s 0-60 time that the LM did during its record breaking 0-100-0 run. Here is a link: http://www.mclarencars.com/content/s...es/lmto100.htm Strangely, this article quotes a time of 4.0s, while the Autozine website quotes the figures of the same test at 3.9s (yet the text of the article on the Mclaren site that I linked to says it does 0-60 in under 4 seconds). I guess it must have done 3.9x seconds where x = a number high enough to round it up to 4.0.
__________________
Caleb 91 Silvia Ks
|
|
#15
06-29-2003, 11:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
evo engineering
the evolution 8 does the slalom in
71.4 according to road and track.. 72.5 according to sport compact skidpad at .97 according to car and driver yes.. it doesn't have as good of drag coefficient nor downforce.. but for 30 grand it beats anything else ever made from the factory
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
POST REPLY TO THIS THREAD |
 |
|
|
