The best Motoring episode that featured F50 and Murci

Why did the Murci fall behind the F50 so badly..... when it is capable of meeting and beating it on track.

Well the Lambo almost certainly has more traction, but they are almost identical in a straightline and the while the Lambo probably brakes a little better the F50 is a lot lighter and more track oriented.

Why did the Murci fall behind the F50 so badly..... when it is capable of meeting and beating it on track.

 

It is utter nonsense to state the above considering the F50 specs out way better on paper than the Murcielago.

 

At best the two are equal on the road, but on the racetrack, forget it. The Gallardo is superior to the Murcielago on the track, and the F50 has roughly the power of a Gallardo, and 1000 lbs lighter than a Murcie...

 

Charles, pick your battles more wisely :mrgreen: :goodman:

BTW, this whole AWD superiority thing, is not as clear and dry as the AWD "fanboys" claim it is.

 

Traction is greater yes, but it's not traction given for free....there comes a price for it.

BTW,  this whole AWD superiority thing, is not as clear and dry as the AWD "fanboys" claim it is.  

 

Traction is greater yes, but it's not traction given for free....there comes a price for it.

 

It is???? * runs off and cries in the corner* What about the SE30???

BTW,  this whole AWD superiority thing, is not as clear and dry as the AWD "fanboys" claim it is.  

 

Traction is greater yes, but it's not traction given for free....there comes a price for it.

 

It is???? * runs off and cries in the corner* What about the SE30???

 

Now that's a sweet car. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

First off, the F50 in that episode is not STOCK, second off, if you listen to the translated version, the driver of the Murci had never even sat in a Murci prior to that, and he was under strict orders from the cars new owner to take it easy.

First off, the F50 in that episode is not STOCK, second off, if you listen to the translated version, the driver of the Murci had never even sat in a Murci prior to that, and he was under strict orders from the cars new owner to take it easy.

 

Whats on the F50???? Koenig parts??? Never seen the translated episodes

First off, the F50 in that episode is not STOCK, second off, if you listen to the translated version, the driver of the Murci had never even sat in a Murci prior to that, and he was under strict orders from the cars new owner to take it easy.

 

Whats on the F50???? Koenig parts??? Never seen the translated episodes

exhaust, headers, suspension, brakes, wheels. The Gt2 in that episode is modded also, as is the f40.

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

 

F50: 347 lb-ft

Gallardo: 363 lb-ft

F430: 350 lb-ft

 

Horsepower:

 

F50: 513

Gallardo: 500

F430: 483

 

As for the weights of these cars (some conservative guesses):

 

F50: < 3000 lbs

Gallardo: 3400 lbs

F430: 3300 lbs

 

Look, people don't give the f50 enough respect. It's overpriced if you want a car with that level of power, but IMHO, it's V12 power with V8 car handling.

 

In order for the Gallardo & Murcielago to outperform an F50 on the track, they would need to have vastly superior suspension technology.

 

Given the effort put into the F50 ten years ago, I doubt it.

 

People are accepting the F430 as a slightly superior performer to the pre '06 Gallardos, so why aren't you letting this one go??

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

 

F50: 347 lb-ft

Gallardo: 363 lb-ft

F430: 350 lb-ft

 

Horsepower:

 

F50: 513

Gallardo: 500

F430: 483

 

As for the weights of these cars (some conservative guesses):

 

F50:

Gallardo: 3400 lbs

F430: 3300 lbs

 

Look, people don't give the f50 enough respect. It's overpriced if you want a car with that level of power, but IMHO, it's V12 power with V8 car handling.

 

In order for the Gallardo & Murcielago to outperform an F50 on the track, they would need to have vastly superior suspension technology.

 

Given the effort put into the F50 ten years ago, I doubt it.

 

People are accepting the F430 as a slightly superior performer to the pre '06 Gallardos, so why aren't you letting this one go??

 

This is about the Murcielago and F50, why put in the Gallardo torque rating and not the Murcielago?

 

Have you ever driven the F50? It is EXTREMELY dissapointing. An F40 would kick the crap out of it all day long. Inmo, a good Murci would outrun an F50. On track, until the Murci cooked its brakes, I also think the Murci would dust the F50.

Ill also add, the 430 will also dust a F50 on track.

Allan..... YOU DROVE an F50 which cars HAVEN"T you gotten your hands on??? :?:

Ill also add, the 430 will also dust a F50 on track.

 

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

 

F50: 347 lb-ft

Gallardo: 363 lb-ft

F430: 350 lb-ft

 

Horsepower:

 

F50: 513

Gallardo: 500

F430: 483

 

As for the weights of these cars (some conservative guesses):

 

F50:

Gallardo: 3400 lbs

F430: 3300 lbs

 

Look, people don't give the f50 enough respect. It's overpriced if you want a car with that level of power, but IMHO, it's V12 power with V8 car handling.

 

In order for the Gallardo & Murcielago to outperform an F50 on the track, they would need to have vastly superior suspension technology.

 

Given the effort put into the F50 ten years ago, I doubt it.

 

People are accepting the F430 as a slightly superior performer to the pre '06 Gallardos, so why aren't you letting this one go??

 

 

You have no idea do you?The F50 has got to be the most disppointing Ferrari i have driven given all the hype about it.The F40 IMO is a much better car and faster than the F50 for half the price.Yes the F50 is light and that is about it.It handles well but nothing spectacular.Why do you suppose Ferrari chose not to race it as opposed to the F40 which saw a lot of track time and races.

F40 rocks,F50 sucks

So the F430 is a mini enzo. I keep wondering how Ferrari makes more than 100hp/ Litre wioout their engines blowing.

So the F430 is a mini enzo. I keep wondering how Ferrari makes more than 100hp/ Litre wioout their engines blowing.

 

*points to the honda s2000* it's a freakin' honda!

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

 

F50: 347 lb-ft

Gallardo: 363 lb-ft

F430: 350 lb-ft

 

Horsepower:

 

F50: 513

Gallardo: 500

F430: 483

 

As for the weights of these cars (some conservative guesses):

 

F50: < 3000 lbs

Gallardo: 3400 lbs

F430: 3300 lbs

 

Look, people don't give the f50 enough respect. It's overpriced if you want a car with that level of power, but IMHO, it's V12 power with V8 car handling.

 

In order for the Gallardo & Murcielago to outperform an F50 on the track, they would need to have vastly superior suspension technology.

 

Given the effort put into the F50 ten years ago, I doubt it.

 

People are accepting the F430 as a slightly superior performer to the pre '06 Gallardos, so why aren't you letting this one go??

 

 

You have no idea do you?The F50 has got to be the most disppointing Ferrari i have driven given all the hype about it.The F40 IMO is a much better car and faster than the F50 for half the price.Yes the F50 is light and that is about it.It handles well but nothing spectacular.Why do you suppose Ferrari chose not to race it as opposed to the F40 which saw a lot of track time and races.

F40 rocks,F50 sucks

 

First off, I have not driven the F50.

 

Second, I would have figured that the factory would have made a superior handling car to the F40. Maybe not by a lot, but at least similar.

 

If it weren't for the specs I wouldn't bother to really get into this. Perhaps then the car is heavier than it actually is claimed to be, and maybe the power/torque ratings are inflated as well. But even if the car was 3200 lbs, and had 20% less power than claimed, and had an F40 suspension, it should still rock. I *doubt* the turn in of an F50 is worse than a modern awd sports car. I could be wrong.

 

As for the "never raced" comment, I don't know. Your comments make sense, but I do know for a fact that the F50 GTR-1 was created (3 or 4 exist), and cancelled most likely because the car was significantly quicker than the 333 SP around Fiorano. The car weighed around 2000 lbs and had ~700 hp.

 

I agree the car shouldn't cost $600k. But if that's the reason for the hate, then it's unwarranted. Let's judge cars without considering price tags please. :mrgreen:

Going strictly by hp & weight, the F50 is in a superior class to the Murcielago, stock for stock.

 

 

It has very little torque though

 

F50: 347 lb-ft

Gallardo: 363 lb-ft

F430: 350 lb-ft

 

Horsepower:

 

F50: 513

Gallardo: 500

F430: 483

 

As for the weights of these cars (some conservative guesses):

 

F50:

Gallardo: 3400 lbs

F430: 3300 lbs

 

Look, people don't give the f50 enough respect. It's overpriced if you want a car with that level of power, but IMHO, it's V12 power with V8 car handling.

 

In order for the Gallardo & Murcielago to outperform an F50 on the track, they would need to have vastly superior suspension technology.

 

Given the effort put into the F50 ten years ago, I doubt it.

 

People are accepting the F430 as a slightly superior performer to the pre '06 Gallardos, so why aren't you letting this one go??

 

 

You have no idea do you?The F50 has got to be the most disppointing Ferrari i have driven given all the hype about it.The F40 IMO is a much better car and faster than the F50 for half the price.Yes the F50 is light and that is about it.It handles well but nothing spectacular.Why do you suppose Ferrari chose not to race it as opposed to the F40 which saw a lot of track time and races.

F40 rocks,F50 sucks

 

First off, I have not driven the F50.

 

Second, I would have figured that the factory would have made a superior handling car to the F40. Maybe not by a lot, but at least similar.

 

If it weren't for the specs I wouldn't bother to really get into this. Perhaps then the car is heavier than it actually is claimed to be, and maybe the power/torque ratings are inflated as well. But even if the car was 3200 lbs, and had 20% less power than claimed, and had an F40 suspension, it should still rock. I *doubt* the turn in of an F50 is worse than a modern awd sports car. I could be wrong.

 

As for the "never raced" comment, I don't know. Your comments make sense, but I do know for a fact that the F50 GTR-1 was created (3 or 4 exist), and cancelled most likely because the car was significantly quicker than the 333 SP around Fiorano. The car weighed around 2000 lbs and had ~700 hp.

 

I agree the car shouldn't cost $600k. But if that's the reason for the hate, then it's unwarranted. Let's judge cars without considering price tags please. :mrgreen:

 

No price tags mentioned at all. I have driven an F50, my experience is not really on the track but the street. On the street, it SUCKS. No torque, no power unless you are in exactly the right gear, at a very high rpm. Also, i think it looks like ass. Not to mention, Ferrari diehards were even dissapointed with the F50.