2017 FK8 Honda Civic Type R - 7:43.80 at the Nurburgring - reclaims fastest FWD title
04-28-2017, 09:33 AM
#61
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The weight difference is less than 100 lbs. This car had to be a Ring'r. That is how we explain it, through some Honda marketing BS! Not that every other manufacturer isn't doing the same thing. The whole Ring thing is a joke IMO.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
04-28-2017, 09:50 AM
#62
The weight difference is less than 100 lbs. This car had to be a Ring'r. That is how we explain it, through some Honda marketing BS! Not that every other manufacturer isn't doing the same thing. The whole Ring thing is a joke IMO.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
Technology has significantly advanced in terms of making cars more stable, more forgiving, grippier (tires are WAY better now than 10 years ago), better balanced, etc. They have an adaptive suspension on the Type R vs the fairly jouncy, rough suspension on the Z06. They quote 10 kph faster through one particular high-speed corner, compared the previous Type R, which is pretty good (6 mph). That's worth seconds per lap right there, over the original car. Throw in better tires, more torque, more power, more rigid body, etc, and you can easily find the 7s improvement over the last Type R.
We know it was on street legal "track focused" tires. That could be anything, really, and I guarantee they were shaved down and heat cycled to be absolutely perfect for that one lap. Now add in the "perfect day" with a professional driver on a dry track with no traffic and you've got a pretty good advantage over a bone stock C6Z (that wasn't supported by the factory, as best I know) that took a few flying laps to set a time.
The time is not a poor reflection on the C6Z but rather a reflection of the (lack of) prep and support given that car in setting its time. Jan Magnusson did the driving but he did a STANDING start, which is worth quite a few seconds on its own. This was also in 2005 (12 years ago) running on pretty crappy tires (Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar Extended Mobility run flats!). Who knows if it was an open track or if they rented it for the run?
Additionally, the Z06 is not easy to drive at the limit, especially on a bumpier track. Confidence and composure go a LONG ways to making a car fast around a track, even with the best drivers at the helm.
2006 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 vs. 2006 Dodge Viper SRT10 Comparison Tests - Page 3 - Car and Driver
04-28-2017, 04:10 PM
#63
Jim Mero drove a C6Z with the Z07 package to a 7:22.68 lap time at the Nordschleife. The Z07 package includes Michelin Pilot Sport Cup tires. On the same grade of tires, I believe the C6Z would murder the Type R on any track in the world. It would not be close.
04-28-2017, 05:11 PM
#64
Community Organizer
I don't care either way but the car has a damn cage it.
But yeah, momentum ........
But yeah, momentum ........
04-28-2017, 05:20 PM
#65
15 years ago, a Nissan Altima 3.5 was faster in a straight line than an S2000. That didn't bother me then, didn't make the S2000 any lesser of a car, and it doesn't bother me now if a ~$34k Mustang GT is faster than a similarly priced or more expensive CTR. Not that I'm interested in purchasing one, however, per my previously stated dislike of FWD, I just thinking pointing to Mustangs has never been, and isn't currently, valid criticism of any other performance oriented car.
04-28-2017, 05:27 PM
#66
That's more like it. The C6 ZR1 did a 7:19 so that makes good sense.
04-29-2017, 05:53 AM
#68
Vette ran it with sparco seats and harness bar, not a production car! Cheater cheater, putting in safety equipment
http://www.superchevy.com/features/vemp-1111-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-nurburgring/
http://www.superchevy.com/features/vemp-1111-chevrolet-corvette-zr1-nurburgring/
04-30-2017, 02:46 PM
#69
The weight difference is less than 100 lbs. This car had to be a Ring'r. That is how we explain it, through some Honda marketing BS! Not that every other manufacturer isn't doing the same thing. The whole Ring thing is a joke IMO.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
What do you mean by improved technology? They finally added a mechanical LSD up front, and now the car is so much faster through the turns that it runs down cars with 66% more power, even with huge long straights, even though it has skinny ass 245 tires? I actually like the car, but let's be realistic.
I totally agree.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
