1000TT?!?!??!?!

Discussion in '2000 Hennessey Viper Venom 800TT' started by MastrVipr, Dec 6, 2002.

  1. #1 MastrVipr, Dec 6, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    i found this site about the 100TT, i didn't know that it existed but it might be new news for some of you others
    http://www.dodge-vipers.com/hm1000tt.html
    click specs for specs. they are pretty sweet specs.
     
  2. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    i heard about it but ive never seen it...that is awesome, i hope they build more
     
  3. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    looks mad...i'm gonna have 2 get 1 of them 2!
     
  4. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    i don't get, this car has 300 more HP than the 800tt yet it only goes .15 seconds faster in the 1/4 mile. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/confused.gif"></A>
     
  5. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    maybe it weighs more.
     
  6. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    you would be stupid not to have this beast!
     
  7. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    actually the 1000tt is 30lbs. less than the 800tt
     
  8. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    I dont think they have quite learned how to take it to its limits yet...
     
  9. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    maybe they are using different tires or the weather it was driven in.
     
  10. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    i don't know, i mean you just don't pull 1200 horses out of the air...
     
  11. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    Who cares...
    Both fast, both look good, both another great piece of American Art!
     
  12. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    these cars (800tt & 1000tt) are both sweet, anther good viper is the 2000 Dodge Stryker Twin Turbo Viper with that sweet amrican flame paint job
     
  13. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    who agrees with me? the 1000tt when it gets on this site... if it ever does then it will send those biased euro cars are your masters american cars suck bastard runnin for the hill. ppl were shocked about the bugatti when it came here. when and if this get here ppl will piss their selves . i know i would to actually see full stats and official stats for this monster. by far when it gets here it will be the king of cars!
     
  14. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    it's importand to know that the 800TT ran a 9.9 while it was drizzling outside and with strong winds. This 1000TT ran a 9.8 it's first time around. It's more than capable of running 8's after more practince and better conditions. Remember, the Vette TT ran a 8.9 after months of practice and tuning. So give it some time and the viper will be in the 8's. One more thing, that viper svs twin turbo, the one with 1100hp and 1300lb ft of torque, that car is a mid 8 drag care waiting to be discovered. From what i have seen so far, it's only been at the Salt flats for top speed runs.
     
  15. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    so ur sayin' that the 800tt did it stats on wet road!
     
  16. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    i hate vipers and people who have seen my posts will know but that is one beast of a car, brilliant!
     
  17. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    No, only the standing mile was done on the rain-slicked road (fishtailing much of the way).

    The other stats were done in the dry, but their was a fairly strong headwind.
     
  18. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    Guibo:
    "No, only the standing mile was done on the rain-slicked road (fishtailing much of the way).

    The other stats were done in the dry, but their was a fairly strong headwind."


    So is supercars.net wrong when they say the 0-60 time was done in the rain using slicks? (if the 1/4mile was only done that way) ? <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/confused.gif"></A>
     
  19. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    That's true. But as much as I like Vipers, I still think that the McLaren F1 has the advantage on the track. But on the dragstrip, nothing on this entire website could beat the 1000TT. What supercar is going to beat 0-60 in 2.2?
     
  20. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    ya i guess the mclaren would have more of an advantage seeing as it was built for racing. but ive seen slalom speeds of 75 mph and braking of 60-0 in 110ft so i dont know this could have a great run on some tracks.
     
  21. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    sorry
     
  22. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    Reasons why 1000hp car, with 200 more hp, may still be only a fraction of a second faster to 60/in the 1/4 mile than an 800 hp car.
    (i'm assuming identical tires, a dry road, and identical weight for this)

    there is only a certain amount of friction a tire can have on a given road surface.

    this is basically a classic "stick-slip" physics problem

    here is an equation...
    Frictional Force = (coefficient of friction) x (weight of object in newtons)

    the coefficient of friction is constant for two surfaces (i.e. tires & road)

    let us assume that the coeff of friction is 1 (a value one might see using very good tires or slicks)

    therefore...the frictional force will be the same for both cars.
    whenever the applied force (i.e. acceleration) is greater than the frictional force, the object is under acceleration.

    but, due to the finite friction, adding hp after a point has diminishing returns.

    i'll have to look back to a physics textbook to get the full mathematical explanation if anyone wants it...
     
  23. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    i did not understand one firggin word you jus said!
     
  24. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    Yes, this site is wrong. It's not the first time either.

    There were two main sets of acceleration numbers (excluding the 0-1 mile run) given in the Motor Trend article.

    On stock Michelin Pilots, the 800TT achieved these numbers on its shakedown runs:

    0-60: 3.21
    1/4 mile: 10.71 @ 137.6 mph

    They then changed the tires over to Mickey Thompson ET Streets and got these numbers (after a couple more runs):

    0-60: 2.34
    1/4 mile: 9.99 @ 138.95

    The next day, they did the standing mile run: 28.23 @ 193.54

     
  25. Re: 1000TT?!?!??!?!

    Surely the only reason this takes 2.7 seconds in 0-60 is because the driver sat at 59mph for 2.6 seconds! Its gotta be faster than that with over 1000nm of torque?!?!
     

Share This Page