How much faster is each car than the other?

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by autoracer1, Dec 21, 2002.

  1. autoracer1

    autoracer1 Rallyx postponed :wtc: Next one May 10.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ferrari F2002 F1 car

    Any CART car

    Audi R8

    Group B monster like Lancia Delta S4

    Comparing handling, acceleration and braking.

    Ive always been curious. I watched that Mercedes promotional video of the c230k vs s55 amg vs clk gtr vs f1 car ( i think thats car lineup) and watched the f1 car absolutely slaughter all of them out of the last turn.. so it got me thinking.
     
  2. Guido The Penguin

    Guido The Penguin Hi, I'm here for the gang bang.

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2001
    Messages:
    16,792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    p'cola, FL
    Ferrari F2002 > any CART car > R8 > Group B Lancia


    In pure handling/acceleration/braking, the F-1 car beats all, especially the 2002 model Ferrari.

    The F-1 car plain out-handles the CART cars.

    The Audi R8 does produce alot of grip, so it could probably hang in a twisty road with the CART cars. That could be a very interesting battle.


    But all would out-perform the Group B Lancia, in lateral grip and overall handling especially.
     
  3. autoracer1

    autoracer1 Rallyx postponed :wtc: Next one May 10.

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,638
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know about the Lancia :p Just because it was said that acceleration at the time rivaled the cart cars.

    Thanks for clearing that up though.

    Do you think that in an endurance race (for example a petit le mans), the R8 would take the cake because it is more reliable and built to last longer races, negating any speed deficit?
     
  4. elysium

    elysium Guest

    Formula 1 cars and CART cars are not built for endurance racing. For example, after a 2 hour F1 race, it is not unusual for an engine to have cracks in the engine block.

    So yeah, an R8 probably would win, but such a competition would never happen.

    However, if an F1 car's engine was detuned to something like 60% power output, perhaps it could last a 24-hour race. If it lasted, it would beat the R8 no doubt. Formula 1 cars are inherently superior in handling, so engine/transmission reliability would really be the only problems for an endurance race.

    But again, that would never happen. Although it would definitely be interesting to see. :bigthumb:
     
  5. vudoodoodoo

    vudoodoodoo Guest

    F1 cars > *
     
  6. elysium

    elysium Guest

    indeed. :big grin:
     
  7. Buck-O

    Buck-O Guest

    Montreal Canada

    CART - Fastest Lap - Cristiano da Matta 1:18.959
    F1 - Fastest Lap - Juan Pablo Montoya 1:15.960

    3 secoends aint a bad gap, considering that a Champ car is roughly 1/3 the cost of an F1 car.

    Hers some ALMS vs. CART results.

    Laguna Seca
    Audi R8 - Fastest Qualifying Lap 2002 - 1:15.765 @ 106.339
    CART - Fastest Lap - Helio Castroneves - 1:07.722 @ 118.969

    Mid-Ohio
    ALMS - 1:14.169
    CART - 1:05.347

    Miami
    ALMS - 1:03.873
    CART - 1:01.264

    Let the numbers do the talking.
     
  8. elysium

    elysium Guest

    Correction:
    The fastest F1 qualifying lap at Montreal by Montoya was 1:12.836.

    This then puts the F1-to-CART gap to over 6 seconds, twice the gap previously mentioned.

    I'd also like to say that a 6-second gap is quite large for races that average such high speeds
    (i.e. > 100mph).

    Also, the amount of engineering necessary to increase this gap is exponentially increasing every year. This is mainly due to the fact that most of the F1-to-CART difference is due to superior handling. The amount of suspension, aerodynamic (downforce), and brake (CCM) development is nothing short of insane.

    Another reason F1 cars are so expensive is the engine. CART does use small (2.65L) engines, but they have the luxury of using turbochargers to produce their horsepower. Everyone knows that its easy to make huge horsepower numbers with a turbocharger and still be reliable as long as your bottom-end is strong. On the street, a perfect example is the Nissan Skyline. They also have 2.6L engines, and everyone knows you can get 700hp out of an RB26... And on top of that, the engine will still be reasonably reliable. So this illustrates the luxury CART has in creating horsepower. Furthermore, CART uses V8's in comparison with the RB26's Inline-6. More cylinders allows even further efficiency (obviously). Anyways, my point is that F1 cars do not have the luxury of using turbochargers today like they did in the past. Instead they have to rev REALLY high (up to 19,000RPM) like motorcycles to make their horsepower. Yes, they have 3.0L V-10 engines, which are larger than CART's, but CART engines do not have to go anywhere near 19,000RPM. Judging from the sound of CART engines, I wouldn't expect them to ever go above 11,000RPM. So this means F1 engines have to deal with extreme stress throughout their powertrain and drivetrain, which obviously means exotic alloys, bushings, seals, and which in turn means a lot of money.

    So in any case, I believe that 6-second difference should not be overlooked. :bigthumb:

    BTW, this is not meant to be a flame or anything to you Buck-O :big grin: I am just passionate about these things, and I like people to phear teh F1. :bowdown:

    Oh, BTW, even the lowest funded team (Minardi) and the worst F1 driver (position-based worst; Alex Yoong), was still faster than da Matta. Yoong posted a 1.17:347 as his fastest qualifying lap. :big grin:

    EDIT: Also, the F1 teams have to do all that engineering themselves to create their own chassis and usually their own engine. CART teams' 'engineering' only consists of set-up changes. Their chassis are bought from Reynard or Lola, and their engines are bought from Ford, Toyota, or Honda. The teams don't have to spend any money on R&D. This is actually the biggest reason why CART cars cost 'less'. It would be interesting to see how much money Lola/Reynard/Ford/Toyota/Honda each spend in R&D, then combine one chassis manufacturer and one engine manufacturer, and then compare that to the R&D budget of a F1 team... I wouldn't be surprised if the F1 team's R&D costed less or equal money, even though they produce a faster car.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 23, 2002
  9. Guido The Penguin

    Guido The Penguin Hi, I'm here for the gang bang.

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2001
    Messages:
    16,792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    p'cola, FL
    Lets not forget that a Judd powered car won this past 24 Hours at Daytona.

    A Judd engine is basically an F-1 engine with little bit less revs. Its the same 3.0l V-10 as what F-1 uses.


    But another thing to remember, The engine in the R-8 generates something like 600 ft/lbs of torque. An F-1 style engine doesn't produce near that much torque, meaning it would only be good on wide open, straight courses.
     
  10. elysium

    elysium Guest

    At the same time, Formula 1 cars on average weigh 33% percent less, and therefore require proportionately less torque to deliver the same performance. Also, Formula 1 cars rev much faster as well. And we all know that hosepower is merely the rate at which torque is delivered.

    Audi R8 - 900kg
    Formula 1 - 600kg
     
  11. ae86andkp61

    ae86andkp61 Guest

    Actually, CART engines rev to 14,000, maybe even 15,000 rpm....AND they do it with a "normal" valvetrain. Unlike the pneumatic valve actuation that is allowed in Formula One, CART cars have (had?) to use camshaft lobes and valve springs...pretty impressive, huh? :)

    Still, technology in Formula One> *

    Engineers working for aerospace, the military, NASA, I bet they all cry when they think of F1....:rofl:
     
  12. elysium

    elysium Guest

    Very interesting, I was unaware of that regarding the valvetrain and 14-15K redline. Where did you see/hear about the 14-15K redline?

    Hehe, yeah its quite amazing what can be done these days with cars. I think NASA/Military are mainly slowed down by their beaurocratic(sp?) processes. You'd think that after having first landed on the moon over 30 years ago, that we'd have some sort of damn base or something there... Sigh. Maybe they know something we don't know? :dunno:
     
  13. ae86andkp61

    ae86andkp61 Guest

    http://www.hondaracing.com/pit/engine.html

    There is also a similar article on Toyota's webpage...follow the link to Motorsports, then to CART....and maybe also on CART's webpage, too...but maybe not anymore with the rule changes they have been going through.
     
  14. elysium

    elysium Guest

    Cool, thanks for the link... Upon skimming that Honda site, I also found another cost-advantage that CART has to create horsepower. They use methanol:

    "Methanol burns hotter than gasoline. Hence the reason its blue flame is invisible in sunlight. Methanol also has a higher resistance to destructive detonation, an advantage in a high-compression, turbocharged engine."

    Of course it also says that using methanol gives them worse fuel economy, but it is a cost-advantage and easier-to-make-horsepower-advantage in engine design none-the-less.

    Cheaters! :p

    J/K. I love CART and watch all the non-oval races. But I still think they have it much easier than F1 teams. :big grin: F1 uses normal unleaded 'petrol'. (Although probably pretty high octane to resist detonation as well, but obviously not to the extent of methanol)
     
  15. Buck-O

    Buck-O Guest

    Well, all things considered, Methanol is ALOT cheaper, and alot more readily avliable then the 140+ octane gas that F1 uses. So it probibly cuts cost in more ways then one.
    I think it will be interesting to see what happens next year when CART moves to the N/A engine spec. Interesting as in, what will they now start doing to the chassis, and suspension to make them brake and corner faster. And see hwo much the line between F1 and CART gets blurred. Becuase in top speed the CART cars are considerably faster. Its the overall speed that the F1 cars beat them out on, with the sorter braking distances, higher cornering abilities, and lighter weight, with snappier acceleration. Plus you hvae to take into account things like traction control, launch control, and gear shifts messured in milliseconeds.
    But no matter how much the line does get blurred, with the new CART rules, i still think F1 will be faster for one SIMPLE reason alone...no solid rear axel. Which is what the CART teams are forced to use.
    Its amazing how much of a difference an active differential can make. Granted there is more to it then that, but i think you would see a couple seconeds quicker a lap if you where to place an active diff on a CART machine.

    Just my 2 ¢
     
  16. Guido The Penguin

    Guido The Penguin Hi, I'm here for the gang bang.

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2001
    Messages:
    16,792
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    p'cola, FL
    Actually the highest rating for F-1 fuel is 102 Octane.....
     
  17. BoogieKnight

    BoogieKnight Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Messages:
    24,196
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Wacko, Tejas
    I'll venture out on some guessing here.

    Top Speed (Ignoring Top Fuel Dragsters and Bonneville Type "cars"): CART > *
    The highest average speed ever recorded in a closed track was set by Gil de Ferran in 1999 (?) at Fontana at an average speed of 241 mph during qualifying with top speeds in the 250mph range. Note: This was when CART cars had almost 1000 hp. The next year, the boost was significantly dropped.
    The fastest 500 mile race ever at any track was just raced at Fontana this past year. Guess who set the record? Not Nascar. Not IRL. CART did and it did it with only 800hp cars.

    If you are talking about road/street courses, F1 >>>>> * The biggest difference between F1 and CART is the ability of F1 cars to maintain it's speed in the corners. Not only is it lighter and Aerodynamics way better. The cars themselves are also more narrow than a CART car and F1 is benefiting from a tire war. Plus, CART cars are giving up 400lbs to F1 cars. So, in tighter tracks like Monaco or even Montreal, F1 cars absolutely would kill CART cars. I would love to a comparison of F1 and CART cars at huge road courses like Road America or Monza, where the cars actually have the leg room to show off their horsepower.

    If you've notice, that in the past few years the horsepower in CART cars have decreased nearly 25% (especially next year with the much lower reved, spec Ford/Cosworth 2.65L Turbo V8s), but times haven't really decreased thanks to continuing tire development and improved aerodynamics. BTW, the rev limit of a CART car is around 16000-17000 rpms. But next year it will be cut down to 12000 rpms :( for longevity. :( Fortunately, boost will also be increased.
     
  18. BoogieKnight

    BoogieKnight Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Messages:
    24,196
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Wacko, Tejas

Share This Page