why such a slow 0-60

Discussion in '2001 B.Engineering Edonis' started by deuginthesky, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Zorro</i>
    <b>Ok.

    Here are some more recent figures right out from "sport auto", a french mag who tests regularly the evolutions of the pre-productions Edonis.
    Engine is still the 3.8L V12 Twin Turbo
    Power is 715hp at 8000rpm
    Torque 81.9m/kg at 3500rpm (do the conversion if you talk ft/lbs). At 3500rpm, it puts out 400hp (that's the top hp of an M5!)
    1000m from stabdstill is covered in ... 18.9" which is striking. The Mc Laren was able to go under the 20" mark (19.6"), and the EB110 SS could reach 19.8". The F50 is way behind at 21.1".
    Top speed is 365 km/h
    Weight is 1400kg

    Why such a slow 0.60? My guess is Supercars.net got it wrong. Hell! They missed hp figure, don't know transmission or even weight...they need info.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    The developement is faster than I fought.

    May you scan the article please ?

    J'ai envie de voir ça de plus près <IMG SRC="http://www.supercars.net/servlets/cMsg/html/emoticons/smile.gif">
     
  2. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from killiman</i>
    <b>why does this twin turbocharged v 12 have such a slow 0 to 60 an other v 12 (ferrari f50 hamann i think) have a muh faster 0 to 60, and even top speed,withouth the turbo...i might be wrong,but would someone explain the mechanics of this...</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->It is possibly geard for top speed.<!-- Signature -->
     
  3. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    NismoMasta, deepangel_22, Wheelman, skatanic28:

    hp@rpm = torque@rpm * (rpm/5252)

    i.e. The Edonis: hp@3200rpm = 542.1 ft.lbs@3200rpm * (3200rpm/5252) = 330,2970hp@3200rpm<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    get a countach engine, put 8 KKK titanium turbo's on it, put back into countach=really cool.

    unfortunately no traction.<!-- Signature -->
     
  5. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    i think its WRONG. i mean dont believe every figure you see. as to the torque statement. it is entirely false because drag racing honda civics (all right yea i said civic even though i hate them) produce around 500 hp have probably less torque than this yet accel a lot faster. as to the turbo statement antoher false statement because look at toyota supras with similar hp figures and less engine size it accel faster. the only thing would be they messed up gearing which i doubt or the figures are wrong
     
  6. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    I've posted that the Edonis 0-62 has already been tested in 3.2s , in the forum "more info about the Edonis".
     
  7. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    Ok.

    Here are some more recent figures right out from "sport auto", a french mag who tests regularly the evolutions of the pre-productions Edonis.
    Engine is still the 3.8L V12 Twin Turbo
    Power is 715hp at 8000rpm
    Torque 81.9m/kg at 3500rpm (do the conversion if you talk ft/lbs). At 3500rpm, it puts out 400hp (that's the top hp of an M5!)
    1000m from stabdstill is covered in ... 18.9" which is striking. The Mc Laren was able to go under the 20" mark (19.6"), and the EB110 SS could reach 19.8". The F50 is way behind at 21.1".
    Top speed is 365 km/h
    Weight is 1400kg

    Why such a slow 0.60? My guess is Supercars.net got it wrong. Hell! They missed hp figure, don't know transmission or even weight...they need info.
     
  8. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    are you a retard?? do you have any idea how fast 3.9 seconds 0-60 is?<!-- Signature -->
     
  9. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    I'm sorry but i gotta ask; how fast does your car accelerate? I bet its not 0-60mph in under 6 seconds let alone 3.9
     
  10. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    0-60 in 3.9 isn't exactly slow. If it dosn't accelerate as fast as some others this is probably because the gearing is set up for GT crusing not sotplight brawls. Also unlike the new lamourghini it doesn't have all wheel drive which would help it put its power to the ground. Still I like this design much better than most others in this price range.
     
  11. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    turbo not yet kick in?<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    Once this car got over 60 or in its power band, it would be way faster than other cars that are in the 3s to 60.<!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from triquito</i>
    <b>First of all, 3.9 sec. is not what I consider slow... However, as you can see, even if it has a twinturbo V12, the displacement is quite small (3.8 liters or so). As a result, you can expect the torque figures to be quite low (again all is relative) and the torque is what makes a car accelerate. Without entering big scientific explanations, a high reving engine generally has lower torque but higher horsepower at high speed (so greater top speed).</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    What are you on about?! this car has 542 lbft of torque *AND* is a high reving engine 8000rpm! Obviously because of the flexabilty of its turbo set up.
    The specs don't show the weight of the car, so perhaps it weighs over 3000lbs? Lack of traction or a very tall 1st ratio/final drive would be a better explaination. this car really doesn't lack torque, if you look at the figures this car makes over 500 lbft of torque at 3200rpm, and 680hp at 8000rpm! so 100% of torque is available at 30% of engine speed and usuable torque power is spread across 80% of the rev range. To launch for a 0-60 or 1/4 mile run you'd only need to engage at about 2500rpm and I bet that'd even break traction with 500lbft + going to the ground!
    That is a better power spread than *any* naturaly aspirated larger displacement engine.<!-- Signature -->
     
  14. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from deepangel_22</i>
    <b>has anyone ever considered the fact that all turbochargers do is add hp, no tourque what so ever?... they're nice if u want to go fast AFTER A WHILE, but 0-60 in 3.9 seconds is pretty damn fast... put it this way, bigger is better... displacement=tourque, tourque=acceleration, acceleration=ZOOM ZOOM</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    well power = torque x speed .... turbos don't increase engine speed, so what do you think boost pressure increases.
    turbos and superchargers increase torque by boost pressure - cramming in more air and fuel.
    <!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    Oh god. What a piece of shit. Any car can beat 3.9 seconds 0-60 time!

    *with enormous sarcasm*<!-- Signature -->
     
  16. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    displacement=torque
    depending on the output of the turbos its just not gonna be that much, but who cares, 3.9 is faster than most, much faster
     
  17. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    While I'd hardly call 3.9 seconds a slow 0-60 time, you can look at a few things that explain the "lack" of performance as compared to other high end cars.

    Brake horsepower rates the overall output of an engine, and torque can be described as the ability of the engine to use this power. Now, you can see that maximum horsepower is achived at extremely high revs (8000 rmp), where maximum torque ability is at a mere 3200 rpm. So you can see that very little of the engine's overall output is available at the maximum point on the torque curve, which is at 3200 rpm.

    Obviously, this car was geared for high-end speed, where little torque is needed, which is why all the horsepower is delivered at such a high rpm.

    Any questions?
     
  18. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    man... where did u left your head? at McLaren<!-- Signature -->
     
  19. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    3.9 is not slow... look at all the other cars with the same stats, they are either slower or the same.
     
  20. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    It might have been just cuz the test driver didn't wanna rev so high..and rarity. I doub't the McLaren F1 had its clutch dropped at 7000rpms..and same with this. I may be wrong though..
     
  21. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    has anyone ever considered the fact that all turbochargers do is add hp, no tourque what so ever?... they're nice if u want to go fast AFTER A WHILE, but 0-60 in 3.9 seconds is pretty damn fast... put it this way, bigger is better... displacement=tourque, tourque=acceleration, acceleration=ZOOM ZOOM<!-- Signature -->
     
  22. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    First of all, 3.9 sec. is not what I consider slow... However, as you can see, even if it has a twinturbo V12, the displacement is quite small (3.8 liters or so). As a result, you can expect the torque figures to be quite low (again all is relative) and the torque is what makes a car accelerate. Without entering big scientific explanations, a high reving engine generally has lower torque but higher horsepower at high speed (so greater top speed).
     
  23. why does this twin turbocharged v 12 have such a slow 0 to 60 an other v 12 (ferrari f50 hamann i think) have a muh faster 0 to 60, and even top speed,withouth the turbo...i might be wrong,but would someone explain the mechanics of this...
     
  24. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    Most new supercar manufacturers claim 0 to 60 in 3.9 because it's faster than 4 flat and it's realistic
     
  25. Re: why such a slow 0-60

    it is so slow because thats not the rite time the rite time is in 3.6sec.
     

Share This Page