Team Integra Forums banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
663 Posts
that thing is supercharged at 460 horsepower and is only running 13 flat? that's fast, but i woulda thought they'd be faster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
ZenSokuRacer13 on Sep/06/02 said:
that thing is supercharged at 460 horsepower and is only running 13 flat? that's fast, but i woulda thought they'd be faster.
Yeah, you'd think so. Weird, eh?

By my calculations a 460 hp car that weighs 3185 lbs should do 0-60 in around 3.5 seconds (the Porsche 911 GT2 has 456 @ 3175 and does 0-60 in 3.77 seconds). Okay, that's a little high, but 4.39 seconds is still pretty bad for those numbers. Very weird--I guess it's all about how the power is delivered (hp/torque curves). Clearly the peak "lies."

Kinda disappointing, but it's still a neat car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
robertmcdonald on Sep/06/02 said:
By my calculations a 460 hp car that weighs 3185 lbs should do 0-60 in around 3.5 seconds (the Porsche 911 GT2 has 456 @ 3175 and does 0-60 in 3.77 seconds).
Oh, and how do I arrive at those numbers? Neat little trick I came up with. Given the horsepower and weight of a car you can pretty well calculate its acceleration (in this case 0-60 times). It's accurate within about +/- 10% on most cars.

Quite simply take the weight, divide by the horsepower, then divide that by two.
Really simple. It seems that really good cars (i.e., the Porsche 911 Turbo or even the Integra Type-R!) do better than these times and really crappy cars (i.e., the Comptech NSX and Dodge Viper or even the Ferrari 575M Maranello) do a lot worse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
743 Posts
you would think traction would come in to play somewhere in the mind of a great physics proffessor like yourself.lol
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
b18bad on Sep/06/02 said:
you would think traction would come in to play somewhere in the mind of a great physics proffessor like yourself.lol
Well, duh. But a well designed car can negate these factors and allow all its horsepower to move its weight. A good car can make use of its horsepower, not waste it burning its tires. Whatever needed to be done to help that NSX (be it modifying the engine, supercharger, or just giving it more traction) it didn't do it, and its deviation from the simple equation I talked about shows that.

Ferraris are huge culprits of "wasting horsepower," too. Given their horsepower and their weight, many Ferraris just throw all those ponies away on... well, I'm not sure. Could be any number of things (including traction). But Ferrari rarely impresses me. Porsche, on the other hand...


Traction or no, the stupid little equation is still useful. It even works on POSs like the Ford Escort for God's sake!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
the biggest losses can be in the drive train too, ford stick-shifts only lose 15% in the drivetrain, while i've heard most people use 20% losses in our cars; things like the nsx and ferraris might lose; like ferrari's "auto stick" thing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
966 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
DaBoyNBlu on Sep/06/02 said:
...like ferrari's "auto stick" thing
Ah, you must be referring to the incredible Ferrari F1 manual transmission. Not an automatic at all, my friend, but the most glorious manual transmission ever made (when I said Ferrari rarely impresses me, this is one of those rare cases
).

The F1 shifter (as its called because it's derrived from Formula one racing transmissions) is simply a manual gearbox with the clutch and shift action hydrolically controlled. Flick the right paddle shifter (F1 style) and the computer pushes in the clutch, shifts up a gear, and pulls the clutch back out--and faster than any human ever can (especially in the Enzo Ferrari's F1 gearbox). Downshifts are the real kicker though: identical to before but the computer perfectly matches the revs of the engine for the next gear while, again, executing a blazingly fast shift.

Since it's even used in the Enzo Ferrari (see, like, every car magazine in the last month or two
), I doubt this is much of a cause for horsepower loss. If there's one thing I'm sure Ferrari can manage with its F1 shifters, its making sure there's no hp loss through them.

Oh, damn I want an F1 gearbox in my car... If only it wasn't a $10,000 option on even a Ferrari--a car that's supposed to have it! (BTW, BMW's SMG--for Sequential Manual Gearbox--is the same kind of thing.)

The F1-type gearbox is the only partially automatic manual that is faster than a standard manual transmission--often times .1 seconds faster on the same car in 0-60. Pretty damned nice, but the downshifts are the best thing. An sequental manual is not to be confused with a "ManuMatic" transmission like those found in Acuras--those are just regular automatic slushboxes with a manual mode. Bleh. Even Porsche's Tiptronic S Semi-Manual Auto can't compare to a standard stick (at least everyone I know who's driven one, including me, thinks so).

Okay, that's enough from me. I'm starting to drool...
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top