0-200mph shootout
08-07-2007, 04:29 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by duboseq,Aug 6 2007, 07:06 PM
Where is the Saleen S7 TT and the Konesisegg CCX?
08-07-2007, 05:03 AM
#12
Registered User
I drove a SLR (not at warp-speed just around some b-roads) and let me tell you it's insane for the street.
I can't imagine the SLR is the slow-poke of the group (along with the stupidly slow Murc
)
Did the test say what the 0-100 mph times were? The Enzo was about 6.6s to 100 mph.
I can't imagine the SLR is the slow-poke of the group (along with the stupidly slow Murc
)Did the test say what the 0-100 mph times were? The Enzo was about 6.6s to 100 mph.
08-07-2007, 05:26 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Southern Part of Heaven
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't read the article yet. Just glanced at it. Didn't they say the Viper ran 100 to 200 in 13 seconds (guess it would have to to get 0 to 200 done in 20 seconds)? That's just unreal. The thing pulls harder from 100 than the S2000 does from a standing start. Obviously, though, these cars are just wretched excess for the street or track (and, possibly, rolling coffins).
08-07-2007, 05:54 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by S2020,Aug 6 2007, 05:17 PM
where would the S2000 place in this test?
0 - 60 mph 5.3 seconds
0 - 100 mph 13.8 seconds
0 -
08-07-2007, 06:02 AM
#17
Registered User
[QUOTE=overst33r,Aug 7 2007, 05:29 AM] At first glance the Murcielago kind of stands out, it does 0-60 in 3.8s but it takes nearly another 6s to do 40mph?
0-100MPH Data:
BugattiVeyron16.4________6.2
HennesseyViper__________7.3
Lamborghini Murci
0-100MPH Data:
BugattiVeyron16.4________6.2
HennesseyViper__________7.3
Lamborghini Murci
08-07-2007, 06:03 AM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Scottsdale
Posts: 2,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dude watching that veyron launch is amazing...it doesn't seem that crazy because of the launch control, until all of a sudden you can hardly see the car in the distance...
08-07-2007, 06:06 AM
#19
Registered User
Veyron:
0-200: 24.2 seconds
0-100: 6.2 seconds.
100-200: 18 seconds.
How'd that story go? That the Veyron could do 0-200 in the same time it took the McLaren F1 to go 100-200? The McLaren F1 specs I could find are as follows:
0-200: 28.0 seconds (3.8 longer)
0-100: 6.3 seconds (just 0.1 longer)
100-200: 21.7 seconds (3.7 longer)
Which makes sense - the similar power-to-weight ratios of the two cars means similar low-speed accelerations. But at higher speeds, the weight isn't as much a factor and it's all about power and aero drag. So the Veyron accelerates faster at higher speeds, but not so fast as the urban legend claims.
That's not the case with the Viper, though.
The Viper does 100-200 in all of 13 seconds, for a total time of 20.3 0-200. Faster that the McLaren's 100-200 time. That's just a brutal amount of power.
0-200: 24.2 seconds
0-100: 6.2 seconds.
100-200: 18 seconds.
How'd that story go? That the Veyron could do 0-200 in the same time it took the McLaren F1 to go 100-200? The McLaren F1 specs I could find are as follows:
0-200: 28.0 seconds (3.8 longer)
0-100: 6.3 seconds (just 0.1 longer)
100-200: 21.7 seconds (3.7 longer)
Which makes sense - the similar power-to-weight ratios of the two cars means similar low-speed accelerations. But at higher speeds, the weight isn't as much a factor and it's all about power and aero drag. So the Veyron accelerates faster at higher speeds, but not so fast as the urban legend claims.
That's not the case with the Viper, though.
The Viper does 100-200 in all of 13 seconds, for a total time of 20.3 0-200. Faster that the McLaren's 100-200 time. That's just a brutal amount of power.
08-07-2007, 06:08 AM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rai,Aug 7 2007, 06:02 AM
that's kind of slow for the Murc to get to 100 (as the F599 did 100 in 7 seconds but different conditions etc..)
The Euro cars with AWD get a good launch, but the Big engine US cars have serious traction issues until they get moving (out of first few gears) which will slow them down. This is the main reason why I'm surprised the Bug didn't win but it's got the most weight also.
The Euro cars with AWD get a good launch, but the Big engine US cars have serious traction issues until they get moving (out of first few gears) which will slow them down. This is the main reason why I'm surprised the Bug didn't win but it's got the most weight also.
Regarding the Murcielago, it is really slow in this comparison. The LP640 does 0-100 in 8.1s and it only has about 70hp more...
Considering this was done at an airstrip, the ground was probably not very sticky...