Your quote:
|
Firstly, I'm unsure if you understand Awd has nothing to do with contact patch.
|
My quote:
|
All that being said, if a designer does a good job maintaining the contact patch over all 4 wheels during this condition (and this where the benefit of AWD comes in) and the drive to offset the scrub loss (due to the slip angle at, or close to the limit of adhesion) is distributed to fill the friction circle on the contact patches that are maxing out purely with lateral accel., your Ff can actually exceed comparable cars.
|
As stated above, one of the benefits of AWD (when designed/developed properly) is that it can selectively apply torque to any and all wheels which have not exceeded their maximum grip level. As you should know, the effective friction force on any contact patch is the vector addition of BOTH the lateral and longitudinal force components (the defining axes of the friction 'circle'). Your response may be: well if the front outside tire has exceeded it's max grip level (i.e. understeer), does it really matter whether you can apply more at the rear? Well, in certain cases yes, because by increasing the torque at the outside rear wheel in this condition, you could increase weight transfer to the rear, and thereby decrease the (in general) over-loading condition at the front outside, while at the same time increasing the normal (and therefore Ff) force at the comparatively under-loaded rear wheel. This, is just one specific example of how AWD can benefit in the turns.
Oh, and I distinctly remember audi entering American race series, about 20 years ago, in I believe Trans-Am and some other series, where they cleaned up so convincingly with their 'outlandish' and 'ponderous' AWD sedans. This also happened in the Australian touring car series in the late 90s with the A4. I'm sure their are other examples people can come up with.
|
Now, to the part you definitly don't understand. A cars handling isn't a factor of a stead state constant radius turn, it is more a function of its transition too and from the steady state. How much you can carry in and out, how soon you can get on the power. These are the important parts of the system.
|
Hmmm, what exactly is that I have stated which would validate this claim? I have specifically provided the example of the steady-state max. lateral accel. rate condition, as it is the easiest to define from a physics/mathematics standpoint (i.e. objectively again). I am not aware of having downplayed the importance of turn-in, or the transient conditions.
|
Do you honestly think for a second given that the lighter car has a competent designed suspension that you can gain enough friction force to overcome that 1000lbs. Do you understand the order of magnitude of increased friction force necessary? You aren't going to see that sort of gain over another best in world super car.
|
As you yourself have mentioned, since the Ff is mu*Fn, the Ff increases with mass... As long as tires are sized appropriately and can therefore handle the heat energy into them, all should be well.
|
but the enzo will quite obviously be able to enter the corner at a higher speed and hold this higher speed through the turn (something even the articles you posted admit).
|
Where exactly?
|
Its great that your a fan and all. But the simple reality is, mid length tracks the enzo will eat the veryon for breakfast.
|
...and your proof is where exactly? BTW, the only credible track test I am aware of in the public media pitting (with the same driver) the Enzo against the CGT and SLR, and Murcie for good measure, was the ams review from many moons ago, where they recorded top speeds at Nardo (which, surprise, surprise the Enzo won, kind of like a Veyron would now...). More importantly, in the area where any real supercar should show its peers who's boss, at an actual road course, guess who won? No, not the esteemed light on its heels Enzo; rather the 'old school' CGT, by approximately 1s. Yes, it was a 'tightish' course, but the CGT also smoke all of its peers in 200 km/h - 0 as well. So, in my not so humble opinion, I wouldn't choose the Enzo as your 'best-in-class' benchmark. FYI, I posted this ams video here a while back. It was obviously based on their mag article, which included the braking data. I have that copy (somewhere as well).
|
Which brings us to Nfinitys point: handling on one back road tells about as much about a car as a drivers opinion. Nothing. Was it tight, Sweepers, number of straights? In fact there is even a larger concern... If your suspension is designed for the track it will be less then competent on the road. Tracks are generally smoother then roads, race car suspensions are not designed to cope with potholes and other undulations and cannot be as fast on those sort of roads.
|
So, I guess evo et al should pack their bags, since you guys are the unofficial experts, and your statements should never be questioned? Regarding the comparative track data, as I have stated before, check out revlovers.com, as they actual ran a couple Veyrons against pretty much everything that is fast, including the 'beloved' Enzo. BTW, it wasn't even mentioned as a comparable to the Veyron, when they ran it at Hockenheim.
As I have stated repeatably, I have info, which I have provided from numerous public sources regarding my position. Where exactly is yours?