the quickest production cars at Nardo

[Ford Capri 2.8i]

As far as i know, Jaguar still has the record of speeding of a production car with the XJ220 at Nardo as far as i know.....but ive no clue about how much speed the Jag reached to get the record......and ive no clue either about the maximum speed got in that racetrack about the Ferrari Enzo and the McLaren F1....it will be a very interesting to get for example a list which has the 10 fastest production cars record in that racetrack

[Fleischmann]

Mclaren F1 has the official record, wonder when the Keonigsegg team will hit Nardo. And then the Bugatti squad...maybe...in a few years time...

[Fleischmann]

^^that's if they got the engine running at all :wink:

[racer_f50]

.....but ive no clue about how much speed the Jag reached to get the record.....

If i remember right, the Jag got up to 217mph, which is quite respectable, but 3mph short of Jaguar's goal.

[mrzonda]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I could be), but the McLaren's speed was set at Wolfsburg, not Nardo.

As for the Jag, apparently the banking eats up a small percentage of the top speed. So, I think if the Jag had a long enough straight, it could hit 220mph.

As for the Koenigsegg, I think I read on their website that they did a shakedown test at Nardo and did 226mph in the rain. :o That was the CC8S and not the CC8R.

[Vansquish]

Correct me if I'm wrong (which I could be), but the McLaren's speed was set at Wolfsburg, not Nardo.

As for the Jag, apparently the banking eats up a small percentage of the top speed. So, I think if the Jag had a long enough straight, it could hit 220mph.

As for the Koenigsegg, I think I read on their website that they did a shakedown test at Nardo and did 226mph in the rain. :o That was the CC8S and not the CC8R.

Don't know if the track at Wolfsburg is the same one on which the Mclaren F1 set it's 240.1 top speed. The name of the track at which that happened was Ehra Lessen or something like that. The Macca hit 231 on Nardo, which trounces everthing else (the MTM Bimoto wasn't really trounced, but then it still didn't beat it hehe)

[mrzonda]

Remember when the VW W12 did that 24 hour test at Nardo? I know that it averaged ridiculously high speeds, but does anyone know what it topped out at?

[mrzonda]

ya, it is... that includes pitstops too, doesn't it

[mrzonda]

I think they do. The average speed would be much higher if they didn't include them. Cars can go flat out the whole way around, right? So, if they didn't include them, chances are, the W12 would be averaging more like 340ish.

[mrzonda]

I'm sure they'd replenish stuff like water and coolant at the pitstops.

[RC45]

That's not really that impressive.

In 1990 a Corvette ZR1 set the previous 24hr speed record, at 280kmh - on a tri-oval.

http://www.zr1.net/endurance_epic.html

If a super car from 2004 can not maintain 300+kmh for 24 hours, then they are not that super... and at NARDO - what an easy feat. ;)

[Vansquish]

Actually, the ZR1 was not the previous record, the Murcielago beat it quite a while ago, but the VW beat even the Murci. (btw, what's a tri-oval? I've heard the term, but I don't know what it is)

While the ZR-1, Z06, and even the standard 'vettes are undeniably fast vehicles and capable of maintaining high speeds for extended periods of time, what we have to consider is the fact that in any case the average speed is not the same as the top speed. To have a car average 322kmh over 24 hours is quite a bit of an improvement over the ZR-1. Consider the extra mileage put on the drivetrain over that distance, and the fact that the forces are that much greater at that kind of speed.

Any way you look at it, 322kmh is quite fast hehe.

[RC45]

Actually, the ZR1 was not the previous record, the Murcielago beat it quite a while ago, but the VW beat even the Murci. (btw, what's a tri-oval? I've heard the term, but I don't know what it is)

While the ZR-1, Z06, and even the standard 'vettes are undeniably fast vehicles and capable of maintaining high speeds for extended periods of time, what we have to consider is the fact that in any case the average speed is not the same as the top speed. To have a car average 322kmh over 24 hours is quite a bit of an improvement over the ZR-1. Consider the extra mileage put on the drivetrain over that distance, and the fact that the forces are that much greater at that kind of speed.

Any way you look at it, 322kmh is quite fast hehe.

I am not talking about top speed - I am talking average speed over 24 hours in a 1990 car.

All points that magnify the fact that some of the most expensive and advanced cars should be expected to trounce a record set 14 years later.

That's my point.

Nardo is a big circle... the Fort Stockton has corners...

The venue, a 7.712-mile oval owned by Firestone Tire, although having banked turns and ideal length, lacked fences to keep wildlife out. At speeds needed to break records, hitting a 50 lb. coyote would at least be catastrophic and possibly fatal.

As the track also lacked retaining walls, loss of control in a turn would have frightening consequences. A Corvette would rocket over the edge of the banking, fly 375 feet and crash to the ground. Because of the track's size, a driver might wait 10 minutes for help to arrive.

Barring off course excursions, setting The 24 still required great courage. Turn Three took nerves of steel. Coming off the back straight, the ZR-1 was downwind at 188-192 mph. For each driver's 80-minute stint, It was foot to the floor the entire 7+miles around the track. To set The 24, one can not lift.

...And, what about the ZR-1? Would its LT-5, 5.7-liter, four-cam V8 run 5500 rpm for a day? Could the transmission and the differential stand the heat? What about accessory drives, suspension, brakes, radiator hoses...?

[RC45]

erm, let's see here. the ZR-1's record was annihilated by over 42 KM/h (280 to 323km/h).

that's a trouncing. what...you want it to beat the record by 1000 km/h? LOL

I am guessing english is NOT your first language.

Please pull you heads out of your collective assholes.

I am simply saying that after 15 years and with $100,000 more worth of car and technology the very LEAST you can expect is for these new super cars to be able to trounce (which is what I said - that they DID trounce the ZR1 record) this old car record.

42km/h - big fucking deal - the ZR1 could only run to 185mph stock anyway.. that means it was running at almost 95% of it performance potential for 24 hours - while 320km/h is only about 86% of these cars 370km/h potential.

THAT - again is my point.

If you don't understand that fact then you are even less of a performance car enthusiast than I thought you were.

To be impressed, let's see these over-priced pieces of euro-trash run at 95% for 24 hours.. :P

[RC45]

erm, let's see here. the ZR-1's record was annihilated by over 42 KM/h (280 to 323km/h).

that's a trouncing. what...you want it to beat the record by 1000 km/h? LOL

I am guessing english is NOT your first language.

Please pull you heads out of your collective assholes.

I am simply saying that after 15 years and with $100,000 more worth of car and technology the very LEAST you can expect is for these new super cars to be able to trounce (which is what I said - that they DID trounce the ZR1 record) this old car record.

42km/h - big fucking deal - the ZR1 could only run to 185mph stock anyway.. that means it was running at almost 95% of it performance potential for 24 hours - while 320km/h is only about 86% of these cars 370km/h potential.

THAT - again is my point.

If you don't understand that fact then you are even less of a performance car enthusiast than I thought you were.

To be impressed, let's see these over-priced pieces of euro-trash run at 95% for 24 hours.. :P

Each and every day, you prove yourself to be an even bigger wanker than the day before. Nice one!

the bottom line is that the ZR-1 doesn't hold the record. I would call 42 KM/h a trouncing, whether you'd like to agree with that or not; that's your choice.

I never said the ZR-1 wasn't a good car. Instead of you attempting to drag down all the european supercars, why don't you just focus on acknowledging that the ZR-1 was a solid automobile.....You probably won't do that because it gives you satisfaction to TRY and diminish the accomplishment of others. Get rid of the insecurity, mate :P

oh...and when you speak about english, read your own post first :roll:

You dumb mother fucker.. I am saying that it was trounced.

Never said otherwise.

I am also saying that after 15 years these new cars better be able to post and beat these old records.

[mrzonda]

Whichever way you look at it, the Z-R1's achievement was impressive. I agree with that. However, the achievements of the other supercars are just as impressive. To move the game on up 40 km/h from 280 is a big step. Its not like going from 60km/h to 100, or even 160 to 200.

Consider how much money and time it takes an F1 team to improve by a few tenths per lap. Ya, it's a bit of an exaggeration, but it's the same idea.

Also, remember that drag increases with the square of the speed. With that comes cost increases, and the need for time to develop and test the technology.

So, like I said at the beginning of the post, the Z-R1's achievement is impressive. But the things that new supercars have done are just as, if not more impressive.

[RC45]

Whichever way you look at it, the Z-R1's achievement was impressive. I agree with that. However, the achievements of the other supercars are just as impressive. To move the game on up 40 km/h from 280 is a big step. Its not like going from 60km/h to 100, or even 160 to 200.

Consider how much money and time it takes an F1 team to improve by a few tenths per lap. Ya, it's a bit of an exaggeration, but it's the same idea.

Also, remember that drag increases with the square of the speed. With that comes cost increases, and the need for time to develop and test the technology.

So, like I said at the beginning of the post, the Z-R1's achievement is impressive. But the things that new supercars have done are just as, if not more impressive.

Just as - not more.. as they are not running at 95%+ of their potential...

And this is not a Corvette thing... This is simply stating that the supercars of today should be able to do much better.

Perhaps this is the proof that the new generation are tuned up for bragging rights at launch time - but really are not that much better than cars of 10 years ago.

Case in point being just how good the Macca F1 was/is... it will be a long time before something eclipses that car - not just beats it by a little.. but thoroughly trounces it.

[RC45]

You dumb mother fucker.. I am saying that it was trounced.

Never said otherwise.

I am also saying that after 15 years these new cars better be able to post and beat these old records.

I would suggest you learn how to c-o-m-m-u-n-i-c-a-t-e, asshat.

The point is, after 15 years the new cars ARE beating the older cars, so what's the point of your post? to remind us that what's happening IS correct? LOL. jokes.

:roll:

[Vansquish]

Thanks for the track info :-)

I completely understand the point of view RC45, the ZR-1 as a 375bhp vehicle in 1990 managing 280kph for 24 hours is a truly impressive feat. I'm not trying to sell it short, nor the more recent attempts at the record. The only thing I was trying to do was explain that the faster the cars go, the more they have to put up with, so in order to achieve something like 322kph for any extended period of time at Nardo, the car has to be able to maintain that sort of speed for lap after lap around a circular track which inherently scrubs speed off. In essence, the cars are running laps while understeering (or occasionally oversteering) nearly the whole way. If the ZR-1 was run at Nardo, no doubt it would still hit nearly 95% of its top speed, while the exotics would be significantly farther off that mark even if they did run 42kph faster than the Vette.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the track limits the possibilities enough that eventually it isn't really feasible to go any faster in any car. Until some enormous breakthroughs in Aerodynamics and tyre technology come up, it's unlikely we'll see anything much faster than 350 at Nardo.

Does anybody know where the 322kph number came from, all I can find is 7085.7km in 24 hours...which comes to 295.24kph on average.

Oh yes, and if you want a really stark comparison which shows how much tech has changed, look at the records for the bowl at MIRA in Britain:

"With a lap time of 1min 00.56 secs, the F1 comfortably exceeded the previous record of 161.655mph (260.15 km/h) set in April 1967 by the Jaguar XJ13 sports-racing prototype. The XJ13 — built with the express purpose of winning the Le Mans 24-hour endurance race — was driven by David Hobbs."

In other words, that lap by the Macca was run at a little over 168mph...

The VW Nardo looks a little more impressive now doesn't it, LOL hehehe.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[RC45]

Does anybody know where the 322kph number came from, all I can find is 7085.7km in 24 hours...which comes to 295.24kph on average.



the VW first broke the record with 295.24, then broke its own record again when it set 322 km/h. so there were 2 record times by it.

So they ran 2 24hr attempts?

Does anyone have an actualy link to these "record attempts" - and whose record? Guiness?

[RC45]

Oh - so these are not even production car records.. but prototype car records... :roll:

Next -- Nothing to see here -- Move on... let's see this repeated with production equipment.