[QUOTE=henk4]Remember that Wikipedia is filled out by everybody who wants to. This must have been a 928 fan...[/QUOTE]
Can anyone else verify the claim of the 928?
Thanks.
Printable View
[QUOTE=henk4]Remember that Wikipedia is filled out by everybody who wants to. This must have been a 928 fan...[/QUOTE]
Can anyone else verify the claim of the 928?
Thanks.
I had a video of a Mclaren F1 going 391km/h
[QUOTE=Fleet 500]Don't forget the '69 Dodge Charger Daytona, 426-Hemi... 180+ mph. And for only less than $5,000 (original retail price).[/QUOTE]
Your selective memory is kicking in :D
Because after you previously claimed a 426 was "the engine the powered the '69 Charger Daytona to a top speed of over 180 mph straight from the factory" you were unable to prove that any stock-production Daytona would or could get remotely close to 180mph ..
[url]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=374989&postcount=44[/url]
[url]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=375110&postcount=49[/url]
(btw check the various magazine inconsistencies in revs vs mph)
[QUOTE=Ingolstadt]I had a video of a Mclaren F1 going 391km/h[/QUOTE]
You have a video of McLaren's reading of 391kmh, whilst the official timing equipment read 384kmh
To bad the Callaway 1998 corvette (Project Sledgehammer) never did an official run, and yes most will not consider this a production car even though its street legal.
254.7mph (409.9kph)
What is the official # necessary to be considered "production"?
[QUOTE=Sledgehammer]
What is the official # necessary to be considered "production"?[/QUOTE]
Ill take a stab and say...crap I have no idea.
I'm sure Guiness has a set definition of what's considered "production"
[QUOTE=nota]Your selective memory is kicking in :D
Because after you previously claimed a 426 was "the engine the powered the '69 Charger Daytona to a top speed of over 180 mph straight from the factory" you were unable to prove that any stock-production Daytona would or could get remotely close to 180mph ..
[url]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=374989&postcount=44[/url]
[url]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=375110&postcount=49[/url]
(btw check the various magazine inconsistencies in revs vs mph)[/QUOTE]
A '69 Charger Daytona could be ordered with a 2.76:1 rear axle ratio. This means that there were plenty of revs available to reach 180 mph.
As shown in the link, NASCAR driver Bobby Issac once said that anyone could drive a '69 Hemi Daytona off the [I]showroom[/I] floor and hit 180 mph.
[QUOTE=2ndclasscitizen]I'm sure Guiness has a set definition of what's considered "production"[/QUOTE]
Yep, they do have a standard definition. I think it's ~100, but i'm not sure.
[QUOTE=sunk]Yep, they do have a standard definition. I think it's ~100, but i'm not sure.[/QUOTE]That'd probably rule out the CCR, I doubt there's 100 of those kicking about
The CCR and CCX are considered production cars. The CLK-GTR was required to produce 25 of their road cars to be eligible to compete. Which they did after winning for several years. So I would assume that 25 is the "magic" number, but its entirely possible that I am wrong.
mercedes-benz w125 has a record of 432.7 km/h in 1938
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W195[/url]
[QUOTE=2ndclasscitizen]You have a video of McLaren's reading of 391kmh, whilst the official timing equipment read 384kmh[/QUOTE]
Well, it's a rather choppy copy; and i could'nt read the speedo either, it's "announced" by a host-commentator-like person from the video .... I remember official timings was done by the average of 2 runs right? perhaps ....