JonBoy

I've already said it - the NSX will beat a GT-R around a track (any track). How much? I don't know. But it'll beat it.

rob-2

You say that but don't agree on the time for a gtr on the ring. This is to allow you to claim it beat it.

Man up Jon. You've been called out and you're flip flopping for all to see. Are you scared to commit to a time? What gives?

Agree with me on a reasonable gtr ring time for their 545hp and lets see if Honda beats it.

WolfpackS2k

I disagree. The front motors are disengaged above 124 mph. Thus at speed on a track, at best the total combined power of the NSX is 547. Though really, it's probably closer to 525 at high speeds.

I could be wrong, but I believe he's set a high standard for this car specifically because of it's needlessly complicated and heavy drivetrain. If the car isn't completely amazing because of this drivetrain, than what's the point? This drivetrain already isolates the driver from feedback, and seems to do a lot of the driving for you. Basically the argument being proposed is that "could this car be better without all this "high tech" heavy crap?"

Heavy's heavy, and I've been critical of the 918 for the same reason.

JonBoy

The 918 Spyder's front motor disengages above 146 mph. Same issue there...

I've set a high standard because that's what Honda has promised on the car. I, for one, believe them and the reviews have supported the idea that it can handle amazingly well.

More torque, more power, better handling - the GT-R shouldn't be a problem at a track.

JonBoy

Why would I make up a time for the GT-R? It makes no sense for me to postulate on what a GT-R can THEORETICALLY do, and then use that THEORETICAL time as a benchmark. Next thing you know, you'll have me making up a time for the NEXT GT-R, to prove that the NSX won't be competitive in the future....

I said the NSX will beat the GT-R. Period. End of story. That's a commitment. I can't commit to beat a time that doesn't exist.

How about Nissan runs a time and we'll work against that? Until then, "small" tracks will have to suffice - same day, same conditions, same driver (probably). That's as fair as we'll get for now.

Why is that such an issue for you?

rwheelz

So much for the benefit of the doubt! It shouldn't be long before we have times to compare for tracks all over America. Will the NSX best the half-priced C7Z at your local road course? If this car can't hang with a base GTR or Z06 then they have failed miserably (at double the price).

WolfpackS2k

I didn't know that, good to know for sure. However, the percentage of track time at or above 146 mph is considerably less than 124 mph.

Notice I didn't say anything about the handling. I said driver involvement

Marioshi

Instinctively, I don't see why the narrow peak powerband of a geared ICE and the broad peak powerband of an electric motor couldn't be designed to overlap at some point in time. Obviously this isn't going to be the case in every gear. If you really think about it, the gearing of the ICE engine is meant to keep it at or near peak performance at all times. The only way I can see these power bands not lining up is by design. Which is certainly possible (hence the request for more info).

BTW, Porsche's spec sheet for the 918 lists 608 peak hp for the ICE, rear electric at 156hp and front electric at 129hp which adds up to 893 not 887 which disproves your theory that they just "added it up". Note that it lists maximum system output as the often quoted 887hp.

http://press.porsche.com/vehicles/20...918-Spyder.pdf

I mean really, how did you assert that the peak hp of the Porsche system was "perhaps 790 (at best)"? That certainly hasn't been in any article I have seen. I honestly would like to find a powerband chart of these cars operating at full power so I can understand how they compare to ICE only designs but so far I haven't seen anything like that. So if you have something that shows the power curve of these cars, why would you pass on the opportunity to share it?

Marioshi

BTW if you look at the interactive web special for the 918 it specifies that it makes 887hp @ 8500 rpm which is just under the ICE peak hp level. That certainly gives it a bit of legitimacy as an actual figure that car can achieve rather than a simple addition of the various peak outputs of the system.

It also lists the decoupling speed of the front motor as 165 mph not 146 mph as has been quoted elsewhere.

http://956.porsche.com/microsite/918...-electricdrive

Click on "technical data"

JonBoy

Because the electric motors are single-speed - they have no gearing. That means that the car MIGHT have matching peaks in one gear (at best) but obviously never would in any other gear.

Secondly, I've done a fair bit of work with electric motors (ie, actual work experience, including spec'ing them for industrial applications) so I'm using practical knowledge to support my commentary.

I'm off by 6 hp. The source I quickly checked listed the numbers I put down. It doesn't change my argument or conclusion.

Because typically an electric motor's power value at peak ICE power revs is typically 60-65% of the electric motor's full rated power. Again, that's based on common knowledge and practical experience.

Porsche does have a power curve. And you'll love the results that support my theory.



795 hp (not 887), as compared to my estimate of 790 hp. Seriousy, am I good or am I good?

Also, you couldn't have actually searched for that graph because I found it very easily (Google "Porsche 918 Spyder power curve").