Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'American Cars' started by ajzahn, Jan 20, 2006.
LOLZ FORD SUCKZ!!
at least the Ford GT in 3rd gear is a bit faster than the Chrsyler Viper SRT-10 at the Hockenheim short track!
Another nice article, thanks.
the F430 had semi-slicks and the GT had gear box problems.the surface of the Hockenheim is more ruogh,which makes the tires warm up faster.the Nurburgring has huge straights were the tires cool down.semi-slicks need high temperatures to run well.
first of all,why are porsches also fast on other tracks?because they tested their cars on every track on this planet?look at the lap time of the GT3 RS.it is fast on the NUR and on the HR.but the tracks are totally different.
the Nurburgring is close to the normal roads.engineers are interested on how the car behaves on the Nur because the car will behave the same way on the streets.that's why so many manufaturers develop their cars on the Nur.it is sayed that 1km on the Nur is like 10km on the roads.so it wouldn't be dumb to make reliability tests there.
wouldn't it be stupid to spend millions to make a car fast only on 1 track??
also BMW didn't claim the M5 lap time.it was a rumour and the driver was the "Nurburgrung Taxi Driver" Sabine Schmitz.if you believe in that lap time you're an idiot.
so you believe a claim someone till someone else proofs that he's wrong?i can say i did 8:00 in van with the hand brake pulled...and it was snowing and i had to change the tires during the lap.so,do you believe me?
then there is this thing of the driver:
i thought that the GM lap times were a bit too fast because they were like 15 seconds faster than on the Sport Auto tests.i said it before,but Walter Röhrl was on 3 different cars +-4 seconds faster than on the Sport Auto test.you can say whatever you want,Walter Rörhrl is the best rally driver of all time and also beated F1 drivers on the track and he also the chief test driver of porcsche,so he knows what he's diving.now,maybe GM test drivers have an HUGE talent or their are just making publicity for their car.i can't help wondering why they didn't invite journalists or publish the track data instead of making pictures of a corvette on the Nur and of Jan Magnussen posing in front of corvette.and they somehow wanted to beat the CGT lap time...i think before telling everyone that it clocked a 7:30 someone thought "hmmm...people are stupid but not that stupid..."
about the lap times you gave:these are incredible differences that i can only explain by the bad level of the edmunds drivers.btw BM tested the Ford GT when it was on development.it had 500hp and less than 690Nm of torque.
i don't know who the edmunds test drivers are but the comparo is valid because i presume it was laways the same driver.but comparing to the C5 Z06 lap time it was incredible lame.maybe they aren't race drivers.horst von saurma is.
i didn't knew that...
4-5 seconds isn't very much for a driver like Jan Magnussen on such a long track, and then when you consider the testing that they did there.......
Besides, 7:52 is fairly poor compared to what the GT's been doing at other tracks such as Oschersleben, where it's about 4 1/2 seconds faster than the 996 turbo. It's odd that it's margin of victory is less on a lap that's a few times longer.
Ford GT is the best american performance car, ever.
Yes, if you don't consider the price.
So have any proof of this?
Nurbur-record is denied for Ferrari... <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/wink.gif"></A>
M5 7'52": stupid lie
who belive it: much more stupid!!! <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
8:13 --- 150.426 km/h -- BMW M5 (E60), 507 PS/1844 kg (sport auto 12/04) , FACT!
come on...how can you possibly think that the Z06 is faster on the Nur then the GT??
anyway,we'll see when they test the Z06.i guess it will do close to the 8 minutes mark.
And M6 (8'09") confirms it... But someone prefers tales!!!
8:09 --- 151.656 km/h -- BMW M6, 507 PS/1761 kg (sport auto 12/05), www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=0&fID=2&tID=63338
only the M3 CSL is faster than the Ford GT at the Ring:
7:50 --- 157.787 km/h -- BMW E46 M3 CSL (sport auto 08/03)
It is a bargain compared to the next sweetest american exotic (S7)
I didn't say that it was faster in a general sense. I merely said that one of its laps could be faster than one of the GT's laps.
8 minutes? Are you aware that the C5 Z06 usually posted faster lap times than the 996 turbo? Sometimes it was 2 sec faster on short tracks. It also tied the 996 GT3 when tested by a German car magazine. The 7:56 that the C5 Z06 posted at the 'Ring is very believable. The C6 Z06 has an extra 100 hp, wider tires, and an improved chassis. Add Jan Magnussen to the equation, and a 13 second improvement seems perfectly normal. That's equivalent to about a 2.5 second improvement on a shorter track. The driver alone can do that. Even in F1, talent varies by about 2 seconds/lap. When you compare a professional driver such as Jan Magnussen to an automotive journalist, I'd expect an even bigger difference.
Please don't dodge this question. Do you think that Jan Magnussen lied about this? If it's only GM who's lieing, don't you think that Jan Magnussen would speak up?
"The Nurburgring is close to the normal roads..."
What, and you don't think normal roads require a different setup than most racetracks?
Surely, you're not trying to convince me that the GT3 RS, set up for the Nurburgring, couldn't improve its time elsewhere with a different setup.
M5...this is a rumour?:
"Munich (fnp) the knight impact took place on the Nuerburgring. When the strongest BMW M5 of all times had orbited the north loop in only 7:52 minutes, even Professor Burkhard Goeschel was a little baff. 'that was a treat, a piece racing', schwaermte the BMW member of the board after the successful test of the new supersportsman."
If it was a rumour, how can it be 'Ring taxi driver Sabine Schmitz who set the time? "The 7:52 is a fake time. It was actually set by..." If it's just a rumour, why isn't the mag/website above not sued for false reporting?
And that's not even where I originally read about the 7:52 time. Nor have I read that it's possible to lap the 'Ring in 8 minutes in a van with the handbrake pulled. But then, even common sense tells me that shouldn't be possible.
How do you know the BM Ford GT was a 500-hp development car? When was this test done, I'm just curious?
Anyway, the 500-hp rating of the Ford GT is likely to be totally irrelevant, seeing how the GT (when rated at 500 hp) hit 150 mph in 16.9 seconds by C&D (very similar to Autocar's time with the 550-hp GT) and outlapped both the 360CS and GT3 when tested on the same day at Gingerman Raceway by some 2 seconds. Many people will acknowledge the 550 rating is not the result of more development, but merely a more accurate indication of actual power (and even the 550 is still underrated). Basically, there should be little to no difference in track times between a Ford GT rated at 500 hp vs one rated at 550. Certainly not the 5 second difference we're seeing between edmunds.com ("bad level" drivers) vs BM (Gan San?).
On the Willow Springs track, BM got 1:48.13 with the Nismo 350Z. For reference, R&T got 1:40.06 with just the 350Z Track. Are you going to tell me next that BM was just testing a development 350Z?
"but comparing to the C5 Z06 lap time it was incredible lame.maybe they aren't race drivers."
And maybe they are. Aside from being a former 500cc world champion on motorbikes, Schwantz also has had experience in Nascar and touring car racing. But his experience behind a Corvette is largely questionable, whereas for Andy Pilgrim it's not.
I have proof, in the form of Ford GT's sitting in the Nurburgring parking lot. Ford (with partner Roush) has a homologation facility next to the 'Ring. It may be a part of the new Jagaur facility they set up nearby some time ago, I'm not sure. So yes, it is technically correct to say that Ford has spent time at the 'Ring with the Ford GT. It doesn't mean they do a lot of timing/development on the actual track.
This UK Ford GT press car is based in the UK.
Well I know that Ford UK did have some cars there, but he claimed that it spent more development time there than the vette.
i said it would near the 8 minutes mark in the Sport Auto test.
i don' know if jan magnussen had a stop watch in the car.he works for GM and even he has superiors that tell him what to do(btw i know a japanese commercial of the hinda prelude where ayrton senna(!!)speaks of it like it was jesus on 4 wheels).maybe he really clocked that lap time but not with a stcok Z06.
no jan magnussen would have said nothing because he earns his money from GM.he he gets fired he would drive for someone else but he wouldn't earn the same money.
ok,so even Professor Burkhard Goeschel was surprised with that lap time...it says a lot about the credibility oof that lap time.the journalist just told him the lap time and he would surely not say "no this is a bit too fast..".
they said it.the video came out in July in the US.i think there is a difference of 2 or 3 months(or more...)between the japanese and american release date.
8 seconds...now this is getting stupid.that's maybe the difference between an amateur and a F1 driver.look at the lap times of Top Gear.the difference between the best F1 and best celebrity guest is 5 seconds.i'm speaking of F1 drivers and normal people who probably never were on a race track.maybe BM should send R&T drivers for the Nurburgring time attacks.i'm sure that NSX-R could beat the CGTs lap time.and maybe if the same drives the Z06,maybe he can be Stefan Bellof's lap time.
i was comparing the Andy Pilgrim and R&T lap time with the Z06.
edit:th GT3 RS did 1:11,8 on HR.i think that's very fast because it it the same lap time as the Zonda S and Gallardo.i don't think that the can be improved only by changing the setup.
He's also probably done literally like a thousand laps.