sport auto Supertest: Ford GT

Discussion in 'American Cars' started by ajzahn, Jan 20, 2006.

  1. #151 F40 Le Mans, Feb 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Guibo, this is my shop in Italy

    I don't have try, Saleen 750hp, F1, 911GT1 and CLK GTR, CCR, not the CGT and MC12 (but it has my customer that has also F40..) ... and and little others..but I have friends or custmers that has try parts of these supercars..

    F40, F40 600hp, F50, Diablos (GT, SV, VT), Murcielago, XJ220, EB110 GT,...Enzo (of my friend)...Zonda S (with Pagani)...996GT2 (also this car my custmers has tuned to 600hp).. a 500hp 911 3.3 turbo...and others...all I have try.

    TopGear opinion
  2. #152 Porsche addict, Feb 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    holy shit you've got a Porsche 906 in there!
  3. #153 F40 Le Mans, Feb 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Yes, this is my Porsche 906. do you like?

    Can you help me to reconstruct the 'hystoric palmares' of this 906?
    I have not. This car has raced in USA and the chassis number is 906140.
    Help me, plase!!

    For documentations, here my site and e-mail
  4. Guibo, I cannot give other better documentation to you than my syte, if you want to take an airplane and you come to find me... make to see you beautiful cars. While face to face we can ourselves understood better than here.
  5. #155 Porsche addict, Feb 1, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    I love it yes, and I found a list of 906's with their number and info
    but it doesn't mention much about yours:

    1966 - Geneva auction 1998, not sold - Monaco auction 1999, not sold.
  6. F40 le Mans says the truth: I visited his showroom in 2002, it fells like the Even on Earth!!!
  7. #157 F40 Le Mans, Feb 2, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Yes mafalda, and you know (not like Guibo) that F40 is very very very quick car in 80-270 Km/h or 50-170 Mph times passage.
    Quiker than a big numbers of Supercars.

    The *strong point* is the 100-200 Km/h passage, because:

    1) very lightweight
    2) Strong twinturbo torque and near 500 Hp.
    3) Only one gear-change in 100-200 Km/h passage.
    4) only V8 2.9 liter.
    5) is penetrating

    Also over 200 Km/h is quick, in comparing to other cars.
    But at very high speed, F40 in straight line has much more limits, for power limit. But between low/high is still today a very quick car.
  8. #158 F40 Le Mans, Feb 3, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Guibo you remember? you belive that Veyronman *was too hard* with me?

    You belive that Veyronman *is* a really really really lame member???
    Here, pag.10 to 21, start your stubborn opinion..
    look here..

    This graph not did the *real* sense of the *real* progression line of The F40 and the others, so you can also stopped.
    this picture? whot is the sense? to amuse you? (here the 580ho F1 !?!?!?! and did 0-300 in 23.4s???)

    look and remember, mafalda has right to some yours different versions at that time and now, on Ford GT, Enzo, S7, Zonda, CGT, comparison...ext, ext.. So...

    So, now, for better comparison, consider, yes, the *positive factors*, Torque, Power, gears ratio...but ALSO the *negative*!!!
    I re-read all, and all these your argument are based only *in one sense way*!! so your have in your mind a *not real version* of the realty, whene you are side by side to others cars comparison!!

    And How is your stubborn in your examples like this:

    In Quattroruote, F40 did:
    49.7 - 149.1 mph in 13.12 seconds. That's 3.4 m/s^2
    In Autocar, Pagani Zonda C12 S did:
    50 - 150 mph in 13.2 seconds. That's...3.4 m/s^2. Pagani Zonda is just as fast as F40!!
    F40: 149.1 - 1 km mark (163.8 mph) in 4.59 seconds = 1.43 m/s^2
    Zonda: 150 - 170 mph in 4.8 seconds = 1.863 m/s^2. Zonda has FASTER acceleration, even over a WIDER range of speed! Zonda S is FASTER than F40!!! (What about Zonda F???)

    My version:
    Yes, here in these two tests they has a similar 50-150 Mph.
    But you not have considered that F40 was tested with 91,4 F degrees sure in full summer 1989 (print in September).
    The Zonda was tested 04/06/2002 but for comparing results to the others Zonda's test probably the climatic conditions are much betters than
    F40's road test. For better line progression results (TopGear with Zonda did 0-150 Mph 17.0 secs).
    So this confirm, and you have not consider, only the 286 miles for Zonda (also F40 was new), that in the same conditions the F40 is little faster than Zonda the same day with same conditions.
    But, you this never said and considerd.
    Not talk for 150-170 Mph, that I have explain it.
  9. I have already explain the Zonda's 150-170!!

    Oh yeah, and do you think that is representative/typical performance between Murcielago and Zonda? You seriously think Murcielago will outrun the Zonda in a straight line on a flat road? By Sport Auto figures from Galgenkopf to Doettinger Hohe, Murcielago outruns the Zonda S by 3.1 mph. However, in a TopGear test between these two on the same day, 80-150 mph acceleration figures for these two cars were:
    Zonda S: 11.5
    Murcielago: 13.6
    By your logic (and faith in Doettinger Hohe trap speeds), the Murcielago not only ERASES its 2+ second *disadvantage* in the 80-150 sprint, but in the space of the next 20 mph, it beats the Zonda S by over 3 mph?? Does THAT make sense?

    Why not? the Cx factor is an important factor at High speeds.
    Look the gears ratio: in 5th/6th the Murci?algo is much shorter gears than Zonda!
    So why not? why Murci?lago can not recover in 5th the Zonda? and touch the same 280/283 Km/h in Dottingehr Hohe? why not have sense for you?

    Murcielago did in a test 0-300 in 34.2 Km/h and in others test approx. 37 secs, so is simple undarstand that Zonda not can did a 0-300 Km/h in less than sure 35-36 secs.
    Now, carrera GT did 34.2s (like the best of murcielago).
    This confirm that untill 150 Mph Zonda, really, is near Carrera GT but after 150 mph, NOT!!
    So this point confirm also that Zonda can NOT did 170 Mph at KM Speed trap or faster than CGT (162-165 MPH)!!!
  10. I found this Zonda S Vbox chart to compare the Autocar test. It can help?

    60-150 mph 12.3s
    150-170 mph 4.8s

    60-150 mph 12.5s
    150-169 mph 7s

    EDIT: the Vbox chart seems to say that the 1000m trap speed published on the 2002 road test was wrong. That VBox'ed Zonda was just slightly slower than the car tested by Autocar but at the same time this explain that the 150-170 mph 4.8s was just out of place. Over 150 mph the chart line has no intention to conclude in less than 7 seconds to reach 170 miles per hour.
    On the kilometer this car was maybe just a pair of tenths slower than Autocar, in every way the trap speed suggest it was no more than 162 mph.
    It is not impossible that the right Autocar data was really 160 mph depending to the gear shift in to fifth looking how speed flexes.
    From this there is not a single point from 60-170 mph where the Zonda was faster than the Fastlane's F40. Then, look at that customer Enzo's VBox chart 150-170 mph about 5.5s is there to confirm the result obtained by the Zonda.
  11. Hi 906,
    according with what I said many years ago about Autocar, 170mph was surely a typo.
    unfortunally, some users MUST be no agree...
  12. What the #$%# is this shit?
  13. 0-100 km/h in 11.9 seconds? No, I think you meant the quarter mile in 11.9 seconds. :lol:

Share This Page