heyarms

iTrader: (5)

I think the high points of this discussion betwene Kurtz and Smoky is:

Kurtz: Very high HP from a standstill is negated due to traction control. TC wont let all of the HP get to the tires if it knows theyll slip. Therefore, from a standstill high HP is "useless".

Smoky: High HP car is still a fast car to run around town, its not all about planting all the HP to the ground from a stop light. IF it was, some cars have the luxury of launch control (yes it takes away power similar to TC, but its a work around from spinning tires).


Just thought i'd cliffnote what i saw.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Right. Which the 09 GT-R did with 180 less horsepower. Because that extra hp is little to no use

Not really. I mean, compared to 300 hp cars, sure. But again even in the 1/4 mile, which is about more than just the launch, the GT-R is exactly as quick with 180 less hp. Because, again, that extra power is largely useless. Further- launch control is designed to work from a stop, not a roll, so you're going to again either have traction issues, or be using traction control which pulls away nearly all your extra horsepower to stop you from losing traction.

I occasionally broke my wheels loose going into second and sometimes even chirped into 3rd with 500 hp. With 660 it'd be even worse.


Now, see, you go too far.... at 200-300 hp AWD is about useless to launch. The car isn't traction limited at all so all AWD does is waste power and add weight.

It's going much north of 450 hp that AWD really matters.... and that adding power past that is largely useless for RWD cars in street applications... you get, as I've said from the start, increasingly diminishing returns.

Look how much gain 65 hp gives you in an AWD car like the GT-R at these levels.... now look at how much less adding 110 hp gains in a RWD one. Because most of that power is useless.

.

Coefficent of drag can make a HUGE difference from 150-200, areas both of these cars play in.... but from 0-60? not much.


.

Grasping at increasingly tiny straws.... 3829 for the 2012 GT-R... 3871 for a 2013 GT500... So 42 pounds lighter.


.

and the straws get even smaller.... the GT-R is also AWD... which means higher drivetrain losses and more rotational weight to drive compared to a 2WD transmission in a mustang.... but the fact you can't get an auto for the GT500 makes it an even crappier car to daily drive so thanks for mentioning it!


.

Except, it won't. As I've explained repeatedly it's much slower in the 1/4 mile too.

.

You go 150 a lot on the street do you? (which is what we've been talking about)

How bout 130 stoplight to stoplight?

In street use the extra power of the GT500 is worthless, as I've repeatedly shown, because it can't make much use of it.

Even your own numbers make the GT500 look bad because even going to speeds where the extra power can do something useful it's barely quicker (less than 2%) despite having well over 100 more horsepower and over 150 more torque.


.


It is! Which is why you bringing up what the car does at 150 looks so insane.

.

Some people think they're smarter than computers (see also people still driving manuals

Or, they're driving cars that can actually launch without it (ie cars with 300 hp instead of 500)



But if you leave it on, I mean, do you actually understand what TC does?

It reduces the power going to the wheels.

So leaving it on when launching your 500 hp car means you're not launching with 500 hp.

WHICH HAS BEEN MY ENTIRE POINT ALL ALONG.

You can't launch with 500-600 hp on the street with 2WD. You wouldn't go anywhere.

Yet after explaining this to you 5 different times you still don't seem to grasp it as a basic fact.

The only way to try launching with all that 500-600 hp is to turn TC off. In which case you'll sit there in a huge pile of spinning burning tires rather than actually hook and launch if using street tires on public roads.

Turn it on and you can launch. By having the TC system reduce your power significantly.

Hence- that extra power IS LARGELY USELESS IN STREET USE

Short of buying a billboard I'm not sure how to make these basic facts any clearer to you.



.

The IS-F is closer to 3800 (3780)

The E63?

http://www.leftlanenews.com/new-car-...benz/e63-amg/#
So 270 pounds difference.

That's not nothing, but it's not nearly enough to eat up the >100 hp difference between the cars... yet they run virtually identical times.

Because the extra power is largely wasted.


Absolutely! meaning even if we use your inflated 500-600 lb weights you still have 50-60 extra hp in the mercedes, yet it's no faster 0-60

because that extra power isn't useful at street speeds


Not for nothing man, but is english not your first language or something? I've explained this repeatedly since my first post to you and you still keep asking questions that have been simply and clearly explained to you before.



Go back and read the chart I posted that included the 250 and 350.

HP makes a large difference from 200->300 hp.

It makes a significant but much smaller difference 300->400 hp.

It makes an even smaller difference from 400->500 hp.

Gains in hp become increasingly useless as you approach, and exceed, 500 hp.

that has been the entire point of this

and yet you come back and ask why you buy a 300 hp car over a 200 hp one?

It's very difficult to believe you're arguing honestly here rather than deliberately ignoring or misunderstanding everything said to you.




yes, and I've repeatedly proven you're wrong about that.

If you don't know how go back and re-read my last few posts until you understand them. Learning what launch/traction control does would help you out too.


[quote=smokyis350;7327262]
I never said that it can put down 660HP at launch.[QUOTE]


Sure you did. Like 6 inches up in this very post. That it could reliably put its 660 hp down with minimal traction issues.

Do you not even read your own posts? that'd explain a lot!

which demonstrates you have no grasp of what launch control is.

Because what it's doing is preventing the car from putting tha power down.

It's instead insuring the car put less power down. Otherwise it'd just spin the tires.

In which case why not just have a 400 hp car that can actually launch at full power, rather than a 600 hp car that has to pull 200 hp of power to go anywhere?

That extra 200 is wasted there.


Now, going from 100-150, that 200 hp is useful. But that's not street use, is it?

because you don't understand what launch control is doing. See above again.


Because it doesn't make the car any quicker than a car with 200 less horsepower that can acutally use all of it (the 09 GT-R) and considerably slower than a car with 110 less hp that can actually use all of it (the 12 GT-R).

The extra power doesn't do anything for you.

Again, 09 GT-R with 480 horsepower runs the same 0-60 times as the 13 GT500 with 660 horsepower.

What did that extra 180 hp do for you?

nothing

because it's not useful in street situations.



At which point the system will pull the power output down into the 400s so the car will actually move.

Rendering all that extra hp pretty useless.

If it wasn't it'd be quicker than a car with 180 less hp...but it's not.


and both will be wasting a lot of that power.... as evidenced by the 110-less hp 2012 GT-R spanking the heck out of it both 0-60 and 1/4 mile. It's not until you're going north of 120 that the GT-Rs power gets useful (and barely- it's only 2% quicker to 150 than the much less powerful GT-R)


and I've already explained why each of those makes little to no difference on the street. The weight is barely a difference, aerodynamics make little difference at 0-60, and the transmission is more of a power drain on the GT-R than the Mustang.


Except they're not in the same league.

The GT-R is much quicker.

Put it another way- the current GT-R is roughly twice as "quicker" 0-60 and in the 1/4 mile as the IS-F is to the IS350.

And the GT-R does it with considerably less horsepower.

Because unlike the GT500 it can actually use most of it.

But really the price thing is pretty silly... the GT-R is much quicker than a slew of cars that cost a ton more than it does (almost anything Italian for example)


you're leaving out that one of those bolt-ons is drag racing slicks (and race gas from what I read)

Because it can't launch with anywhere near its full power on street tires.

Which was what we were discussing.

Which is the entire point here.

The extra power is virtually useless on the street. Because a 2WD car is severely traction limited on street tires at these power levels.

Really.

Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Sure it's still a fast car.

But the key point is it's barely (or sometimes not all) faster than if it had 100-200 less horsepower.

because in street-legal situations it can make little to no use of that added power on 2WD.


Now if you want to bring a 500-600 hp AWD car into the discussion that power suddenly gets useful again.

B16da9

iTrader: (7)

IS0311

RR Racing just release an supercharger for the 3gen IS350 which is putting 430HP at the crank. They are finishing the development supercharger for the 2gen IS350. 430+HP for everyday driving is great. Unless you want ridiculous crazy stupid insane retarded rolling burnout horsepower from a 2JZ than I guess you must have DEEP pocket $30k+, not worth the money in my opinion