This will be good http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cul...cars-will-be-our-performance-car-of-the-year/
Last edited:
Top 8 Supercars selected for Road and Track
- Thread starter Para81
- Start date
I think it's funny that motortrend doesn't have a gt350r in their annual competition.
Then again, they said the 1le vs gt pp was a numbers only segment, no word on daily driver luxary.
And they said the track toy zl1 vs gt500 was about so much more than numbers; comfort, daily drivability, etc.
When the mustang has numbers, it's about comfort/balance.
When the mustang has balance/comfort, it's about numbers.
When the mustang is a phenomenal drivers car, it's about not being invited.
Motortrend is deep in gm's pocket.
Then again, they said the 1le vs gt pp was a numbers only segment, no word on daily driver luxary.
And they said the track toy zl1 vs gt500 was about so much more than numbers; comfort, daily drivability, etc.
When the mustang has numbers, it's about comfort/balance.
When the mustang has balance/comfort, it's about numbers.
When the mustang is a phenomenal drivers car, it's about not being invited.
Motortrend is deep in gm's pocket.
GT350 wasn't available for the Motor Trend Best Driver's car comp.
We were in LA for last week and decided to rent a nice car while we were there. We rented an SL550. They didn't have the AMG version of it, so settled for the regular model. Still, I was SUPER impressed with this car. 4.7L TT. Little lag and felt like it had plenty of pull, regardless of the RPMs. I can only imagine what the AMG version drove like. It's got to be SICK! My wife was a little disappointed by the ride, because it was a little stiff, but I had to remind her that it was still a sports car.
I find it hard to believe.
Ford's had the cars out and running since June/July, did they film it in May?
Up here at 4600ft, with da's often approaching 6500ft, these stock turbo v8 Germans are literally walking 1-2 cars on bolt on na Coyotes. Altitude and turbos is just a great approach.
I hope ford goes tt on the next gt500. About the time a tune adds 100whp, is when the sc or nothing guys will eat humble pie and start to like turbos. When they are factory reliable as well, it will definitely improve the unreliable stereotype that turbo kit Cobras had as well.
I'd love an ecoboost v8 mill. 750hp from 5.0L would be fine by me. We've been making 750whp on 91 octane with turbo terminator 4.6's since 2005. Time for ford to toss some twins at the v8 cobra's. The sc's are awesome and always will be, but obviously the Germans have moved on, time for Ford and Chevy to do so as well. Dodge can come in 7 years late with 1000hp I guess too sometime in 2022 with a new hellcat.
The Mercedes wins it allegedly.
You can google something like "amg gt motortrend best drivers car" for the scoop.
You can google something like "amg gt motortrend best drivers car" for the scoop.
but this is Road and Track...
Correct. Sorry I had derailed the thread mentioning motor trends similar article as well. I was disrespectful of the op in so doing.
Ford still hasn't released any GT350(R)s to the press for instrumented testing. The M/T Best Driver's Car was completed in June.
I disagree with that. Maybe the centrifugal superchargers fall down at altitude, but positive displacement superchargers do not. PD superchargers used to be used on fighter planes back in the '40s/'50s; propeller planes, obviously. That's a heck of a lot higher than 4600' - 6500' of altitude. And that's with the old Roots style blades. Today's twin screws will give turbos a run for every bit of their money at altitude.
That is incorrect on the positive displacement blowers. They do in fact fall flat at higher altitude(and other weather conditions) similar to NA engines. There HP does indeed drop off. They draw in a fixed amount of air at a given engine speed/rotor speed. They compress in the housing or in the intake manifold depending upon if it's a screw or roots blower. It is true they used Superchargers to raise the ceiling of aircraft due to making more HP and have less power drop off at altitude compared to an NA engine.(this is also why they began using Nitro methane mixed fuel because it contained its own oxygen. Which was discovered by accident coincidently)
However the turbos can speed to a higher rate when back pressure(boost) in the manifold begins fall off. They are not dependent on engine speed only exhaust energy. It just simply keeps the wastegate closed forcing the more exhaust energy to go through the exhaust turbine housing. As long as the turbine speed doesn't go excessive so that the computer opens the wastegate in order to slow the turbine down it will spin as fast as it needs to make the commanded amount of boost. You can see that situation happen on the 2011-13 powerstrokes in Denver in the winter. They simply over speed the turbine and the computer opens the waste gate to bring it down to the designed parameter. Turbos are easily better in high altitude and less susceptible to weather changes. It will adjust the turbine speed to make the same amount of boost regardless of the conditions.*if properly sized*
Last edited:
That certainly hasn't been my experience. My butt dyno tells me my car runs just as strong, if not a tad stronger, at altitude. It [PD blower] definitely doesn't fall off similar to a NA engined car. On the turbo waste gate arena; turbos might have more adjustability, but it's not wholly unique to turbos to be able to adjust boost as altitude climbs. When I'm driving up into the mountains, I can watch my boost gauge climb as the altitude increases. (It generally goes from 0psi to 3 or 4 psi.) And I'm talking about under a steady throttle, not gassing it. Not hurling any rocks your way, but I always find it curious why turbo guys seem to think turbos have a monopoly on boost control.
Anyway, let's not derail this thread. Turbo versus supercharger discussions almost always end up in the gutter.
I wouldn't consider myself a turbo guy. But engineering principles and data shows my statement to be true.
My PD car drops off on weather and altitude changes at the racetrack in the form of MPH. Percentage wise a supercharged car will not fall off as much as the NA car but it still does.
My PD car drops off on weather and altitude changes at the racetrack in the form of MPH. Percentage wise a supercharged car will not fall off as much as the NA car but it still does.
The but dyno is a real crappy measurement to make such a bold statement like you did. Ww2 fighters had centrifugal blowers to help at altitude and even then they would loose power. Pd and centrifugal fall off at altitude. Turbos in the other hand just get the boost a little but higher on the power band than at sea level so da doesn't really hit them hard.
NHRA correction for a SC is half of the correction of a NA car at my altitude.
The fastest I've ever seen a Hellcat trap at Bandimere was 119, that was on a cool night. I've seen as low as 115 too.
Altitude destroys power, turbos and juice are the only way around that it seems. GTRs regularly out-trap Hellcats up here.
The fastest I've ever seen a Hellcat trap at Bandimere was 119, that was on a cool night. I've seen as low as 115 too.
Altitude destroys power, turbos and juice are the only way around that it seems. GTRs regularly out-trap Hellcats up here.
Wrong.
This is the GT350R being tested by road and track
It was put through its paces last week
??? I'm sorry but you are very misled or mistaken.
Ww2 fighters did run centrifugal superchargers but the altitude ceiling was decidedly broken by turbo and turbine powered engines. I think like doubled and tripled to be honest.
There is so little oxygen at 40,000 ft that a supercharger would be mathematically tested to even work today with modern technology.
Turbo wheels spin faster to maintain O2 counts and airflow. It's common for a wheel to spin 3-15% faster for 1000-5,000+ ft of altitude. 55,000rpm at sea level generating "x" O2 counts and flow will spin at say 63,000rpm at 2500ft or so to compensate for the needed oxygen. That's it. Boost is a metric based on an atmosphere compression of 14.7psi representing one bar.
Superchargers are mechanically driven. It's a fixed relationship. Turbochargers are regulated by wastegates and programming. They literally have a potential to spin faster when spinning against sparser air.
The same turbo car in the same location on a 20 degree day will see its turbo wheel(s) spinning slower than on a 100 degree day with sparse air.
Turbos are dictated by oxygen flow where as superchargers are mechanically belted and pullied.
The lobes of a supercharger also heat sink easier with sparser, hotter air.
I live at 4500ft. I've been around all kinds of performance cars for over a decade, turbo vettes, Cobras, vipers, Audi R8 v10's, lamborghinis etc all in various trims from na to sc to turbo and nitrous.
There is no discrepancy or question, turbos are the preferred and optimal power adder when working at altitude.
I would definitely own a blower car at sea level. I love the sound, torque, general simplicity, and did I mention the sound.
That said, I love turbos and would also own turbos at sea level. I own multiple cars now, and would if I lived at sea level. I love open down pipes. Open wastegates as well, to me the sound of a mean nasty open turbo v8 modular is sex on fire with brandy, and steak. I love it. I love blower wine as well but I'd take turbo whistle, howl and belch any day when done right.
Back on topic though, up here and living with them daily, there is no question that turbos are faster than sc cars.
I'll literally give you this opportunity to make $1,000. Come up to my town, baseline your car, see what it puts down uncorrected. If it makes the same power you make at sea level, uncorrected, I will pay you $1000 cash. If you can reach the same trap speed that you reach at sea level in the quarter mile, pulled and component list being the exact same, no funny business, I'll sign you the deed to my house. To put it in context, the fastest stock zr1 corvette times lip up here is a 11.8@121, from a hell of a hot shoe. That time is a complete laughing stock in the zr1 world. It corrects to a 10.9@130 from what I remember. We are 4500ft and the da that day was in the 4000 area from what I remember of the time.
Stock terminators struggle to run 13.8's up here, I went 13.6@105 with mufflers and a cai. I could have probably ran 13.3@107 power shifting.
Stock sti's and evo's hit 13.6's though at 100mph, which is barely off what they run at sea level. Stock cobalt ss's have gone 103 up here. They've done 106 at sea level.
It just isn't possible. I love blowers and they are great, but you are misinformed.
Last edited:
Very cool. I chased an AMG through the mountains near Firenza en route to a Cars and Coffee event in Torino. At the event, was a stunning yellow AMG, a white Cayman GT4, a red (of course) Ferrari 488 GTB, and a gray ZO6. The old lady and I had a great time.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2oeJygZjR8 Trendy event overview, but cool.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wCzlPnwPkg Departure from the event after lunch en route to the Sparco factory. I roast the Goodyears at the 3 minute mark.....
Users who are viewing this thread
