F430 0-60 in 3.5 sec 11.7 quarter mile
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,351
From: New York
Rep Power: 298
Originally posted by tdf360
Well, we don't know that yet. I'm eagerly awaiting the first test.
Gary
Well, we don't know that yet. I'm eagerly awaiting the first test.
Gary
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,321
From: Atlanta, GA
Rep Power: 73
Originally posted by Tpup
The kerb weight of the 430, listed on Ferrari's website, is 3,197...
Is the 3,500 the weight as tested??
Roy
The kerb weight of the 430, listed on Ferrari's website, is 3,197...
Is the 3,500 the weight as tested??
Roy
Think about 510hp on the 911 turbo:
You can run close to an 11.7 s 1/4 mile with an '01 911 turbo with chip/exhaust, and 3400lbs (curb weight).
Thread Starter
|
R.I.P. ben, lj
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 27
From: PA
Rep Power: 23
483hp and 3200lbs (curb weight) will pull an 11.7s 1/4 mile. That sounds about dead-on. Think back to what the newest gen GT2 runs. I wonder what the trap speed is...perhaps 120-122mph?
Trap speed was 121.1. Doesn't the Gallardo weigh about the same though?
Trap speed was 121.1. Doesn't the Gallardo weigh about the same though?
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 842
From: Park City, Utah
Rep Power: 55
Originally posted by rockitman
The clutch needed to be replaced after that 0-60 run.... :-)
The clutch needed to be replaced after that 0-60 run.... :-)
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,803
From: Atlanta, GA
Rep Power: 99
Originally posted by Soon2be993tt
there never has been proof of manufacturers sending rigged cars, it's always been speculation
there never has been proof of manufacturers sending rigged cars, it's always been speculation
The first magazine test of the Ford GT recorded a 0-60 time of around 3.3 sec. The magazine and Forums out there were falling all over themselves (death to the European sports cars, American technology at it's finest, etc) ...a 500 hp car doing 0-60 in the low threes. We later find out Ford wasn't exactly telling the truth about the "500" horsepower...it was more like 550...and that was at the wheels.
That's a "rigged" car in my opinion.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12,873
From: Walnut Creek, CA
Rep Power: 580
Originally posted by Dock (Atlanta)
It depends on what "rigged" means.
The first magazine test of the Ford GT recorded a 0-60 time of around 3.3 sec. The magazine and Forums out there were falling all over themselves (death to the European sports cars, American technology at it's finest, etc) ...a 500 hp car doing 0-60 in the low threes. We later find out Ford wasn't exactly telling the truth about the "500" horsepower...it was more like 550...and that was at the wheels.
That's a "rigged" car in my opinion.
It depends on what "rigged" means.
The first magazine test of the Ford GT recorded a 0-60 time of around 3.3 sec. The magazine and Forums out there were falling all over themselves (death to the European sports cars, American technology at it's finest, etc) ...a 500 hp car doing 0-60 in the low threes. We later find out Ford wasn't exactly telling the truth about the "500" horsepower...it was more like 550...and that was at the wheels.
That's a "rigged" car in my opinion.
but aren't all the GT's going to be setup exactly the same? I heard rumors that they changed pulleys' and such bet nothing was proven.
Old SS ls1 camaros were factory rated at 325 hp but were laying down 330ish to the wheels. Does that mean they were "rigged"
To me rigged is cranking up the boost beyond what the cars will be sold with, I don't think this was proven w/ the GT's
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,321
From: Atlanta, GA
Rep Power: 73
Originally posted by Godzirra
Trap speed was 121.1. Doesn't the Gallardo weigh about the same though?
Trap speed was 121.1. Doesn't the Gallardo weigh about the same though?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,803
From: Atlanta, GA
Rep Power: 99
Originally posted by Soon2be993tt
To me rigged is cranking up the boost beyond what the cars will be sold with, I don't think this was proven w/ the GT's
To me rigged is cranking up the boost beyond what the cars will be sold with, I don't think this was proven w/ the GT's
BTW, I think manufacturers should claim accurate power numbers.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,453
From: Chicago, Illinois
Rep Power: 80
Re: Re: F430 0-60 in 3.5 sec 11.7 quarter mile
Originally posted by ben, lj
i think most of us have concluded the F430 with 170 less hp can't run with an Enzo even if R&T says so. Wasn't this the "downhill" test that wasn't even a full 1/4 but was "calculated" on a portion of one anyway.
i think most of us have concluded the F430 with 170 less hp can't run with an Enzo even if R&T says so. Wasn't this the "downhill" test that wasn't even a full 1/4 but was "calculated" on a portion of one anyway.
The Enzo is still much faster. Its probley closer to 3.6-3.7 then 3.5 but its definently very fast espacially with launch control in race mode.
I want to see other tests, There where no down hill tests of the F430.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,166
From: here
Rep Power: 150
Re: Re: Re: F430 0-60 in 3.5 sec 11.7 quarter mile
Originally posted by Ferrarislave
They never said it did run with the Enzo. The Enzo is still much faster.
Its probley closer to 3.6-3.7 then 3.5 but its definently very fast espacially with launch control in race mode.
I want to see other tests, There where no down hill tests of the F430.
They never said it did run with the Enzo.
The Enzo is still much faster. Its probley closer to 3.6-3.7 then 3.5 but its definently very fast espacially with launch control in race mode.
I want to see other tests, There where no down hill tests of the F430.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 282
From: Los Altos Hills, CA
Rep Power: 0
Originally posted by rockitman
In the end does it really matter???? I would still take the 430 even if it was 2 seconds slower than the vette 0-60.
In the end does it really matter???? I would still take the 430 even if it was 2 seconds slower than the vette 0-60.
Gary