Options

VROOOM PSH VRROOOOOM [Car thread]

11516182021100

Posts

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    in the glovebox of every hellcat is a coupon for half-off at the street legal drag slick store

  • Options
    webguy20webguy20 I spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    buy the hellcat and spend 30k on an all carbon fiber body, seats and interior panels. Weight problem solved.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    Assuming that it really is a 60lb discrepancy between the Camaro ZL1 and the Hellcat, we can make some comparisons assuming the Hellcat suspension is close to the quality of the ZL1. The ZL1, then, is 60lbs lighter but makes 127 less horsepower and 94 less lb-ft of torque than the Hellcat. Using everybody's favorite track as a benchmark, the ZL1 ran the Nurburgring Nordschleife in 7:41.27. I would think the Hellcat would be pretty close to that.

    The stripped down and track focused Camaro Z/28 runs it in 7:37.4 on a damp track. Which goes to show just how much can be gained from weight reduction and suspension tuning, because the Z/28 is down 75hp and 75lb-ft of torque from the ZL1. The Z/28 is really meant to get beat up on the track though, so I am not surprised that it can put out that kind of time.

    jgeis on
  • Options
    Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    The ring is very much a tempo course as well, which would convey additional advantages to the Z/28 as it's able to maintain speed through many sections where the hellcat wouldn't be able to. Most modern race courses aren't designed like that at all with chicanes and numerous 90-180 degree corners with large braking zones.

    Adding lightness is obviously incredibly important, but if you took the Hellcat to road america i imagine the disparity wouldn't be as large on a percentage basis as it would be on the ring compared to the Z/28.

    oh who am i kidding all these cars are insane and i'd die if i owned any of them.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
  • Options
    KrieghundKrieghund Registered User regular
    Comparisons are tough, but the Z/28 is a serious track machine. Anything with turns it will eat a Hellcat alive. Mustang is a mystery. A Hellcat will take a GT 500, but who knows what the new car is like?

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    jgeis wrote: »
    Assuming that it really is a 60lb discrepancy between the Camaro ZL1 and the Hellcat, we can make some comparisons assuming the Hellcat suspension is close to the quality of the ZL1. The ZL1, then, is 60lbs lighter but makes 127 less horsepower and 94 less lb-ft of torque than the Hellcat. Using everybody's favorite track as a benchmark, the ZL1 ran the Nurburgring Nordschleife in 7:41.27. I would think the Hellcat would be pretty close to that.

    The stripped down and track focused Camaro Z/28 runs it in 7:37.4 on a damp track. Which goes to show just how much can be gained from weight reduction and suspension tuning, because the Z/28 is down 75hp and 75lb-ft of torque from the ZL1. The Z/28 is really meant to get beat up on the track though, so I am not surprised that it can put out that kind of time.

    Don't forget the fucking massive tyres! 305 series on the front?!? So that's how you quell understeer in a car based off of an Australian family sedan...

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    exclusive hellcat tire preview

    17oz5lz3gj9dpjpg.jpg

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
  • Options
    Bendery It Like BeckhamBendery It Like Beckham Hopeless Registered User regular
    Down.

  • Options
    pimentopimento she/they/pim Registered User regular
    7f03_015.jpg

  • Options
    Bendery It Like BeckhamBendery It Like Beckham Hopeless Registered User regular
    Also, train racing maybe?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMO4JtdBPoI

    This is similar to what i used to watch as a child over at the local speedway, but the trains we watched were welded together, and the back car was backwards with another driver to steer.

  • Options
    pimentopimento she/they/pim Registered User regular
    Combine the two?

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    pimento wrote: »
    Combine the two?

    I like you. You're good people.

  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    Here's a video of Marco Diniz de Oliveira, SRT's Vehicle Dynamics Engineer, wringing the Hellcat out around Portland International Raceway:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpGdPIkSL3k#t=93

  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    I actually think a professional driver could get some more out of it in the corners though, it seems like he's taking them a bit slower than the car can actually handle.

  • Options
    schussschuss Registered User regular
    jgeis wrote: »
    I actually think a professional driver could get some more out of it in the corners though, it seems like he's taking them a bit slower than the car can actually handle.

    Oh yeah, he was not pushing it at all.

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    he's babying it

    braking way way early and casual on the throttle...

    you can see they laid out yellow cones for him at the braking points

  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    That sound though, oh man.

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    Jasconius wrote: »
    he's babying it

    braking way way early and casual on the throttle...

    you can see they laid out yellow cones for him at the braking points

    If the test driver's not wearing full fire safety gear and their helmet, they're not pushing it as hard as they could be.

  • Options
    msuitepyonmsuitepyon Registered User regular
    And Mini is telling my wife she needs a timing chain in her 2009 Clubman to the tune of $3000. Welp, fuck that car.

    Now we get to look for cars.

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    how in the holy hell can a timing belt cost 3 grand?

  • Options
    TheStigTheStig Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    I think he put one too many zeros on that.

    edit: look at the internet for a brief minute and apparently that's not uncommon and the clubman has known issues with it? Lame.

    TheStig on
    bnet: TheStig#1787 Steam: TheStig
  • Options
    msuitepyonmsuitepyon Registered User regular
    Three thousand is correct. I knew it would be a little high but not that high...

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    I had a Saturn that needed a timing belt replaced and I think the total bill was like... $800? And that was with the water pump they always throw in on that repair. Those dudes is ripping you off.

  • Options
    TheStigTheStig Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    No see, mini timing chains are expensive to repair because they're designed to not require regular maintenance, so when you need to replace one it's a big deal. But there is this little problem where they commonly break at like 60k miles and destroy your engine. That's what I gathered from a few stories on the webs.

    TheStig on
    bnet: TheStig#1787 Steam: TheStig
  • Options
    PsykomaPsykoma Registered User regular
    Making me realize I still haven't even looked under the hood of my car.

    I should get on that.

  • Options
    pimentopimento she/they/pim Registered User regular
    Uh.. yea, the whole point of a timing chain rather than a timing belt is that they last basically the life of the car. Like, when it goes wrong, it's a good indicator that it's probably time to scrap the thing, or sell it to a shade tree mechanic who wants to rebuild an engine for fun. Chewing a timing chain out suggest something nastily defective in the engines that PSA/BMW overlooked.

    So.. I guess don't buy a second gen neumini? What engine is in it?

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    Yeah, timing chains should outlast piston rings. You shouldn't ever even have to think about it until your engine needs a major overhaul.

    Replace the Mini with a Polo GTI or a Fiesta ST!

  • Options
    webguy20webguy20 I spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    Official Mustang numbers released.

    The V8
    435hp
    400 Torques
    3700ish pounds curb weight
    $32,100

    The Turbo 4
    310hp
    320 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $25,170

    The V6
    300hp
    280 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $23,600

    Not too freakin' shabby at all, and with the all new independent rear suspension this thing could be seriously fun to drive. My mother has a 2005 that puts out somewhere around 315 horsepower with a solid rear axle and that thing is a hoot to drive. I can't imagine another 110 horsepower, better suspension and ten years of refinement overall.

    I really can't wait to see the Turbo 4 numbers against the FRS/BRZ on a track. The mustangs power to weight ratio is 177 horse per ton, the BRZ is 144.4 horse per ton. Even though with less power per ton, it is around 700 pounds lighter, which should really show in the corners.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
  • Options
    KrieghundKrieghund Registered User regular
    I priced out a 2015 base GT with just the Track Pack and Recaros as options. $37k. Eesh, my 07 GT only cost $27k out the door.

  • Options
    webguy20webguy20 I spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    if the build quality is any way decent then even 37k will be a pretty good deal, if you enjoy that kind of car anyways.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
  • Options
    msuitepyonmsuitepyon Registered User regular
    So yeah, my wife brought home a detailed estimate. They quoted 11.5 hours of labor and replacing the timing chain and the variable valve timing actuators (BMW's infamous VANOS).

  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    That's rough but I'm not surprised with that labor estimate. Timing chains can be a pain on transverse motors or when they're mounted on the back of a longitudinal engine.

    My girlfriend's Jetta has a known issue where the timing chain eats the tensioners because they're made of cheap plastic. It's hard to tell which cars have bad engines so we're kind of always worried it will just fail. Or it could run forever with no issue.

  • Options
    KakodaimonosKakodaimonos Code fondler Helping the 1% get richerRegistered User regular
    Just buy cars that have a straight 6. :)

  • Options
    Donovan PuppyfuckerDonovan Puppyfucker A dagger in the dark is worth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered User regular
    webguy20 wrote: »
    Official Mustang numbers released.

    The V8
    435hp
    400 Torques
    3700ish pounds curb weight
    $32,100

    The Turbo 4
    310hp
    320 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $25,170

    The V6
    300hp
    280 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $23,600

    Not too freakin' shabby at all, and with the all new independent rear suspension this thing could be seriously fun to drive. My mother has a 2005 that puts out somewhere around 315 horsepower with a solid rear axle and that thing is a hoot to drive. I can't imagine another 110 horsepower, better suspension and ten years of refinement overall.

    I really can't wait to see the Turbo 4 numbers against the FRS/BRZ on a track. The mustangs power to weight ratio is 177 horse per ton, the BRZ is 144.4 horse per ton. Even though with less power per ton, it is around 700 pounds lighter, which should really show in the corners.

    When you say "torques", do you mean ft/lb or Nm? Because Nm are about a third more than ft/lb.

    The Mustang should wipe the floor with the BRZ in a straight line, but 700 pounds heavier? On all but the fastest flowiest tracks, it should get ruined by the smaller car.

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    edited July 2014
    a turbo 4 mustang is just wrong

    meanwhile the V6 remains a great buy. a lot of weight loss too over previous gen.

    no more solid axle? that's mildly sad. it made the car fun

    Jasconius on
  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    The outgoing Mustang V6 beat the BRZ around Laguna Seca. It was described as being less sharp and heavier, but I think it was faster by close to a second? And the outgoing model did that on a solid live axle out back, not the IRS the new 'Stang is getting.

  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    the hill climb to the corkscrew at laguna seca massively favors the mustang

    driving a street car with 200hp up that fucking hill is like pushing a boulder

  • Options
    webguy20webguy20 I spend too much time on the Internet Registered User regular
    webguy20 wrote: »
    Official Mustang numbers released.

    The V8
    435hp
    400 Torques
    3700ish pounds curb weight
    $32,100

    The Turbo 4
    310hp
    320 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $25,170

    The V6
    300hp
    280 Torques
    3500ish pounds curb weight
    $23,600

    Not too freakin' shabby at all, and with the all new independent rear suspension this thing could be seriously fun to drive. My mother has a 2005 that puts out somewhere around 315 horsepower with a solid rear axle and that thing is a hoot to drive. I can't imagine another 110 horsepower, better suspension and ten years of refinement overall.

    I really can't wait to see the Turbo 4 numbers against the FRS/BRZ on a track. The mustangs power to weight ratio is 177 horse per ton, the BRZ is 144.4 horse per ton. Even though with less power per ton, it is around 700 pounds lighter, which should really show in the corners.

    When you say "torques", do you mean ft/lb or Nm? Because Nm are about a third more than ft/lb.

    The Mustang should wipe the floor with the BRZ in a straight line, but 700 pounds heavier? On all but the fastest flowiest tracks, it should get ruined by the smaller car.

    As far as torque, since it's America I would assume ft/lb, but they did not specify.

    Steam ID: Webguy20
    Origin ID: Discgolfer27
    Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
  • Options
    jgeisjgeis Registered User regular
    I still don't really understand the Toyobaru twins. They just don't seem to be offering up enough in terms of horsepower vs handling vs cost to beat out their competitors. The Miata is long in the tooth but still an excellent car and can be had for around the same price. The Nissan 370z starts at about $5000 more than what the FR-S is going for here in the States, and it offers more power and better handling. The American pony cars are around the same price and offer more horsepower, decent handling, and more usable GT car space/comfort. Then you have a bunch of hot hatches that aren't quite directly comparable but still pretty similar in purpose to the Toyobaru twins and offer more practicality.

This discussion has been closed.