Oh yea... This article claims the CGT gets 11.75sec 1/4mile...

tom91722 got 11.75sec@126mph 1/4mile with his GT2, with only an EVO Airbox and GIAC/Sharkey/EVO flash (whatever)...

So Porsche's top model, the Carrera GT, gets the same 1/4mile as a GT2 with a couple of mods?? That's funny... Someone needs to learn how to drive.

Check out the rest of the details:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...threadid=28908

 

enough said.


A very well known motoring journalist said this to me today infact:

"You dont believe everything you read in car magazines?"

 

Has anyone seen or can post dyno graphs from any of these 3 cars?

 

Ah,

Even though I agree these times are BS they are listed in KPH not MPH.

 

Does the CGT need to shift at 60mph? Because 100kmh is 62.5 mph, so maybe thats the difference also. All magazines will not get the same results, different cars, differnt days, different conditions. The Murci has also been clocked faster 0-60 in 3.5 sec by Motor Trend, and these guys got a lower mph than anyone in the 1/4.

 

Are you saying that the real world 0 - 60 time for the CGT is arund 4.0 seconds. Cool if you are. Just curious and it would seem a big disappointment if it was not sub 4.

 

I do know what you are saying and I do agree about some car magazines... But these times are obviously very high... We are talking about the top supercars of today... There is no way that a slightly modded GT2 can get the same times as Porsche's top model/ supercar... Oh and I didn't know a Murci is significantly faster than a CGT to 62.5mph?? There would be something wrong in with that situation... Don't you agree??

 

I dont agree at all, Murci has allwheel drive. Can launch allot harder.

 

Are you seriously trying to say that a Murci can out accelerate a CGT??

 

Im saying you obviously dont have too much experience with cars. Im saying a Cgt will have a VERY difficult time off the line against a well launched Murci. The CGT is certainly faster, but dead stop, 0-100mph, very tough time.

 

You obviously don't have much experience with cars. Go to a Lambo forum or something... Trying to mash on the CGT like that. You can't compare a Murci to a CGT... 0-100mph a CGT will eat a Murci alive! Look at the 0-200kph times you posted (about 0-124mph)... The Murci got 12.84sec. and the CGT got 11.44sec. Pretty big difference I think.

 

He's not bashing the CGT, but off the line without a good driver the Murcielago will most likely win, because of the aid of all wheel drive. The Murcielago is definetly a bargan in comparison with the CGT and Enzo. I would go with an Enzo first and probley a Murcielago over a CGT, Im just not 100% fond of the CGT looks and its very raw handling.

 

from rennlist for a CGT:

This data is from August of last year(Not done @ Devek).

.97 SAE correction factor

Run 1: 535.9 hp @ 8500 rpm & 377.1 ft-lbs @ 6000 rpm
Run 2: 529.2 hp @ 8250 rpm & 384.2 ft-lbs @ 6000 rpm

Car had roughly 4000 miles.

Greg A

 

Yes, and you obviously have no idea what you are talking about in any regard. No doubt that a CGT will beat a Murci to 200kmh. But as i said, OFF THE LINE, dead stop, Murci launched properly will be a headache for the CGT until they get into those speeds.

 

Stephen,

I have seen and have a copy of the runs from which I posted info on Rennlist. See rmrmd1956's post above mine.

I am not going to post these copies here as they do not belong to me and I don't have the owner's permission.

What is it you would like to know?

Greg A