CGT video
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,166
From: here
Rep Power: 150
CGT video
check this out, particularly at the end at how fast it just leaves the audi which is already flying:
http://www.audipassion.com/services/...erte_hd_fr.mpg
btw, from rennteam today:
W8MM
Pro
Reged: Aug 08 2003
Posts: 340
Loc: Cincinnati, OH, USA USA enthusiast media test Carrera GT in Italy
#27022 - Thu Mar 18 2004 08:57 PM Edit Reply Quote
I just had a delightful conversation with a writer for an American car magazine who had been testing the Carrera GT in Italy. This was apparently a USA media event held at a small, tight race track in Italy. The writer said that it was not conducive to high speeds and was "about as tight as a kart track" (maybe some hyperbole here).
At least one other writer with whom I am very familiar was in attendance from a competing magazine.
There were two test cars; a red one and a silver one. They were prototypes with sequence number "0000" on the dashboard. This sounds like the same two cars used in the European tests with which we are already familiar.
The following quick numbers were recited:
0-60 MPH = 3.5 seconds
0-100 MPH = 6.8 seconds
0-130 MPH = 10.8 seconds
1/4 mile = 12.2 seconds @ 132 MPH
70-0 MPH Braking = 145 feet - this result was the shortest braking distance that the editor could remember ever recording.
Max Lateral g = 1.1 g measured in average mode with VBOX GPS vehicle dynamics measurement system. (unknown averaging period)
The other writer measured 1.25 g using the instantaneous mode on the VBOX and looking for local data peaks.
The Enzo was tested some time ago using the average mode on the VBOX and came out at 1.03 g.
Tidbits:
As to fluid leak on Tim Allen's CGT; there are no external oil lines that connect the engine to the oil tank that is housed in the transmission casting. There are cast, or machined, oil passages in the two castings that are joined by gaskets at the mating surfaces where the engine and transmission castings are joined.
The carbon fiber body and chassis supplier is the same as for the Enzo (we already knew that). The CGT carbon fiber parts are produced at a rate of 2 per day until the Enzo production is completed. After that, the rate goes up to 2.7 per day. This starts in the Fall.
The 1/4 mile times are "conservative', and limited by available traction. All accelleration runs were conducted with the traction control "ON". Without TC engaged, the launches were described as "buck, smoke 'em, or stall". The difficulty comes from the very light rotating inertia of the engine. It is super quick to rev, but there is very little rotary inertia stored in the engine/flywheel/clutch to "dump" into the tires on launch. Makes it tough to perfect quick times.
The clutch doesn't really slip any appreciable amount. The take up distance in the clutch pedal is only about one inch. Motoring away from rest is easy on the flat by letting out the clutch pedal at idle, and then gently adding some gas. The editor said it was comfortable, but he might be nervous if he had to pull out of a parking spot going up-hill. He allowed that more practice time would certainly help.
The ceramic clutch seemed extraordiarily durable -- "took a sh** load of abuse". The writer for the competing magazine (known for abusing clutches to obtain stellar 0-60 times) asked the Porsche techs if they planned to replace the clutch after the testing. They replied, "No. ... Why?"
The lower control arms of the suspension on the CGT are made of steel because alloy isn't strong enough due to their unusual length. The "longness" contributes to better (lower) camber changes during jounce or rebound of the suspension. The control arms have been given an air-foil shape to help them intrude less on the aerodynamics of the rear under-body diffusers through which they pass.
The review is scheduled to print in May with a June, 2004 cover date.
That's about all I can remember from the conversation.
Cheers,
--------------------
Mike
http://www.audipassion.com/services/...erte_hd_fr.mpg
btw, from rennteam today:
W8MM
Pro
Reged: Aug 08 2003
Posts: 340
Loc: Cincinnati, OH, USA USA enthusiast media test Carrera GT in Italy
#27022 - Thu Mar 18 2004 08:57 PM Edit Reply Quote
I just had a delightful conversation with a writer for an American car magazine who had been testing the Carrera GT in Italy. This was apparently a USA media event held at a small, tight race track in Italy. The writer said that it was not conducive to high speeds and was "about as tight as a kart track" (maybe some hyperbole here).
At least one other writer with whom I am very familiar was in attendance from a competing magazine.
There were two test cars; a red one and a silver one. They were prototypes with sequence number "0000" on the dashboard. This sounds like the same two cars used in the European tests with which we are already familiar.
The following quick numbers were recited:
0-60 MPH = 3.5 seconds
0-100 MPH = 6.8 seconds
0-130 MPH = 10.8 seconds
1/4 mile = 12.2 seconds @ 132 MPH
70-0 MPH Braking = 145 feet - this result was the shortest braking distance that the editor could remember ever recording.
Max Lateral g = 1.1 g measured in average mode with VBOX GPS vehicle dynamics measurement system. (unknown averaging period)
The other writer measured 1.25 g using the instantaneous mode on the VBOX and looking for local data peaks.
The Enzo was tested some time ago using the average mode on the VBOX and came out at 1.03 g.
Tidbits:
As to fluid leak on Tim Allen's CGT; there are no external oil lines that connect the engine to the oil tank that is housed in the transmission casting. There are cast, or machined, oil passages in the two castings that are joined by gaskets at the mating surfaces where the engine and transmission castings are joined.
The carbon fiber body and chassis supplier is the same as for the Enzo (we already knew that). The CGT carbon fiber parts are produced at a rate of 2 per day until the Enzo production is completed. After that, the rate goes up to 2.7 per day. This starts in the Fall.
The 1/4 mile times are "conservative', and limited by available traction. All accelleration runs were conducted with the traction control "ON". Without TC engaged, the launches were described as "buck, smoke 'em, or stall". The difficulty comes from the very light rotating inertia of the engine. It is super quick to rev, but there is very little rotary inertia stored in the engine/flywheel/clutch to "dump" into the tires on launch. Makes it tough to perfect quick times.
The clutch doesn't really slip any appreciable amount. The take up distance in the clutch pedal is only about one inch. Motoring away from rest is easy on the flat by letting out the clutch pedal at idle, and then gently adding some gas. The editor said it was comfortable, but he might be nervous if he had to pull out of a parking spot going up-hill. He allowed that more practice time would certainly help.
The ceramic clutch seemed extraordiarily durable -- "took a sh** load of abuse". The writer for the competing magazine (known for abusing clutches to obtain stellar 0-60 times) asked the Porsche techs if they planned to replace the clutch after the testing. They replied, "No. ... Why?"
The lower control arms of the suspension on the CGT are made of steel because alloy isn't strong enough due to their unusual length. The "longness" contributes to better (lower) camber changes during jounce or rebound of the suspension. The control arms have been given an air-foil shape to help them intrude less on the aerodynamics of the rear under-body diffusers through which they pass.
The review is scheduled to print in May with a June, 2004 cover date.
That's about all I can remember from the conversation.
Cheers,
--------------------
Mike
Honored Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 334
From: Cincinnati, USA
Rep Power: 36
Originally posted by rmrmd1956
12.2sec doesn't add up. My stage 4 takes .35 sec to go from 130 to 132mph and the CGT is in 4th gear til 143mph. 11.1 at 132 seems more believable
12.2sec doesn't add up. My stage 4 takes .35 sec to go from 130 to 132mph and the CGT is in 4th gear til 143mph. 11.1 at 132 seems more believable
Maybe the writer mis-quoted his notes to me.
Maybe I'll call him back when I get back from vacation.
Cheers,
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
