Guibo

It should also be a matter of principle on a discussion forum to actually answer the very relevant questions posed to you. As you see, it is not I who is diverting. Just answer the question.

Yes, it is unpleasant for you that you cannot answer the questions of all of those other factors I mentioned. Didn't Nissan's GT-R show us that you can make no accurate prediction of performance based on power/wt? Didn't that supercar shootout a few years ago on the 'Ring show us that power/wt didn't determine the fastest car? (The Koenigsegg was the most powerful, with the highest power/wt ratio; the Maserati MC12 was among the least powerful; yet the Maser set the fastest time, while the Koenigsegg was slagged for certain behaviors that don't show up on a spec sheet.)

Uh, and where did I argue against that concept? I even brought in the XJ220 for chrissake. And that's not all you did:

Contrary to your claim that all you were saying is that a V6TT can be super fast (a claim I never disputed and indeed supported by way of a bonafide supercar, XJ220), you went above and beyond that and made repeated claims that the Rossion will easily beat the ZR1. How can that be true, if the same-weight (but +200 hp) M600 on fatter tires can't outrun a 458 with ease (it's actually slower) on the same day, while on the same day, the ZR1 is faster than the 458? By your logic, the Rossion should be faster than the M600.
And you accuse me of being the pretzel-bending weasel? LOL.
You are aware that R&T compared the Noble M400 (425 hp, 6.0 lb/hp) against the '06 Z06 (6.2 lb/hp) at the Streets of Willow, right? The Z06 was on the old Goodyear F1s; Noble on Pirelli P Zero Corsa. Tell me which one was faster.

petermj

If you start editing my posts in your quotes, we are done. BTW, it may help you notice that M600 is also 200 pounds heavier than Q1 while you are on your tangent

gs_M6

We all know LS cars can get 30+ on the highway, but let's not throw around those lofty MPG ratings. Just referring to EPA, show me a v6 powerplant that matches the LS3 in power and efficiency.

gs_M6

I didn't discard it, I said stick to EPA. Let's define power as in horsepower, any part of the band, I assumed that was implied. EPA figures C6 vs...

petermj

Now, this should be a meaningful one.

petermj

So basically, all we have to do is find a car that has the same Cd, same weight and a V6 (I guess twin turbo) achieves the same engine power output? Here is a thought, you find out and demonstrate that is worse or better or the same

gs_M6

Well it's to the point. You, as many, assume V8's in performance cars are dead because they presumably are inferior in efficiency (MPG) in accordance with the power they make compared to ttV6's. Not asking for a ton of examples, just one.
HP & EPA C6 vs HP & EPA of... Clear enough for ya?

gs_M6

That's what I thought.

petermj

Still waitin, go ahead and post whatever car you had in mind

petermj

Get something straight here, I never claimed that they were inferior, just limited in development potential. I simply pointed out corporate mentality forcing them to meet unrealistic expectations that do result in added complexity, weight and loss of performance that would be possible otherwise. Is this clear enough for you? Seems like you did not bother to comprehend what you read.

gs_M6

Drawing a blank there. With ttV6's set to overtake V8s any day now, I'm sure there's plenty of examples you can pull of the top of your head...

gs_M6

Say again sir? That and your suggestion for ttV6's had made as much implied.

PhillyLS1

^ 1970's mentality.

The EB motors make 420tq at 1500 rpms. There's no reason why GM can't modify a V6 to match a v8 when they were doing it in the 80's.

My Ecoboost f150 gets 19city and 28highway. And that's without me even trying.

petermj

Here is something to ponder regarding pushrod

2013 Mustang GT500 15/24 (DOHC)
Corvette BASE 16/26
Corvette ZR1 using premium gas and M6 14/21

petermj

I am drawing even a bigger blank from your posts, all the way to 2 cylinder mode for the next version of AFM and another 30-50 pounds extra to the engine

petermj

There is a lot of 1970s mentality around here, in case you missed it.

Guibo

I didn't edit anything other than to omit those passages that are not relevant to our current discussion. I did not switch your words, if that's what you're getting at. I highlighted the point that you now seem to be running away from: Your claim that the Q1 easily beats the ZR1.
M600 was weighed in that test at 2745 lbs. That is only 70 lbs heavier (not 200) than R&T's curb weight of 2675 lbs. We're still talking 4.22 lb/hp for the M600 vs 5.9 lb/hp for the Q1.

Tell me one you think was faster on the track: Noble M400 vs C6Z on GY F1s. Same-day test with pro racing driver Gary Sheehan in each car.

petermj

I do not know Guibo... looking here, it clearly states 2809+ (apparently more?)

http://fastestlaps.com/cars/noble_m600.html

And Noble itself lists the DRY weight as 2641 lbs

http://www.noblecars.com/m600/m600.html

Rossion on the other hand give the DRY weight of Q1 as 2475 lbs. Are you suggesting Q carries around 30 gal of fuel and another 10 gal worth of other fluids to make it run?

http://www.rossioncars.com/model-specs.php

I think you should practice finger math more. Nice try with M400 considering less power and different aerodynamics. M400 is actually lighter though

I think we are done now, I hope.

Michael A

That's not 1970's mentality. I guess Ferrari, Lamborghini, Maserati, BMW, Mercedes, Lexus, and every other manufacturer with V8 and V12 engines has a 1970's mentality by your measurement.

That's called not following the herd down the "el cheapo" road. There is no point in a turbo V6. It's a downgrade.

Rear wheel drive was considered a 1970s mentality in the 1980s. I don't think we want to go down that road either.

Michael

petermj

If they use pushrod design for their engines, then they do but do they? Not to mention the difference in displacements.