What is the Nurburgring record for Enzo?

[bmagni]

Nardo? I cant see how CGT can lap nardo faster.....cant.

i wasnt talkin bout nardo, i was talkin bout the tv show wherethey tested the cars at nardo and then went to another track

[SnakeBitten]

I dont see why everyone is so against the CGT beating the Enzo...If yoiu look at the acceleration between the two its only until really high speed the Enzo exerts its power advantage...On any track not made up of multiple long straightaways, I fully believe a CGT can and would beat the Enzo...Its lighter and has more downforce.....

And for the guy saying the Murcilago cant outbrake the Enzo because it doesnt have carbon carbon brakes...Heres another one that will give you a heart attack....The Viper SRT10 also outbrakes the Enzo according to recent MT and C&D tests....It has set the production car stopping distance...Not bad for just comparatively normal brakes.....the Enzo is impressive but it aint unbeatable...

[HoboPie]

It really depends on the test, sometimes the Enzo hits 100mph nearly 1/2 a second quicker other times it's 1 tenth of a second.(Autocar 0-100-0 and motortrend)

The Enzo actually is a very tiny bit lighter than the Carrera GT so that isn't an advantage for the Carrera GT. More downforce is again doubtful. The figures released by both Ferrari and Porsche indicate the Enzo is running more.(no idea where to find that info currently)

I don't know if anyone said a Murcielago couldn't outbrake and Enzo because of Carbon brakes it is more a matter of weight and brake technology. Steel brakes have the exact same stopping power for a single run. Both can lock the tires so it has to do with the brake application technology.

Anyway, admittedly there are a few cars out there that can stick with the Enzo for braking. At least from slower speeds. The Murcielago from 60mph takes 122ft according to car and driver the Enzo took 109ft. But from 80mph the Lambo took 213ft the Enzo only took 188ft.(188ft is R&T record from the distance even after the CGT was tested)

C&D tested the Enzo at 151ft the CGT at 147ft and the Murcielago at 155ft from 70mph. How is a car that in other tests loses ground past this point(Murcielago) supposed to gain on the Enzo from higher speeds considering aerodynamics and greatest of all weight. It doesn't make sense that the CGT would pull away when it is so comparable and that the Murcielago would magically start braking better when it isn't so comparable.

edit: I've been searching tests. That is only test ever where a Murcielago beat the Enzo in braking from any distance and also the only test that indicated the CGT had any major advantage over the Enzo.

[mindgam3]

yeah i'd agree that the murci wouldnt be able to brake as well as either the CGT or Enzo. It has less powerful brakes and not as good aerodynamics and dynamics overall.

At the end of the day, in a real life situation say on a track day the faster car between the CGT and the Enzo would be the one with the better driver. Apart from ultimate top speed the differences between them are so minimal

[sentra_dude]

Maybe we will see some times from owners...that would be nice!

[espen]

Whats the big deal, the CGT is faster on regular tracks and Walther Wøhl spent weeks driving it at the Ring - whereas the Enzo has barely been to the Ring... do you seriously believe the Enzo will all of a sudden turn out to be superior at the one track the CGT will seriously excell at?

[Max Power]

MotorTrend put these two cars together....what became of it?

[SnakeBitten]

Originally Posted by Max Power MotorTrend put these two cars together....what became of it?

The Enzo topped out at 211mph...the CGT at 201mph and the FGT at 200mph but still acceleratiing....I dont recall lap times if any but I would suspect the order would stay the same if laps were run...

[dons5]

the acceleration figures between the cgt and Enzo are soo similair until much highers speeds???? i think not, jus to 60mph the enzo does that in 3.1 - 3.3 and the quarter in 11 flat possibly under 11. Those times are better then even the Mac f1. Enzo is way more technologically advanced also its i think the only car ever tested that couldnt lap faster with tc off. And i heard from top gear the cgt is extremely hard on the limit the back end breaks away alot

[HoboPie]

In the motortrend they did a figure eight test which though nice is not a track test. The CGT beat the Enzo by about a second there, but then the Stradale got a better time than the Enzo and that isn't even a close comparison.

The Enzo in that test at least proved to be the hairer of the cars. It had the objective stats to stay with the CGT, but through the slalom and figure eight at least, it was too snappy. The Enzo was apparently too neutral handling with essentially no understeer. On a track a skilled driver can deal with that and even use it to his advantage, but with over 650 hp it was too much in the slalom.

[SnakeBitten]

Originally Posted by dons5 the acceleration figures between the cgt and Enzo are soo similair until much highers speeds???? i think not, jus to 60mph the enzo does that in 3.1 - 3.3 and the quarter in 11 flat possibly under 11. Those times are better then even the Mac f1. Enzo is way more technologically advanced also its i think the only car ever tested that couldnt lap faster with tc off. And i heard from top gear the cgt is extremely hard on the limit the back end breaks away alot

You're not serious are you? Faster than the Mac F1? Blasphemy I tell ya. I do believe with todays tire tech the Mac F1 would be easily a 10 sec car...It traps the 1/4 at 138mph for godsakes...Mush faster then any current Hyperexotic....Enzo may beat it on a track because of better tech and tires etc but if you upgrade the Mc F1 with todays brakes and rubber I dont think it would be a contest...Im not even talking bout the LM jsut the reg Mac F1...

Also the acceleration numbers between the Enzo and CGT are close in the 1/4 mile...the Enzo is 11.0 at 133.9 mph to the CGT 11.1 at 133.4 mph....What more proof do you need that these two are virtually tied in the quarter mile acceleration...Its only till extreme speeds where the Enzo exerts it hp advantage over the CGT as I stated before...Put them both on a track with a few straightaways and you cant see that the Enzo could lose???Not many tracks have straightaways that will allow most cars to get up to 190-200 where the Enzo would have the advantage..Both comming off a corner onto a long straight will be dead even or who ever is in front will likely remain there till next corner imho....Its not like the Enzo is gonna be blasting by the CGT like its a Civic.....I think that depending on track layout either on can beat the other...I my mind they are virtually tied and it will come down to track and/or driver.....

[mindgam3]

Originally Posted by SnakeBitten Originally Posted by dons5 the acceleration figures between the cgt and Enzo are soo similair until much highers speeds???? i think not, jus to 60mph the enzo does that in 3.1 - 3.3 and the quarter in 11 flat possibly under 11. Those times are better then even the Mac f1. Enzo is way more technologically advanced also its i think the only car ever tested that couldnt lap faster with tc off. And i heard from top gear the cgt is extremely hard on the limit the back end breaks away alot You're not serious are you? Faster than the Mac F1? Blasphemy I tell ya. I do believe with todays tire tech the Mac F1 would be easily a 10 sec car...It traps the 1/4 at 138mph for godsakes...Mush faster then any current Hyperexotic....Enzo may beat it on a track because of better tech and tires etc but if you upgrade the Mc F1 with todays brakes and rubber I dont think it would be a contest...Im not even talking bout the LM jsut the reg Mac F1... Also the acceleration numbers between the Enzo and CGT are close in the 1/4 mile...the Enzo is 11.0 at 133.9 mph to the CGT 11.1 at 133.4 mph....What more proof do you need that these two are virtually tied in the quarter mile acceleration...Its only till extreme speeds where the Enzo exerts it hp advantage over the CGT as I stated before...Put them both on a track with a few straightaways and you cant see that the Enzo could lose???Not many tracks have straightaways that will allow most cars to get up to 190-200 where the Enzo would have the advantage..Both comming off a corner onto a long straight will be dead even or who ever is in front will likely remain there till next corner imho....Its not like the Enzo is gonna be blasting by the CGT like its a Civic.....I think that depending on track layout either on can beat the other...I my mind they are virtually tied and it will come down to track and/or driver.....

agreed, which is what i said a few posts ago

So your saying the CGT is not technologically advanced?? I would say they're almost even on that front, you tell me one more technologically advanced component on the enzo that there isnt an equal comparison for on the CGT.

[numerouno]

Does CGT have an integrated control sytem?
Enzo Control (was a first in the world): Fully integrated electronic control system - watching over everything from engine and gearbox to suspension, brakes and traction control, and even the adaptive aerodynamics (that generate high downforce with low drag)

(If it does, I've not heard of it)

[dons5]

Easy the tc in the cgt cant come close to the Enzo's, and according to both Motor trend and Road and Track the Enzo beats Mac F1 on 0-60 0-100 and quarter mile easily. Road and Track got the Enzo to 60 in 3.28 compared to 3.4 and quarter in 11.1 at 133 and 11.6 at 125 for mac.

"its quarter-mile time and speed pulverize the mighty McLaren F1's numbers of 11.6 sec. traveling at a mere 125 mph past the quarter-mile mark. Wow!"

And in Motortrend herta got the mid corner speeds as follows Ford gt 185mph cgt 186 and Enzo 195, 9 mph what a difference, and at the end of the straight it was Ford gt 200.1mph, cgt 201.5 geez only 1.4 mph difference between cgt and ford gt not good porsche not good. Enzo 211 thats a huuuge difference in racing. but its weird cause herta was saying the enzo was hard at the limit with the rear end coming away but the cgt had understeer, but in Road and Track during the Enzo's 73 mph slalom time they said the Enzo had mild understeer and that the rear stayed planted and on top gear they said the cgt was hard at its limit and the rear end snapped loose alot and tiff on 5th gear said the enzo was easier to bring to the limit then most supercars, i guess in the end it all depends on too many things like driver, tire condition/temp/pressure, road surface, altitude, air temp and too many things. Noone will never know whats faster until Schumi tests all of them in a row on the same day 8) ,

and by the way to all u mac F1 fans that think the mac f1 hits 240 mph, reality check it doesnt, it hits 231, the 240 was either

1. the lifted the rev limit to 7800 instead of i think 7500 ( i think they said this was done in 97)

or

2. an earlier version of the mac when not in production yet, it was not the same as the one that eventually went into production

i heard more stories about "2" but just today i read the one about the rev limiter

[dons5]

oh ya and in the end Ferrari dominates F1 the pinnacle of allll motorsports, where porsche dont even have the guts to come in, the closest they can do is being the sponsor for the Speed Channel "Track map guide" or whatever