|
|
12-18-2007, 03:43 PM | #133 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Let's leave the IS-F stuff in the IS-F thread, certainly not for avoidance just for purely keeping organized and OT. But since you must continue on that point there is one single "unofficial" dyno for the IS-F as well so that leaves you in a 100% contradictory position . The dyno results prove you are right and I am wrong about a small potential under-rating of the IS-F but it can not be evidence for my case with the GT-R? Get with it, you need some serious lessons on CONSISTENCY and EVIDENCE (as usual). And as much as you want to call it "case closed" on the IS-F my and Bruces simulations both point to a potential under-rating, the car is simply too fast for its power to weight ratio. That issue is far from settled. At least I have a level of reasonableness to call it like it is, there is some evidence, the case is not closed, simple. It is exaclty the same with the IS-F and GT-R. You "calling" it any other way is incorrect, premature and lacking simple common sense. I really have a hard time seeing your general objection to the fact that manufacturers both under-rate and over-rate regularly. Hp is one of the most important car specs and selling points (if not the most important). Why is it so unfathomable to you that the marketing folks would over rule the engineering folks and under or over rate? Last edited by swamp2; 12-18-2007 at 06:12 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 03:50 PM | #134 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Last edited by swamp2; 12-18-2007 at 05:51 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 03:52 PM | #135 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 05:35 PM | #136 | |
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep 1,329
Posts |
Quote:
Here's the wiki for the track, it's quite famous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsukuba_Circuit What this means is the GT-R is much faster than the McLaren F1, 997T, Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale..the stripped out racing version of the F360 with the F1 gearbox when the laps are run on a smaller track more typical of backroads and small US racing circuits then the Nordschleife. For instance in terms of my professional experience, my GSXR600 race bike was capable of race times only 1 second off that of the GSXR1000 at my home track, GIR which is a small track with a premium on handling and braking, despite being virtually the same bike with 40% less HP. At Road America, however, a long fast track, the 600 would be 10 seconds or more down to the 1000 despite the track being only 3x as long. To find a vehicle that excels in both types of venue is very special and requires the total package. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 05:35 PM | #137 | |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
Last edited by gbb357; 12-18-2007 at 05:50 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 05:56 PM | #138 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 06:10 PM | #139 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 07:46 PM | #140 | |
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep 1,329
Posts |
Quote:
Some heavy, high HP cars like the M6 don't do very well at either, but show much more competitive times at Nordscheife than for instance Car and Driver's VIR one-lap. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-18-2007, 08:59 PM | #141 | |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 01:21 AM | #142 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 10:10 AM | #143 | |
Captain
68
Rep 706
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 11:18 AM | #144 |
Expert Road Racer
59
Rep 1,329
Posts |
More Lap Times - Suzuka this time
Suzkuka of course is a GP FIA - F1 track:
Nissan R35 GTR Stock 2:22.80 Comparison times: 1. Ferrari F40 2:25.26 Best Motoring 2. Ferrari F50 2:26.52 Best Motoring 3. Porsche Carrera GT 2:28.42 "Best Motoring" 4. Porsche 993 GT2 2:29.148 "Best Motoring" 5. Porsche 993 Turbo (3.6) 2:31.165 Best Motoring 6. Honda NSX 3.2 2:32.54min best motoring 7. Lamborghini Diablo 2:32.98 Best Motoring 8. Porsche 996 GT3 2:32.988 Best Motoring 9. Ferrari F355 2:33.25 Best Motoring 10. Honda NSX-R (3.0) 2:34.19 best motoring 11. Honda Civic Type-R JDM (FD2) 2:35.20 Tsuchiya 12. Nissan Skyline GT-R R34 2:36.263 "Best Motoring" 13. Mitsubishi Lancer Evo VI 2:36.50 best motoring http://kultivate.wordpress.com/2007/...ime-on-suzuka/ This one makes you you go, WTH? |
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 12:24 PM | #145 | ||
Colonel
99
Rep 2,000
Posts |
Quote:
In fact, I took that tack mainly to see if I could get you to move even the slightest on a previously stated position. What I really think is that the GT-R is a Porsche Turbo without the penalty of having the engine positioned in a different zip code. However, there was a zero point zero percent chance you would ever move toward that kind of stated position, hence my attempt at something more attainable from you. Now, after approximately fourteen billion posts on the topic with you being dragged, kicking and screaming all the way, you post the following (in another string, yet!): Quote:
My question might be "What the hell took you so long?", but I already know the answer. Swamp, you are a giant pain in the ass (and as a card-carrying Charter Member of PITA International, I speak with authority), but you are also my favorite pain in the ass. You're intelligent, smart, articulate and passionate, and a very strong contributor in these and other topics. In short, Swamp, you are the real thing. What my military son would call a "thirty pound head". He's an intelligent man himself (and didn't get where he is by being a dummy), but says he likes to "sit in the back with the other ten pounders". The problem is, you have doubts where none are justified, hence the almost instant attack mode when disagreements arise. There's also the fact that, as with many other folks in a position where they've established something of a reputation, you end up spending a bunch of your time and energy defending instead of using what got you that reputation in the first place. Folks may think your ego is too big, but my contention is that it's not big enough - and it's way too fragile. Speaking of which, the most remarkable thing I've noticed about fighter pilots in general (mostly Navy, but also Air Force when I've watched them congregate after joint "practice" missions), is that their egos are so damned big that they are completely invisible - and pretty much impregnable. They basically feel that they don't need to prove a thing against anybody but another fighter pilot. Swamp, when your inner confidence level matches your capabilities, you'll be a better contributor. We are who we are, but we can all be better. In this recent situation, can you see that you risk more credibility by defending like this, rather than early on saying you may have drawn an incorrect conclusion? Bruce PS - Yeah, I know you'll essentially read this as an attack and respond accordingly, but remember this post in the future. |
||
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 01:36 PM | #146 |
Major General
1133
Rep 8,020
Posts |
Bruce,
I take it you have read the times that the GTR has achieved with Edmunds, 0-60mph in 3.3s and a 1/4mile in 11.6s @120mph are both times which surely aren't common place with cars that have 480ps and weigh over 3800lbs. I don't know anything like the amount both you and swamp do but I have had some experience with the TVR Cerbera 4.2v8 and it was a car which seemed to hit above it's weight compared to other compatible machines but it's achievement in this don't even come close to matching the GTR in respect to this. P.S. The times it has been producing around the Suzkuka track in many ways is even more incredible than it's acceleration as the list of cars it's quicker than are more track based than even it's meant for. Either this is a case of Japanese propaganda at it's extreme or dare I say it again, one of the most advanced and complete cars currently available. |
Appreciate
0
|
12-19-2007, 06:00 PM | #147 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
I have already admitted that the title of this thread and the evidence for it was a bit premature. I said that long before we had the Edmunds test results. Indeed there is evidence, from multiple sources for an under-rating, but I guess we both do agree that the jury is out, period. I have done a lot more work in simulating the 997TT (yesterday in fact before your post above) and have good results there. First here are is a collection of magazine times I have found, it is not complete yet (it is tough to find all of this stuff online). It is interesting to notice the variation even in times reported by a single magazine for different tests and consequently likely different cars and even different models years and all of the other differences you can imagine that matter to performance (a point I have spent a lot of time dwelling on): ......../C&D/R&T/MT/ 0-60:./3.3-3.8/ /3.2 0-100:/8.3-9.2/9.5/ / 1/4:.../11.6-12.2/12.3/11.4/ trap:../118.3/ /120.5/ top:.../193/ / / Comments: The MT (Motortrend) results are for the tiptronic tranny and wow, they are impressive. However not only because it is a more complex transmission but also because the results seem to be outliers, thus I have stuck to simulating and discussing the 6MT for now. My simulation results are: 0-60: 3.7 0-100: 8.9 1/4: 12.1 trap: 114.5 top: 191 So here again, other than trap speed, my results are right in the range of what mags have obtained. However, to get to the best end of what the magazines have found, I need to bump the cars hp/tq to about 540/490. With these figures I obtain : 0-60: 3.3 0-100: 8.0 1/4: 11.6 trap: 119.8 top: 196 Pretty much in line with the best test results. The lesson here is that just the same way is take a tremendous power increase to increase the top speed even modestly, a similar thing occurs with all of the other metrics as well. You don't get a real appreciable bang for the buck. So I do find reasonable evidence that the 997TT is under-rated as well. Back to the the GT-R my predictions for it with quoted power and tq are: 0-60: 3.6 0-100: 8.8 1/4: 12.0 trap: 115.6 top: 191 So indeed very close to the sims for the 997TT with its stated hp and tq. Bumping the GT-R to 525 hp and 470 ft lb gives: 0-60: 3.3 0-100: 8.0 1/4: 11.6 trap: 119.4 top: 201 Which is pretty much in line with the fantastic results from Edmunds. Again a little shy on the trap but this seems to be the norm with CarTest. What else do we learn? Despite the GT-Rs weight disadvantage the lightning fast shifts do make a big difference. Either way you slice it I do agree that the GT-R and 997TT both on their reported specs and actual performance are quite similar. Still the pieces of evidence above as well as teh dynos do still point to an under-rating in both cars. I don't have anything to hide from nor weasel away from here and I can easily accept being wrong. If you recall it is more important to me to understand and to have consistency than to be right. I know you think you understand my motivations but if you really believe anything other than this, you are mistaken. What we are trying to accomplish here, both you and me, is a bit of "forensic armchair engineering". It really is science: each piece of new information obtained can go toward proof of under-rating or toward accuracy/honesty on behalf of the manufacturers. What we should do is team up, rather than compete. CarTest has its inherent strengths in its flexibility/customization and huge number of outputs. You have your strengths as well such as you ability to immediately know which variables and vehicle systemes and changes will have what effect and even how large those effects will be on drag performance. By the way your knowledge and abilities here far exceed mine. Quarter Jr has its strengths as well in that is seem to nail the all important trap result better than CarTest. Maybe at some point, with enough evidence, we can say with certainty which is the case for the GT-R under-rated or not. I really would enjoy working with you on this topic we are both passioniate about. Since you have been so kind to really "lay it all out" here I would like to share with you some famous quotations from one of my personal heros, the late Carl Sagan, great phyiscist, astronomer and advocate of science and skepticism. "It seems to me what is called for is an exquisite balance between two conflicting needs: the most skeptical scrutiny of all hypotheses that are served up to us and at the same time a great openness to new ideas. If you are only skeptical, then no new ideas make it through to you. On the other hand, if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense in you, then you cannot distinguish useful ideas from the worthless ones." "In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time someting like that happened in politics or religion." "The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age." "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Cheers Bruce. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 10:12 AM | #148 |
Conspicuous consumption
99
Rep 1,183
Posts |
Swamp,
You appear to have this enormous ego that could never be satiated, coupled with your need to defend it and massage it, ad nauseam. Do you have the ability to simply admit you are wrong without saying another word? |
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 10:33 AM | #149 | |
Captain
138
Rep 926
Posts |
Quote:
Porsche has been accused of late to mark up their cars so much that each unit costs 60% of the sticker price. So, it will be interesting to note what Porsche develops to answer this most amazing car of the 21st century
__________________
92 Mazda Mx6 (sold), 00 VW Jetta (sold),
07 BMW 335i (sold), 10 VW Jetta (sold), 14 BMW X5 35ix (sold), 18 VW Jetta (totaled), 19 Audi SQ5 (sold), 20 Audi S6 (sold), 22 Audi SQ5 |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 02:03 PM | #150 | |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Quote:
Well put Bruce, and good approach. I think swamp's response reveals the scientific part of his 30 lb head is dominant to a fault.... "It takes all kinds to make a world" - Roger Miller, do whacka do..... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 02:23 PM | #151 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Can you folks read? Have you entirely missed my point? I'm not sure how you think I should have responded to Bruce. I graciously accepted a compliment from him, paid him one right back as well making it one that was completely honest. I think my behavior would pass any etiquette test out there with flying colors. As far as admitting I was wrong I simply won't do it. Bruce and I now seem to clearly agree that the jury is out on the principal topic of this thread. I just can not repeat enough times that the title of my post was too aggressive. This does not mean anyone is or is not incorrect yet, given the information we have. If you don't agree then we will have to leave it at a disagreement, however, that disagreement will then be Bruce and myself against you, again at least as far as the prinicipal topic here. Maybe neither of you see the point of all the continued simulations of the 997TT and the GT-R. I, however, view this as a very interesting and yes truly a scientific investigation. If you think I am beating a dead horse or posting anything worthless or invalid go ahead and chime in on that. I want to know the elusive truth and if you do as well you can keep on reading the thread. If either of you really want to know something about me please re-read the quotes I provided to Bruce. If you think the pursuit of truth makes me an ego-maniac so be it but you are really not seeing the big picture. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 02:32 PM | #152 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
I think the Mitsubishi Evo is one shining example that proves a very highly engineered and sophisticated sports car does not have to cost $100k. Well this case actually proves one does not even have to cost $50k. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 03:32 PM | #153 |
Major
75
Rep 1,288
Posts |
Hmmm... never called you an ego-maniac. I believe there's more to understanding every story beside the numbers and facts... including your own story Swamp! I'm not as scientific smart as you and I never will be, but I have a good grasp of human behavior and motivations, which makes this thread and all the arguments in it interesting to me in another way...
|
Appreciate
0
|
12-20-2007, 04:13 PM | #154 | |
Lieutenant General
611
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|