For Ken Henderson.....

Found this.....Car And Driver Ferrari 430.

you know that this car is setup for this, or something else is wrong, the car has 483 hp, about 3300 lbs...F50 has 520 HP, and about 2750 lbs......and its slower?

Did you read the part where it tells you, half way through the straight it starts to go downhill?

The Enzo records a 0-60 of 3.15 on the Fiorano downhilll stretch by comparison to its more conservative 3.3 in real life.

Not according to Top Gear, they couldnt get below 4 sec. Other have been 3.6, 3.8 etc.

Allan,

 

I see you've been busy. So have I, which is why I've been MIA the last few days. In any event, I was aware of the of the portion of the article you scanned when I made my original prediction that the F430 would outperform the Murci in everything except terminal velocity. It still doesn't change my opinions on this matter.

 

If you'll read my posts carefully, you'll note I said you had a bias against F-cars that was not supported by the public record. You keep accusing Ferrari of cheating in its tests, and I've never knowingly cited Ferrari performance tests of any of its cars. I inadvertently cited manufacturer's performance data when I referred to Evo's "The Knowledge", which I subsequently deleted when you called the matter to my attention. All of the tests I've cited have been conducted by mainstream magazines, and it is those various tests of various F-cars that you have chosen to ignore unless, in your opinion, they support your position.

 

For instance, you ignore C/D's, R & T's and Motor Trend's tests of the Enzo, all of which were well under 4-seconds in 0-60 and continue to cite the fact that Top Gear, historically one of the worst testers of cars relative to other magazines, could not break 4-seconds. The information I cited shows, without a doubt IMO, that various Ferraris tested by various magazines in various conditions have demonstrated the Ferrari's performance claims have been met time and again by independent testers. This, apparently, is not good enough for you because you continue to accuse Ferrari of cheating. Even when you toss out the best and worst independent tests of the same vehicle, it supports the fact that these cars match factory performance claims.

 

As I said in the other thread, this reminds me so much of the same discussions I have had on SupraForums, 6speedonline, a couple of Busa forums and other performance car forums. Flat Earth Society members just refuse to believe anything that runs against their preconceived notions about various cars. Until vids were posted, there was NO WAY a Supra could beat a built Busa from a roll, or a brand new Murci or a ten-second Viper at the same event; the same way I couldn't beat my brother in a 996TT when I was rolling in an E55 (S/Ced).

 

I believe you know the launch is everything in a 0-60 sprint. I believe you also know that launching cars with small displacement motors with torque peaking high in the power band are notoriously difficult to launch consistently, so you would expect some variance in performance data solely because of this fact. The Modenas have only 275 lb-ft as I noted and still Motor Trend went 3.92. Oh, I forgot. You categorically dismissed that. I understand such categorical denials must take place when facts get in the way. I also understand the disappointment, because I share in it, when larger displacement (with more cylinders to boot) AWD Lambos can't keep up with the certain F-cars. Last, I understand all this is even more difficult to take when the relevant F-car is the entry-level Ferrari. So let's skip to the other end of the spectrum. You tell me what top speed test of the Enzo was Ferrari cheating in.....the one where the car went 211 mph, 217.5 mph or 221 mph? Inquiring minds want to know.

Ok Kenny, here we go again... From Motor Trend, driven by Factory Test driver, Dario Bennuzzi:

 

"He indicated he had finished, and already the next magazine representative was attaching his test gear. After I had downloaded the data, I answered the group of eager Ferrari representatives who had gathered around. "First run 3.8; second run 3.5, and third run, 3.3 seconds," referring to the 0-60 mph times of the car, "but he only reached 97.18 mph." That was all he did. The first three acceleration runs of the day (he was improving) and just four minutes of data. One run was on a slight uphill, one downhill. One run started in a corner exit and finished when he applied brakes for the next corner. I scanned the data to see if I had missed anything after the acceleration, but no--no maximum braking, and no threshold cornering. He did say he had used the Enzo's launch program ("Race" on, "ASR" off) which only allows a driver-selected-rpm clutch-drop from the F1-style gear box--no fancy Formula 1 racing traction control. We'd have to be happy with what we had recorded. In fact, we were in a better position than one of the other magazine's representatives whose luggage and test gear were lost en route to Italy."

 

Again, who will get the most from a car, independent test driver that has spent a few hours with car, or factory test driver on Downhill course?

Oh and lets not forget this, same Motor Trend:

 

"The test numbers you see have been shared among several magazines and with Ferrari SpA. And, because no two sets of data recorded that day were alike, the results will reflect these variances. Our data has been subjected to the same SAE corrections as all of our published acceleration data: 1-foot roll-out, 60°F, sea-level, 29.92 barometric pressure and 0% humidity. Because our best run ended between 97 and 98 mph, we extrapolated the remaining data to 100 mph. The quarter-mile time, braking distance, skid pad, and slalom figures are pure estimates based on our knowledge of the car and our limited experience within it."

 

Did you see how they couldnt even do 0-100mph? Thats because the straight is not long enough, the same straight used for the 360.

Ahhh and heres our good friends from Car and Driver:

 

"Those Tricky Numbers

 

 

The Enzo’s major straight-line numbers—0 to 60 mph in a flabbergasting 3.3 seconds, a quarter-mile of 11.2 at 136 mph—aren’t as ironclad as we’d like. The acceleration runs on Fiorano’s straightaway were slightly downhill and too short to get a true quarter-mile, so our 1320-foot time is a mathematical plot from the last solid data point at 120 mph and 954 feet.

 

Nor did we apply our usual equalizing corrections for temperature, humidity, and barometric pressure, figuring they would only make wobbly numbers more uncertain. So, our numbers reflect what that Enzo did on that day at that track, with no warranties expressed or implied. —AR"

 

 

I can keep going for you Ken. Thanks for Playing!

A quick glance around brings this set of numbers from a Motor Trend test of a 2004 Challange Stradale against a GT3, from Motor Trend.

 

Acceleration, sec

0-30 1.6 1.4

0-40 2.2 2.0

0-50 3.4 2.9

0-60 4.3 3.9

0-70 5.5 4.9

0-80 6.9 6.3

0-90 8.2 7.6

0-100 10.1 9.1

 

1/4 mile, sec @ mph 12.53 @ 114.14

Anyways, we can argue till we are blue in the face, fact of the matter remains,

 

Diablo will own any Ferrari barring an Enzo, F40 and F50. In straightline speed, the DIablo will also run neck and neck with the F40 and F50. Winning in some cases, losing in some.

 

Murcielago-ditto above.

 

Gallardo will ruin the 360, and any other NON special edition Ferrari, IE Enzo, F40 or F50.

Allan,

 

You're missing my point. The Enzo tests I cited were with private cars and occurred here is the U.S., not at Fiorano. R & T drove the Enzo for 1500 miles over a week when testing it. I'm not citing any Fiorano tests except for the 430. I'll save my comments about various Lambos owning various F-cars for later.

Motor Trends recent top speed test of the Enzo also recorded 0-60 in 3.3, the Swap Shop privateer Enzo. The privateer Enzo loaned to R&T also recorded 3.30. Thats dual verification. Autoweek acquired 3.15 on Fiorano with the Ferrari test car.

Well those were tests i looked up quickly, and ill check again. BUT, its a moot point, as this discussion is not about the ENZO being fastest, its about the 430, WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED BY A PRIVATEER. You have never seen me deny that the Enzo is fastest.

 

So again, ill repeat:

 

Lambo owns all Ferraris, barring the Enzo, F40 and F50.

 

And if you are trying to compare the 360's 3.92sec 0-60 time that fell out of the sky in Motor Trend to Lambos, that will be tough to get into the Diablo 6.0s- 0-60mph time of 3.4 sec, and Murci's 3.5 sec, recorded by Motor Trend also. Not to mention the Lambos running in the 11's in the 1/4 in the 120's, not a pathetic 113mph.

 

Lastly, id like to know how much time MIT and Ken have spent behind the wheel of a 360? If youd have spent 1/10th the time i have, youd know that the only way a 360 will realisticly do 0-60 in under 4 seconds, is if you threw it off a cliff.