Ferrari 360CS Test by "Sport Auto" ...dissapointed

[SFDMALEX]

Originally Posted by Ivanhoe how bout the gt3 rs? i know that car can kick the cs' ass like none other... figures anyone?

That is NOT what Evo said.



Shit people....read magazines or something.

[blah]

wow it ran the same time as a Z06, and its cost what 2x as much?

[SFDMALEX]

Originally Posted by blah wow it ran the same time as a Z06, and its cost what 2x as much?

wow...do you read....that whole test was bullshit.

[DeMoN]

This is disappointing indeed, however, in a way I hope it disappoints. There are too many variants of the 360 already. Maybe that will make them stop reproducing it. Anyway, I am sure Ferrari wont let this stay this way. Lets just wait for another review and hope to see it in Top/5th gear.

[Hawk]

Wow that is dissapointing. Would have expected more than that from ferrari. Never been a big fan of 360 anyway.

[RC45]

Maybe now you yahoos will realize that unless tests are conducted on the same day, back to back, they are little more than numbers on paper

When 2 people start throwing HP number in each others faces, for diff. cars, measured on diff. days, only the ill-informed will believe that each dyno chart is an absolute.

The only absolutes you have in car comparisons are things like measured curb weight, the fuel, coolant etc volumes and the measured passenger and luggage capacities.

All the rest, acceleration, braking, skid-pad numbers, slalom speed etc - are so impacted by variables - just use the results as an indication of what the conditions of the day allowed

I am really struggling to understand how a group of supposedly intelligent folks get so bent out of shape - and also fail to understand all the mitigating factors surrounding performance results.

Do you doubt the length, width, height numbers they publish? If not, why would you doubt the number they read off the scale (unless they print a retraction for a typo at a later date) - I already tried to share with everyone that claimed and actual curb weights are VERY different numbers.

Any way - I am just going to sit back and laugh at all y'all struggling to comprehend reality. The reality of tests conducted in different ambient conditions.

LOL

[yg60m]

This is not the only magazine to have recorded these times :
Sport Auto (french mag.) times : 0-62 mph : 5.4 ; 0-124 mph : 15.9 ; standing quarter and km : 13.3 and 23.5.
Le Moniteur Automobile (french and Belgium) : 0-60 : 5.1 ; 0-124 : 15.6 ; 1/4 mile : 13.2 ; standing km : 23.3 not really better than the stock 360 they tested.
NOw on the Autocar they tested it twice, they compare the GT3 RS and the Stradale 2 weeks ago :
GT3 RS Stradale
0-60 mph : 4.4 4.4
0-100 mhp: 9.7 9.7
standing qtr: 12.7 12.7
standing km: 22.8 22.6
Slightly better but not that impressive yet, the RS is heavier and less powerful.
They tested it on September in Italy too :
GT3 Stradale CSL
0-60 mph: 4.5 4.8 4.8
0-100 mph: 9.3 10.5 10.9
test on same wet track : 1:56.7 1:54.6 1:59.5
test on same dry track : 1:12.0 1:12.6 1:11.5
The CSL is faster and it has the same Pirelli Corsa tyres.

[HoboPie]

I don't like the test much myself, but it doesn't seem to really be all that outrageous. I mean the Nurburgring time is a little unexpected, but it is a direct competitor with a car like the GT3, but was never really tested at the ring.

At Hockenheim where it is probably more in its element it beats both of its immediate rivals, the GT3 and CSL. In fact it is closer to the Pagani Zonda at Hockenheim than the Zonda is to the CGT.

I think the conditions or car might not have been perfect and it seems a little odd that even on paper it is only competitive with the 360, but in track times it sits right with its rivals.

[levensnevel]

RC,

you took the words rigth out of my mouth

[Chingachgook]

I don' believe the Stradale is so heavy, and it's so slow. It's faster than the standard 360, it has more bhp, less weight and it's stripped down. The GT3 has a little advantage in acceleration because of the engine behind the rear wheels, so it has a lot more traction, but c'mon! I don' believe it at all! I don't believe those performances figures, there are too much differences between wvery test that the 0-60 and so on times are only useful to make an idea of how fast the car can go, but the essence of every car isn't in cold numbers.

[noosee]

I can't beleave that M3 was the fastest

[HoboPie]

I could see it happening at the Ring. Not all normal conditions come into play as much there. For I example I think confidence is more a factor there than at another circuit.

That said, I was under the impression the Stradale was perhaps not quite as quick turning in as the GT3 for example, but felt more planted in the corners, more confidence inspiring.

Maybe on a lot of corners at the ring that just translated into massive understeer, but it does seem a little odd. I guess we will have to wait for someone to translate some of it when the article is available.

I know someone at supercars.net did that with CGT supertest

[st-anger]

...well, before i want to talk about all that in detail i want to read the article by myself, i´ve only got these figures from a guy with close ties to "Sport Auto" but i´m sure the figures are correct...
about the credibility of that article or generally about "SA"..., well IMO "SA" is THE car mag, definitely. i know EVO and all the competitors too, but the “Supertest” figures from “SA” are all set up by one and the same driver, Horst v. Saurma and not from various editors.
and one thing is for sure, any one who knows HvS will tell you that he´s definitely THE man for the “Supertest”. He´s probably one of the most experienced drivers on the NS and clocked thousands of laps there and on many other tracks round the world. He´s also a pro race driver, e.g. every year he´s driving the 24h race on the NS, so he really knows how to drive a sportscar, so it couldn´t have been the driver, definitely NOT!
about the weight, well all what I can say is that “SA” has always been 99% right with their weight figures, I know that, because I know how heavy the Porsche modells are due to my work, and all the figures in the mag have been right so far when we compared them with our figures. As someone already pointed out, “SA” weight figures are DIN figures, the 1180kg stated by Ferrari might be the dry weight, i´ve heared that some times before that Ferrari´s quoting the dry weight in their specifications, so I don´t know if other mags like EVO actually really measure the weight of the car before they test it and if this´s really the DIN weight…
about that lap times, especially in Hocke, i´ve already posted that some weeks ago in “Porsche news” that i´m quite sure that the Ferrari´s ( 360CS & Enzo ) will be faster at Hockenheimring, but slower on the NS, and now we know it for sure…
so I believe in the “SA” figures and in HvS, but I ´ll wait for the mag to arrive to know it for sure…

[yg60m]

I beleive the "SA" figures too because it's a very serious mag and as i already post it, these figures have been recorded by other mags too, and they have the same opinion about the sound but very linear acceleration. In fact they were much impressed by the GT3 engine (except the sound).
For me, everything is coherent even the weight that was quoted at 1380 kg by "Le moniteur automobile".

[dylan99]

the other reviews of the car were great so I think they didn't tested it right or they did an other sort of review. it is still a great car if it is true