2009 ZR1 Reaches 7:26.4 on the Nurburgring

[monaroCountry]

VetteTube - Corvette Videos, Corvette Crashes, Corvette Burnouts, Corvette Racing (http://vettetube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=d3a2547b6c9622c77de0)

[Fiorano]

for reals?! wow go GM -Go Corvette!

[bruxell]

Wow, the noises that car is making are incredible! The time speaks highly of the chassis development that the team have put in, but I would like to see more confirmation of the timing. Is there anything other than the title of the video that says the cars are going that fast?

I still say "ring" times are of minimal importance, but if this turns out to be true the Corvette team have earned a vacation...

[RacingManiac]

well they kinda got called back in after the supposed end of development.....

just curious, what's ZO6's time?

[digitalcraft]

One site I saw said the Z06 did 7:42.9.

This site says 7:40 (http://www.z06vette.com/forums/f64/c6-z06-nurburgring-times-article-84528/)

The wiki page says 7:42.99 under muggy conditions. (notice they also have a V-spec GT-R on already with 7:25? And a LF-A? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordschleife_fastest_lap_times)

[monaroCountry]

The GTR VSpec 7:25 time isnt reliable and was timed by an unknown bystander, the LF-A is the same, both are not official and so cant be trusted as production.

The ZO6 went around with a time of 7:42 but this was with a standing start, on the old suspension setup etc. The Corvette ZR1 made it around with a time of 7:26.4 with a flying start, however more time can be had with more time (more than 2 weeks, nissan spent 2 months) on the ring and a professional driver as pilot (not an engineer).

[Ferrer]

The GTR VSpec 7:25 time isnt reliable and was timed by an unknown bystander, the LF-A is the same, both are not official and so cant be trusted as production.

The ZO6 went around with a time of 7:42 but this was with a standing start, on the old suspension setup etc. The Corvette ZR1 made it around with a time of 7:26.4 with a flying start, however more time can be had with more time (more than 2 weeks, nissan spent 2 months) on the ring and a professional driver as pilot (not an engineer).
Congratulations.

[digitalcraft]

The ZO6 went around with a time of 7:42 but this was with a standing start

I thought that didn't matter because they do more than just 1 lap and take the best one?

[Sledgehammer]

...however more time can be had with more time

Reverse that.

[kingofthering]

The GTR VSpec 7:25 time isnt reliable and was timed by an unknown bystander, the LF-A is the same, both are not official and so cant be trusted as production.

The ZO6 went around with a time of 7:42 but this was with a standing start, on the old suspension setup etc. The Corvette ZR1 made it around with a time of 7:26.4 with a flying start, however more time can be had with more time (more than 2 weeks, nissan spent 2 months) on the ring and a professional driver as pilot (not an engineer).

Yeah, yeah,we know. GT-R = bad, Corvette = good.

[LHamilton_w]

7:25...same for the LF-A


What a load of BS.

[The_Canuck]

http://theroosterstrikes.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/beating-a-dead-horse.gif

[digitalcraft]

Oh have there been lots of topics about the ZR-1 reaching 7:26.4 on Nur?

[The_Canuck]

Oh have there been lots of topics about the ZR-1 reaching 7:26.4 on Nur?

Yes, enough to justify the GIF, which is 2.

[kingofthering]

Oh have there been lots of topics about the ZR-1 reaching 7:26.4 on Nur?

Most of his posts involve how the GT-R sucks and how the ZR1 rocks. He's like a Bizzaro world GT-R fanboy.

[Kitdy]

Aww monaro, according to Garage 419 who has supposedly a reputable source, both the ZR1 and GT-R may have been cheating, shaved tires, race fuel, race tune, etc.

Wah wah wah...

[monaroCountry]

According to garage 419 the GTR is a 480hp 3900lbs pig, the ZR1 a 638hp 3350lbs athlete. The ZR1's specs are closer to those cars in the 7:20's-30's, the GTR is closer to the 8 minute mark. At the moment you have two ring experts, a very well respected racer and a 5 time F1 world champion who doesnt believe that a stock GTR can achieve anywhere close to Nissan's 7:29 claim.

[monaroCountry]

Yes, enough to justify the GIF, which is 2.



Dont worry ill post more GTR threads in the future. Ill even highlight it when the GTR looses to a base Corvette C6. Im sure GTR fanbois love to see more GTR threads.

[culver]

As for the ZR1 lap time, GM has stated the conditions under which they ran the lap.

As for the Z06 lap time. I saw this on another forum credited to a Bwright who seems know a thing or two. As I can not find a source for these statements beyond Bwrights' original post please take it for what it's worth. Then again I have seen my own statements quoted by others in the same manor so please don't entirely dismiss it either.


The timed lap was run with a rolling start, a departure from our previous practice of standing starts. This is more aligned with current industry practice."

Vindication.

When the Z06 was run there was no, repeat, no industry standard. The Ring does not have an official procedure and there is no sanctioning body. Never was. Claims of "standard operating procedure" are both clueless and baseless. No such thing existed. Period.

So GM chose the most difficult standard they could conceive of so they could never be accused of taking any kind of a shortcut (no pun intended). Laps were run from a standstill and covered the entire track. By sheer dumb luck I ran into someone at GM who knew this and who then detailed same to me. Long before today’s official confirmation I relayed this information here to those who would listen about how precisely they did this with the Z06. The screaming clue was in the fact that it took Jan an hour to do only four laps. John Heinricy effectively spells that out in this video on the CTS-V's lap: YouTube - CTS-V (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgfKYeFKK9Y) Listen carefully to what he says from 2:26 - 2:57. Pay particular attention to the last 10 seconds of what he says about how much time it would take to do one lap if you were going around the track to come to the start/finish line.

Anyway, though it pains me to say it, Nissan's great contribution to the process was in filming it for proof. Their drawback was that, unlike GM on the CTS-V and now with the ZR1, they did not also clearly state all the car's technical settings and modifications, if any, to the vehicle. Competition often brings positive change and Nissan's approach has brought greater clarity to the increasingly important process of Ring runs. Like GM since, other manufacturers in the class will also now be forced to both film and explain. Those who have been using aggregated segment times are now under considerable pressure.

"Wonder what the C6 Z06's time would have been with a rolling start like this one. Really doubt if there is a 16 sec differential between the two."

Good question my friend. Magnussen's lap should have been 4 seconds faster using a rolling start. Had he used a partial lap as Nissan did for their 7:38 GT-R run then that would have netted him an additional six seconds. So Magnussen’s run adjusted to the GT-R’s 7:38 procedure would actually have been a 7:32:9.

I have no idea if GM will run additional Ring laps with a pro-driver. In any event Mero is really, really good and getting exclusive track time under favorable conditions is pretty difficult so this may be it. But, again, I don't know and am disinclined to ask.


Corvette Forum - View Single Post - ZR1 Hits 7:26 on RING!!! (http://forums.corvetteforum.com/showpost.php?p=1566094245&postcount=119)

[Kitdy]

According to garage 419 the GTR is a 480hp 3900lbs pig, the ZR1 a 638hp 3350lbs athlete. The ZR1's specs are closer to those cars in the 7:20's-30's, the GTR is closer to the 8 minute mark. At the moment you have two ring experts, a very well respected racer and a 5 time F1 world champion who doesnt believe that a stock GTR can achieve anywhere close to Nissan's 7:29 claim.

So you are just going to ignore the allegations that Chevrolet cheated as well?

Dont worry ill post more GTR threads in the future. Ill even highlight it when the GTR looses to a base Corvette C6. Im sure GTR fanbois love to see more GTR threads.

monaro, there aren't any GT-R fanboys here.

[kingofthering]

At the moment you have two ring experts, a very well respected racer and a 5 time F1 world champion who doesnt believe that a stock GTR can achieve anywhere close to Nissan's 7:29 claim.

Who, may I ask, is the F1 champion?

[Rockefella]

Who, may I ask, is the F1 champion?

Jarno Trulli.

[P4g4nite]

It's kind of sad that no matter how fast any of the ultra Corvettes run, the Corvette fanbois won't let it escape the shadow of the GTR.

[digitalcraft]

So you are just going to ignore the allegations that Chevrolet cheated as well?


The point was not that the ZR-1 time can't be compared to the GT-R, but that the Z06 probably actually ran it faster than the GT-R also, if the same standards were used as for the ZR-1 and the GT-R.

[monaroCountry]

Who, may I ask, is the F1 champion?

Alain Prost also known as the 'The Professor' !!!!!!


YouTube - michael s. vs. ayrton senna and alain prost (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8wtOO-an6Y)

[Kitdy]

The point was not that the ZR-1 time can't be compared to the GT-R, but that the Z06 probably actually ran it faster than the GT-R also, if the same standards were used as for the ZR-1 and the GT-R.

That may well be the case, but the fact of the matter is is that monaro is ignoring allegations of cheating on the Corvette, but not on the GT-R.

Based on the raw stats, I would figure the ZR1 would beat the GT-R and maybe the Z06 as well however.

[The_Canuck]

Honestly this thread shoudn't even exist for the simple fact that it's a repost.

[monaroCountry]

That may well be the case, but the fact of the matter is is that monaro is ignoring allegations of cheating on the Corvette, but not on the GT-R.

Based on the raw stats, I would figure the ZR1 would beat the GT-R and maybe the Z06 as well however.





The ZR1 still hasnt proven itself but unlike Nissan Chevy doesnt have the history of cheating around the Nurburgring (Nissan GTR R33), doesnt have highly respected drivers questioning its credibility and Chevy actually has specs comparable to cars that achieved the same ring time.

[Kitdy]

The ZR1 still hasnt proven itself but unlike Nissan Chevy doesnt have the history of cheating around the Nurburgring (Nissan GTR R33), doesnt have highly respected drivers questioning its credibility and Chevy actually has specs comparable to cars that achieved the same ring time.

All of this is fine and the GT-R's times seem pretty insane and I could easily see them being faked, but this in no way means that Chevrolet didn't cheat with the ZR1 either.

Fine - maybe the ZR1 didn't cheat as much as the GT-R did, but some sources say that it still cheated.

[kingofthering]

Alain Prost also known as the 'The Professor' !!!!!!
[/url]

Prost only has four titles. ;) Still, nothing to sneeze at.

[monaroCountry]

Prost only has four titles. ;) Still, nothing to sneeze at.



My mistake, still, he is one of the best drivers around.

[2ndclasscitizen]

Chevy actually has specs comparable to cars that achieved the same ring time.

Small point: None of these other cars achieving those kinds of lap times have anything approaching the drivetrain technology of the GTR.

[Ferrer]

So basically because this has become a competition and the cheated to win, lap times are a totally irrelevant way of comparing perfirmance.

[Rockefella]

Small point: None of these other cars achieving those kinds of lap times have anything approaching the drivetrain technology of the GTR.

Drivetrain doesn't make up for 150 someodd horsepower and 500 lbs of curb weight.

[clutch-monkey]

i don't care about ring times, i'd rock this car (yes, over a GTR)
i don't know if it would offer me anything over a standard Z06 that i'd actually need/see as an improvement

[2ndclasscitizen]

Drivetrain doesn't make up for 150 someodd horsepower and 500 lbs of curb weight.

And you know that...how?

[Rockefella]

And you know that...how?

I don't. I'm just pretty confident both Chevy and Nissan are doing their damndest to get these incredible ring times. In the end when two customers take both cars to the track, I can't see the GT-R make up for the weight/power difference through the use of an advanced 4wd system. If it was something like 100 lbs and 30 to 50 horsepower, then I could probably understand if the cars were even. 500 lbs and ~150 hp is a huge deficit to make up.

[charged]

Im abit with both camps the new zr1 is impressive and so is the GTR... We have just had our first time attack event here in Australia and a stock GTR with street tyres was entered it placed 11th. It was in the same class as full blown race cars running r spec tyres the fastest time on the day was a Lotus Elise with a 1.12 that has had plenty spent on its development.

SuperLap 2008: GT-R Time Attack Photo Gallery (http://www.gtrblog.com/index.php/2008/07/05/superlap-2008-gt-r-time-attack-photo-gal?blog=4)

GTRBlog.com was in attendance at SuperLap 2008 today at Oran Park Raceway outside Sydney, Australia. Entered into the open class for the time attack was Russel Newman with his brand new Hi Octance Racing / CNJ Motorsport Nissan R35 GT-R. For the event he had fitted up a HKS VAC speed delimter but the car was mechanically standard and was wearing the standard JDM base model Dunlop summer tires.

Russel managed an awesome time of 1:17.1 in the GT-R and was looking consistent in the 1:17s on his hot laps. We will most likely have a complete rundown of the results by early next week. To put that in perspective the fastest cars on the day ran 1:12 - 1:13s and they were race prepped supercharged Lotus Elises weighing somewhere around half a GT-R.


Enough said a very impressive performance for a road car, MC will doubt this because of the world wide GTR conspiracy theories:p



Race results
NATSOFT Race Result (http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/results.cgi?05/07/2008.ORAN.SL)

Google some of the cars the R35 competed against, some serious track weapons for sure


clutch-monkey originally posted

i don't care about ring times, i'd rock this car (yes, over a GTR)


I think the prerequisite for driving a Corvette is someone in their late 50s, balding, open shirt and plenty of bling, young hottie is a optional extra:p

[clutch-monkey]

I think the prerequisite for driving a Corvette is someone in their late 50s, balding, open shirt and plenty of bling, young hottie is a optional extra:p
hey i fit the last one and probably will fit the second..:D
besides, it's more of a 'sports car' than a GTR (which imo doesn't even need to be as fast as it is)

[charged]

I just need 10 years and I will be there, dont have a young hottie yet or the bling though.

Wouldnt mine either car in my driveway

[ruim20]

Im abit with both camps the new zr1 is impressive and so is the GTR... We have just had our first time attack event here in Australia and a stock GTR with street tyres was entered it placed 11th. It was in the same class as full blown race cars running r spec tyres the fastest time on the day was a Lotus Elise with a 1.12 that has had plenty spent on its development.

That does not compute! It could only be a ZR-1 with a GTR bodyshell on top!

[RacingManiac]

Drivetrain doesn't make up for 150 someodd horsepower and 500 lbs of curb weight.

It can if it can fully make use of its tires, which is by far the most important piece in a track situation....in GTR's case with bespoke tires and all the AWD wizardry and good damper tuning....it will make some significant difference, especially over a track thats as bumpy and twisty like Nurburgring....

[roosterjuicer]

Im telling you guys...ring times dont matter all that matters is 0-60 and 1/4 mile! You are wasting your time! :^)

[Matra et Alpine]

As the 'ring is an ordinary tarmac road with bumps, undulations and patches which takes between 8 and 15 minutes to drive then it has more relevance to daily driving than a 5 second "sprint"

[The_Canuck]

As the 'ring is an ordinary tarmac road with bumps, undulations and patches which takes between 8 and 15 minutes to drive then it has more relevance to daily driving than a 5 second "sprint"

But what relevance is there in the time it takes to go around it? I read that there are 19 variables that can effect 0.1 seconds of a 0-60 time. Imagine the amount of variables on the Ring, let alone any racetrack.

The only real way to compare cars would be to drive them both on the street and rate how they feel etc, and there's the catch, comparing cars will always be subjective and any sort of performance numbers mean absolutely nothing when comparing street cars.

[kingofthering]

My mistake, still, he is one of the best drivers around who supports my point.

fixed. ;)

[Matra et Alpine]

But what relevance is there in the time it takes to go around it? I read that there are 19 variables that can effect 0.1 seconds of a 0-60 time. Imagine the amount of variables on the Ring, let alone any racetrack.
My post was to point out how silly using an acceleration capability to judge a whole vehicle :)
The points you make support that view.
The only real way to compare cars would be to drive them both on the street and rate how they feel etc, and there's the catch, comparing cars will always be subjective and any sort of performance numbers mean absolutely nothing when comparing street cars.
Now, as EVERY person can't drive EVERY car then it falls to a few (trusted!) test drivers and a "standard". So for perfromance cars, we're back at the 'Ring. NO racetrack offers road-like conditions and no road has as much variability and can be closed off for safety.
'Ring rules :)

[Jack_Bauer]

My post was to point out how silly using an acceleration capability to judge a whole vehicle :)
The points you make support that view.

Now, as EVERY person can't drive EVERY car then it falls to a few (trusted!) test drivers and a "standard". So for perfromance cars, we're back at the 'Ring. NO racetrack offers road-like conditions and no road has as much variability and can be closed off for safety.
'Ring rules :)

Firstly I think roosterjuicer was being sarcastic in his post.

Secondly, I'm not in the least convinced that the "'Ring rules" in terms of judging a sports car. Ring times have become such a hot topic in magazine/internet forum/fanboy circles that you see manufacturers now having good 'Ring times as being something that they engineer their cars specifically towards achieving. Driving flat out at ten tenths on a race track, albeit a very bumpy one, under controlled conditions in order to set a time a couple of seconds faster than your rival car bears absolutely no relevance to one's enjoyment of a sports car, unless you bought your GTR purely for the purpose of racing Corvettes around the 'Ring.

It's for certain that to achieve these kinds of times they aim at, the cars end up being stiffer and more compromised for general road usage. By all means use the 'Ring to help fine tune the ride/handling balance of a car like the majority of manufacturers do. But using it as a means of gaining some kind of bragging rights like GM and Nissan are doing does not improve your end-product.

Anyone who thinks that a better 'Ring time = better sports car or, even worse, gives consideration to 'Ring times when actually purchasing such a car needs a good, hard slap.

'Ring times test how fast a car can go around a particular race track on a particular day with a particular driver behind the wheel. They do nothing to prove which is the best car.

[Matra et Alpine]

"particular track" -- erm you do know you're talking about 14 MILES of closed road ?

To get "faster" then in gneral cars get better chassis designed, better suspension setup developed and capable of coping with the real-world road-like conditions.

So pray, do tell what else can give a "standard" for comparing the performance of fast cars ? One that isn't going over the same piece of track every 2 miles OR can't test the limits due to speed limits adn other road traffic ?

Talking about "slap" :) Do you know any of the usage the 'Ring sees from amateur, fun to professional drivers and teams. Do you know WHY teams and manufacturers use the 'Ring for "normal" cars to do tests on as adjunct to their own closed-circuit testing.

I suspect you're being blinded by the fanboism going on at the moment over the US trying to prove it can make a sportscar and Nissan trying to grab the top of the tree as they once did with the original GT-R.

Tell me what other environment can be used to test a sportscar at it's performacne and handling limits that reflects real world roads ?

oh and you can't setup for the 'Ring too stiff or you spin out on 30% of the corners :D

[Ferrer]

Firstly I think roosterjuicer was being sarcastic in his post.

Secondly, I'm not in the least convinced that the "'Ring rules" in terms of judging a sports car. Ring times have become such a hot topic in magazine/internet forum/fanboy circles that you see manufacturers now having good 'Ring times as being something that they engineer their cars specifically towards achieving. Driving flat out at ten tenths on a race track, albeit a very bumpy one, under controlled conditions in order to set a time a couple of seconds faster than your rival car bears absolutely no relevance to one's enjoyment of a sports car, unless you bought your GTR purely for the purpose of racing Corvettes around the 'Ring.

It's for certain that to achieve these kinds of times they aim at, the cars end up being stiffer and more compromised for general road usage. By all means use the 'Ring to help fine tune the ride/handling balance of a car like the majority of manufacturers do. But using it as a means of gaining some kind of bragging rights like GM and Nissan are doing does not improve your end-product.

Anyone who thinks that a better 'Ring time = better sports car or, even worse, gives consideration to 'Ring times when actually purchasing such a car needs a good, hard slap.

'Ring times test how fast a car can go around a particular race track on a particular day with a particular driver behind the wheel. They do nothing to prove which is the best car.
+1

That's basically why Nurburgring times (or any other track) is a pointless way of comparing car, and now even more so.

[Matra et Alpine]

+1

That's basically why Nurburgring times (or any other track) is a pointless way of comparing car, and now even more so.
Nothing is perfect.

But for a performacne sports car then the 'Ring offers the only place on the planet where there are safe closed roads that are like real roads.
The Nordschleife is not a fettled, flat F1 track :)
Or a couple of miles of planned road-like track.

Track times are important in comparing cars.
If you are wantign to set a car up for optimum accelreation or handling or whatever floats your boat.; You gotta spend time on the track and making the adjustements.

[Ferrer]

Nothing is perfect.

But for a performacne sports car then the 'Ring offers the only place on the planet where there are safe closed roads that are like real roads.
The Nordschleife is not a fettled, flat F1 track :)
Or a couple of miles of planned road-like track.

Track times are important in comparing cars.
If you are wantign to set a car up for optimum accelreation or handling or whatever floats your boat.; You gotta spend time on the track and making the adjustements.
Well it's a bit like EuroNCAP isn't it?

It was good when it was an independent, little known test. Cars were really tested as they came of the facotry for real life situations. But once it got popular car manufacturers started caring about it and designing some car's features specifically to achieve good ratings. The tests then got a bit pointless and less relevant thatn they used to be.

And in a way that's what has happened with the Ring as well it used to be a good test because it was an "independent" one. Know that everyone wants to have the record it has become a bit pointless.

[Matra et Alpine]

Ferrer, where are you coming from with EuroNCAP ?
It is still valid -- just that now the scale is wrong as most moedrn cars ( 'cept the CHinese ) are hitting 5s. But using the full report the small differences are clear.
It's not a fixed set either and they are refining it as advances occur.
eg Pedestrian safety.
The car "designs" to achieve good ratings are in EVERY car off the production line. So it is definately valid and valuable.

The only thing with hte 'ring now is the fanbois as I said. To the drivers, purchasers, enthusiasts it has a clearly defined and understood role.
Just because ricers added wings to Civics didn't mean that F1 shoudl have removed them :)

[Ferrer]

My point is since it started being a competition the Nurburgring has become less valuable than it used to be.

[Matra et Alpine]

but it's always been a "competition".
Just look back on any of the Nordschleife web sites :)
It is just that a US "sportscar" has managed to get to the top or that a Datsun is there again ???????
:D:D:D:D:D
I think it's up to how the reader takes it.
If you think it's no longer useful fine ... doesn't make it so tho' :)

[clutch-monkey]

a 'ring time as a whole is a bit useless to separate cars performance wise..maybe if the time was addressed as sections..i don't know..

[Matra et Alpine]

good point. THe single number is a good "all rounder" figure as I said at least more representative than the TopGear single lap or "normal" track times.
THere are a few check points on times used by some testers, but there isn't really a natural difference in any of it. It's not like there's a straight bit or a hilly bit or a twisty bit. In any 5 mile section there is all of the above :) It's what makes it great and a real challenge to car and driver.

and remember that what is being seen is MARKETING numpties using the numbers to try to attract buyers. They can't cope with too many numbers so keepign it to one makes life possible for them :)

[monaroCountry]

People drive their cars at 10/10th in a proper racetrack, the ring isnt like any other racetrack?

People also dont drive their cars at 10/10th on public roads and certainly not over 300km/h. So really whats the point of testing around the ring and trying to achieve a good time?

[P4g4nite]

I was reading the issue of R&T with the GTR vs 911T vs ZO6 today while I waited for the lady in my life to try on shoes, I noticed that the test said of the ZO6 that they were on eggshells through the twisties, a track comparison in EVO said basically the same thing. But that the GTR never had the same problem, it's AWD system allowing controllable power slides and enormous traction.
Anyway, the point is that even if some journo GTRs were tweaked for more power, the car can turn it into considerably quicker lap times but given what I've heard of the Corvettes I'm not sure the same is true of them. And we know how easily more power can be had from the GTR.

[Matra et Alpine]

Relatively simple....
If a car is good from speeds of 10mph to 200 mph then you can feel confident in it's abilities at 50-100mph. The higher the speeds and cornering the more the car has to be capable. Capable not just in accelration and speed, but in braking, steering, handling, bump absorption, off camber etc etc etc. So there are valid reasons why looking at the 'ring numbers can assist a buying/testing choice. Just don't use it to judge "comfort" :)

The 'ring doesn't have vast run-off areas. MOST of it is tight ARMCO -- and hit-it-you-buy-it policy means offs are very VERY expensive. It doesn't have pristine tarmac and kerbs. It's worse than the road outside my house :) Grip levels vary enormously. So you don't drive 10/10ths even there ( tho' you can argue that a driver IS 10/10ths to the limits of the track :) )

erm some of us DO run 10/10ths on public roads - especially in rallies !
There are a number of roads we favour in the Highlands where you can do sections at 10/10s anf they are even harder than the 'Ring :) Not without it's dangers as a fellow RX-8er wrote-off his new car on a nasty dip, bridge, off-camber rise, corner, dip .... ditch :( BUT that's what drivng cars fast when it's safe ( for people - not necessarily cars ) can lead to :)

Granted difficult to get to 300km/h in the real world and on most race tracks too ... but you can only reach that on a couple of bits of the 'Ring if you've to a monster amount of torque ! The average 'ring speed is only about 140km/h for even the fastest cars.
Doesn't really sound that fast does it :)

Q: If I offered to build a bridge in your local town and siad it coudl take 10 cars at a time. Would you want me to test it at 10 ? or 20 ?? or 30 ???


PS: and I'm off to my local track for another 2 hours of fun and testing as I want to get the tyre pressures set up for the new rubber :)

[monaroCountry]

Rally cars are vastly different to these cars, rally events are on public roads but the roads are closed (which rarely happens). The ZR1, Zonda and GTR would see its full potential in a proper race track and not on a road course like the ring.

[Matra et Alpine]

?eh? --- so all those rallies I've been doing on public roads that are NOT closed were a figment ?
Rally cars to run on tarmac events are very much like these cars.
ANY car will achieve a higher potential on a pukka race track because there are less adverse undulations, camber and better tarmac condition.
What were you trying to say ?

[clutch-monkey]

good point. THe single number is a good "all rounder" figure as I said at least more representative than the TopGear single lap or "normal" track times.
yeah, i don't think on a track this large you can positivly say one car is better/faster than the other based on a few seconds difference.
sub 8 min = fast :D

Rally cars are vastly different to these cars,
um not tarmac rally cars...in fact iirc one of the stipulations is that you must keep stock suspension/ride hieght (for some categories anyway)
rally events are on public roads but the roads are closed (which rarely happens)
just wtf do you think the nurburgring is?

[Matra et Alpine]

yeah, i don't think on a track this large you can positivly say one car is better/faster than the other based on a few seconds difference.
sub 8 min = fast :D
Definately the thing everyone shoudl remember.
a second could even just be down to the normal variation of fuel grade !!
um not tarmac rally cars...in fact iirc one of the stipulations is that you must keep stock suspension/ride hieght (for some categories anyway)
Don't know about your regs.
But UK national, international and WRC events don't stipulate ride height. Group N cars have to have "standard" suspension ... but can be adjusted ( and are) for diffrent springing, damping and ride height.
At clubman/national level you get all sorts. Colin McRae had a Mark2 Escort with Subaru rear end suspension and transmission :)
And then there's cars like the Darrian which is all custom.
just wtf do you think the nurburgring is?
What do you mean ?
The Nordschleife ( so we're not confusing the long circuit with the GP one ) is a local government owned legal toll road. German traffic laws apply at all times on the road. If you can ignor the painted kerbs and the grafitti painted on the track then it's like country roads in most countries I've driven on in the world ! ( Actually I've seen the latter on Tour De France route :) )

[clutch-monkey]

Don't know about your regs.
But UK national, international and WRC events don't stipulate ride height. Group N cars have to have "standard" suspension ... but can be adjusted ( and are) for diffrent springing, damping and ride height.
At clubman/national level you get all sorts. Colin McRae had a Mark2 Escort with Subaru rear end suspension and transmission :)
And then there's cars like the Darrian which is all custom.

well from what i can gather from events like the suncoast classic rally etc etc there's some restrictions for suspension - whether it's just a recommendation or for practicality i don't know (my car is standard ride height or close to it iirc from one of the rallies).
just something i've heard around the pits. i think it's mostly to do with people bottoming out?

[Matra et Alpine]

I read the CAMS regs and also looked over the Suncoast 2009 regs and there is NO reg on ground clearance. I can imagine it may be an "advisory" so that owners of classic cars don't tear them up on things like speed bumps :)
Sometimes organisers have to do specific stage regs/advisories to protect the road surface, haven't come across a height one before :) Our "Rally in the park", we restrict turbo'ed 4WD. You can have or the other, not both.
Make sure it's not jsut a wiley old competitor telling you this to make sure you can't beat his times :D :D :D

[charged]

pretty sure its only advisory, A guy I know ran his s13 silvia( dont laugh he came 4th:p) in the comp section and he didnt set it up for cams regs.. he had it riding slightly higher than he does on the track and with longer springs etc for extra droop due to undulations