Re: Better than the Carrera GT

Discussion in '2002 Lamborghini Murciélago' started by FLY BY, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. this is what i have done to my supra:

    a t67 single turbo conversion
    engine block bored over by .020 to fit
    JE 8.5:1 compression pistons.
    A Blitz Boost controller set to 20ft/lbs boost


    like i said, i dont lie. i am not digging myself into a big hole, and just because i am not perfect with my language, that dose'nt mean that i dont know shit about cars. i know alot, maybe enough to totally overpower you......
    peace #%$..
     
  2. "Lamborghni's are faster than all Porsches and Ferraris," "Ferraris are faster than Lamborghini's," these statements are stupid! They don't make sense.

    Also, no one can say anything about the Carrera GT because it has not been tested. So this comparisonof performance "Murcielago vs. Carrera GT" has no pont!

    If you want to talk about performance, Murcielago, Porsche GT2, F50, F40, Diablo GT, etc. have been tested so talk about these!
     
  3. #53 TylerDurden, Aug 10, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>However, you are again digging yourself into a hole by making statements that you fail to back up. The only thing that you have provided that even remotely resembles fact is heresy from gsolinas. The Lambo (which one?) has outperformed every Porsche ever made? What about the 911 GT1? The Dauer-Porsche 962 LM? The 2002 996 GT2 and 1998 993 GT2-R? The 911 GT3 RS? The 959? I could go on. Certainly there are some tracks on which the Murcielago would turn in better times than the latter Porsches that I listed, but pit the Murc against the 959 or 959 S, and the race is over before it even begins. Remember what the 959 did to the F40 on anything but a completely dry track? It left it breathing exhaust fumes. I suggest you do a little research before making those silly claims of yours.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Porsche 959 faster around a track than the F40?

    Porsche 959 has a good 4WD system and has a very good start:

    0-60 mph: 3.6s
    1/4 mile: 11.9s
    0-125 mph: 13.3s

    But compare to F40:

    0-60 mph: 3.9s
    1/4 mile: 11.8s
    0-125s: 11.4s

    959 is not nearly as fast as F40, despite that it has 4WD traction. In fact, 1993 Diablo VT (492 hp) is faster than 959 beyond 100 mph! Read the comparison of the race 959 and F40:

    http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/lancia/58/959/959_9.htm

    959 is can not compete against F40 and Murcielago.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Read my post again. I stated that the 959 lapped the F40 on anything BUT a dry track. In the wet, the 959 shamed the Ferrari, despite being underpowered and overweight.

    L8R<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. "Read my post again. I stated that the 959 lapped the F40 on anything BUT a dry track. In the wet, the 959 shamed the Ferrari, despite being underpowered and overweight."

    Normal conditions is dry track! Is Porsche Turbo faster around a track than GT2? Or Diablo VT faster than Diablo GT? No. I can say Diablo VT has an advantage over GT in the rain because it has 4WD, but Diablo GT is still better for the track than VT.

    And what is this:

    "Certainly there are some tracks on which the Murcielago would turn in better times than the latter Porsches that I listed, but pit the Murc against the 959 or 959 S, and the race is over before it even begins."

    On a dry track, 959 can not keep up with F40 and Murcielago. In the rain 959 has advanced 4WD system to help it and has advantage over F40, but has advantage over Murcielago? Murcielago has 4WD as well! When does 959 have advantage over Murcielago, in the rain or in dry? The 959 itself is not as fast as the others, and shows in normal conditions.Has advanced technology for 4WD, but the car itself is only a little faster than Countach 5000QV in acceleration after the start.
     
  5. #55 Razzo, Aug 10, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TylerDurden</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>However, you are again digging yourself into a hole by making statements that you fail to back up. The only thing that you have provided that even remotely resembles fact is heresy from gsolinas. The Lambo (which one?) has outperformed every Porsche ever made? What about the 911 GT1? The Dauer-Porsche 962 LM? The 2002 996 GT2 and 1998 993 GT2-R? The 911 GT3 RS? The 959? I could go on. Certainly there are some tracks on which the Murcielago would turn in better times than the latter Porsches that I listed, but pit the Murc against the 959 or 959 S, and the race is over before it even begins. Remember what the 959 did to the F40 on anything but a completely dry track? It left it breathing exhaust fumes. I suggest you do a little research before making those silly claims of yours.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Porsche 959 faster around a track than the F40?

    Porsche 959 has a good 4WD system and has a very good start:

    0-60 mph: 3.6s
    1/4 mile: 11.9s
    0-125 mph: 13.3s

    But compare to F40:

    0-60 mph: 3.9s
    1/4 mile: 11.8s
    0-125s: 11.4s

    959 is not nearly as fast as F40, despite that it has 4WD traction. In fact, 1993 Diablo VT (492 hp) is faster than 959 beyond 100 mph! Read the comparison of the race 959 and F40:

    http://www.fortunecity.com/silverstone/lancia/58/959/959_9.htm

    959 is can not compete against F40 and Murcielago.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Read my post again. I stated that the 959 lapped the F40 on anything BUT a dry track. In the wet, the 959 shamed the Ferrari, despite being underpowered and overweight.

    L8R</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    tyler ...whatever.... u were wondering what i had done to my supra...... well, here it is:

    a t67 single turbo conversion
    engine block bored over by .020 to fit
    JE 8.5:1 compression pistons.
    A Blitz Boost controller set to 20ft/lbs boost


    and yes i know what i am talkin about ..............
    peace #%$
     
  6. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from gsolinas</i>
    <b>

    Thecargods, Lamborghini stays out of racing like shit. The SVR and GTR are both in racing circuits and doing fine. I wouldn’t doubt the Murcielago entering competitions as well. How could you say Lamborghini is not about performance? That’s crazy. I’ll let you in on something:
    (All road legal cars I am well aware that many non-production or modified cars out did some of these)
    -1971 Lamborghini Miura SV-Fastest car in the world-290kph/180mph
    -1982-1983 Lamborghini Countach LP5000-Fastest car in the world-300kph/186.4mph
    -1998-2000 Lamborghini Diablo GT-Fastest car in the world 340kph/211mph
    -1998 Lamborghini Diablo Gemballa Roadster VT-unofficially the fastest road legal car in the world 255mph/410kph

    I don’t think a make with this much to say doesn’t bother with performance.
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    Maybe you should read my post before making a comment on it. I said, and I quote, "It was designed to go fast, and it does a pretty damn good job." So that’s my answer to your little "don't say it’s not about performance." And about the SVR and GTR racing, that’s in the Diablo racing circuit. Lamborghini does not sponsor it. The teams in that circuit finance themselves. They buy the Lamborghini from the factory, then receive no further input from Lamborghini. And if there are Lamborghini's in any other race circuits, they are not factory-prepped racecars. They are privately financed and modified without help from the factory, aside from the factory selling the teams the stock cars and replacement parts.

    So yes. Lamborghini does stay out of racing.


    And TylerDurden. Thanks for the comment. These forums usually quickly degrade into pissing matches where people's reason for saying things is nothing more than "The car sucks/is amazing because it's from America/Japan/Europe." Ethnocentric people like that piss me off.<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. No Automobili Lamborghini stays out of racing, the Lamborghinis race, you admitted it yourself. The company does stay away from it though focussing instead on road going cars.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  8. Thats what I said. Notice the Lamborghini is not plural. When I said Lamborghini stays out of racing, I also said Lamborghinis are in races. I wouldn't be so stupid as to contradict myself in the space of two paragraphs. But now that we agree, its kinda stupid to keep going like this. I respect your opinions. You actually know what you are talking about, unlike the majority of the ppl on this site.<!-- Signature -->
     
  9. To suparaz: No one cares about your Supra! Wanna talk about it? Go to The Supra section on this site!
    To gsolinas: You said "The GT2 would get blown away by this car and the Carrera GT would put up a better fight but certainly not win...look at the numbers." The numbers point to Carrera Gt
    To Porsche LVR: I know the Carrera Gt would kick its @$$
    To TylerDurden: I respect you for your knowledge
    To EVERYONE: THE MURCIELAGO IS NOT BETTER THEN THE CARRERA GT
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  10. What numbers are you looking at because the top speed is the same and the acceleration (0-60) is certainly better for the Murcielago.<!-- Signature -->
     
  11. this car is in production, i saw it in westmount, montreal and orange wow is this #$%#er loud and fast and wooooow so nice shutup whoever said this ugly...<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. #$%# you carrerra gt racer!!! fuk u and ur whole #$%#ing family!! go and tell ur mom to give u a blowjob!!
    fuk u, if u dont like me, blow me #%$
    mother fuking *****
     
  13. Personally I think it's too soon to be comparing these two cars... if the carrera GT actually has been tested, I'm sure that the testing hasn't been complete enough to come up with scientifically accurate average of the top speed, zero to sixty, and quarter mile times. Also, considering that the Carrera GT is just a concept car... what's the point of comparing it to a car that is actually in production? Anything could be a concept... I could come up with a concept for a car with two jet engines and compare it to the Murc'... the point is that it doesn't really accomplish anything. Not to say that it isn't fun to debate about cars, I'm just saying that we should be debating about things that actually exist.

    Now, to change the subject... which car would i rather own? Well, i personally think they both look extremely basass. I would be proud to drive either car. But suppose that I'm a millionaire without unlimited income and I want a car that I can own to drive on the weekends with little hassle. I would choose the Carrera GT (if it was in production). Simply becuase Lambo's, Ferrari's, Fiat's, or any Italian car for that matter aren't exactly known for their outstanding reliability. Whereas German cars are. Do I have any specific proof for this? No, but I did see a show on speedvision a while ago that was coverage of a pleasure drive accross Europe of high performance sports cars and concept cars from around the world (if i remember correctly the Carrera GT drove in it w/out trouble). By the end of the drive a large number of cars had dropped out becuase of mechanical failure. The majority of these were Italian made sports cars. The point of this statement is that both cars will be extremelly fun to drive and will make you smile ear to ear when you press on the gas after comming out of a turn. But which car will be more reliable? I put my money on the Carrera GT.
     
  14. Actually, the Carrera GT is in production as we speak. Porsche plans to build 1000 units at a price of $330 000 USD each. Porsche also claims that the horsepower figure of 558 will undoubtedly be improved upon in the production models, and that the expected 0-160km/h time will be in the low 6's. Note that Porsche always makes conservative claims. So, in effect the Carrera GT is *not* just a concept any more. It is, in every respect, a production road car. There just isn't any test data available on it, since its release is scheduled for mid-2003.

    L8R
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  15. I heard they were making 300. Oh well either way it is in the process of being produced, they're just not on the road yet.

    As for unreliable Italian cars, in the 80's Maseratis and other lower level Italian makes had trouble but Ferrari, Lamborghini, Pagani, Bugatti and others have never had a bad reputation for reliability. I know many owners of Ferraris who have never complained about their cars and i know one former owner of a Miura who had trouble prior to selling but the car was 25 years old. Ferrari is really good though when it comes to servicing cars. I've talked personally with people at Ferrari of Ontario and though problems are few and far between they are dealt with immediately.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  16. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from TylerDurden</i>
    <b>Actually, the Carrera GT is in production as we speak. Porsche plans to build 1000 units at a price of $330 000 USD each. Porsche also claims that the horsepower figure of 558 will undoubtedly be improved upon in the production models, and that the expected 0-160km/h time will be in the low 6's. Note that Porsche always makes conservative claims. So, in effect the Carrera GT is *not* just a concept any more. It is, in every respect, a production road car. There just isn't any test data available on it, since its release is scheduled for mid-2003.

    L8R
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    Carrera GT 0-160 kmh in 6s? This is impossible!

    911 GT1 has 544 hp, but a weight of 1150 kg on road. Also has very short gear box with a top speed of only 308 kmh (191 mph). With all this it has these performances:

    0-100 kmh: 3.9s
    0-160: 7.1s
    0-200 kmh: 10.5s

    How can Carrera GT have 0-160 kmh in 6s, with worse hp/kg ratio and longer gearbox than GT1?
     
  17. I was just quoting a Porsche claim. They're not known for making B.S. claims. Ever hear of aerodynamics? Maybe the Carrera GT had a lower C.D. than the 911 GT1; it is, after all, a much more recent display of Porsche technology. I'm not saying these numbers are concrete. Even if the Carrera GT doesn't do 0-160km/h in the 6's, fact still shows that it does 0-125mph in *under* 10 seconds. Extrapolate the results yourself.<!-- Signature -->
     
  18. TylerDurden,
    When test comes out for Carrera GT you will be dissapointed; Should be fast (maybe a little faster than Murcielago between speeds of 60-160 mph), but will not be under 10s! Pagani also claims 550 hp Zonda C12S can do 0-200 kmh in 10s, But in reality can not do better than 11.9/12s! Don't pay attention to silly factory declarations! They are not always right.

    Aerodynamics? Carrera GT will need more than that to make 10s on 0-125 mph! It is "impossible!"

    In theory, Carrera GT probably can do:

    0-100 kmh: 3,9s
    0-160 kmh: 8s
    0-200 kmh: 11,3/11,5s

    If Carrera GT has no downforce, maybe can be 0.3/0.5s faster for 0-200 kmh, but then will not be able to handel. Porsche will most likely have a lot of downforce! Is much better to handel well then to go a little faster and handel badly at high speed. Regardless of aerodynamics, can not make 0-200 kmh near 10s.
     
  19. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>TylerDurden,
    When test comes out for Carrera GT you will be dissapointed; Should be fast (maybe a little faster than Murcielago between speeds of 60-160 mph), but will not be under 10s! Pagani also claims 550 hp Zonda C12S can do 0-200 kmh in 10s, But in reality can not do better than 11.9/12s! Don't pay attention to silly factory declarations! They are not always right.

    Aerodynamics? Carrera GT will need more than that to make 10s on 0-125 mph! It is "impossible!"

    In theory, Carrera GT probably can do:

    0-100 kmh: 3,9s
    0-160 kmh: 8s
    0-200 kmh: 11,3/11,5s

    If Carrera GT has no downforce, maybe can be 0.3/0.5s faster for 0-200 kmh, but then will not be able to handel. Porsche will most likely have a lot of downforce! Is much better to handel well then to go a little faster and handel badly at high speed. Regardless of aerodynamics, can not make 0-200 kmh near 10s.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Let's go with the factory claims for now and when the Carrera GT does do 0-60 in 3.3 and whoops the Murcielago in topspeed then I'm going to ask how these factory claims are.<!-- Signature -->
     
  20. Whatever, it's not like the F60 won't kill the Carrera GT anyway.Either way 2003 fastest car of the year won't go to Porsche, even if it does top the Murcielago (which it won't).<!-- Signature -->
     
  21. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from gsolinas</i>
    <b>Whatever, it's not like the F60 won't kill the Carrera GT anyway.Either way 2003 fastest car of the year won't go to Porsche, even if it does top the Murcielago (which it won't).</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->Yeah but it won't go to the Murcielago either. It'll probably go to the F60. Yeah I'm sure it'll top out the Murcielago.<!-- Signature -->
     
  22. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>TylerDurden,
    When test comes out for Carrera GT you will be dissapointed; Should be fast (maybe a little faster than Murcielago between speeds of 60-160 mph), but will not be under 10s! Pagani also claims 550 hp Zonda C12S can do 0-200 kmh in 10s, But in reality can not do better than 11.9/12s! Don't pay attention to silly factory declarations! They are not always right.

    Aerodynamics? Carrera GT will need more than that to make 10s on 0-125 mph! It is "impossible!"

    In theory, Carrera GT probably can do:

    0-100 kmh: 3,9s
    0-160 kmh: 8s
    0-200 kmh: 11,3/11,5s

    If Carrera GT has no downforce, maybe can be 0.3/0.5s faster for 0-200 kmh, but then will not be able to handel. Porsche will most likely have a lot of downforce! Is much better to handel well then to go a little faster and handel badly at high speed. Regardless of aerodynamics, can not make 0-200 kmh near 10s.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    I'm amazed at how confident you sound making these statements. Words like "impossible", and phrases like "you *will* be disappointed" are self-condemning if used improperly. Tell me, what proof do you have that Porsche's claims are impossible? Or is it that they urk you as a Lamborghini-lover? In any case, Porsche has decades of fulfilled (and surpassed) expectations of their cars to back up their claims.

    As for aerodynamics and downforce, have you ever wondered why the 1998 911 GT1 has better acceleration and lap times with 544 bhp than the 1997 911 GT1 with 600 bhp? The reason, my friend, is the improved aerodynamics of the '98 version over the '97. They play a *big* role in the speed of any car. And please don't bombard me with myriads of numbers and statements of how "aerodynamics only matter beyond 100mph...", etc. <!-- Signature -->
     
  23. I repeat, Is Impossible for Carrera GT to do 0-160 kmh in 6s or 0-200 kmh in 10s. This is crazy!

    This has nothing to do with Lamborghini, I say it is impossible for Carrera GT to do better times than Porsche GT1! Has worse hp/weight ratio and longer gears! You do not believe me because of Aerodynamics, but do not even know what aerodynamics has the Carrera GT?

    Mclaren, with good aerodynamics (no downforce!) did:

    0-160 kmh: 6.3/6.9s
    0-200 kmH: 9.7/10s

    Mclaren has 627 hp, lighter weight than Carrera GT and good Cx! How can Carrera GT come close? You think if what I say is complicated, then it is not true. And if you don't want to listen and understand, then I then I do not want to speak with you. You just want to believe impossible factory declarations. Unless will have 630 hp like Mclaren F1, and lighter weight, it can not do 0-160 kmh in 6s or 0-200 kmh in under 10s.

    And I am assuming Carrera GT has good Cx! But only CLK GTR, Mclaren F1, and MAYBE 600 hp Porsche GT1 can do 0-200 kmh in under 10s, and few others.
     
  24. #74 Christianmc, Aug 10, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    GT1 with 600 hp is the racing version! with 600 hp can do:

    0-60 mph: 3.4s
    0-100 mph: 6.2s
    1/4 mile: 10.9s

    Tested by R&T! Look:
    http://members.fortunecity.com/carstats/porsche%20911%20gt1%201997.htm

    But road version with 544 hp does:

    0-60mph: approx 3.7s (0-62 mph 3.9s)
    0-100 mph: approx 7.2s (0-99 mph 7.1s)
    1/4 mile: 11.6s!

    tested by Quattroroute! See:
     
  25. #75 MobyDick935, Aug 10, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016

Share This Page