Old proof that a CGT is faster than an Enzo on a circuit
 

This video clip is footage from part (III) of an old ams comparison test, where the prime motive was to establish which had the highest top speed, although they tested accel, braking (CGT smoked everything else here as well), and of course the road course. Yes I know, it looks like a pretty tight circuit, so the 'pointy' CGT would have a bit of a natural advantage over the Enzo, but they were competing in Italy after all...

Sorry if it's a repost, I know it's quite old, but I don't remember seeing it anywhere else.

http://www.dpccars.com/car-movies/08...arshootout.htm

Thanks for the vid tforth. Love scene where the supercars are crossing the flooded city. Some nice track time for each of them also.

Re: Old proof that a CGT is faster than an Enzo on a circuit
 

The Enzo dominated the acceleration test (4 seconds faster to 300km/h than any other car there)... The CGT was bettered even by the Murcielago to 100km/h.

PS. One test is hardly 'proof', considering the Enzo beat the CGT around Top Gear's track.

Fucking irritating how someone finds a random video then declares it as proof of something, just like that dumbass McLaren F1 thread.

as you said a little bit old... but really good :)

wow the sound of those cars. :drool: thanks

Re: Old proof that a CGT is faster than an Enzo on a circuit
 

Now I happen to believe the CGT is probably faster on most tracks and is probably better sorted than the Enzo, so I am not against the CGT.

That said, this is hardly 'proof' that the CGT is faster. It is just one track, and a small & slow one at that. Not even taking account what would happen if different drivers were brought in, you can't make conclusions based on just one vid.

To make a statement of 'proof' you'd need track times from at least 4 to 5 widely varying types of tracks where the CGT is shown to be faster at each of those tracks by an acceptable margin...not just a margin of error.

Thanks for the vid though, its a good one! 8)

The fact that they were tested the same day is a strong point for sure as the Enzo was faster than the CGT on Top Gear's track but not on the same day :wink:

Re: Old proof that a CGT is faster than an Enzo on a circuit
 

well, Enzo isn't as fast on NS according to the racing god known as Walter Rohl
http://www.motorworld.net/forum/show...=695917#695917

and the CGT is king of the NS too.... as in 7:32 - less then 7:32... all on less agressive tires then the Enzo has ;)

the Enzo may be faster on a flat even F1 surface then a CGT... but on many circuiits, the CGT is king...

i have to say looking at the facts that overall the enzo is a faster car in many different situations :D

That circuit was too small for the Enzo, which has better aerodynamics than the others.

Re: Old proof that a CGT is faster than an Enzo on a circuit
 

Rohl is a Porsche test driver, so yea, take that how you will. As for the Nordschleife, I don't recall ever seeing any official times for the Enzo around it. By the way, the Radical SR8 is the real king of the Nordschleife.

In the end it comes down to your final comment, it all depends on the circuit in question it seems. Though to your "many circuits" remark, I have to shake my head a little, considering there have been very very few comparable lap times done between the two cars on a single track, certainly not 'many'.

I believe that I had qualified the acomplishment by stating that it was a very tight course. That being said, I am very suspicious of TG times! They seem to be done for drama rather than accuracy...

I actually have the old ams issue where they include all the data between these cars - I'll have to dig it out, because the braking comparison was pretty funny, especially from 200-0 km/h.

Lastly, enough said about the Enzo. Yes, it's clearly faster in a straight line than the CGT. However, since when has that been the goal of Ferrari? If it was so good at high speed courses than why doesn't have an established lap time at NS??

Oh, and the quote about the Enzo being faster, only refers to accel/top speed. This is the only same day/driver/track test comparing the two that I have seen, nevermind a video. So, please provide evidence to the contrary...

I dont think we will see an Enzo time at NS.

It will only bobble around and fly off the road when it catches a bump at 150mph.

Ehh......gimmie the MC12 over the Enzo....at least its completly useless. <--- LOoks better too.

CGT is the king - the Enzo relishes in the V10's exhaust fumes and basks in its melodic noise.

HArdly, in fact in any direct comparison drivers prefer the balance and tractability of the Enzo. Extend a one lap time to a 10 lap race, well see what drivers prefer. And again, one test says nothing. Im willing to bet each car would be faster depending on the type of circuit, but on the road at least the Enzo is far better to drive, based on articles ive read.

Well in the current evo magazine they just clocked their 'long term' CGT at 1:19.70 on their benchmark Bedford Autodrome - West Circuit. The only car that they have tested which was faster, was the Caterham R500 evo, which did an almost identical 1:19.62.

For comparison purposes, here are some of the other significant times:

Koenigsegg CCX (with 'TG wing'): 1:22.30
Ascari KZ1 1:23.20
Porsche 996 GT3 RS 1:23.35
Ferrari F430 1:24.20

According to the admittedly dubious TG, the CCX proved to be 1.4s faster than the Enzo, which is around 2 s faster than the F430 (see http://www.autozine.org/html/Ferrari/F430.html).

So, if there is anybody out there that can provide some data to the contrary I would like to see it.