Re: Real performance of Diablo GT

Discussion in '1999 Lamborghini Diablo GT' started by F40 Le Mans, Aug 10, 2002.

  1. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Perfect!!! you to say true things a lot much in this moment!!! OK!!!!! All the world to even think like you and me!!! Unfortunately it is not therefore in a generalized manner to exist badly information of thought in people!!!!!! They are important HP and kg!!!!! these make the difference!!!! not 0-100 in 3,5s why 4wd and 4s why 2wd!!!! the difference is 0-200 and 0-300 or 0-400m and 0-1000m in the smaller possible time!!!!

    Here the Diablo GT Quattroruote test!!!!!!!!

    Top speed (short-ratio) 320,7 km/h
    0-60 2,3s
    0-80 3,0s
    0-100 4,2s
    0-120 5,1s
    0-140 6,5s
    0-160 7,9s
    0-180 9,5s
    0-200 11,8s
    0-220 14,1s
    0-240 17,7s
    0-250 19,6s
    400m 11,8s @ 200,0km/h
    1000m 21,0s @ 256,1km/h
    g lat R: 55m 1,10g

    Our friend wont to say this, example:
    If you take Diablo GT vs Murcièlago in a standing start time the new Lamborghini is little faster than Diablo GT because is 4wd!! But Diablo GT is faster in acceleration than Murcielago!!!!

    Murcièlago test by Automobilismo Italian magazine and approx. same times of Auto test:
    Top speed 326,8km/h
    0-100 3,64s
    0-200 ???(probabily 11,7/11,8s!!did 198 in over 11,5s!!!)
    400m: 11,54s @ 198,6km/h
    1000m: 20,98s @ 249,7km/h

    Look!!!
    Diablo GT did 0-80 and 0-100 in 3,0s and 4,2s and in the Automobilismo test Murcièlago did 0-100 in 3,6s!!!This confirm that Murcièlago have a better initial traction than Diablo GT because is 4wd but after Diablo GT is faster because weight less and have a smaller 100>200 in 7,6s vs a 8,2s passage of Murcièlago!!!and Diablo GT have a smaller 100>250 than Murcièlago!!!!!!!!!
    ……..and Diablo GT have a 400m to 1000m passage in 9,2 at over 256km/h of terminal speed vs a 9,4s of Murcièlago a over 249km/h of terminal speed!!
    All this confirm that Murcièlago did this good times because is 4wd but Diablo GT weight approximately 1720kg with fuel and driver!!!! vs 1840kg with fuel and driver!!!! of Murcièlago and logically GT is faster after the traction initial period!!!! Is important the Hp/Kg ratio but also are important in a test: traction, torque, gears ratio and aerodynamic Cx and Cz!!!!!!!
    Sorry my English, I am Italian!!!!!!!
    I can make a lot of other examples like this………….
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  2. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Perfect!!! you to say true things a lot much in this moment!!! OK!!!!! All the world to even think like you and me!!! Unfortunately it is not therefore in a generalized manner to exist badly information of thought in people!!!!!! They are important HP and kg!!!!! these make the difference!!!! not 0-100 in 3,5s why 4wd and 4s why 2wd!!!! the difference is 0-200 and 0-300 or 0-400m and 0-1000m in the smaller possible time!!!!

    Here the Diablo GT Quattroruote test!!!!!!!!

    Top speed (short-ratio) 320,7 km/h
    0-60 2,3s
    0-80 3,0s
    0-100 4,2s
    0-120 5,1s
    0-140 6,5s
    0-160 7,9s
    0-180 9,5s
    0-200 11,8s
    0-220 14,1s
    0-240 17,7s
    0-250 19,6s
    400m 11,8s @ 200,0km/h
    1000m 21,0s @ 256,1km/h
    g lat R: 55m 1,10g

    <!-- Signature -->
     
  3. 1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)
     
  4. how is there a .7 second diffrence from 60mph to 62mph?
     
  5. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Perfect!!! you to say true things a lot much in this moment!!! OK!!!!! All the world to even think like you and me!!! Unfortunately it is not therefore in a generalized manner to exist badly information of thought in people!!!!!! They are important HP and kg!!!!! these make the difference!!!! not 0-100 in 3,5s why 4wd and 4s why 2wd!!!! the difference is 0-200 and 0-300 or 0-400m and 0-1000m in the smaller possible time!!!!



    <!-- Signature -->
     
  6. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from F40 Le Mans</i>
    <b><!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Jackamo</i>
    <b>1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->
    Perfect!!! you to say true things a lot much in this moment!!! OK!!!!! All the world to even think like you and me!!! Unfortunately it is not therefore in a generalized manner to exist badly information of thought in people!!!!!! They are important HP and kg!!!!! these make the difference!!!! not 0-100 in 3,5s why 4wd and 4s why 2wd!!!! the difference is 0-200 and 0-300 or 0-400m and 0-1000m in the smaller possible time!!!!

    Here the Diablo GT Quattroruote test!!!!!!!!

    Top speed (short-ratio) 320,7 km/h
    0-60 2,3s
    0-80 3,0s
    0-100 4,2s
    0-120 5,1s
    0-140 6,5s
    0-160 7,9s
    0-180 9,5s
    0-200 11,8s
    0-220 14,1s
    0-240 17,7s
    0-250 19,6s
    400m 11,8s @ 200,0km/h
    1000m 21,0s @ 256,1km/h
    g lat R: 55m 1,10g

    Our friend wont to say this, example:
    If you take Diablo GT vs Murcièlago in a standing start time the new Lamborghini is little faster than Diablo GT because is 4wd!! But Diablo GT is faster in acceleration than Murcielago!!!!

    Murcièlago test by Automobilismo Italian magazine and approx. same times of Auto test:
    Top speed 326,8km/h
    0-100 3,64s
    0-200 ???(probabily 11,7/11,8s!!did 198 in over 11,5s!!!)
    400m: 11,54s @ 198,6km/h
    1000m: 20,98s @ 249,7km/h

    Look!!!
    Diablo GT did 0-80 and 0-100 in 3,0s and 4,2s and in the Automobilismo test Murcièlago did 0-100 in 3,6s!!!This confirm that Murcièlago have a better initial traction than Diablo GT because is 4wd but after Diablo GT is faster because weight less and have a smaller 100>200 in 7,6s vs a 8,2s passage of Murcièlago!!!and Diablo GT have a smaller 100>250 than Murcièlago!!!!!!!!!
    ……..and Diablo GT have a 400m to 1000m passage in 9,2 at over 256km/h of terminal speed vs a 9,4s of Murcièlago a over 249km/h of terminal speed!!
    All this confirm that Murcièlago did this good times because is 4wd but Diablo GT weight approximately 1720kg with fuel and driver!!!! vs 1840kg with fuel and driver!!!! of Murcièlago and logically GT is faster after the traction initial period!!!! Is important the Hp/Kg ratio but also are important in a test: traction, torque, gears ratio and aerodynamic Cx and Cz!!!!!!!
    Sorry my English, I am Italian!!!!!!!
    I can make a lot of other examples like this………….
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    Thank you for the test of the Diablo GT a lot! It is good that you like my post, because I learned some of it from you in your posts in the Ferrari F40 forum explaining the F40 acceleration in relation to other cars! No coincidence! <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">

    And I have a test of the Murcielago From Motor Magazine, so if you were wonderring the Murcielago tested 0-200 kmh in 11.4 seconds. I think that is pretty fast vs. Diablo GT's time of 11.8 seconds. But I am waiting for Quattroroute to test the Murcielago so I can compare that with their test of the DIablo GT to see for certain which one is faster. I think you are right that the Diablo GT would be a little faster beyond 60 mph because it has a better hp/weight ratio.
     
  7. I explain you why F40 is better in performances compared to all the supercars excluded Mclaren F1, CLK-GTR, and 911GT1 much more expensive and considered true prototypes and not GT!!!
    Its 478hp over a weight of 1170kg render F40 a car from optimal HP/KG ratio, but what it renders very fast F40 is the distribution of power!!!
    In fact a method in order to confront the supercars is just this, and we do not have only to confront weight and power, but also the availability of power of distribution in all the range of use engine!!!
    Lengthening the gears, as an example, F40 to work in 2nd from 4800rpm to 7000rpm, 3rd from 5000 to 7000, 4 gear from 5500 to 7000rpm!!! If you have the graphical power you can see: To the regimen of 4800 to distribute approximately 390hp, to 5000rpm distributing approximately 400hp and 5500 approximately 430hp!! And all on a weight of 1170kg!! Diablo GT to distribute from 4800 to 5500 approximately, from 420 to 480cv but on a weight of 1620kg!! between F40 and Diablo GT more difference exists than pushed in wrap medium of the RPM, always based on the weight, and greater that to 7000 or 7300!!! It is for that F40 covers the 0-200 in 11/11,5s and nobody other to make equal.

    I to hope of being comprehensible !!!
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  8. Hello Jackamo,

    I explain you why F40 is better in performances compared to all the supercars excluded Mclaren F1, CLK-GTR, and 911GT1 much more expensive and considered true prototypes and not GT!!!

    Its 478hp over a weight of 1170kg render F40 a car from optimal HP/KG ratio, but what it renders very fast F40 is the distribution of power!!!
    In fact a method in order to confront the supercars is just this, and we do not have only to confront weight and power, but also the availability of distribution power in all the range of use engine!!!

    Lengthening the gears, as an example, F40 work exactly in 2nd from 4800rpm to 7000rpm, 3rd from 5000 to 7000, 4 gear from 5500 to 7000rpm!!!
    If you have the power graphic you can see: to the regimen of 4800 distribute approximately 390hp, to 5000rpm distributing approximately 400hp and 5500rpm approximately 430hp!! And all on a weight of 1170kg!!

    Example: Diablo GT distribute from 4800 to 5500 approximately, from 420 to 480cv but on a weight of 1620kg!!
    Between F40 and Diablo GT exists more pushed difference in the medium range of RPM, always based on the weight, and greater that to 7000 or 7300!!!
    >>>At 4800rpm “only 30hp” of difference but over a weight difference of 450kg !!<<<here F40 is fast!!!
    At 7000/7300rpm exist 100hp of difference but also 450kg and F40 has equally a better hp/kg ratio !!

    If you compare F50, it distribute from 6000rpm “the same” 390/400cv of F40, to arrive at 8500 and 520hp but over a weight of 1250/1260kg !!! and also in this case nothing difference in medium range of power but with a difference of weight of 80/90kg…… and after………..to 7000 for F40 and 8500 for F50, exist difference of 40hp but also a difference over 80/90kg !!!

    I vont explein that F40 has the best hp/kg ratio in the “medium range of power”, from 4500rpm to 5500rpm (medium range) and from 5500 to 7000 (high range), and not only at 7000 ( 478hp over 1170kg!)

    It is for that F40 covers 0-200 in 11/11,5s and nobody other: F50, Diablo GT and SE, Murcièlago, Zonda C12S, EB110GT,……. to make equal.

    I to hope of being comprehensible !!!
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  9. 1999 Diablo GT:
    0-60 mph: 3.7 seconds (but 0-62 mph 4.4 seconds)
    0-100 mph: 8.0 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1/4 mile: 11.8 seconds (Quattroroute)
    1 km standing: 21.0 seconds
    Top speed: 211 mph tested by EVO magazine, but with short 5th gear ratio probably 199 mph

    Does any one have the full test results from Quattroroute for the Diablo GT? If any one has the test results ffrom EVO magazine I would also like to have it. Thank you!



    (I can't post a new thing in this forum for some reason, so I have to edit this comment to answer your question)


    The Diablo has to change gears after 60 mph, so in order to get to 62 mph, it needs to change gears. Diablo uses metal shift gate so it takes longer than most cars. Also, 1st to 2nd gear takes especially long for the Diablo. The DIablo GT was tested for 0-62 mph (100 kmh) at 4.4 seconds, but EVO magazine tested 0-60 mph for the Diablo GT at 3.7 seconds. They don't contradict, only are measuring different things.

    This is why 0-100 mph and especially 0-60 mph times do not matter as much, and only give you general idea; they rely to much on technicalities of gear changes. 0-124 mph and 0-180 mph give you a better idea of acceleration, but still rely a little on the time of gear change. When comparing real performance, it is always best to compare distance (1/4 mile, 1 km standing, etc.) in relation to initial traction (i.e., if two cars have 1 km standing of 20.9 seconds, but one car has 4WD and better initial traction and the other is RWD and has a worse start, that means the RWD needs to be faster in order to have the same time and catch up; that is only an example, but is how you compare real acceleration)
     
  10. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from F40 Le Mans</i>
    <b>Hello Jackamo,

    I explain you why F40 is better in performances compared to all the supercars excluded Mclaren F1, CLK-GTR, and 911GT1 much more expensive and considered true prototypes and not GT!!!

    Its 478hp over a weight of 1170kg render F40 a car from optimal HP/KG ratio, but what it renders very fast F40 is the distribution of power!!!
    In fact a method in order to confront the supercars is just this, and we do not have only to confront weight and power, but also the availability of distribution power in all the range of use engine!!!

    Lengthening the gears, as an example, F40 work exactly in 2nd from 4800rpm to 7000rpm, 3rd from 5000 to 7000, 4 gear from 5500 to 7000rpm!!!
    If you have the power graphic you can see: to the regimen of 4800 distribute approximately 390hp, to 5000rpm distributing approximately 400hp and 5500rpm approximately 430hp!! And all on a weight of 1170kg!!

    Example: Diablo GT distribute from 4800 to 5500 approximately, from 420 to 480cv but on a weight of 1620kg!!
    Between F40 and Diablo GT exists more pushed difference in the medium range of RPM, always based on the weight, and greater that to 7000 or 7300!!!
    >>>At 4800rpm “only 30hp” of difference but over a weight difference of 450kg !!<<<here F40 is fast!!!
    At 7000/7300rpm exist 100hp of difference but also 450kg and F40 has equally a better hp/kg ratio !!

    If you compare F50, it distribute from 6000rpm “the same” 390/400cv of F40, to arrive at 8500 and 520hp but over a weight of 1250/1260kg !!! and also in this case nothing difference in medium range of power but with a difference of weight of 80/90kg…… and after………..to 7000 for F40 and 8500 for F50, exist difference of 40hp but also a difference over 80/90kg !!!

    I vont explein that F40 has the best hp/kg ratio in the “medium range of power”, from 4500rpm to 5500rpm (medium range) and from 5500 to 7000 (high range), and not only at 7000 ( 478hp over 1170kg!)

    It is for that F40 covers 0-200 in 11/11,5s and nobody other: F50, Diablo GT and SE, Murcièlago, Zonda C12S, EB110GT,……. to make equal.

    I to hope of being comprehensible !!!
    </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    But the F40 LM is so exclusive that I doubt there are more than 10 in all the world.

    I still prefer the Diablo, and I stil think that the F40 is the best Ferrari ever.<!-- Signature -->
     
  11. Gearchange !
     

Share This Page