Re: Diablo GT vs. Mclaren F1

Discussion in '1999 Lamborghini Diablo GT' started by Dave-GTR, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Formula1 Cars live from their POWER @ very high rpms and not from the torque. Its just a 3 litre engine, you just cannot get so much torque out of it, so the ing.'s try to raise the rpm to gain power.

    Okay, lets say 850BHP@20.000rpm, that results in ..*calculating* 302Nm/233ft-lb

    i cant imagine how F1 cars should have such a torque..<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. diablo gt is almost a track ready car its handeling schools the regular f1's however the gtr and lm are on par with it and kick its ass in the speed department. though the cost a #$%# load more.
     
  3. YEAH, good on ya. Ive alwats known that the diablos have always been better then ferrari not just the F50, ALL Ferrari
     
  4. hey fool, there a couple o' Lamborghini's which will kill both the F50 and the Mclaren, The Coatl (or Eros) for instance
     
  5. LAMBORGHINI DIABLO IS BETTER OVER ALL <!-- Signature -->
     
  6. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from red</i>
    <b>
    This goes out to everone who LOVES MCLAREN F1. I just wanted to prove that the mclaren f1 has incredible handling if not the best, it has good handling and great breaking for its power.How else can it win the lemans so many times in a row and beat the porsche gt1's which have really good handling.I don't think a any production car can beat it in a race or oval track.And its design gives it amazing stability at high speeds. Its the first car with the inovative design of the centered mass technique (not real name), meaning all main masses in the center of the car to improve handling and center of gravity.ITS STYLING BY PETER STEVENS AN DESIGN BY GORDON MURRY GIVE IT SPECTACULAR SPEED,ACELLERATION AND HANDLING.NOW DONT GET ME WRONG THE F50, JAG XJ220, ALL DIABLOS AND THE FORD GT90(ford only in styling) ARE MY FAVORITE CARS AFTER F1, THEY ARE AMAZING, but there is a fine line between, better and BEST. And for the guy who that the corvette was all that that car was souped up, IMAGINE WHAT A F1 CAN DO IF IT WAS SOUPED UP, THAT VETTE CAN'T EVEN LICK THE F1 TREAD MARKS.


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



    ok red
    take the low price of a z06
    subtract it from the cost a f1
    and then put the left over cash to modify the vette
    then you will see the f1 get destroyed by a vette

    its common thing that the f1 may have the fastest toop speed but it also has the top price
     
  7. Diablo GT vs. Mclaren F1

    I said somewhere else that the Mclaren F1 can go 100 mph in 6.6 seconds (Car and Driver). Well, that is the GTR version of the Mclaren; that should be compared with the GTR version of the DIablo (for which I have no clue what its 0-100 time is).

    Anyways, the regular Mclaren, which should be compared with this car (the GT), does 0-100 in 7.7 seconds. That is nly 0.3 seconds faster than the DIablo GT. So the Mclaren has a slight edge over the Diablo in acceleration, and probably in top speed, too (although that is not certain). However, the Diablo GT has considerably better handeling, and is MUCH more aerodynamically stable at high speeds. It would be a pretty tough competition.

    Oh, and for your information, the Murcielago has more torque than both of them, is much more aerodynamically stable than both, and more power than the GT. <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">
     
  8. You made some correct points. McLaren F1, although it's the fastest production car in terms of top speed, it doesn't have very good handling. It's simple, in order to have good handling at high speed, you need downforce, but in order to have a very high top speed, you don't want downforce because drag is a by-product of downforce. It is clear that McLaren has gone the top-speed way. They just wanted to make the world's fastest car, but not the world's best performance car. That's why the Ferrari F50, although is slower than the McLaren F1 in speed, it can pretty much beat the F1 on any circuit. (Circuit excludes Nascar type oval tracks).

    Now the Diablo GT, although not an F50 beater, might be able to put up a good fight with the McLaren on the track, but it has it's own problems, which is weight. So, I don't know which is better.
     
  9. You both have an excellent point. And i get really annoyed when all the mclaren lovers (who only like it because it has really high top speed) cant seem to refrain themselves from posting stuff about the stupid F1 in every car forum. Example: "this car sucks, a mclaren F1 would own this car!!" all those dudes need to grow up and learn about real cars.
     
  10. ya i like the f1 but mclaren now not only has a car that doesnt handle that well but its not even the fastest production car anymore. although i would still choose it over the diablo.
     
  11. Yes, I think there is a lot of stereotypes going around that the Mclaren F1 is unsurpassable, which isn't true. It's still one of the best, though.

    Hey, I just want everyobody to note: The Diablo 6.0 is faster than the F50 in acceleration (0-60 and 1/4 mile time) and top speed, and better traction, too, obviously. So if the 6.0 can beat the F50, the GT would even moreso. So I would definately call the GT an F50 beater. They are like 4 years apart, though, so it doesn't matter that much.
     
  12. Allow me to argue for the sake of McLaren lovers:
    1) The McLaren revolutionized supercar design, with its three seat layout and unbelievable looks
    2) The F1 was the first supercar to make extensive use of carbon fiber, a miraculous substance.
    3) The F1 utilizes a cool systemthat adds downforce WITHOUT THE USE OF ANY SPOILERS. As proven, this is not the most effective way to add downforce, even though this system was good enough to be banned from racing when McLaren put it in the car and won (i forget which race car it was)
    4) The McLaren is one of the safest cars in the world, being the first and only car (for a while, i think) to be abe to drive away from the 30mph crash testing
    5) Try comparing the Lambo GT against the F1 LM. I am not going to argue this one, because all of you know the outcome of that race (or the race between the LM and any other road-going car)
    6) Without the production of the McLaren, almost all of the modern supercars would not have been half as good, as almost all supercar manufacturers learned a lot from the McLaren.

    Beat that.
     
  13. oops, forgot something:
    also remember that the McLaren design started in 1989! that's two years b4 the original diablo came out
     
  14. you guys interpreted some facts there wrong

    First off, the McLaren F1 (standard) needs 6.3 or 6.6 to 100mph (depends on stats), 3.2 - 3.4 to 60mph

    the McLaren F1 LM needs 2.7 to 60mph and under 6 to 100mph
    the McLaren F1 GTR (race version, street-illegal) needs 2.1 (2.2 another stat) to 60mph, and 4.2 to 100mph on slicks. Yes, 4,2 seconds.
    (i know race car acceleration is a bit unclear cause of transmission and other setup things)
    About the GT i dont know.

    The F1 has .86g, the F1 LM has .94g, and the F1 GTR has around full 2g on slicks

    And, the F1 LM is not a GTR. Its something else, the LM is an upgraded standard McLaren, but, what most people dont know, there are 2 street legal real GTRs (but not on slicks), those should still need under 2.7 to 60mph. GeForce, i assume 1.2g, but just my own estimation here

    The F1 LM should win against a DiabloGT or F50 on a track, but not the standard F1. And the GTR race version? Should beat all by FAR, look it won 95 LeMans and 97 the Car-class (i call a class win a real win).

    And yes, im a McLaren fan, although i would never call any other car a shitcar, look, in every construction of a supercar dozends of experianced ingenieurs, race drivers and mechanics where involved.<!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Any one who says that any car is better that the Maclaren F1 need to have their head examined. I beleive that it is the best car ever made and no car will ever beat it!
     
  16. I'm sorry but u r wrong the Maclaren F1 do 0-100 mph in 6.3 seconds<!-- Signature -->
     
  17. im sorry dave gtr but ur quote that the mclaren f1 gtr does 0-100 in 4.3 secsis, well to put it mildly, slightly off, formula 1 cars need 3.8 secs on slicks to do a 0-100 run, and they have a power to weight ratio of 1300bhp per ton, the F1 cars are designed to accelerate quickly, and the Mclaren F1 GTR doesnt even come close to F1 cars in power to weight or gearing, so i think that u r slightly off there, and as for it pulling 2gs on slicks, formula palmer Audis dont even pull 2 g's, and they r single seater race cars that weigh 200kg and have 300bhp, i also think that u could be off there as well, if u can show me some proff of these claims then i may be proved wrong, lol
     
  18. Sorry, the standard F1 has a 1/4 mile time 0f 11.5 seconds (car and driver tested). How can it do 0-100 in 6.6 seconds?

    Yes, I have seen the Diablo GT in handeling, and it looks very responsive. If you want to compare the F50 GTR, then compare it to the Diablo GTR, not the road going GT.

    I knew that an F50 would beat a Diablo SV (was it the MAY '99 SV?). It's known that the F40 is also faster than the F50 in a strait line, though not in the curves, and that the GT2 is Porsche's top of the line revolutionary road going racer.

    The Diablo 6.0 would beat them all. The Diablo GT even more. The 6.0 liter engine was a big improvement over the last year's. Their handeling is not sloppy at all; the only complaint is a slight understeering for the 6.0, which is non-existent in the GT. The GT, in all probability, would beat an F50. (That shouldn't be surprising; the GT is 4 years newer)
     
  19. Hmmm I have to comment that despite performance figures.. when it comes to saying which car is the best out of any supercar it still always comes down to personal taste and opinion, which basically eliminates any one car from being the best. This is because no one car is going to be liked by everyone... it's simple, EVERYONE has their own idea of what's cool and what's not and everyone is free to make their own decisions. This is why it angers me when people rant on about how the Mclaren F1 is the best, bla bla bla.
    To be honest, I don't like the styling much and I personally think the Lamborghini Diablo GTR is the coolest looking supercar ever made. But that's my opinion and I'm not going to try to ram that down anyone else's throat so perhaps that wombat guy and any others preparing to make similar comments should consider the implications of what I have just said and rethink their post.

    btw, check my signature :p<!-- Signature -->
     
  20. yeah, and i think the McLaren F1 has the coolest styling ever. my opinion, i neednt discuss about this.

    Lets come to the facts, the F1 needs 6.3 not 7.7 to 100mph, and not 11.5 but 11.0 on quartermile. Check the Toyota-Supra vs McLaren F1 video, and i say it can be done faster.
    and at a 6.3 on 100, a 11.0 on quartermile is possible, also look at the gear switching times. And it looks normal in my own drawn diagramme of the performance curve.

    Yeah, i cant really believe the 4.2 to 100mph of the McLaren too, but the 2g side-force is sure. RACECAR, GT1! It won against the prototypes on LM'95, so it might have around the same side-g forces by the way. So the fact of 2g is believable in my FOV (field of view) here.

    Back to the 4.2 to 100, well, a formula-1 car has an extremly long 1st grear (150kph), the F1 GTR goes 80kph in first, then 130 in second, and 170 in third. Gear switch times very low cause of fast-switching gearboxes. Then, a Formula1 car is stronger, but the F1 GTR HAS TWICE THE TORQUE, and with a half so long first gear, it HAS THE QUAD TORQUE of a Formula1 Car. So i stay saying 100 in 4.2 is possible.

    And then one again, well i saw the 2.2 to 60mph in a magazine, are magazines lying now or what? And in NFS4 it needs 2.1, and NFS4 stays a quite relyable source (i know Ford GT-90 topspeed i know i know, but anyway relyable enough).<!-- Signature -->
     
  21. No one denies that the Mclaren is an awsome car, especially for its time. So is the Bugatti EB110. In a strait line race, the regular Mclaren would beat this Diablo, but not so when you're dealing with curves. The DIablo has an edge over it there. But that is to be expected, because, as you say, it is much older!

    The LM is virtually the same as a GTR. So the best comparison for that would be the Diablo GTR. Again, I can't say anything for certain (because I don't know exactly how fast the GTR is), but I would suspect it would be a similar case as a regular GT vs. a regular Mclaren.
     
  22. Yes, again, no one CAN say that McLaren F1 is not one of the best and fastest cars. It certainly has a super light weight construction, and a super high top speed.

    But I like F50 more. It has more unique and agressive styling. It handles and sounds like nothing else on earth (the closest thing to driving an F1 car in fact). McLaren might beat the F50 in accel and top speed, but F50 would win any race because handling is what counts the most in racing. Again, not to say that McLaren is not good, just that F50 is known for it's handling, and McLaren is known for it's top speed and accel.

    But let's get back on topic. This is a Lamboroghini forum. Just want to say that 6.0 and GT are both great cars, of course GT is better than 6.0 because it's lighter and faster and it's RWD. But F50 and McLaren F1 are both better than the 6.0 and the GT. GT and 6.0 are supercars, F50 and McLaren are legendary supercars.
     
  23. This is a good comparison... but I believe the McLaren still has the edge in most aspects...<!-- Signature -->
     
  24. personally, being a Bimmer lover, I gotta do with the McLaren (it runs a S70/2 60 Degree BMW V12)... The ONLY problem with the McLaren is it's lateral acceleration (at .86g)... this is the ONLY and I repeat ONLY drawback to thins vehicle in this comparison...<!-- Signature -->
     
  25. i agree that the bmw engine is good, and for the sake of arguement the gtr and lm can turn, however the f50 put a carbonfiber car into "production" before the f1 and ferrari has been playing with carbonfiber, kevlar and other composits since it's deadly b's of the early 80's around a track it would be an interesting race between a gt and an f50
     

Share This Page