Crown

Board: Motor Sports Language: English Region: Worldwide Share/Save/Bookmark Close

Forum - Thread


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    m4ever:
    kudryavchik:
    m4ever:
    kudryavchik:
    m4ever:

    The racing history would have been probably re-written had Mercedes-Benz not retired from racing in 1955 following the tragic Le Mans of that year. Mercedes today is nowhere near where it used to be (which is a shame in my opinion). 

    Agree, Till 1955 that was the strongest team with greatest technologies and greatest budget. All other...maseratis, alfas, ferraris, brm etc were like a farm compared to silver stars;) Unfortunately AU was already dead that time...

    Today Mercedes is not Mercedes...unfortunately, its Ilmor+Brawn...Nothing common with mercedes except the name. Real racing mercedes has finished its history when they closed their Group C program and started to outsource racing engines to Ilmor.Smiley

    But maybe Merc spirit lives in todays DTM cars? Sometimes it also revived in Le Mans cars...Smiley


    --

    sportcars-history.com

    I would add to your list also Porsche ,it  was not really a player in 1950s (compared to Mercedes)

    It would be great to see (competitive) Mercedes works cars at Le Mans against Porsche


    --

    911 Club Coupe, 72' 911 Targa 2.4 S, 12' Audi S4 Avant

    Being diehard fan of Porsche I have to admit that they were far behind Merc that time, fact. Merc was the best with AU. Yes, I also want to see how Porsche will winSmiley


    --

    sportcars-history.com

    I am also a diehard Porsche fan, however in 1950s although Porsche was successful with the 356 , 550 Spyders this was in the minor league; let`s not forget the  engines were not really powerful (did have great chassis though) compared to Mercedeses, Ferraris , Alfa Romeos, Maseratis, Jaguars and Aston Martins. They had class wins in Le Mans, but the real deal in Le Mans has always been the "who arrives first" . This is why the 1970 victory was such an achievement for Porsche and it was long awaited.

    Those times Porsche having brilliant chassis, light engines and lots of exotics in term of materials, which Italians didn't have, gained the reputation of giant killer;)


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    So, which is the greatest racing series ever?


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:

    So, which is the greatest racing series ever?


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Racing event- there are 3 events that make a triple crown- 24 h le mans, monaco gp and indy500. I have made some analysis in rissian social net vkontakte - 24h Le Mans won with great margin. Considering, that in Russia F1 is the most popular, I think the result is quite representative.

    Series... Hard to say... To me: WSC(WEC), Can-Am, F1, Imsa Camel Gtp))) About series it will be very hard to say. They are too different... Some people like nascar, some irl, some F1, some rally. How to compare?

    The only thing I can say about racing series, it is not F1 alone. Yes, popular, but is it racing?Smiley Like in music...snoop dog is more popular than Grieg. Is snoop dog better? I hardly doubtSmiley

    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    For me it is Le Mans 24 Hours over any other form of racing. 

    These 24 hours counterweight a whole season of F1. Actually, if Ferrari (with the legend it carries) wasn't in F1 I wouldn't care to watch it.


    --

    "Form follows function"


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.

    Carbon fiber appeared first in f1, agree. Kers -lmp1 panoz 1998. Active suspension f1=proto beginning 90's camel gtp. Pdk proto. Ground effect pre war gp on closed wheel cars(!), revving engines is shit ;) requirement of regulations, no more. The most unefficient way to increase hp. Regulated Turbo - protos. Intercooler protos. Sequential transmission le mans. And it is not the full list;) ah, forgotten, active ground effect protos, active wings protos;) air break protos;)))

    About quickness. I dont remember f1 car going 400 kph in race specs, le mans cars adopted to do it for 24h in 70's;)

    Turboed 917/30, or nissan ck90 will outrun any f1 car, even 2004 on straight line;) especially from 300 kph. Lap time with f1 will be better due to protos have to run 24 hours. Even so till 79 can am protos of 73 were faster than f1 cars. 917 and 512 were faster than f1 of that period.

    About hp litre ratio. Mazda 787b had 930 hp from 2,6 litre;)

    The most expensive event is 24 h Le Mans. Such projects as 917, gt40, clr gtr, toyota gt1 were much more expensive. Have read, that toyota spent around 500 mil dollars in 98 to run their car. Merc spent 200-300 mil. 

    So, check your DB and stop read PR junk that mr. Ecclestone writes on his facebook page;)

    Best regards. 

    P.s. i understand your opinion about f1, you are ferrari fan, but ferrari lost tech game to macs and williams... 60-70 is the period of cosworth dfv  and aliminium cans in f1 that why ferrari took its place in f1 arena. 

    P.p.s sorry for grammar. Writing on ipad.;)

    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    reginos:

    For me it is Le Mans 24 Hours over any other form of racing. 

    These 24 hours counterweight a whole season of F1. Actually, if Ferrari (with the legend it carries) wasn't in F1 I wouldn't care to watch it.


    --

    "Form follows function"

    +100500;) i watch because of Schumacher and Macs;)


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.

    Carbon fiber appeared first in f1, agree. Kers -lmp1 panoz 1998. Active suspension f1=proto beginning 90's camel gtp. Pdk proto. Ground effect pre war gp on closed wheel cars(!), revving engines is shit ;) requirement of regulations, no more. The most unefficient way to increase hp. Regulated Turbo - protos. Intercooler protos. Sequential transmission le mans. And it is not the full list;) ah, forgotten, active ground effect protos, active wings protos;) air break protos;)))

    About quickness. I dont remember f1 car going 400 kph in race specs, le mans cars adopted to do it for 24h in 70's;)

    Turboed 917/30, or nissan ck90 will outrun any f1 car, even 2004 on straight line;) especially from 300 kph. Lap time with f1 will be better due to protos have to run 24 hours. Even so till 79 can am protos of 73 were faster than f1 cars. 917 and 512 were faster than f1 of that period.

    About hp litre ratio. Mazda 787b had 930 hp from 2,6 litre;)

    The most expensive event is 24 h Le Mans. Such projects as 917, gt40, clr gtr, toyota gt1 were much more expensive. Have read, that toyota spent around 500 mil dollars in 98 to run their car. Merc spent 200-300 mil. 

    So, check your DB and stop read PR junk that mr. Ecclestone writes on his facebook page;)

    Best regards. 

    P.s. i understand your opinion about f1, you are ferrari fan, but ferrari lost tech game to macs and williams... 60-70 is the period of cosworth dfv  and aliminium cans in f1 that why ferrari took its place in f1 arena. 

    P.p.s sorry for grammar. Writing on ipad.;)

    --

    sportcars-history.com

    Come on now mate! Revving is the most technically advanced way of getting power out of an internal combustion engine. It's the hardest way also. Soihiro Honda used to say that boost is cheap, revs are expensive! The best engines worldwide are the high revving atmospheric ones!

    As for PR, please do not patronise me! Ferrari had a budget of about 1 billion Dollars in the mid noughties!  

    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 

    This is not even a contest. Obviously you are a sports car diehard, but sportcars would be some 30 seconds slower than an F1 car round Monza or Silvestone. Deal with it.

    Regards! 


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.

    Carbon fiber appeared first in f1, agree. Kers -lmp1 panoz 1998. Active suspension f1=proto beginning 90's camel gtp. Pdk proto. Ground effect pre war gp on closed wheel cars(!), revving engines is shit ;) requirement of regulations, no more. The most unefficient way to increase hp. Regulated Turbo - protos. Intercooler protos. Sequential transmission le mans. And it is not the full list;) ah, forgotten, active ground effect protos, active wings protos;) air break protos;)))

    About quickness. I dont remember f1 car going 400 kph in race specs, le mans cars adopted to do it for 24h in 70's;)

    Turboed 917/30, or nissan ck90 will outrun any f1 car, even 2004 on straight line;) especially from 300 kph. Lap time with f1 will be better due to protos have to run 24 hours. Even so till 79 can am protos of 73 were faster than f1 cars. 917 and 512 were faster than f1 of that period.

    About hp litre ratio. Mazda 787b had 930 hp from 2,6 litre;)

    The most expensive event is 24 h Le Mans. Such projects as 917, gt40, clr gtr, toyota gt1 were much more expensive. Have read, that toyota spent around 500 mil dollars in 98 to run their car. Merc spent 200-300 mil. 

    So, check your DB and stop read PR junk that mr. Ecclestone writes on his facebook page;)

    Best regards. 

    P.s. i understand your opinion about f1, you are ferrari fan, but ferrari lost tech game to macs and williams... 60-70 is the period of cosworth dfv  and aliminium cans in f1 that why ferrari took its place in f1 arena. 

    P.p.s sorry for grammar. Writing on ipad.;)

    --

    sportcars-history.

    I am also keen on endurance racing however F1 does have merits inherent to the type of racing , max performance on 90 min vs reliable performance in endurance. The technological envelope is just different. When your pistons travel at 25 metres/sec at 18,000 rpms the requirements on design and materials are different than on an engine that runs on half of that. You have a great deal of development going in there.  This to say that it is not fair to paint the f1 as a pr stunt. 

     


    --

    911 Club Coupe, 72' 911 Targa 2.4 S, 12' Audi S4 Avant


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.

    Carbon fiber appeared first in f1, agree. Kers -lmp1 panoz 1998. Active suspension f1=proto beginning 90's camel gtp. Pdk proto. Ground effect pre war gp on closed wheel cars(!), revving engines is shit ;) requirement of regulations, no more. The most unefficient way to increase hp. Regulated Turbo - protos. Intercooler protos. Sequential transmission le mans. And it is not the full list;) ah, forgotten, active ground effect protos, active wings protos;) air break protos;)))

    About quickness. I dont remember f1 car going 400 kph in race specs, le mans cars adopted to do it for 24h in 70's;)

    Turboed 917/30, or nissan ck90 will outrun any f1 car, even 2004 on straight line;) especially from 300 kph. Lap time with f1 will be better due to protos have to run 24 hours. Even so till 79 can am protos of 73 were faster than f1 cars. 917 and 512 were faster than f1 of that period.

    About hp litre ratio. Mazda 787b had 930 hp from 2,6 litre;)

    The most expensive event is 24 h Le Mans. Such projects as 917, gt40, clr gtr, toyota gt1 were much more expensive. Have read, that toyota spent around 500 mil dollars in 98 to run their car. Merc spent 200-300 mil. 

    So, check your DB and stop read PR junk that mr. Ecclestone writes on his facebook page;)

    Best regards. 

    P.s. i understand your opinion about f1, you are ferrari fan, but ferrari lost tech game to macs and williams... 60-70 is the period of cosworth dfv  and aliminium cans in f1 that why ferrari took its place in f1 arena. 

    P.p.s sorry for grammar. Writing on ipad.;)

    --

    sportcars-history.com

    Come on now mate! Revving is the most technically advanced way of getting power out of an internal combustion engine. It's the hardest way also. Soihiro Honda used to say that boost is cheap, revs are expensive! The best engines worldwide are the high revving atmospheric ones!

    As for PR, please do not patronise me! Ferrari had a budget of about 1 billion Dollars in the mid noughties!  

    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 

    This is not even a contest. Obviously you are a sports car diehard, but sportcars would be some 30 seconds slower than an F1 car round Monza or Silvestone. Deal with it.

    Regards! 

    Yes it is technically advanced, pneumovalves etc...right boost is also not cheap. As you can remember from history of F1, what was the reason of turbo ban?;) cost cut;)

    sorry, which engine is the best?)))

    Ferrari never had billion budget. In mid 90's they hardly were the most rich team. They were richest in 2000's with 450 mil a year;) in mid 90's their cars were one of the most simple;) though i can be mistaken, they had 10 bil a yearSmiley proof please;)

    Not 1500hp, 1300 hp and only bmw for 2 mins;) renault 1200hp, honda 1100-1200 hp, porsche 1050 hp. See gurneyflap.com 

    Racing sets were much lower, -2 bar boost.

    bmw had this power with 5,6 bar boost. Nissan had 1100hp with around 2 bar boost;) 

    30? I thought 12-15;) is it like with billion))))


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    m4ever:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    I am not familiar with the music paradigms you gave but F1 is the pinnacle of technology and the quickest cars round a circuit, so I will go with that.

    Pinnacle of technology? Smiley Funny. In 30's gp, no doubt. 50' too. 60-70' noSmiley. 80-mid 90's the same, a little bit different directions of development... 2000 f1. Today top tier protos are going to be more advanced. 

    Quick... Depends on regulations too. The main disadvantage of proto - mass. But much better aero. So around corners f1 is faster, due to low mass. But every proto, take off restrictor will outrun any car on straight. Take off a little bit weight and it will outrun f1 on corners;) you can remember from 91-93 when group c cars having 150 kg ballast over f1 had a pace of top 10 f1 peleton;)

     

     

    Carbon fibre tubs, engines revving at 18,000 RPM with a specific output of some 300 BHP per litre, KERS, carbon brakes and by far the fastest lap times. Quicker also down the straights due to their unbelievable power/weight ratio. LMP1 are heavier and less powerful. Still today's cars are much slower than in 2004, when the fastest F1 cars in history ran. Also, the most expensive racing series by far.

    Carbon fiber appeared first in f1, agree. Kers -lmp1 panoz 1998. Active suspension f1=proto beginning 90's camel gtp. Pdk proto. Ground effect pre war gp on closed wheel cars(!), revving engines is shit ;) requirement of regulations, no more. The most unefficient way to increase hp. Regulated Turbo - protos. Intercooler protos. Sequential transmission le mans. And it is not the full list;) ah, forgotten, active ground effect protos, active wings protos;) air break protos;)))

    About quickness. I dont remember f1 car going 400 kph in race specs, le mans cars adopted to do it for 24h in 70's;)

    Turboed 917/30, or nissan ck90 will outrun any f1 car, even 2004 on straight line;) especially from 300 kph. Lap time with f1 will be better due to protos have to run 24 hours. Even so till 79 can am protos of 73 were faster than f1 cars. 917 and 512 were faster than f1 of that period.

    About hp litre ratio. Mazda 787b had 930 hp from 2,6 litre;)

    The most expensive event is 24 h Le Mans. Such projects as 917, gt40, clr gtr, toyota gt1 were much more expensive. Have read, that toyota spent around 500 mil dollars in 98 to run their car. Merc spent 200-300 mil. 

    So, check your DB and stop read PR junk that mr. Ecclestone writes on his facebook page;)

    Best regards. 

    P.s. i understand your opinion about f1, you are ferrari fan, but ferrari lost tech game to macs and williams... 60-70 is the period of cosworth dfv  and aliminium cans in f1 that why ferrari took its place in f1 arena. 

    P.p.s sorry for grammar. Writing on ipad.;)

    --

    sportcars-history.

    I am also keen on endurance racing however F1 does have merits inherent to the type of racing , max performance on 90 min vs reliable performance in endurance. The technological envelope is just different. When your pistons travel at 25 metres/sec at 18,000 rpms the requirements on design and materials are different than on an engine that runs on half of that. You have a great deal of development going in there.  This to say that it is not fair to paint the f1 as a pr stunt. 

     


    --

    911 Club Coupe, 72' 911 Targa 2.4 S, 12' Audi S4 Avant

    Of course, no doubt, f1 is a great tech area. But requirements on materials are the same. They use almost the same tech processes. Differs are only dictated by regs.

    But lots of pr... More than racing. 

    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    Realzeus, proof about billion budget;)  maximum 40mil;) 

    The Ferrari 412T was the type name for the cars used by Ferrari in the 1994 and1995 Formula One Season. It was designed by John Barnard and Gustav Brunner. The car was a simple and economical design powered by a 3.5 litre (1994)/ 3.0 (1995) litre V12 engine. The T stood for ...


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    You do realise the diffence betwern early 90s and mid noughties, don't you?

    The reasaon for the turbo ban was the crazy power. Same with the V12 and then with the V10s. 


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:

    You do realise the diffence betwern early 90s and mid noughties, don't you?

    The reasaon for the turbo ban was the crazy power. Same with the V12 and then with the V10s. 

    Sorry, 1995 - not mid? Beginning? Sorry, what is mid 90's?

    Realzeus, you know f1 history really bad;) by 1988 there was 2,5 bar limit, 700hp, no more extreme speeds, pace was down 3 secs. In 1986 1 honda quali engine had a price 80000 £, by the way;)

    You should start to operate facts, otherwise, I like to chat with you, its interesting, but you dont give me any info. Still waiting for some facts that will answer my large post;) Technologies, f1 cars that reached 400kph in race trim, still haven't understood why you gave me untrue info about turboed f1 engines, how is it connected with n/a we were talking...

    Also, about revvs. It is not so difficult today...pneumatic valves were introducted by renault in beginning 80's. No more spring iertia limitations. Nowadays system is not so extreme. By the way it is very unreliable system, requiring very clean air in combustion chamber. Have looked on materials of engines once again. Alum pistons, titanium rods, steel crankshaft, Tungsten counterweights. Great materials, but lmp1 has the same, 100% the same;) carbon fiber gearbox housing, or titan, or magnesium, or aluminium...lmp1 has the same. Titanium driveshafts, lmp1 has the same. Difference in suspension, f1 use carbon, lmp1 teams aluminium or titan, think the first one... 

    So to conclusion, stop be emotional and start to operate facts. And dont write about billion again, because it is very funny, considering the price of dollar that time and that the budget of other top teams was about 100 mil;)

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    mid noughties :  that is about 2003 to 2008 roughly?


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    Gladstone:

    mid noughties :  that is about 2003 to 2008 roughly?

    MaybeSmiley i havent heard noughties in english.

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    2004 f1 teams budgets (russian). See first table. Mil. Us dollars

    http://www.f1news.ru/memuar/budget2004.shtml

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    You do realise the diffence betwern early 90s and mid noughties, don't you?

    The reasaon for the turbo ban was the crazy power. Same with the V12 and then with the V10s. 

    Sorry, 1995 - not mid? Beginning? Sorry, what is mid 90's?

    Realzeus, you know f1 history really bad;) by 1988 there was 2,5 bar limit, 700hp, no more extreme speeds, pace was down 3 secs. In 1986 1 honda quali engine had a price 80000 £, by the way;)

    You should start to operate facts, otherwise, I like to chat with you, its interesting, but you dont give me any info. Still waiting for some facts that will answer my large post;) Technologies, f1 cars that reached 400kph in race trim, still haven't understood why you gave me untrue info about turboed f1 engines, how is it connected with n/a we were talking...

    Also, about revvs. It is not so difficult today...pneumatic valves were introducted by renault in beginning 80's. No more spring iertia limitations. Nowadays system is not so extreme. By the way it is very unreliable system, requiring very clean air in combustion chamber. Have looked on materials of engines once again. Alum pistons, titanium rods, steel crankshaft, Tungsten counterweights. Great materials, but lmp1 has the same, 100% the same;) carbon fiber gearbox housing, or titan, or magnesium, or aluminium...lmp1 has the same. Titanium driveshafts, lmp1 has the same. Difference in suspension, f1 use carbon, lmp1 teams aluminium or titan, think the first one... 

    So to conclusion, stop be emotional and start to operate facts. And dont write about billion again, because it is very funny, considering the price of dollar that time and that the budget of other top teams was about 100 mil;)

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com

    Let's get some things straight here. I have been following motorsports since the mid '80s and I do not take kindly such ad hominem accusations.

    I was wrong about the budget. It was about half a billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuderia_Ferrari My memory served me poorly and I apologise for that. 

    Noughties is the english term for the '00 decade. On January 1, 2000, the BBC listed the noughties (derived from "nought"[13] a word used for zero in many English-speaking countries), as a potential moniker for the new decade.[14] This has become a common name for the decade in the UK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_(decade)

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Most of the technologies we have been mentioning were first used in F1. Also, had it not been for the overly restrictive and descriptive regulations we would also be seing marvelous things coming out of that series. This stands true for most series though.


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley


    --

    fritz


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:

    You do realise the diffence betwern early 90s and mid noughties, don't you?

    The reasaon for the turbo ban was the crazy power. Same with the V12 and then with the V10s. 

    Sorry, 1995 - not mid? Beginning? Sorry, what is mid 90's?

    Realzeus, you know f1 history really bad;) by 1988 there was 2,5 bar limit, 700hp, no more extreme speeds, pace was down 3 secs. In 1986 1 honda quali engine had a price 80000 £, by the way;)

    You should start to operate facts, otherwise, I like to chat with you, its interesting, but you dont give me any info. Still waiting for some facts that will answer my large post;) Technologies, f1 cars that reached 400kph in race trim, still haven't understood why you gave me untrue info about turboed f1 engines, how is it connected with n/a we were talking...

    Also, about revvs. It is not so difficult today...pneumatic valves were introducted by renault in beginning 80's. No more spring iertia limitations. Nowadays system is not so extreme. By the way it is very unreliable system, requiring very clean air in combustion chamber. Have looked on materials of engines once again. Alum pistons, titanium rods, steel crankshaft, Tungsten counterweights. Great materials, but lmp1 has the same, 100% the same;) carbon fiber gearbox housing, or titan, or magnesium, or aluminium...lmp1 has the same. Titanium driveshafts, lmp1 has the same. Difference in suspension, f1 use carbon, lmp1 teams aluminium or titan, think the first one... 

    So to conclusion, stop be emotional and start to operate facts. And dont write about billion again, because it is very funny, considering the price of dollar that time and that the budget of other top teams was about 100 mil;)

     


    --

    sportcars-history.com

    Let's get some things straight here. I have been following motorsports since the mid '80s and I do not take kindly such ad hominem accusations.

    I was wrong about the budget. It was about half a billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuderia_Ferrari My memory served me poorly and I apologise for that. 

    Noughties is the english term for the '00 decade. On January 1, 2000, the BBC listed the noughties (derived from "nought"[13] a word used for zero in many English-speaking countries), as a potential moniker for the new decade.[14] This has become a common name for the decade in the UK. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000s_(decade)

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Most of the technologies we have been mentioning were first used in F1. Also, had it not been for the overly restrictive and descriptive regulations we would also be seing marvelous things coming out of that series. This stands true for most series though.

    First of all, thanks for a new word for me. ;)

    you shouldn't think wrong about me;) i dont want to offend you, but man, only on budget you have mistaken for 550 mil!!! Its huge mistake. This is overall budget including wages, development budget is much less. And not only that.  If you were on gurneyflap you could see dyno tests. Yes, most of data was hidden, but google a little bit and you will find enough exact info.

    1300 and 1500 hp - big difference, you shouldnt operate the numbers you cant confirm.

    About tech, i think my post was quite clear, I have told you which techs were firstly used in protos;) if you have other info, give it please. Once again, operate facts, and everything will be ok;) 


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley

    Once again, mistake on mistake;) 1987 season had a bit higher race boost, around 900 hp (+ 30hp +-), but quali trim was much less than in 1986, where bmw had 5,6 bars and renault more than 5;)

    1987 Season was limited on 4 bars. 1,6 bars for 1,5 litre engine is quite much.

    1000 hp in 2004 had quali set engines, racing set was 50-100 hp less due to regulation on reliability changes.

    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley

    The table shown below was scanned from the 1987 edition of the "Autocourse" annual put together by top contemporary F1 journalists, including Alan Henry, Doug Nye, Mike Doodson, from information gained officially and "unofficially" from their regular close contacts with members at all levels of the F1 teams they met at every race weekend.
    The race-trim power output figures quoted will be (due to the limitations imposed by the pop-off valves and fuel consumption restrictions) somewhat lower than the maximum values attainable on static test benches if these limitations were not applied.
    However, the fact is that they are so much lower than the 1500hp claimed in your above post for the Ferrari engine that anyone reading them will know what to think of that claim.
    I'm quite sure that you will think that you know better than the journalists who were involved in the F1 circus on a day-to-day basis back then, but don't be surprised if other people think otherwise.

     

    1987 F1 Engines.jpg


    --

    fritz


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley

    Once again, mistake on mistake;) 1987 season had a bit higher race boost, around 900 hp (+ 30hp +-), but quali trim was much less than in 1986, where bmw had 5,6 bars and renault more than 5;)

    1987 Season was limited on 4 bars. 1,6 bars for 1,5 litre engine is quite much.

    1000 hp in 2004 had quali set engines, racing set was 50-100 hp less due to regulation on reliability changes.

    --

    sportcars-history.com

    So basically we are not disagreeing on the facts. 1986 you say? Okay then, so be it. That does not change things much, does it? Smiley

    @fritz: I am fairly certain that these figures are in race trim.


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    REALZEUS:
    kudryavchik:
    REALZEUS:
    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley

    Once again, mistake on mistake;) 1987 season had a bit higher race boost, around 900 hp (+ 30hp +-), but quali trim was much less than in 1986, where bmw had 5,6 bars and renault more than 5;)

    1987 Season was limited on 4 bars. 1,6 bars for 1,5 litre engine is quite much.

    1000 hp in 2004 had quali set engines, racing set was 50-100 hp less due to regulation on reliability changes.

    --

    sportcars-history.com

    So basically we are not disagreeing on the facts. 1986 you say? Okay then, so be it. That does not change things much, does it? Smiley

    @fritz: I am fairly certain that these figures are in race trim.


    --
    FERRARI RULES!!!

    So what about techs and speed;) anyway, virtual cup of beer?;)Smiley


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
    fritz:
    REALZEUS:
     
    You want to speak specific output? 1500cc, 1500 horses in the turbo hayday of F1! Match that! 
    REALZEUS:

    The exact power of F1 engines is undisclosed. We are all operating on conjexture here. Ferrari for example says on its official site that the 054 V10 produced some 865 HP, whereas many drivers of that era were mentioning the magic tonne (1000). Clearly, the truth is hidden but accusing one of being a liar is not kind and next time I will take offense over such a thing. 

    Considering the discrepancy between those two statements in the same thread, maybe you just have yourself to blame if others are so unkind as to question the veracity of your posts. Smiley

    You do realise that the 1500 figure refers to the turbo heydays of the '80s (1987 to be precise with the quali engines running 4+ BAR of boost) and the 1000 to the V10s of the mid noughties, don't you? Smiley

    The table shown below was scanned from the 1987 edition of the "Autocourse" annual put together by top contemporary F1 journalists, including Alan Henry, Doug Nye, Mike Doodson, from information gained officially and "unofficially" from their regular close contacts with members at all levels of the F1 teams they met at every race weekend.
    The race-trim power output figures quoted will be (due to the limitations imposed by the pop-off valves and fuel consumption restrictions) somewhat lower than the maximum values attainable on static test benches if these limitations were not applied.
    However, the fact is that they are so much lower than the 1500hp claimed in your above post for the Ferrari engine that anyone reading them will know what to think of that claim.
    I'm quite sure that you will think that you know better than the journalists who were involved in the F1 circus on a day-to-day basis back then, but don't be surprised if other people think otherwise.

     

    1987 F1 Engines.jpg

    Fritz, great table!!! I take it;) thank you;) 


    --

    sportcars-history.com


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    So anyway.....

    I randomly got the chance to go see a big-time drag racing event a few weeks ago, and if you have even a drop of passion for motorsport, you should take the opportunity to go see this if the opportunity presents itself. If only for the spectacle. Such a visceral experience - the noise alone is worth the price of admission. 

    As a result, I'd like to throw caution to the wind by nominating this as one of the greatest racing cars that has ever been built:

    Miller_Lite_NHRA_Top_Fuel_Dragster_20062.jpg

    Sure it's crass, and showy, and pretty much aimed at the NASCAR crowd, but the numbers don't lie:

    8.19L supercharged V8 burning nitro-methane , 8000+ bhp

    1000kg, Aluminum spaceframe w/carbon panels

    0 - 330 mph (531 km/h) in 3.7 seconds

    5g under acceleration, same under braking with carbon rotors and twin parachutes

    There's no racing car that has ever been built that would see which way one of these things went in a straight line.

    So certainly not the greatest racing car ever, but a damn impressive achievement on performance alone, and I think deserving of consideration for a list like this FWIW.

     

     

     


    Re: 7 Greatest Race Cars

    JesseBank:

    So anyway.....

    I randomly got the chance to go see a big-time drag racing event a few weeks ago, and if you have even a drop of passion for motorsport, you should take the opportunity to go see this if the opportunity presents itself. If only for the spectacle. Such a visceral experience - the noise alone is worth the price of admission. 

    As a result, I'd like to throw caution to the wind by nominating this as one of the greatest racing cars that has ever been built:

    Miller_Lite_NHRA_Top_Fuel_Dragster_20062.jpg

    Sure it's crass, and showy, and pretty much aimed at the NASCAR crowd, but the numbers don't lie:

    8.19L supercharged V8 burning nitro-methane , 8000+ bhp

    1000kg, Aluminum spaceframe w/carbon panels

    0 - 330 mph (531 km/h) in 3.7 seconds

    5g under acceleration, same under braking with carbon rotors and twin parachutes

    There's no racing car that has ever been built that would see which way one of these things went in a straight line.

    So certainly not the greatest racing car ever, but a damn impressive achievement on performance alone, and I think deserving of consideration for a list like this FWIW.

     

     

     

    Yes;) great cars, staggering level of performance. OHV V8 2 valves...romantic)))) but the problem here, we know the class-top fuel, but we dont know brands there...

    Also great class- jetsSmiley


    --

    sportcars-history.com


     
    Edit

    Forum

    Board Subject Last post Rating Views Replies
    Porsche Sticky SUN'S LAST RUN TO WILSON, WY - 991 C2S CAB LIFE, END OF AN ERA (Part II) 4/17/24 7:16 AM
    GnilM
    767853 1798
    Porsche Sticky Welcome to Rennteam: Cars and Coffee... (photos) 4/7/24 11:48 AM
    Boxster Coupe GTS
    438123 565
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Cayman GT4 RS (2021) 5/12/23 12:11 PM
    W8MM
    261632 288
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Porsche 911 (992) GT3 RS - 2022 3/12/24 8:28 AM
    DJM48
    258754 323
    Porsche Sticky The new Macan: the first all-electric SUV from Porsche 1/30/24 9:18 AM
    RCA
    83251 45
    Porsche Sticky OFFICIAL: Taycan 2024 Facelift 3/15/24 1:23 PM
    CGX car nut
    5351 50
    Porsche The moment I've been waiting for... 2/1/24 7:01 PM
    Pilot
     
     
     
     
     
    878098 1364
    Porsche 992 GT3 7/23/23 7:01 PM
    Grant
    811003 3868
    Porsche Welcome to the new Taycan Forum! 2/10/24 4:43 PM
    nberry
    389019 1526
    Porsche GT4RS 4/17/24 8:53 PM
    GaussM
    387113 1452
    Others Tesla 2 the new thread 12/13/23 2:48 PM
    CGX car nut
    370053 2401
    Porsche Donor vehicle for Singer Vehicle Design 7/3/23 12:30 PM
    Porker
    367611 797
    Ferrari Ferrari 812 Superfast 4/21/23 8:09 AM
    the-missile
    291197 550
    Porsche Red Nipples 991.2 GT3 Touring on tour 4/11/24 12:32 PM
    Ferdie
    287286 668
    Porsche Collected my 997 GTS today 10/19/23 7:06 PM
    CGX car nut
     
     
     
     
     
    259727 812
    Lambo Huracán EVO STO 7/30/23 6:59 PM
    mcdelaug
    238310 346
    Lotus Lotus Emira 6/25/23 2:53 PM
    Enmanuel
    226888 101
    Others Corvette C8 10/16/23 3:24 PM
    Enmanuel
    220529 488
    Others Gordon Murray - T.50 11/22/23 10:27 AM
    mcdelaug
    167690 387
    Porsche Back to basics - 996 GT3 RS 6/11/23 5:13 PM
    CGX car nut
    139599 144
    BMW M 2024 BMW M3 CS Official Now 12/29/23 9:04 AM
    RCA
    116234 303
    Motor Sp. 2023 Formula One 12/19/23 5:38 AM
    WhoopsyM
    107857 685
    Others Valkyrie final design? 4/28/23 2:45 AM
    Rossi
    99439 219
    Porsche 2022 992 Safari Model 3/7/24 4:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    83772 239
    AMG Mercedes-Benz W124 500E aka Porsche typ 2758 2/23/24 10:03 PM
    blueflame
    74927 297
    Porsche 992 GT3 RS 3/3/24 7:22 PM
    WhoopsyM
    53343 314
    Motor Sp. Porsche 963 3/16/24 9:27 PM
    WhoopsyM
    24789 237
    Ferrari Ferrari 296 GTB (830PS, Hybrid V6) 1/21/24 4:29 PM
    GT-Boy
    21022 103
    BMW M 2022 BMW M5 CS 4/8/24 1:43 PM
    Ferdie
    19294 140
    AMG G63 sold out 9/15/23 7:38 PM
    Nico997
    16491 120
    129 items found, displaying 1 to 30.