RE: Geneva 2015 - Liveblog
Discussion
bobberz said:
sad61t said:
Looking at the line-up of traditional Morgans in the headline photo. That black Roadster is stunning, so much more to my taste than the rather strange concoction of the new Aero.
I agree, as an already noted Morgan fanboy, complete with tweed cap, beard, and handlebar moustache. I must own one, someday, but I just don't see how. They're so expensive that if I had the money, I'd be more tempted to add a couple more Alfas to my stable, plus a few Lancias.The two other best-looking cars of the show are that RuF and that gorgeous, green McLaren F1 Longtail. I think Mr. Bird should have his PH Card revoked for those comments!
The mahoosive side vents on the 488 GTB seem to detract from an otherwise pleasant design, but I'll wait 'til I see one in-person. The 458 took some time to grow on me, and the Speciale finally made me a believer, so maybe the 488 will grow on me, as well? I always reserve final judgement until I see one in-person. For instance, the LaFerrari is far, far better to look at in-person than in pictures.
As far as new designs from Geneva go, the Vulcan and the Koenigsegg are the clear winners, for me, despite the fact I'll most likely never get to sit in one.
works a lot better than the Longtail. Just personal preference...
Matt
Max_Torque said:
But unfortunately, the exact words used are confusing and contradictory.
If you are at full throttle in third gear, at 2000rpm, then the engine is already making maximum boost and hence BMEP. So, the time it takes to get to maximum LongAcc simple depends at what engine speed peak torque occurs. For example, for a BMW 335d, peak torque is AT 2000rpm, so it would take zero seconds to get to max LongAcc! So by that reconing a 335d is clearly a "Betterer" car that either a 675LT /498 etc.......
It also depends on the gear ratios chosen and a million other factors.
A FAR better measure of the engine response to throttle inputs is the 10-90% torque response. This is the time it takes the engine to increase it's output from 10% of the maximum torque at any engine speed to 90% of it.
For an N/A engine this is broadly equal across the engine speed range, and simply depends on how quickly the throttle can open and the intake manifold volume.
For a Turbo engine, it also depends on the response of the boosting system, as in order to make the high specific torque a high positive plenum pressure is required.
The other issue is that for a car, you don't actually want too fast a reponse, because it makes the car very difficult indeed to drive. Typical electrically assisted boosting systems can now provide maximum boost pressure in approximately 0.1sec or less. And if you drive a car fitted with these systems it is HORRIBLE. You floor the throttle and the drivetrain winds ups instantly, the rear wheels spin almost instantly and then you spend the next 3 sec pogoing around as the drive train oscilates/unwinds. yuk. In fact, the first thing the driveability calibrators do is to damp the maximum torque application rate to match the vehicles fundamental powertrain stiffness, which for a road car, with rubber mounts etc is generally in the order of 2hz.
I disagree that it's a meaningless stat. My own car takes about 2 seconds in third gear to go from cruising with no boost to full boost to overtake. When overtaking, etc you can use the throttle earlier to compensate for it.If you are at full throttle in third gear, at 2000rpm, then the engine is already making maximum boost and hence BMEP. So, the time it takes to get to maximum LongAcc simple depends at what engine speed peak torque occurs. For example, for a BMW 335d, peak torque is AT 2000rpm, so it would take zero seconds to get to max LongAcc! So by that reconing a 335d is clearly a "Betterer" car that either a 675LT /498 etc.......
It also depends on the gear ratios chosen and a million other factors.
A FAR better measure of the engine response to throttle inputs is the 10-90% torque response. This is the time it takes the engine to increase it's output from 10% of the maximum torque at any engine speed to 90% of it.
For an N/A engine this is broadly equal across the engine speed range, and simply depends on how quickly the throttle can open and the intake manifold volume.
For a Turbo engine, it also depends on the response of the boosting system, as in order to make the high specific torque a high positive plenum pressure is required.
The other issue is that for a car, you don't actually want too fast a reponse, because it makes the car very difficult indeed to drive. Typical electrically assisted boosting systems can now provide maximum boost pressure in approximately 0.1sec or less. And if you drive a car fitted with these systems it is HORRIBLE. You floor the throttle and the drivetrain winds ups instantly, the rear wheels spin almost instantly and then you spend the next 3 sec pogoing around as the drive train oscilates/unwinds. yuk. In fact, the first thing the driveability calibrators do is to damp the maximum torque application rate to match the vehicles fundamental powertrain stiffness, which for a road car, with rubber mounts etc is generally in the order of 2hz.
Instant torque will spin tyres far more easily before they're fully loaded. However if you've got AWD like Tesla cars have, then you can still have an 'insane' mode that gives near instant torque.
Everyone on here probably knows that if you put a force into the tyre/s at a faster speed than the suspension can transfer the weight to the tyre/s, you won't get the maximum grip available from the tyre/s. Though if you're Daniel Ricciardo, you laugh in the face of such small minded concepts when you make a Suzuki Liana dance.
Matt Bird said:
bobberz said:
sad61t said:
Looking at the line-up of traditional Morgans in the headline photo. That black Roadster is stunning, so much more to my taste than the rather strange concoction of the new Aero.
I agree, as an already noted Morgan fanboy, complete with tweed cap, beard, and handlebar moustache. I must own one, someday, but I just don't see how. They're so expensive that if I had the money, I'd be more tempted to add a couple more Alfas to my stable, plus a few Lancias.The two other best-looking cars of the show are that RuF and that gorgeous, green McLaren F1 Longtail. I think Mr. Bird should have his PH Card revoked for those comments!
The mahoosive side vents on the 488 GTB seem to detract from an otherwise pleasant design, but I'll wait 'til I see one in-person. The 458 took some time to grow on me, and the Speciale finally made me a believer, so maybe the 488 will grow on me, as well? I always reserve final judgement until I see one in-person. For instance, the LaFerrari is far, far better to look at in-person than in pictures.
As far as new designs from Geneva go, the Vulcan and the Koenigsegg are the clear winners, for me, despite the fact I'll most likely never get to sit in one.
works a lot better than the Longtail. Just personal preference...
Matt
.IMO, I'd be perfectly satisfied with either... Though I'm not a big fan of fixed wings on anything except actual race/track cars.
Dan Trent said:
Watch this space - we haven't forgotten this most vital element of any Geneva coverage!
Cheers,
Dan
Thanks! I was almost beginning to worry, as it seemed Matt was wrapping up the coverage. Thank you for your prompt response and I apologise for my extremely tardy one; being on the other side of the pond and five-hours removed means I'm often on here at what is late at night/early morning in the UK. Cheers,
Dan
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff