Re: 500 hp @ 4000 RPM??????

Discussion in '2000 Dodge Viper GTS-R Concept' started by Guibo, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. #26 Guibo, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  2. #27 550_Maranello, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    >>A SUB-STANDARD Viper (with only 411 DIN PS and NO anti-lock brakes) is some TWENTY-SIX SECONDS faster than a 350-hp Skyline GTR V-Spec.

    Don't think so? Take a look:
    http://www.skylinegtr.co.uk/articles/1997/october1997.htm
    http://www.nurburgring.de/?rubrik=rekorde&lang=eng


    Here's a man after my own heart! He not only makes a claim he backs it up with facts! Imagine if all the pre-pubescent posters in this forum had to actually back up what they say. There sure wouldn't be as much posturing and posing. Go ahead and look those words up in the dictionary , I'll wait.

    >>Notice that the Ferrari F355 and NSX beat the Skyline in that test. How do those cars compare to a Viper? Look below.


    BTW, when your car is already making 500 horses at 4K rpm, why would you necessarily say that's bad? Since you can't reach top speed at any track short of Le Mans (where the Viper enjoys a considerably nice racing record), the 6 speeds it comes with are more than enough. And in racing terms, there's not much difference between a car with that much power down low vs. a high-revving engine with no low-down torque (and one that is only really useable between 6000-8500 rpm)

    This is true. Also, 500 hp at 4000 RPM is only the peak horsepower. Anyone who has driven a Viper knows there are plenty of horses (AND TORQUE) at 2000 all the way to about 6000 RPM.
     
  3. wow a lot of ppl here are dumb. Whats the point of a racing car that only revs to 4000rpm??? it may do well in the corners, but the gearing will either, make it have good acceleration, or good top speed, severly sacrificing whichever one is nto geared too. There is no in between with a car that makes max power this low. There is no flexibility. You need a broad powerband, and the proper gearing. The only place i coul dsee this car (not a racing viper which revs to 8500 i think) doing good is in truck racing......that was my point<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. ahhaah... typical forum, US fans VS> jap fans! im definitely a jap fan, i love high revving cars for the simple reason that high revving vehicles are usually able to out accelerate the lower revving ones. Guibo stop posting the same damn chart, ive seen it in like 10 different forums, your pissing me off.

    P.S None of you mother#$%#s can take a car to 60 in 3 seconds, so just stick to your mopeds<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Considering a STOCK Viper is already good for 0-60 in 4.0-4.1 and a 186-193 mph top end, what makes you think this particular Viper is in any way lacking? Your argument is nonsense, Dodge's Ram V10 engine was the one that maxxed out at 310 horses @ (coincidentally) 4000 rpm.

    8500 rpm? I think you're being overly optimistic. Perhaps the "sprint"-spec versions of the GTS-R revved to 7000-ish rpm, making about 700 horses in the process. In "endurance" trim, it's closer to 6500 rpm. If you can actually point to some reference (or scan an article) that says it went to 8500 rpm, then I'll believe it.

    In any case it's not the Viper's horsepower delivery that has proven problematic in roadracing. Taking 1st in class at Le Mans 3 times, 1st overall at Daytona, class victories at Sebring, 3 straight One Lap of Americas, the inaugural Open Track Challenge, 4 FIA GT titles, 3 24 Hours of Nurburgring, French FFSA GT and Belcar titles, and last year's 24 Hours of Spa (where Vipers took the FIRST FOUR positions) should tell you this car has no power delivery and gearing problems.

    In the meantime, who's got a dyno chart on that Spoon Civic? This I gotta see.
     
  6. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from WAY2FAST4YOU</i>
    <b>i love high revving cars for the simple reason that high revving vehicles are usually able to out accelerate the lower revving ones.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    You're assuming that the cars have similar displacements, torque, etc. Your statement might be true if the S2000 and NSX outaccelerate the Z06 and Viper. Yet, they don't. Curious how that works out, eh?

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from WAY2FAST4YOU</i>
    <b>Guibo stop posting the same damn chart, ive seen it in like 10 different forums, your pissing me off
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    The same chart? Which one is that? What other 10 forums have I posted them in? Please give us links, otherwise be noted for the BS artist that you are.
    I really don't care if I piss you off or not. You should know that by now. Slow learner, I guess.

    BTW, see my message for you in the 50th Anniversary Corvette forum.
     
  7. #32 Guibo, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    And back to the topic at hand,

    Type R Personality:
    Here are some numbers for you to consider

    Panoz LMP-01: 6.0 liter N/A V8
    600+ hp @ 7000 rpm; max eng speed: 7250 rpm
    http://www.panozmotorsports.com/7f_specs.html

    Audi R8: 3.6 liter turbocharged V8
    610 hp @ 6800 rpm
    http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/features/2002/june/200206_feature_r8.xml?&page=2

    Corvette C5-R: 7.0-liter N/A V8
    620 hp @ 6400 rpm
    http://www.gm.com/company/gm_exp_live/archived_events/lemans/corvette/pre/16may_corvette_timeline/corvette_timeline.html




    The last one is the direct competitor to the Viper in most racing series. Why the hell would an 8.0-liter V10 need to rev to 8500 rpm? It makes no sense.

    BTW, if ANYONE can point to an 8.0-liter V10 used for roadracing or as a production car engine that revs to 8500 rpm, I'll be impressed. Any takers? Anyone?

    http://www.panozmotorsports.com/7f_specs.html
     
  8. hey idiot guibo, i'm not talking about power delivery on racing vipers (although i stated that) i'm talking about making 500 hp at 4000 rpm. It couldnt keep up with cars on the track on the straight, no matter if it were le mans or not. The gearing would be too short. And if u wanted it to keep up on the straigts that would be impossbile because the gearing would be too high and take too long to reach the speeds. Which is precisely why this car is a prototype.<!-- Signature -->
     
  9. yes notice all of those cars are above 550 hp (if i recall) and they all rev past 4000 rpm, most of all 2000 above...which is vital to the engines elasticity in the powerband...even the torquey(all of them are) vette engines at least rev to 6000 nowif i could jsut find that motor trend issue where they drive a le mans viper i admit i was exaggerating about the 8500 rpm, it';s around where u said i just wanna find out exactly what it is i'll get back to you asap<!-- Signature -->
     
  10. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Type S Personality</i>
    <b>wow a lot of ppl here are dumb. Whats the point of a racing car that only revs to 4000rpm??? it may do well in the corners, but the gearing will either, make it have good acceleration, or good top speed, severly sacrificing whichever one is nto geared too. There is no in between with a car that makes max power this low. There is no flexibility. You need a broad powerband, and the proper gearing. The only place i coul dsee this car (not a racing viper which revs to 8500 i think) doing good is in truck racing......that was my point</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    The Viper can use 2nd and third gear all around the track, with power on demnd all thye time, where a high reving engine has to shift more to stay in its power band, resulting in sloppier driving in some cases and slower lap times. The Viper also has incredible top end, as stated in an issue of automobile which basicly said the shift into 4th gear is remarkable in its burst of acceleration. The Viper has one of the broadest power bands anywhere, and thus it is a very good handler and top-ender. This car is more flexible than its competition in most cases, including high reving cars. Look at the dynos and gearing to see what I mean.<!-- Signature -->
     
  11. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from WAY2FAST4YOU</i>
    <b>ahhaah... typical forum, US fans VS> jap fans! im definitely a jap fan, i love high revving cars for the simple reason that high revving vehicles are usually able to out accelerate the lower revving ones. Guibo stop posting the same damn chart, ive seen it in like 10 different forums, your pissing me off.

    P.S None of you mother#$%#s can take a car to 60 in 3 seconds, so just stick to your mopeds</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    And you should shut your trap. Anyone who wants to see what an expert he is can go to the Aniversary Vette forum and see his thread, and what he claims.<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from WAY2FAST4YOU</i>
    <b>ahhaah... typical forum, US fans VS> jap fans! im definitely a jap fan, i love high revving cars for the simple reason that high revving vehicles are usually able to out accelerate the lower revving ones. Guibo stop posting the same damn chart, ive seen it in like 10 different forums, your pissing me off.

    P.S None of you mother#$%#s can take a car to 60 in 3 seconds, so just stick to your mopeds</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    you must have an IQ of 750...freekin retard! High reving engines have to rev higher to get to their power while low reving engines don't, their power is availible very early. Its as simple as that.

    simple comparison viper [email protected] S2000 that revs to 9K makes about 140 to 150 at the same rpm....I wonder which one is going to be faster.

    And I haven't seen it said yet but having [email protected] doesn't mean that your power drops off at 4001rpm, in fact it keeps damn close to that 500hp mark until redline! And charts show information that back up is statement, something I've never seen you do!
     
  13. True type S, but the fact that the ACR was not as refined has little to do with the powerband. The new Viper, with its revised chassis will put such problems to rest, I am convinced, and yes, it is easy to snap a Vipers end around, but that is also due to its generaly less advanced chassis. The new Viper prototype, aka not really precisly tuned, is being priased by many ofr its manners at the limit. Given the proper chassis, low end grunt is definitely an advantage. If you were watching the last ALMS race, the R8 was trailing the Panoz. When the two came out of a corner, the Panoz would get a few feet on the R8, then they would be dead even, then the R8 would out break it and make up the distance. The point I'm making here is that the Panoz had the intant acceleration, where the higher reving, lower tourqe R8 lost time to the Panoz. The low end is what got the Panoz the win.

    That said, in a chassis that is not advanced, low end grunt can kill you, definitely. The old Viper was about brute power, and thus it was a tricky car to drive well. So it really depends on the driver and chassis. In many cases, a load of low end can be hazardous to your health at the track.

    Nice to see you are actually utilizing brain matter on this, I was thinking it was going to be a flame war. You make your point well.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  14. to Type S Personality:

    The main reason that the previous generation of viper was hard to drive is the solid rear axle. Now that the Viper has IRS it has been said to be as easy or easier to drive than the Porsche 911 Turbo (which is a easy car to drive well). It is how the torque is applied rather than how much torque the vehicle has, ie. having 500lb-ft of torque does not necessitate it is hard to drive the car.

    I take exception to people on this site that shoot off their mouth like they know everything there is to know about cars...then when people who do know come along they get a bunch of crap because the people who don't know don't like to be showed that they are wrong.
     
  15. my last statement was not directed at Type S Personality, rather the majority of people that have no usefull information and just want to argue. I'm sorry if I implied that directly to you Type S Personality, that was not my intent...I was just fed up with the crap that keeps spewing forth from these forums.
     
  16. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Type S Personality</i>
    <b>hey idiot guibo, i'm not talking about power delivery on racing vipers (although i stated that) i'm talking about making 500 hp at 4000 rpm.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    LOL, calling me "idiot". Who was it who figured out that the Viper DOESN'T make peak hp at 4000 rpm? (Hint: Not you!)

    Maybe if you knew what the hell you were talking about, this thread wouldn't BE 3 pages long.

     
  17. guibo the site you posted , the first one didn't have any vipers time at all. perhaps they updated the site by the time i checked it? i didn't expect so many people to post in this site over the course of 2 days. anyways the other site compared the skyline, 911, m3, nsx, f355.

    as far as the stats i have seen. the fastest time at nurburging set by the stock viper posts a time of 8:10 at nurburging. the stock skyline posts a 7:59. the skyline's unofficial record was posted by a preproduction model of a r33 skyline.

    someone also stated the two valve pushrod engines work just as well as multi-valved DOHC engines. this is wholly untrue. i do not profess any knowledge of nascar so i couldn't answer why their engines rev to a supposed 9000 rpm. two valve pushrod engines are good at promoting low end power. this is a fact that i know. at low engine speeds the charge velociities in the intake port during the intake stroke are quite low, thanks to the large port and valve curtain areas, when the intake proces ends, the charge is trapped in the cylinder remains somewhat stagnant, lacking motion during the compression and combustion processes. the spark plug is fired, and a flame frotn spreads through the fuel/air mix in the combustion chamber. charge motion is the main reason why 2 valve/cylinder engines often have better low end torque than multi-valve engines of similar displacment. however this is not so in higher rpm ranges where the engine must work harder ti fill the cylinders with less air. it is at this point where volumetric efficiency for such an engine is destroyed.

    the oreca team viper suspension bears almost zero resemblance to that of the stock viper. i like the viper a great deal, i just think it oculd be so much more especailly for a 8 liter engine.

    case in point the tvr speed 12. 7.7 litre engine (closest engine i could find to match the viper's displacment) and output is 800 horses. i have in addition driven one and found it rather exhilirating and at the same time unwieldy.

    i am by no means complaining that the viper sucks or something i just think it could be improved a great deal.
     
  18. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Guibo</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Type S Personality</i>
    <b>hey idiot guibo, i'm not talking about power delivery on racing vipers (although i stated that) i'm talking about making 500 hp at 4000 rpm.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    LOL, calling me "idiot". Who was it who figured out that the Viper DOESN'T make peak hp at 4000 rpm? (Hint: Not you!)

    Maybe if you knew what the hell you were talking about, this thread wouldn't BE 3 pages long.

    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    i know that stock vipers make their hp at more then 4000rpm, i was talking about the prototype viper in this forum....and i did figure out myself that the viper (stock and race) make their hp above 4000rpm. Whats wrong with a thread thats 3 pages long??? i liek them a lot better then threads that are shorter with 3 ppl responding....accept when they are people that say R33(why doesnt the R34 ever get mentioned???) skylines or McLarens are all that are mentions and/or other cars are proclaimed as gay or slow... i dont have amuch respect some people on here, and your on of the few that i give respect too...i think i could be a moderator if i could, because i like all types of cars, and there lots of other people that would make great moderators on here too...
    another point of this thread was to learn from everyone else on here and why they think low rpm machines are good on the track.
    <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif"> (BTW if anyone goes to Hamilton Ontario, and never has really gotten the chance to drive a fast car ( as i have so far i'm 17) then by all means go to the indoor indy in hamilton..the karts go 70 km/h!!!!lol just letting you know...<!-- Signature -->
     
  19. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>guibo the site you posted , the first one didn't have any vipers time at all. perhaps they updated the site by the time i checked it?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Look again. Use the "Find on this page" feature of your browser. You'll find the Viper. You WON'T find the Skyline (and for good reason).

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>anyways the other site compared the skyline, 911, m3, nsx, f355.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Right. And the M3 (an older E36 EVO version), the NSX, and the F355 ALL beat the Skyline. How do these cars compare to a Viper with no anti-lock brakes? See below. Track was Nelson Ledges.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>as far as the stats i have seen. the fastest time at nurburging set by the stock viper posts a time of 8:10 at nurburging. the stock skyline posts a 7:59. the skyline's unofficial record was posted by a preproduction model of a r33 skyline.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Exactly. That's why it doesn't hold up as a standard record for regular production cars.
    Give that Viper another 50 PS (same as the US-spec Viper) and tune its suspension there for three days. You don't think it'll shave 11 seconds off its time?

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>the oreca team viper suspension bears almost zero resemblance to that of the stock viper. </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Right, but we're not talking about suspensions. We're talking about engines and power delivery (and any inherent problems in an engine that revs short of what many people might THINK a car SHOULD rev to).
    Anyway, the Vipers that ran in the past 3 One Lap of America races use stock suspension (tuned springs and shocks and camber plates), as did the Viper that won this year's Open Track Challenge. Even shod with street tires, it beat out an F40 on pure racing slicks.

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>case in point the tvr speed 12. 7.7 litre engine (closest engine i could find to match the viper's displacment) and output is 800 horses. i have in addition driven one and found it rather exhilirating and at the same time unwieldy.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Where did you drive such a car? The TVR Speed 12 is only a concept car, which is now rotting away behind the factory in Blackpool. Are you quite sure you've driven this car, in any setting outside of Gran Turismo 3?
     
  20. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Type S Personality</i>
    <b>another point of this thread was to learn from everyone else on here and why they think low rpm machines are good on the track.
    (BTW if anyone goes to Hamilton Ontario, and never has really gotten the chance to drive a fast car ( as i have so far i'm 17) then by all means go to the indoor indy in hamilton..the karts go 70 km/h!!!!lol just letting you know...</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Thanks for the heads up, but we have karting around here as well (Speedring).
    Low rpm machines aren't necessarily good or bad on the track. It depends on many factors (like displacement, torque, track layout, rules of the sanctioning body, etc). Horses for courses.
     
  21. hey gearjammer, just to let ya know..if someone had an IQ of 750 they would be god.

     
  22. Guibo, thanks for the link. IŽm not telling itŽs impossible to take out the 100 ci advantage in torque with well built mods, but itŽs very impressive if itŽs true.

    Too bad that the last post function doesnŽt work, it seems that thereŽs a need for some reprogramming to be done. IŽll put a note on the help forum.
     
  23. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from blaze4eva</i>
    <b>the tvr speed 12 is a not a concept i assure you however.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    There are no roadgoing TVR Speed 12's that are streetlegal. That is my point.
     
  24. Just an FYI, the reason diesels cannot rev very high isn't because of their long stroke, although that is definitely a factor (high stroke-bore ratio engines generally do not rev as high as low stroke-bore ratio engines). The diesel engines' combustion process (essentially contolled knock, or pinging) is to blame. With a diesel engine, the intake charge (only air, not air and fuel as in a gasoline engine) is compressed (to much higher pressures than a gasoline engine too), then the fuel is squirted into the hot combustion chamber where it spontaneously explodes. When the fuel-air mixture spontaneously explodes, it does so in multiple places at multiple times creating multiple flame fronts. In a gasoline engine, you have a single explosion and single flame front beginning at the sparkplug. It's the uncontrolled nature of the multiple flame fronts in the diesel engine that is responsible for its lack of high-rpm prowess. Diesels don't control rpm via a throttle (or cam timing/lift as in the new BMW 7-series), they increase or decrease engine speed simply by squirting in more or less fuel. Simple enough, but it all goes to hell at higher rpms. New, experimental high-rpm diesels are working to solve that problem with some advanced combustion modeling techniques (read: requires REALLY expensive computers).
     

Share This Page