Re: What's fatser Indy 500 or Formula 1

Discussion in '2002 Ferrari F2002' started by ReeK, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. F1 i'm sure
  2. Ok, so most people reckon an F1 car is quicker, and it should be considering the cost. But I still believe the fastest Champ car would beat a Minardi around any track, oval, square, even triangle.
    How about Le Mans cars? Are they quicker than F1 cars?
  3. I think Le Mans cars reach higher speeds on the straights (the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans is pretty long) but in terms of cornering and acceleration F1 is superior.
  4. <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from 69Stang</i>
    <b>Ok, so most people reckon an F1 car is quicker, and it should be considering the cost. But I still believe the fastest Champ car would beat a Minardi around any track, oval, square, even triangle.
    How about Le Mans cars? Are they quicker than F1 cars?</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->LM cars vs. F1? No chance, the only place LM would beat it out is top speed... Barely.<!-- Signature -->
  5. F1 are much quicker in the road courses because they are simply more advanced. F1 employs a lot of technology such as traction control and even launch control that its so much more technologically superior. The rules in F1 are pretty leanient compared to the US racing series. Engines can be laid at different angles, most teams use a 90 degree V10 which allows good symetry and low center of gravity. F1 cars can take turns much faster but are defintaly slower in the straights, trust me, I heard an F1 commentator and Juan Montoya say this. Although F1 isn't as competitive as CART, the main reason is that each team has its own chassis and engine that is unique to everyone else's. In CART, you have three engine manufactures (Ford, Toyota, and Honda...who is the dominating engine manufacturer since they debuted, not that I'm bragging and all) and two chassis makers (Reynard, Lola) which makes it ultra competitive.

    Oh and don't get me on driver skill, we all know F1 is the king of all open wheel racing. And between CART and the IRL, look what happened at last year's Indy 500: 6 CART drivers took the top 6 positions, just shows the skill of driving in ovals huh? On another note CART is the middle ground between the all-oval IRL and the all-road course F1. Even with all the management troubles in CART, its probably the most fun to watch of the three because it requires that drivers have talents in all kinds of racing circuits (road course, street circuit, ovals)

    And by the way, the closed course speed record is 241.482 MP held by Gil de Ferran at California Speedway in a Honda powered Reynard pushing over 900 HP with 40 psi of boost.
  6. on the highest downforce setting, a 2001-spec formula 1 car will do a rather pathetic 190mph, on the lowest downforce setting, it will still only do 223mph (jean alesi, jordan, monza, 2001)

    i dont knw too much about the IRL, other than it sucks compared to the FedEx Champ Cars...these will do almost 250mph for a whole lap, peaking at mayb 252/3

    so, an indycar will thrash an F1 car around, say, Michigan Super Speedway, it would be very close around Elkhart Lake, and an F1 car would probs win around Monaco

    2days Le Mans cars cant really compete due 2 the stupid rules that have been implemented in the last few years, an old Group C machine would give any F1 car a good race

    As for all time fastest racing cars, look no further than the Can-Am racers of the early 70s, they were considerable faster than formula 1 cars of even the LATE 70s, so if development had continued like it did in F1, Can-Am racers 2day would be the fastest things on earth

    Can-Am cars rule all
  7. Yeah Can-Am racing was awesome, imagine a Sportscar series today, where you had huge (6-8 litre) engines pumping out 1000+ bhp.
  8. I would love to see something like the Can-Am series today. But only if they had cars like the Porsche 917/30K. Who wouldn't like to see cars with over 1000 hp race around a track.
  9. F1 cars are far more refined and faster. They also handle and brake much better.
  10. CART uses ground effects to increase downforce F1 mandates a flat chassis
  11. It's difficult to compare horsepowers especially when turbos are illegal for safety in formula one. And I think a naturally aspirated engines horsepower usually counts for more.

    Also you said a cart cars done 60 in first gear well F1 cars at Monte Carlo do 90 mph in first gear because they lose more time in the one gear change than they would gain. (obviously other way round in road cars even if slow gear change)

    I must say I have respect for both indy 500 and F1.
    Indy bcos they're nutters with walls right next to them
    F1 bcos the drivers are so skilled that they have to turn before they see they should.
  12. Turbos weren't made illegal in formula 1 because of Safety, it was because of cost.
  13. It depends on a lot of factors really. The Formula 1 cars top around 900 hp now-a-days! And they weigh around the 600 kilo mark. Their top speeds vary given a lot of factors, but they have been known to reach 360 and possibly as far as 375km/hr! They rev out to about 20,000 rpm max and some of the better cars maybe up around the 22,000rpm. Generally it is said that they change gears at around 18,000 to 19,000 rpm at a good consistant pace. That's all out of a 3-litre engine. Not bad!

    Now admittedly I don't know much about these cars, but here goes. The Indy cars, although similar in basic shapes, are entirly different cars. They are turbo-charged fire-horsepower-breathing machines. They are a 3.5-litre beast with in-excess of 1000hp! One must consider that according to rules and regulations, the rear wing must be the same for all races for all teams except the Indy 500! That's something to think about. They aren't as high revving as I understand, about 16,000 rpm (which is still an aweful lot!). But their top speeds differ greatly from the Formula 1 cars. I believe they reach the 400+km mark given the right situations which is incredilbe really.

    Now I may not be correct in everything i have said, but it seems that given a good stretch of road, the Indy cars would out-do the F1 cars. In racing, 25km's/hr is a big difference! You have to also realise that without down force the cars will simply flip at low speeds! Hence they'd be unable to reach what they do as is. Therefore there must be a limit to the wing settings that both cars can setup-to to determine and reach their top speeds. It is generally known that Indy cars are faster than F1 cars, however in the streets the F1 cars with their superior light-weight frame and high revving capabilities, would beat the Indy cars on a circuit track - and reasonably comfortably too. Some may disagree, but personally i'd consider them to both be extreme racing cars, And in their own rights, significantly out do the other!
  14. you know it's funny on how much you so called F1 fans can say shit you don't even know

    back in 2000 mika hakkinen was asked to perform a aerodynamics test as well as a top-speed test @ talledega Superspeedway but how ever it was kept a secret from the media the fastest mika went with his
    McLaren was 285.771 MPH with a lap time of 39.0012 seconds now considering the total distance of the track (2.66 miles) thats fast for any car.
  15. 285.771 MPH = 459.9 km/h

    2.66 miles in 39.0012 seconds = 245.531 MPH or 395.14 km/h

    so I presume you are talking about an actual maximum speed on the straight.

    either way, damn thats fast, why would it be kept secret? Where is the Talledega Superspeedway? is it near Indianapolis? because that's the only place I thought F1 cars went to in the US.
  16. this was written in a magazine and gotten from a website:
    Indy cars:
    weight......700kg limited
    power.......700bhp limited

    f1 cars:
    weight......600kg limited

    you tell me which you think is faster

    areodynamics is indy but not by much<!-- Signature -->
  17. hey snyper listen up! cause i think u may have a few things wrong...

    for starters, indy cars.
    they are 750 maybe 800bhp + but as far as i'm aware they aren't limited! they are limited in engine mods etc and wheels and tyres and that, but their power is not limited to that!

    secodnly f1 cars.
    my understanding is that bhp is at the wheels. PLEASE correct me if i'm wrong cause i'd like to know, but if bhp is at the wheels, how can a 900hp engine get 900bhp!? that don't work for me!

    i think u actually got them confused! maybe u meant the stats for indy are f1, and the stats for f1 are indy!? would that be right mate?

    just wondering! cause i don't quite get you! thanks!
  18. the weights are right. Champcars = 700kg and F1 = 600kg

    people always argue about horsepower, I thought engine horsepower for F1 was given at the crankshaft, this is the first time I've heard anything to the contrary.
  19. #44 bmwm5power, Aug 9, 2002
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
  20. The IRL cars would be faster on an oval. The F1 cars would be faster on a road course. Of course, what the hell is the use of only making left turns?<!-- Signature -->
  21. Formula 1 car-apx. 800bhp 600kg 3 liter V-10 20,000+rpm
    Cart/champ car-apx.900bhp 900kg 2.65 liter turbocharged V-8 16,000 max rpm
    IRL car-apx.600+bhp 900+kg 3.5 liter V-8, limited to 10,000rpm

    F1-flat bottems, grooved slicks, but have excellent aero grip
    Cart- ground effects, slicks, aero grip is less than F1, but have better mechanical grip
    IRL-don't know much about them, but I'm guessing they are close to cart

    the champ cars have the highest top speed (apx. 250 mph), IRl is next, toping out at about 240 mph, the F1 car is last with a top speed of around 220-230, but in everything else; braking, acceleration, cornering, the F1 car is tops, just my two cents
  22. oh cmon guys...common sense. How could u expect a f1 car to go around an oval track like 200 times when it revs between 18000-19000. and correction. Not many f1 cars rev at 20000. Maybe renault with they wide angle engine but i doubt the others will rev at 20000. Unless it reved near 20000 and used the boost button. Which was explained in the canadian grand prix that it allows the engine to go above limit and rev a few hundred more than the limit. i dont know how it is done but its just possible. and f1 cars run on groved tires. could u imagine the f1 cars still running on slicks?! slicks give off more mechanical grip than groved tires do and thats the reason why FIA decided to switch to groved. To slow down the cars. but that didnt work very well. lol

    The f1 cars weigh 600 atleast with driver and a full gas tank i think? But some cars may weigh lighter because after the canadian grand prix. marshals found little 4cm by 4cm blocks that weighs the car down more but ends up flying off the car during the race. So making the car lighter and faster.

    F1 cars were designed to race at circuits with many turns. Not oval because thats just torture on that v10 engine. So much heat would build up in the engine that when it comes in for a pit stop it would probably melt. lol just like what happened to montoya at germany last year.

    F1 cars would most likely lose on an oval track but other than that, its dominant on the others. F1 engines hasnt quite reach 900 hp but the williams bmw engine is very close to it according to rumours. Ron dennis said that their engine this year was supposed to give off 40 more hp so that should put mclaren somewhere in the 850 mark and ferrari's engine probably puts out as much as the bmw but not as much.
    I couldnt even imagine how fast F1 cars would be if they had active suspension. These cars would become dangerously fast but i doubt the FIA will ever let that happen.

    who knows, the next accident which causes death would probably change the sport even more. You could see how much it changed since 94 when the greatest driver on earth died. (ayrton senna for those who dont know) the side pannels of the car raised much higher and everything else is much safer than the cars just less than a decade ago.

    for that comment about a cart car beating a minardi car. I wouldnt count on it. Minardi is about 2-4 seconds off the pace if not 6. But im pretty sure the gap between cart and f1 is far greater than just 6 seconds.
  23. Re:

    the minardi's qaulifying time in canada would have still put them on pole for the car race
  24. hi i'm new around here, hi to everybody. i'm ready to jump into the dirt, :))). thats a very accurate analysis. To be honest Oval racing is bull shit, i'll tell you CART got blown away by F1 at canadian circuit and so will IRL 500, and now these guys are scampering towards oval, " come to oval we'll see ". what special talents do you need to go round and round the oval, i'm surprised that they don't doze off doing some 150 laps, sheer stupidity. Give ferrari guys 1 year and they will produce an engine for the oval, put it in a F1 car and whip IRL's ass. Ferrari has rock solid reliability which no manufacturer has achieved, just look at schumacher's records. If IRL 500 wants to challenge F1, let it be on a proper circuit with some real turns. And F1 guys here know whats going to happen.
  25. i dont think Ferrari will waste their time on building a lower revving power unit just for IRL. But hey, they have so much money so a couple of millions wouldnt hurt them. They got fined 1 million this year and it had no effect on the team.

Share This Page