SRT on BBC Top Gear

[Autostream]

Again with the HP/L crap.

I only brought it up again because Guibo was begging me to talk about it concerning the F1/S2k.
I think we're past that and would like to stay on topic. Remember?

The Viper on the Top Gear track agaisnt the world's best?

Everyone was so sure it would be in the Zonda territory before, but now everyone's so quiet

 

[Snakester]

We are only quiet about the Top Gear numbers because we don't know them yet.

In their testing the Lambo Murcielago beat the Zonda and the Koenigsegg CCS8, which both have a MUCH higher power to weight ratio.

Driven well, the SRT-10 Viper should run as quickly around their track as the Murcielago. But if the Stig is unfamiliar with the Viper and drives it (relatively)poorly then who knows.

 

[Autostream]

i cant believe you are saying that if the Viper cant beat the Murci, its because the Stig couldnt drive it well enough. I think that's making excuses.
Thats the only job the Stig has; to get the best times out of a car on their track. He practices all day long and they take his best time. From what I hear the Carrera GT is one of the hardest cars on their list to drive fast and he extracted the most remarkable time out of it.

True, the Murci beat the Zonda by out handling it (faster through the corners). Yet vice versa, by Top Gear's own insistence, the FordGT beat the FerrariCS by out powering it in the straights. So it can work both ways.

But from the comments here, its obvious the general consensus is that the Viper is NOT going to hold its own and thus the Stig's driving skills will be the simplistic whipping boy.

 

[Guibo]

The reason Audi's AWD were banned was because the only unfair advantage AWD offered was that they dont eat tires as fast as 2wd. Quattro could never get the single best lap times. But managing their tires better did the difference.
Hardly an advantage for the street or a single lap.

What makes you think the Stig gives each car only a single lap? It's quite obvious by the Carrera GT episode that cars go out for more than one lap. It'll take more than one just to get acquainted with a particular car's handling, power, and braking characteristics. And by then, what exactly is the advantage of having tires that have gone off?

When Porsche makes racing versions out of its cars, they dont use their AWD system; all RWD (GT,GT2,GT3)

That's because in many racing series nowadays, AWD (if it's still permitted) usually results in some kind of ballast penalty. In the case of the Murcielago GT, they ditched the AWD system because it was not allowed under FIA/ACO regulations. In any event, Porsche likes to take part in endurance racing (not the 2-hour blast of a F1 race), so AWD's mechanical complexity is seen as hinderance.
That's not to say that there aren't any AWD race cars around today. There are. And there's not a crapload of difference between them in terms of lap times:
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=4&article_id=8430&page_number=6
(Notice that all of these cars make ~500-525 hp, and the Audi is the heaviest of them.)

 

[Snakester]

i cant believe you are saying that if the Viper cant beat the Murci, its because the Stig couldnt drive it well enough. I think that's making excuses.

No, it could also be that the Top Gear track doesn't favor the Viper, or that the weather conditions are not as good. but most likely if he got a track time that was slower than the C6 Corvette (with comparable handling, but inferior power and braking) then it would likely be the inexperience of the driver with the Viper's power delivery.

As a point of reference you can look at Motor Trend's track test of the Murcielago and the SRT-10 Viper.
The Mucielago was a bit quicker to 60MPH, and almost the same in the 1/4 mile, but the Viper was quicker to 100MPH, and had much better braking (setting a MT record), and better handling in several tests compared to the Murcielago.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/scenes/112_0306_spdtest/index.html

That's a test done with the same drivers, on the same day, and the same track. It's not proof that the Viper can beat the Murcielago around a racetrack. But it says to me that the Viper can possibly beat the Murci, depending on the track and the driver.

And seeing that the Stig most likely races European cars, if the track times are particularly slow, the numbers would be due to him and not the car, which has already proven itself in MANY other controlled racetrack tests.

We already know that the SRT-10 Viper is up against all odds to prove itself with Clarkson's unmistakable bias against all American performance cars. So if there is any redemption in this test it will be by the Stig. But great numbers are not guaranteed because we don't know what his familiarity is with the Viper, and it's unique power delivery and handling characteristics.

 

[onerareviper]

i cant believe you are saying that if the Viper cant beat the Murci, its because the Stig couldnt drive it well enough. I think that's making excuses.

How can you blame us? We saw what they did to the C6. Smoking the tires in a drag race , locking the brakes approaching the turns , getting the car VERY sideways threw half the turns , etc.... All these things slow times down DRASTICALLY. So if this is the best the guy can do (which we know it isn't), we have no faith. The question is, HOW CAN YOU TAKE THIS ONE TEST SO SERIOUSLY? Since you believe everything you see on this program, how about putting your money where your mouth is.... Stock NSX vs. Stock C6 in a drag race. I'll even give you a head start.... You should win easily, right? LOL!

 

[Autostream]

No, i said the Stig practices all day with a car and then his fastest time becomes the official time.

'Unique power delivery',lol All i know is I saw him toss the Koeniggseggeggg around like it was a sunfire. And that car has the kind of hp and torque that the SRT-10 has wet dreams about. He is the best driver I have ever seen. He 'stayed in it' in the Zonda with the tail completely out and even got the RX-8, with a paltry 237hp, to tie the 333hp M3. He is F-ing good, there is no question about it.

The Stig didnt lock the C6's wheels up, the inferior chevy abs system did. It was a messy lap because of the Vettes suspension. He also had a messy lap with the cumbersome CL65 but messy doesnt matter. One way around a bend may look slow when its actually the fastest. Case in point, the RX8, he purposely understeered around hammerhead and another corner because he said it was the fastest technique for the car- and damn did it pay off!

Wh the heck are people disappointed with the C6's time, it was freakin quick! I watched him squeeze every last millisecond out of it. Its right there in 911tt territory, it beat the tvr, exige, and m3 csl and other stuff costing way more. You should be sending the Stig roses and easy listening cd's.

p.s. lets start a new thread: how an NSX can beat a C6. i'd be genuinely interested in learning more about that. I have to admit i wasnt expecting that, but not surprised by the same token. Those *** boys are very clever- just look at the freekin Evo,lol

 

[Guibo]

'Unique power delivery',lol All i know is I saw him toss the Koeniggseggeggg around like it was a sunfire. And that car has the kind of hp and torque that the SRT-10 has wet dreams about.

Right, but the Koenigsegg only weighs 2810 lbs. The Viper weighs 580 lbs more. Surely, the laws of physics should tell us that a weight disparity of more than a 1/4 ton should make itself apparent. Koeniggsegg is also mid-engined, making it that much quicker to respond to steering input. Its polar moment of inertia is markedly different, as is its weight distribution. There's more weight over the driven wheels. Michelin Pilot Sport 2's, with their softer outer edge for grip, will also be a factor. Throw some runflats on the Koenigsegg, and let's see how well it does. Now, with this in mind, how similar do you think these cars will respond to changes in throttle input. On top of that, the Viper's peak torque comes some 800 rpm sooner.
BTW, the torque between the two isn't all that much different. If you look at the dyno charts on most SRT-10's here, most are in the 550-560 ft/lb range. I've seen one with as much as 572. Squarely in the neighborhood of the Koenigsegg's 553 official rating. The Viper doesn't dream it, it's already living it.

You should be sending the Stig roses and easy listening cd's.

LOL. That's the most offensive part about the whole show!

p.s. lets start a new thread: how an NSX can beat a C6. i'd be genuinely interested in learning more about that.

What's there to say? Hammond was driving (we already know he's too weak to operate the controls). Old C5 Corvette is every bit as quick (in most cases, quicker to the quarter mile than the NSX. And yes, when driven on the same day by the same driver (well, the TopGear "test" got half of that right). Please, don't tell me you took that part of the show seriously too.

 

[Vic]

Lets see a show of hands- Who here actually has driven their car (regardless of its HP/L ratio) on a real road course? This magazine bench racing is making me sick! (heh heh)

 

[GR8_ASP]

Aye (hand in the air).

 

[SylvanSRT]

here also

 

[DT04R]

Best post on the topic so far!

I've noticed much of the "HP-per-liter crowd" are carping about cars from Japan (and elsewhere) that aren't/weren't sold here, and bench racing cars they can't/don't own. My usual retort is how about _your_ car vs _my_ car on track - not some magazine, TV, word-of-mouth-3rd-party-my-brother-in-laws-dentists comparison.

BTW, I think we should rate intelligence based on some kind of ratio as well Maybe, an IQ-to-height(inches) calculation? "Wow, that guy has a IQ-to-Height ratio of 2.2, he must be a genius or really short..."

I've driven (some many times): Sebring, CMP, Summit Point, Road ATL and Roebling Road.

Lets see a show of hands- Who here actually has driven their car (regardless of its HP/L ratio) on a real road course? This magazine bench racing is making me sick! (heh heh)

 

[GARY J]

This piece of [******] comes on the viper forum talking all of this BS about numbers. Then when he was wrong about the displacement of the Mercedes he just skips right over that. Hahaha. To be so damn caught up in the numbers, it's ironic that he made such a blatant mistake about the displacement of the Mercedes. Since he goes on and on about the HP/L arguement, I think we should make an equally big deal out of his 6.5L mistake. Hahaha what a fool!

 

[Kai SRT10]

Lets see a show of hands- Who here actually has driven their car (regardless of its HP/L ratio) on a real road course? This magazine bench racing is making me sick! (heh heh)

Yes.

 

[Autostream]

I am not gonna give my opinion about what happened in the drag race because its really irelavent.
And because there is a bigger issue. The thing is, I dont own a vette, viper, tvr, nsx, or any of the cars that posted a better lap than the C6. I am totally impartial here and just defending honest journalism to a bunch of viper owners who had their minds made up before top gear ever rolled film.

Curiously, I went to the NSX forum to see what they had to say about the NSX/C6 thing. I was expecting something like, 'didnt expect anything less' and 'technology with inherit the earth'. But surprisingly, they all (well most of them) agreed that 'their pride and joy' 'shouldn't' have won that drag race in their minds.

Here is a direct quote from an NSX-lovin nsxprime.com member. I took notice of this post because reading it struck a chord of familiarity....

I was a long time member of the Corvette forum and dont let all the whining on that thread fool you. The Vette forum is one of the most extremely biased, anti "foreign" sites in existance. Thats a case of being able to dish it out, but not take it....

...The C6 and 997 will open a lead for those cars over the NSX. The drag race was almost undoubtedly the result of wheelspin (didnt he even say "a bit of wheelspin off the line"???)

With so little torque, the NSX is easy to launch. On a good launch and with good drivers, there's no way the NSX is passing a C6 (the C6 is fairly close to the current Z06 in a straight line).

On the Vette forum, though, there is a culture of victimization. EVERY publication is biased, EVERY publication uses bad drivers. ANY time the Vette is not named the greatest car in existance, there's a riot. The NSX "*****" the 911 is "overpriced garbage" the Viper is "still a Dodge", the M3 is "a timebomb and not even a real sports car". It's always something.

One thing cool about NSX Prime is that the NSX is represented pretty honestly (good AND bad).

 

[Snakester]

The key is that you are not "totally impartial" because you have not driven these cars. You are totally biased because you do not have a proper point of reference, having never driven ANY of these cars. And you happily buy into their journalistic bias, acknowleging them as expert racers (which they may be) and equating that to unbiased expert journalists (which they most certainly are NOT).

Certainly we are partial to the Viper (and Corvette) because we have actually owned/raced these cars, and in many cases driven several of the competing cars as well.

It is Clarkson's animosity and inexperience with American cars that makes him so biased. Having owned and raced the Corvette, comments like it being hard to shift are clearly off the mark.

And it's pretty clear that the dragrace outcome was due to either the guy leaving on the A/C and traction control, or disengaging the TC and spinning very badly.
These are signs of inexperience with the car, and not any failing with the car's capability, or performance.

Their bias is not admitting that this was the case.

 

[Autostream]

Well since you brought it up, I'd say it lost because they granny shift cars normally. And the C6 gear change would be especially slow considering how notchy it was when he changed up at 54:35 during the drag race in the aug 1 show. It took him exactly 0.6 second to switch gears as it got stuck in neutral for half that time. The NSX's box by contrast is much smoother and therefore, faster.
0.6 seconds is an eternity for a shift in a drag race. If for example the NSX could shift in 0.3 seconds, that could be a whole second the vette would lose in a drag race. Though we dont know what the NSX shifting times are and I dont know what gear the Vette traps in.
But now the test is starting to look realistic.
And if the a/c was on in the vette, it was on in the other cars as well, they're not stupid.
There was smoke from the tires on the vette and porsche which means tires were spinning. Leading one to believe the trac computers were all disabled.
The NSX is the easiest to launch of that group. A fact that has never been disputed. It's mid engine, and low torque figures are optimal for launches. And you can see in the video, it jumped everything and clearly was a full car length ahead of the C6 and the TVR at 2 seconds into the race.
I am gonna find out from the NSX'ers what a normal shift time is to see if my hypothesis works.
I know Car&Driver beats the piss out of tranny's to get those amazing low figures which are then adjusted for things like atmosphere since the cars never race at the same time.
It's nice to see a 'real world' race with a real road and identical weather and normal drivers who arent out to break tranny's and clutches just to get amazing numbers.

 

[GR8_ASP]

Autostream, you are like the Energizer Bunny. You keep going and going and ...

First A/C. Most tracks tell you NOT to use a/c as it puts down water for the next competitor. Not a good thing. But, most cars with modern day electronics (I know that includes Vipers, vettes, etc) have a/c cutoff at WOT. The use of a/c would make no difference in that case. If they did have a/c on then I would say the were stupid, even if it helped one car in some manner.

Second you state the NSX with low torque is optimum for launch. I think you better rethink that. You could say that when traction is poor the NSX because of ... But if traction is good I want the power and torque.

Shifting. Simple physics. The lower the torque the engine produces the lighter duty and easier to shift the transmission. Anyone that takes .6 seconds to shift a T-56 transmission is a WIMP! The only difference is the strength applied to the shift lever.

So, for reference, was Oreca using real world drivers in a real world race when they drove Vipers with essentially the same T-56 transmission. How come they were able to shift more quickly with the same gear? Somehow I feel like that kind of talk and excuse is for wimps.

 

[Snakester]

It could have been a defective Corvette, with a sticky gear shifter, But Corvettes are not hard to shift at all, and the C6 has a new short-throw shifter that's actually easier to shift than earlier models.

If it wasn't broken, then he is just a slow shifter with 0.6 second gaps in shifting. 0.3 is average for any decent car, and driver.

But I do agree that if he shifted really slowly, (after spinning the tires) that he could have easily lost to a better driver in an NSX.

 

[Guibo]

Autostream:
The Daily Telegraph drove that car. Not an identical model, but in fact the very same exact car. They noted:
"...despite a shortened travel, the six-speed shift is not lightning quick, particularly between fourth and fifth, but it is fingertip light."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml;sessionid=01KA2EIN0NV2NQFIQMGSM54AVCBQWJVC?xml=/motoring/2004/07/30/emfcor31.xml&sSheet=/motoring/2004/07/30/ixmot.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=2594

Fingertip light? That guy Hammond looked like he needed two hands to operate the thing. Not sure, but I doubt a drag race is going to see a Corvette getting into a 4-5 shift, as 4th is good for 149 mph, way beyond the Vette's 1/4 mile trap speed.

Anyway, look at how quick the C6 shifts in comparison to other cars. It is every bit as quick as the Elise and Ford GT, two non-paddleshift cars that have some of the slickest gearboxes in the business. It appears to give up nothing in shift quickness to even the e-Gear equipped Gallardo.

You must be registered for see images

I have a couple of head to head, same day, same driver tests between the NSX and C5 Corvette. In practically all of them, the NSX does get a better launch (with a quicker 0-60). Just like in the TopGear video. But the Corvette comes on strong, beating the NSX to the quarter mile. You can even look at the single worst test ever for a 405-hp Z06, which was tested against an NSX (R&T, 3/02).

NSX / Z06
0-20: 1.0 / 1.3
0-60: 5.0 / 4.7
0-100: 12.0 / 10.8
1/4 mile: 13.4 @ 105.9 / 13.1 @ 111.0

Quite obviously, the NSX beats the Z06 off the line. But by 60 and 100, it's all over.
R&T tested a C6 convertible @ 600' of elevation and in 89-degree weather. It recorded:
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 11.2
1/4: 13.2 @ 107.9
Already, a comfortable edge over any NSX they've ever tested. The C6 coupe is only likely to be quicker, given its aerodynamic edge over the convertible.

Some other figures for you to think about, from C&D:

NSX Zanardi, C&D '99
0-60: 4.8
0-100: 11.8
1/4 mile: 13.2 @ 106
0-150: 34.7


You can compare that to some times as recorded for the lightweight NSX-R and C5 Commemorative Edition.
NSX-R, Autocar '04
0-60: 4.91
0-100: 11.41
0-147.24 (1 mile): 34.20

'97 NSX 3.2, Sport Auto Magazine
0-100kmh: 5.5
0-160: 13.7
0-200: 22.0
100-200: 16.5 seconds

'04 NSX-R, Sport Auto Magazine
0-100: 4.9
0-160: 11.2
0-200: 18.2
100-200: 13.3 (as expected, the NSX-R is quite a bit quicker even after the initial launch)

'03 C5 Comm. Ed., Sport Auto Magazine
0-100: 5.2
0-160: 11.3
0-200: 17.9
100-200: 12.7 (the C5, with 50 less bhp than the C6 is quicker once it gets going)


The fastest ever "standard" NSX on record was tested by C&D and recorded:
NSX, C&D '98
0-60: 4.5
0-100: 10.6
0-150: 28.2
1/4: 12.9 @ 110

No NSX has ever duplicated those results. Not really even close. Not even the lightweight NSX-R. Yet, look at C&D's time for their first test of the C6:
0-60: 4.3
0-100: 9.9
0-150: 26.3 (flat out rips the Zanardi and NSX-R a whole new [******]; not even close!)
1/4: 12.7 @ 113

And Motor Trend's first test of the C6:
0-60: 4.3
0-100: 10.2
1/4: 12.7 @ 112.3

Now, do you really think a standard NSX stands a chance against a C6 with equal, professional test drivers at the wheel? And do you really think the C6 would lose a "distant third", as in the video? Think about it: Why does TopGear have an acceleration "test" with 4 different cars driven by 4 different drivers, with the feature car being driven by someone who's already admitted he's too weak to operate the controls? Do you know of any other reputable magazine or legitimate source of real automotive journalism that uses different drivers for different cars? Which one is that?

 

[Autostream]

I agree with the arms of schwarzenegger, one could beat the nsx especially if they didnt care about the clutch or the syncros. Heck, if it was me and it wasnt my car, i might be able to beat motor trends numbers if i had long enough to practice- and didnt lift during shifting and just 'stabed' the clutch while forcing the upshift as hard and fast as i could.

The nsx seems easier to drag race and more consistent.

 

[Guibo]

That jibberish might be relevant...if mags like C&D do clutchless upshifts. But they don't. They even explicitly stated that in their test of the Z06:
(read the last sentence)
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=16&article_id=3325&page_number=1

Even if they did abuse the clutch (which they don't) for the C5/C6, there's no reason to think they wouldn't do the same for the NSX. Point of fact remains: the C5 is every bit as fast (or faster) to the quarter mile than the NSX, even when it loses precious tenths of a second off the line. In order for you to take TopGear seriously (supporting your claim that they practice unbiased automotive journalism and not merely entertainment), you'd have to believe that the C6 is noticeably slower than the C5 in order to place a "lonely third" behind the NSX. Well, which is it? C6 is slower than C5, or TopGear is journalism rather than entertainment? Can't have both.

 

[radta7]

And we have a winner...

Guibo by TKO!!!! Congrats. Nice job Guibo!

 

[Guibo]

Thanks. I'll be very surprised if this is over...

 

[Autostream]

It should be, as we are in agreement. I know the mags do lift-throttle upshifts with clutch, they always have.
My point is the vettes slow gearchange, compared to the NSX's, hampers its time when you arent driving it like you stole it.

 

[GR8_ASP]

My average shift time while cruising is faster than his "racing" shifts (and yes I have many measured shifts while making measurements during the "bog" issue). A non-power shift done quickly, but not aggressively, should be around .5 seconds. Aggressive should get down to .2 to .3 seconds. To have an "expert" take .6 seconds and then complain about shift efforts is just pure balderdash.

And to my knowledge almost all magazine shifts are closed throttle. This is just a bunch of excuses for a pre-disposed journalist to tout his perspective.

 

[onerareviper]

It should be, as we are in agreement. I know the mags do lift-throttle upshifts with clutch, they always have.
My point is the vettes slow gearchange, compared to the NSX's, hampers its time when you arent driving it like you stole it.

Have you ever driven a C6 or NSX? By your comments, I would say a resounding NO. I have driven both, and the C6 is not hard to shift in the least. As a matter of fact, it has a shorter throw than the NSX. Both are very easy cars to shift, but since the C6 has shorter throws it can actually be shifted quicker, not slower. Most C6 owners are women and old men , so super-human strength is not neeeded . The C6 is a piece of cake to drive. You have no freak'in clue.

 

[Autostream]

The C6's WORST feature is its transmission. And it's always been the Vette's achilles heel. The mags have constantly complained about it in the past. The C5's and the C4's (as far back as i can remember reading) tranny's have always been described as 'hard to shift' and 'chunky'.
The NSX's tranny, on the other hand, has always been noted as 'one of the worlds best'
Then you have the audacity to compare the two!
What's next? How the H2 you drove got great gas mileage? Or how the Evo has a wonderfully luxurious interior?
Gimme a break (i can roll my eyes too)

 

[onerareviper]

The C6's WORST feature is its transmission. And it's always been the Vette's achilles heel. The mags have constantly complained about it in the past. The C5's and the C4's (as far back as i can remember reading) tranny's have always been described as 'hard to shift' and 'chunky'.
The NSX's tranny, on the other hand, has always been noted as 'one of the worlds best'
Then you have the audacity to compare the two!
What's next? How the H2 you drove got great gas mileage? Or how the Evo has a wonderfully luxurious interior?
Gimme a break (i can roll my eyes too)

Drive them, then get back to me....

I agree the the NSX has a better 'FEEL', and may not miss a gear ass often. Of course, the NSX transmission is prone to detonate if you put substantial torque to the real wheels. My memory is going, but I recall 350 RWHP the maximum you can put to this box, if that. Hmmmm.... Maybe that's why it is 'Easier' to shift. Lighter/weaker parts. But keep in mind, 'EASIER' and 'FASTER' are completely different, IMO. As far as 'speed' to shift to the next gear, the C6 wins, although it may take a bit more force. Let's face it, the magazine editors are a punch of pansies. I'm used to driving 60's - 70's muscle cars or heavily modified cars with beefed up trannies. These cars are hard to shift, not a stock C6. But if you prefer a car that can be shifted with a flick of your pinky, then yes, the C6 may not be for you. But I figured the people on Top Gear would have no problem shifting the car, especially since they have experience with high HP cars. 10's of thousands of people don't have a problem speed shifting the Vette's at the dragstrip. Maybe they all have super-human strength

 

[Autostream]

I guess it's all relative.....Alright, lets get back to the title...

You must be registered for see images