Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '1999 Lamborghini Diablo GT' started by Mclaren F1 GT fan, Aug 10, 2002.
True because of the driver experiance
A Mclaren F1 would beat anything because of...
its power-weight ratio (see books on physics) and this judges the acceleration of the car (like the formula 1 cars) the diablo is too heavy because of its 1500kg weight (you could put more bhp to make the car faster but it will be too heavy to push for the engine because of its pwr-wgt ratio). Because of its lightness the mclaren has 550bhp per tonne and 1100kg the pwr-weight ratio of the mclaren has the biggest pwr-weight ratio to any production car in the world. Compared to any lambo which the new one is 50kg heavyer than the diablo it will still be slow. Compare the lambos power-wgt to the mclarens and you'll be suprised.
THIS IS WHY THE FORMULA ONE CARS ARE SO LIGHT BECAUSE (less weight + more power [bhp])= more acelleration it's just how physics works!!
And remember DO NOT USE TURBOCHARGING-it just wreaks the engines song and reponse to acelleration
first and formost you are a dumbass comparing a Mclaren wit a Diablo
We all know that the Mclaren is faster,More Expensive and has more bhp so y the hell are u comparin these 2 cars they're both great but u should really think about wut u're saying i am leaving this conversation saying this they"re both great cars but we all kno the mclaren is faster that is like comparing a civic with a Dodge Neon one
costs 39 grand and one costs 10 grand obvoisly the more expensive is better not neccessarilly but it usually is
in that other reply i ment 30
I am not a dumbass thanks, and if you think I am im actually one im not, you cannot say a persons a "dumbass" when you don't even know the person "don't judge a book by its cover". Im only trying to prove a point on everybody saying that this "supercar" can beat that "supercar" (see all the other comments on this site) there are saying which cars can beat each other...Im only trying to prove a point. Im not saying that the Mclaren will not be takein over it will probably be takein over by Bugatti.
Yeah. The Mclaren is faster in a strait line. No one questioned that. The Diablo has better handeling and braking, which is something that also is important.
DUH DUH DUH I'm aretard who just looks at power I'm so #$%#ing stupid. Hey Smart shit If a feather had a v6 on it it wouldn't do shit cause it doesn't have any thing to get the power to the non existing wheels
You can't just look at power Stooge You have take in the whole car oh and a Viper 800TT would eat a Mclaren for Breakfast. I hope you know the people that you talk to about cars are making fun of you behind your backHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA<!-- Signature -->
Power to weight ratio judges how fast the car goes not the raw power so don't judge a book by its cover. The only thing that critics like about lamborghini and ferrari is the engines song so that makes a bugatti sound like a vacuum cleaner
McLaren F1 GT fan is a dumbass. First of all, Mc Laren won't be taken over by Bugatti considering they went out of business. Secondly, comparing a mclaren to a lamborghini is like comparing a greyhound to a turtle. no crap the mclaren goes faster-every one with 1/2 a brain cell knows that. but if you whacked the boost on a hennesey from 7 psi to 20 psi, it would easily go 250+. But no one will ever use that speed unless you're in the Le Mans. You're average Bob Crackhead won't get it up past 85mph, so why waste the money on something that no one will use? It's as useless as tits on a bull.
you have to think about the downforce though. A bi-product of down force is loss in top speed, and everyone knows a diablo will kill a mclaren F1 in manouverability. Also, the mclaren is a racing fully tuned vehicle, sure a diablo gt MIGHT not beat it in top speed but a diablo gt is a road dwelling vehicle, the fastest raod legal vehicle in the world in fact. If you put a Diablo GTR and a mclaren F1, i believe the diablo will kill
PS. There is also the new murcielago which will kill the F1 and the Coatl (or Eros) which has a top speed of 390 kph and could probably get even more on an oval track
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from DiAbLo_MaN</i>
<b>you have to think about the downforce though. A bi-product of down force is loss in top speed, and everyone knows a diablo will kill a mclaren F1 in manouverability. Also, the mclaren is a racing fully tuned vehicle, sure a diablo gt MIGHT not beat it in top speed but a diablo gt is a road dwelling vehicle, the fastest raod legal vehicle in the world in fact. If you put a Diablo GTR and a mclaren F1, i believe the diablo will kill
PS. There is also the new murcielago which will kill the F1 and the Coatl (or Eros) which has a top speed of 390 kph and could probably get even more on an oval track</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->You dont know what your talking about, I think you need to research a bet more buddy!<!-- Signature -->
im sorry but the f1 lm handles exactly the same as this car in lateral g, and brakes better it goes 0 to 100 mph and back to 0 in 11.5 seconds, and no lambo can do that, and 0-100 mph is 6.7 over a second faster than this, and the downforce the mclaren can drive up side down at 100mph again the lambo cant at top speed. stop comparing
these cars the mclaren is a better car in all categories that is why it costs more
<!-- Signature -->
in a straight line the f1 will win. on a road track it doesn't stand a chance. 1998 high speed test revield that the f1 is the fastest car, but it has tall gears, which means after it hits 100 it was one of the slowest accelerating cars from 110-150mph. the lambo has a gear box that allows for faster acceleration after 80mph. On a closed track a car with this much power rarely slows more than 50mph, that means it is geared for the track were as the f1 will slowly accelerate where the acceleration is needed most on the track. I cant say which one handles better because i havent driven ether one, but i know that after mario Andretti tested 10 cars for top speed he reported this car to be unstable.
pit an f1 lm agenst a lambo gt and you got yourself a race.
The DIablo GT has 1.10 g, tested in Quatroroute. The highest g the Mclaren has ever gotten I believe is only 1.02 g, and some magazines only got 0.86 g out of the Mclaren.
The Mclaren is still faster than the Diablo in acceleration, but not as much as some of you are claiming. Here are the True performances of the Mclaren F1:
0-100 mph: 7.7 seconds
1/4 mile: ??
1 km standing: ??
top speed: 217.7 mph
0-60 mph 3.2 seconds
0-100 mph: (7.5 seconds?)
1/4 mile: 11.5 seconds
1 km standing: ??
top speed: ??
Those tests were done with the road legal Mclaren F1. Despite some rumors, the "217.7 mph" top speed is not the result of shorter gear ratios. The acceleration figures you are talking about are from the Mclaren F1 XP5 prototype. ALll this is explained in the Mclaren F1 forum by "Scotti." Here is the performance for the XP5:
0-60 mph: 3.2 seconds
0-100 mph: 6.3 seconds
1/4 mile: 11.0 seconds
1 km standing: 19.6 seconds
top speed: 221/ 231 mph claimed, red line limited
The regular Mclaren F1 has aproximately the same 0-60 mph time as the XP5, but beyond 60 mph the XP5 is much faster. The Mclaren F1 still accelerates faster than the Diablo GT, but not as fast as most of you say. Performance for the Diablo GT is as follows:
0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (Evo)
0-100 mph: 8.0 -7.9 seconds (Quatroroute?)
1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quatroroute?)
1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
top speed: 211 mph (Evo), 215 mph w/ optional 5th gear ratio
The Diablo GT can certainly compete with the Mclaren F1. No hate posts please, these are the most accurate figures I know of. "Scotti" brought this to my attention in the Mclaren F1 forum.
All I have to say is
Diablo Jota GTR
730 bhp and 2500 lbs weight
All I have to say is
Diablo Jota GTR
730 bhp and 2500 lbs weight
you do the math
You are comparing the wrong cars, if you want a stripped out race cars for the road you pick the LM and the Diablo GTR. If you want road cars, pick the Diablo and normal F1. If you think m wieght only applies to acceleration, you guys are way off. Mass is part of any performance figure in a car. Secondly the F1 is the only road car that can out accelerate an F1 car above 100mph. Third, when was the last time lambo won a major race with a slightly modified road car. If you want a physics lesson just keep saying that a diablo can out handle a f1.
I think I'm going to leave this forum. Too many people who don't know what they're talking about. The Mclaren F1 sucks at handeling. Its tiny rear-end always wants to pull in front on the curves, and there is absolutely no down force at high speeds; it's extremely un-stable. Add to that the fact that beyond 60 mph the Mclaren is NOT faster than an F1 car. Your thinking of the XP5 Mclaren F1 prototype, which does 0-100 mph in 6.3 seconds. The XP5 was never sold. The stock Mclaren F1 does 0 -100 mph in 7.4 seconds at the very best (R&T did 0-60 mph in 3.4 seconds and 0-100 mph in 7.7 seconds). byond 60 mph, the XP5 is much faster. Also, the Mclaren F1 does not have good braking (the Diablo 6.0 has better braking). And don't bother saying anything about more control for the Mclaren becasue the Diablo has ABS. The Diablo is not a nimble car like the Porsche GT3 because it's pretty big, but it has good handeling for a car of that size. And it is so much more stable than the Mclaren at high speeds. The Diablo GT consistently has equal lap times to the F50 and F40. and all I've heard about the Mclaren is that the F50 beats it on a lot of tracks.
And what's this about winnng races with little tuned cars? Has Mclaren ever done that? The Mclaren F1 GTR and LM are extremely different from the regular version. It's much faster, much more stable, and has much better braking, and much lighter. The Diablo GTR is barely any different than the GT, And the GT is only the RWD version of the Diablo, the replacement for the SV. And the GT infact is not much faster than the '99 SV. So much for little tuned. And it's a pretty competetive car if you look at it's lap times.
Paul Roche said at one time that he could tune out
of the BMW M s70/2 engine 1000bhp but he never did it
im leaving this forum because of it's neutral debate.
So anybody else who wants to dabate over which car is best
go right ahead and debate over this forum that I first typed out or
go and drive one (or hire one for that matter).
Yes it has a tiny rear end to help at handling, to lower moment of polar inertia. The fan assisted (illegal in most race series because it works so well) helps keep it stable and provides downforce. The rear spoiler pops out during braking to keep the car stable under braking (the diablos nose woud dip and lose all rear end grip). In a straight line the diablo may be able to out brake it, but the non-power brakes and rear spoiler would make the difference on the track. Look up polar moment of inertia in a physics text book and think about the F1 engine and transmission placement, then mentally compare that to the placement of the drivetrain from the muira to the diablo, and you will see my point. Also the suspension design was done by ex-F1 designers and ex-Lotus engineers. If they cant make a good suspension how can anyone else. <!-- Signature -->
If you weren't aware, Mario Andretti (perhaps the one of the most experienced racers anywhere) commented on the handeling of the Mclaren F1 in R&T. He said first of all that the read end always wants to pull in front on the curves, and it prevented him from going into the curves at high speeds. Second of all, he said he was "surprised at how unstable the car is at high speeds. Very unstable." It has good aerodynamics, but has absolutely no down force!. Tiny back ends are not good for downforce. The Diablo has better aerodynamics (o.30 g on the 6 liter models) and has much more downforce than the Mclaren as well, and does not need to put out any electronical spoilers to add downforce. The Diablo has ABS, so it can control itself while braking. The only thing that is not in the favor of the Diablo for handeling is that it has a higher center of gravity. But no one has ever accused the Diablo of being unstable or having nasty back end habits.
"it has a tiny rear end to help at handling, to lower moment of polar inertia."
Sorry, I gotta comment on this: A tiny back end may decrease the overal mass of a car, but the form and shape of it will hinder handeling performance. The way you are thinking is this:
Smaller mass invariably = better handeling.
That's not how it works.
So it does not work that way. A smaller rear end takes mass away from the end of the car and makes it easier to turn and easier to stop turning. Notice how most race cars are mid-engined, that is to lower the polar moment of inertia by putting the majority of the mass of the car right inbetween the axles. Now the diablo does not have the drivetrain with the lowest possible polar moment of inertia. The gearbox is ahead of the engine!
If it does not work that way then tell me.<!-- Signature -->
The Diablo is mid-engined. The Diablo has a higher center of gravity for a car that low, so you have to be careful on the corners so that you don't spin out. However, because the back of the Diablo is somewhat larger than the front (as it should be), it adds some stability to the car, and will help it to stay in place better. This is also good for downforce at higher speeds.
The Mclaren does not have a problem of center of gravity, so it should have better control. But because the back end is smaller than the front, the car can be very unstable, particularly at high speeds; smaller back ends are not good for downforce. And they still did not put a spoiler on it. It's a known fact that Mclaren F1's can be pretty unstable at high speeds, and even at low speeds it's known that the Mclaren F1 does not have as much control as cars like the EB110 and XJ220 (which have larger back ends). Add to that the fact that the Mclaren F1's suspension is not specialized for racing, and it is no wonder a Diablo can out handel a Mclaren. Mclaren's aren't even meant to be the best overall performers on the road. That's the job of the Ferrari F50, F40, Diablo GT and Porsche GT2, etc. The Mclaren is faster than all of them, but it's not so preocupied with giving the best overal performance and lap times. Not that it can't compete, because of course it can; it's sheer speed is it's advantage.
But it was not the high center of gravity that made you be careful not to spin it, but its polar momenent of inertia (hard to spin, but once spinning damn hard to stop). The diablo was hard to stop spinning, because of its high polar moment of inertia. The Diablo also has a long wheelbase (thanks to its drivetrain) and gains stability, but loses handling. Also the stability of the rear end is not affected by the length of the front end, in fact a long front end would help the drag coefficient and overall stability of the car( if designed right). But with tons of stability you lose out in handling. The F1 may be unstable, but it is predicatable, it is easy for the car to turn and easy to stop it from turning. The F1 was designed for predictable easy handling. The F1 was meant for the road not the track, and I think it is the best road car. The best track supercar (if money was no object) is the F50. If the Diablo GT is designed for the track, it better be damn good at it, even though it has inherient weaknesses. Also we should compare this car the McLaren designed for the track, the LM. But why arue, come on the F1 and LM cost over a million. I am just trying to point out the weakness in the Diablos (and to some extent the Murc) and the inherient advantages of the F1. I wish Lambo would go the way of Pagani and lighten the body by developing a more advanced chassis (Saleen or Pagani) by adopt more composites in the chassis (not just body work) and a better drivetrain. <!-- Signature -->