Page 15 of 18 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 225 of 261

Thread: Ferrari F40 VS Porsche 959?

  1. #211
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Bleeding Heart View Post
    Not really. I was more talking about the high-speed test @ Nürburgring by AMuS two or three months ago. The CCX didn't even finish the first lap, it crashed right away! The driver said it had to struggle even in the straights to keep the car in line because each and every irregularity on the track's surface disturbed the car's rear stability.

    The problem is not too much power for grip, it's too little downforce for power. That's why in a drag race you can't notice that.
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Republika ng Pilipinas
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    Not really. I was more talking about the high-speed test @ Nürburgring by AMuS two or three months ago. The CCX didn't even finish the first lap, it crashed right away! The driver said it had to struggle even in the straights to keep the car in line because each and every irregularity on the track's surface disturbed the car's rear stability.

    The problem is not too much power for grip, it's too little downforce for power. That's why in a drag race you can't notice that.
    With that said, the thing that bothers me there is that why doesn't koenigsegg add something like a rear wing to increase the downforce of the car.
    Everything ends at 666...
    666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    3,560
    One has been on their option sheet since atleast 2004.

    The issues TG had where more due to a rushed build on the car than the wing fixing it.
    Chief of Secret Police and CFO - Brotherhood of Jelly
    No Mr. Craig, I expect you to die! On the inside. Of heartbreak. You emo bitch

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    I don't think adding a rear spoiler will do that much difference. The car's behaviour is all too spiky, apparently. I'll upload the article today or tomorrow when I get home.
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wishing I was in Moscow, Idaho
    Posts
    2,585
    Quote Originally Posted by 60Valves View Post
    On the 959, yes once. At the time I was considering buying one. Very fast, very stable, and not terribly involving. Very much the opposite of the F40 in terms of drama. Personally I did not find it that exciting a car to drive.

    One thing that really shocked me was the maintenance costs on the 959 when I went through the history on several (and I am used to Ferrari bills).

    Octane magazine had a good article comparing the two about a year ago.
    Ah, ok. Well, whether or not they liked it, I've never heard anyone call an F40 boring. I hope some day I get the chance to drive one, but it's unlikely.

    Interesting. I never would have thought that the 959 would have such high maintinance costs (at least not compared to a ferrari.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    I don't think adding a rear spoiler will do that much difference. The car's behaviour is all too spiky, apparently. I'll upload the article today or tomorrow when I get home.
    Properly applied downforce is a beautiful thing.
    Big cities suck

    "Not putting miles on your Ferrari is like not having sex with your girlfriend so she'll be more desirable to her next boyfriend." -Napolis

  6. #216
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    Properly applied downforce is a beautiful thing.
    Yes, indeed! The problem is... it's not, in the CCX's case. Even with the rear wing on!
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

  7. #217
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    The problem is not too much power for grip, it's too little downforce for power. That's why in a drag race you can't notice that.
    to be honest and correct, grip is generate by the loss between the tire and the ground, multiplied by the force pushing the car to the ground, which is made of the weight of the car plus the downforce generated by the car.
    the downforce increase with speed, and that's (also) why cars spin at lower speeds.
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  8. #218
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    91
    Quote Originally Posted by wwgkd View Post
    Ah, ok. Well, whether or not they liked it, I've never heard anyone call an F40 boring. I hope some day I get the chance to drive one, but it's unlikely.
    Sorry if I was not clear, it is the 959 that I was referring to as a bit boring. The F40 is anything but.

  9. #219
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    to be honest and correct, grip is generate by the loss between the tire and the ground, multiplied by the force pushing the car to the ground, which is made of the weight of the car plus the downforce generated by the car.
    the downforce increase with speed, and that's (also) why cars spin at lower speeds.
    The downforce only increases with speed if you have the "devices" for it, such as any kind of spoiler or ground-effect ducts. Cause if not, it'll be the opposite way, since a car works more or less like a wing, generating more lift as it increases speed.
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

  10. #220
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    The downforce only increases with speed if you have the "devices" for it, such as any kind of spoiler or ground-effect ducts. Cause if not, it'll be the opposite way, since a car works more or less like a wing, generating more lift as it increases speed.
    that's not correct, both drag and downforce increase with speed.
    it's balance between the two, and the car can generate downforce even just with it's shape in the same way it can generate more drag just with a different design without using airplanes' flaps.
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  11. #221
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Republika ng Pilipinas
    Posts
    665
    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    The downforce only increases with speed if you have the "devices" for it, such as any kind of spoiler or ground-effect ducts. Cause if not, it'll be the opposite way, since a car works more or less like a wing, generating more lift as it increases speed.
    It depends on the shape of the car.

    If you're talking about the shape of modern family cars, this may be plausible. But then, if we're talking about supercars, this would be somewhat of a stupid idea if the manufacturer was to make the car's shape perform like an aircraft wing. Most of the supercars shape is to increase downforce because they need downforce to go round corners or go fast at straight lines.

    I think no manufacturer of Supercars would want their car to do things like what the Mercedes CLR did at LeMans.
    Everything ends at 666...
    666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666 666

  12. #222
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Bleeding Heart View Post
    It depends on the shape of the car.

    If you're talking about the shape of modern family cars, this may be plausible. But then, if we're talking about supercars, this would be somewhat of a stupid idea if the manufacturer was to make the car's shape perform like an aircraft wing. Most of the supercars shape is to increase downforce because they need downforce to go round corners or go fast at straight lines.

    I think no manufacturer of Supercars would want their car to do things like what the Mercedes CLR did at LeMans.
    a few errors:

    - Veyron's shape acts like a wing, and Bugatti (VW) had a lot of difficulties due to the fact they first designed the look without considering it was a car and not a sculpture.

    - downforce is useless in a stright line if the car doesn't have drag issues as the Veyron (relatively, a car always need downforce because of the pressure that the air speed creates under the car)

    - the CLR's accidents were due to a wrong front suspension setup rather than aero issues.
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  13. #223
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Bleeding Heart View Post
    It depends on the shape of the car.

    If you're talking about the shape of modern family cars, this may be plausible. But then, if we're talking about supercars, this would be somewhat of a stupid idea if the manufacturer was to make the car's shape perform like an aircraft wing. Most of the supercars shape is to increase downforce because they need downforce to go round corners or go fast at straight lines.

    I think no manufacturer of Supercars would want their car to do things like what the Mercedes CLR did at LeMans.
    Yes, I meant "normal" cars. The way "supercars" are designed to prevent that is usually with Ventury tunnels to make it reversed-wing shaped, hence increasing the air speed underneath the car and creating depression/suction/downforce.

    Hence, It's as wrong to say the downforce increases with speed than to say it decreases. It all depends on the car's shape. There are cars that will produce large amounts of lift (such as the 911, the Audi TT or the Beetle) and others that will produce lots of downforce (Enzo, F430, McLaren F1). And that LeonOfTheDead can't argue against.
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

  14. #224
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Modena
    Posts
    9,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Joao Gois View Post
    Yes, I meant "normal" cars. The way "supercars" are designed to prevent that is usually with Ventury tunnels to make it reversed-wing shaped, hence increasing the air speed underneath the car and creating depression/suction/downforce.

    Hence, It's as wrong to say the downforce increases with speed than to say it decreases. It all depends on the car's shape. There are cars that will produce large amounts of lift (such as the 911, the Audi TT or the Beetle) and others that will produce lots of downforce (Enzo, F430, McLaren F1). And that LeonOfTheDead can't argue against.
    saying downforce increases with speed is a physics law, because it's generated by the speed the car is traveling at, both considering a venturi tunnel, spoilers or whatever.
    then the global force pushing the car to the ground can change in both direction (increase or decrease) only considering both the drag and the downforce.
    if a spoiler creates 20 N of downforce at say 100 km/h it can only increase that value at an higher speed.
    if a wing creates a drag of 20 N at 100 km/h it can only increase that value at an higher speed.
    now, because the relationships between the increase of both downforce and drag with the speed can be different, it's not obvious to say the overall force is going up (drag) or down (downforce).
    those are two differences ideas, because in the first cases I'm considering only the resultant force acting in the direction of the ground or of the sky, while in the second case I'm considering the resultant force of both.
    talking about downforce to me means only the forces pushing the car to the ground, while you are (I think) talking about the second case.

    btw, the McLaren F1 adopted also a couple of fans to increase the depression under the car, something not connected as directly to the speed to the car, as a venturi channel or spoiler effect.
    KFL Racing Enterprises - Kicking your ass since 2008

    *cough* http://theitalianjunkyard.blogspot.com/ *cough*

  15. #225
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Albufeira
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by LeonOfTheDead View Post
    saying downforce increases with speed is a physics law, because it's generated by the speed the car is traveling at, both considering a venturi tunnel, spoilers or whatever.
    then the global force pushing the car to the ground can change in both direction (increase or decrease) only considering both the drag and the downforce.
    if a spoiler creates 20 N of downforce at say 100 km/h it can only increase that value at an higher speed.
    if a wing creates a drag of 20 N at 100 km/h it can only increase that value at an higher speed.
    now, because the relationships between the increase of both downforce and drag with the speed can be different, it's not obvious to say the overall force is going up (drag) or down (downforce).
    those are two differences ideas, because in the first cases I'm considering only the resultant force acting in the direction of the ground or of the sky, while in the second case I'm considering the resultant force of both.
    talking about downforce to me means only the forces pushing the car to the ground, while you are (I think) talking about the second case.

    btw, the McLaren F1 adopted also a couple of fans to increase the depression under the car, something not connected as directly to the speed to the car, as a venturi channel or spoiler effect.
    OK, We were then talking about two different things giving it the same name (that's what happens when we talk different languages and express in a third language...). I always consider the vehicle as a system of forces. If the resultant pushes the car agains the floor, it's downforce; if it sends it sky-high, it's lift. Drag just sends the car back, not up, IMO.
    Hope we understand each other this way...
    Powered by passion, driven by knowledge

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Really useful performance listings...
    By Egg Nog in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 04-18-2021, 05:13 PM
  2. Porsche vs. Ferrari
    By Scarface in forum Car comparison
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 02-17-2004, 09:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •