[DeTomaso] C6 vs Pantera?
Ken Green
kenn_green at yahoo.com
Sun Oct 19 11:06:10 EDT 2008
I thought that "real" race cars are set up for each track they run? If that is the case, comparing times at a single track would seem to at best say which cars were set up the best for that track. Also, Nurmberg would seem like a very poor choice because the times have to be very dependent on the driver's knowledge of the track and the driver's skills. I would think that something like the One Lap of America would be a much more real basis of comarison.
Ken
--- On Sun, 10/19/08, Göran Malmberg <hemipanter at hemipanter.se> wrote:
From: Göran Malmberg <hemipanter at hemipanter.se>
Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] C6 vs Pantera?
To: Dickruzzindesign at aol.com, JDeRyke at aol.com, DeTomaso at realbig.com
Date: Sunday, October 19, 2008, 7:10 AM
"Goran,
I would not compare the C-6 to a Pantera, that would not be fair. I would
compare the C-6 architectures to current cars that are mid-engine."
"Since the mid-engine layout has for years been seen as the most ideal
architecture, the C-6 overturns that argument with a 51 / 49% weight bias, a
neutral
weight base to build high performance handling on. That is what years ago was
seen as not achievable in a car with a powerful engine.
The Corvette now shows that with available modern electronic technologies
front engine rear drive is
every bit as good, maybe better, than a mid-engine layout. All of those cars
by the way are far more expensive than the Corvette."
DR
Mayself I dont look at these things as beeing fair comparsion or not as it
concern a
mecanical object that is questioned if having a soul or not (to be able to take
ofence).
The weight distribution of a public car is not the major factor in creating a
good
car. In my book I speak about the "Zerocar" which has not only a
50-50zero
weight distribution, it also has the same TW as WB. Not to mention the zero
scrub,
zero SAI, zero caster, zero bumpsteer etc. Now, the question arises, why do we
want to cange ANY of those ZERO features?
Some lap times around the "Ring".
Corvette 2009 Zr1 620hp 7.26.4
Corvette C6 c51.............7.59
Corvette C5...................8.40
Viper SRT.....................7.22.1
Viper.................0-60 3.4 Skidpad..1.08 Braking 70-0 149ft 600hp
(Braking 60-0 100ft factory numbers)
Corvette Z06.......0-60 3.8. Skidpad.1,03 Braking 70-0 159ft 505hp
Porsche GT2......0-60 3,7 Skidpad. 0.98 Braking 70-0 155ft 530hp
Nissan gtr......... 0-60 4.1 Skidpad 0,96 Braking 70-0 155ft 480hp
After the Corvette 7.26.4 pass a privat German car collector Marc Basseng went
out
with 3 of his cars, driving himself...
The Enzo made 7.25.21
Pagani..............7.24.65
Maserati...........7.24.29
There was protests against the Viper for beeing of the line standard.
I am working on a Viper right now, fixing its handling, and I did just corner
weight it.
48,9 % front weight. The new Corvette has 335:s tires at the rear and 285:s
front.
Starts looking like Pantera GT5 stuff...The Lingenfelter 880hp Corvette has
345:s
since they got rear wheel traction problems, maybe it is to light there. The
more
tailheavy Viper brakes better and is faster. Of course, horsepower of modern
cars is
a big part of their performance.
Besides, the Viper has a complex A-arm geometry to say the least, and the
earlier
cars do not have very sofisticated production methods. But this dosent affect
its
function.
We must not forget that was ultimatley produce grip is the development of
modern
tires, not really suspension systems or car brands. When looking under a 2008
car ther is nothing really new under the sun, (or the car).
Goran
_______________________________________________
Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
Archive Search Engine Now Available at http://www.realbig.com/detomaso/
DeTomaso mailing list
DeTomaso at list.realbig.com
http://list.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
More information about the DeTomaso
mailing list