Do you guys know about the Track-Challenge website?

You can compare the GT2(pre 2004) & CGT's nurburgring & hockenheim times among other data points. I predict that a lot of you will be surprised by the numbers.

Note that the weather was not good for the CGT test.

Greg A

the track-challenge site is temperamental, so try again later if the page doesn't load. Also, there *are* popups.

 

Thanks for the info. I thought you were joking regarding the .396. But, I realize your joke was regarding my saying it was like .400. Anyway, thank you.

Lou

 

Yeah, Buddy, it's got downforce!

At 300 KPH, it adds 58% of the car's weight in extra stick from the aerodynamics. That's an extra 800 kg pushing down on the tires.

The car could probably add 10 or 20 MPH more top speed if it were trimmed for low drag, but would be "really interesting" to drive trying to get there. No amateurs need apply.

This is a STREET car with a top speed over 200 MPH!

 

The drag coefficient is only relevant per-se if you are concerned
with either fuel economy or with obtaining higher speed. As has
been stated, you may be more concerned with down-force and
aerodynamically enhanced stability at speed, so you can design
to generate more downforce. Downforce and aerodynamic drag
are inextricably related. In fact, downforce *is* aerodynamic
drag, redirected downward on the chassis by wings, diffusers etc.
It is sure that the GT could be even faster with less drag. It
would almost surely not be as safe though.
Joe