Cars that were too fast at the time

Cars that were too fast at the time

Author
Discussion

bloomen

6,901 posts

159 months

Sunday 31st May 2015
quotequote all
Pan Pan Pan said:
Pps. The Seven is still the only sports car ever to have been entered in a F1 race, and surprisingly did not even come last.
Eh?

Pan Pan Pan

9,919 posts

111 months

Sunday 31st May 2015
quotequote all
bloomen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Pps. The Seven is still the only sports car ever to have been entered in a F1 race, and surprisingly did not even come last.
Eh?
Were you not aware of this fact?

bloomen

6,901 posts

159 months

Sunday 31st May 2015
quotequote all
Pan Pan Pan said:
Were you not aware of this fact?
No. I'm intrigued. Tell us more.

Pan Pan Pan

9,919 posts

111 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
bloomen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Were you not aware of this fact?
No. I'm intrigued. Tell us more.
Look up Lotus 7 in F1 race at Kyalami, it will provide all the details.

Limpet

6,314 posts

161 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
s m said:
Excerpts from a twin test with the 205 1.9 which everyone seemed to decide was the best in class





It seems to suggest not as good as class leader for handling but not too shabby

Depends what you want to 'read into it' though

You have to bear in mind they drove the cars when new and alongside each other

Don't remember the RSTurbo ever being slated - the XR2i didn't get great reviews though
Most of the SVE cars at that time were pretty competent handling wise
I remember a big Car magazine hot hatch group test circa 1990 which contained pretty much every hot hatch of note on the market, and in which all the Car writers participated, and listed their own personal conclusions and pecking order. The Fiesta RS Turbo was very divisive. A number placed it last or near last, but it made the top 5 of a few too.

I've driven a mint, low mileage standard one and I remember it being very entertaining. Bags of performance, and very well balanced handling. Not in a 205 GTI's league, but what was? Very good hot hatch in my opinion, although finding one not knackered or modified to death now must be pretty much impossible.

s m

23,232 posts

203 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Limpet said:
The Fiesta RS Turbo was very divisive. A number placed it last or near last, but it made the top 5 of a few too.
Like a Mk1 Focus RS?

Divides opinions....

GT86, MX5

Devil2575

13,400 posts

188 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
B'stard Child said:
nunpuncher said:
charlie84rum said:
I sure Im correct in thinking that the police had been sold a load of Omega's just before the Lotus Carlton came out rendering them somewhat impotent.

The civic type R was the first "quick" car I ever drove and I hate to think of a 17 year old me getting the keys to one.
The Omega came out a long time after the Carlton. In fact, I think it replaced the Carlton.
Police had just ordered up a rather large number of Senator 3.0 24V's - which in lightweight polac spec (manual windows & gearbox, no leather, sunroof or heavy alloys and minimal sound deadening under the carpet) could hustle up to just the wrong side of 150 mph

So yes I could understand why they were a little piddled about the LC

Didn't stop them re-ordering another 1000 odd of them in 1993 as the production run for the Senators was coming to an end - hence why there were quite a few M plate White Senator 24V manuals - I've had 2.....
Why would it bother them? It's not like they'd be comming up against many on the roads anyway given how rare they were and for the money I doubt the Police would have been able to afford to have bought them instead.

anonymous-user

54 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Not massively powerful but the 1990s Rover 220 turbo coupe was comically overpowered for the very floppy chassis. They put a Torsen diff in it, but it didn't seem to work as well as in the heavier 800 Vitesse Sport. That really was a very ragged thing to try and drive fast.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

188 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
pingu393 said:
Onzlouk said:


Mental biggrin
I had the one litre version without all the bodykit. I must have been lucky to survive smile.
A bit of a difference between the 1 litre version and the 6R4 though. About 350 bhp difference IIRC biggrin

Watchman

6,391 posts

245 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Pan Pan Pan said:
bloomen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Were you not aware of this fact?
No. I'm intrigued. Tell us more.
Look up Lotus 7 in F1 race at Kyalami, it will provide all the details.
The 1962 RAND Grand Prix was "run to F1 rules" but Ambraüsus Niemann did come 10th in a Lotus 7 out of the 15 finishers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Rand_Grand_Prix


TA14

12,722 posts

258 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Watchman said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
bloomen said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
Were you not aware of this fact?
No. I'm intrigued. Tell us more.
Look up Lotus 7 in F1 race at Kyalami, it will provide all the details.
The 1962 RAND Grand Prix was "run to F1 rules" but Ambraüsus Niemann did come 10th in a Lotus 7 out of the 15 finishers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1962_Rand_Grand_Prix

Maybe he wasn't aware of that fact smile

Adam Ansel

695 posts

106 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Until BMW fitted traction control a lot of them exited wet roundabouts backwards. 993 and earlier 911s were not exactly benign on the limit or in the wet, 996 GT2s definitely grab your attention. TVR front suspension bump steer and high power weight ratio made them very interesting. Hence the high attrition rate. Some F cars bit, early 360s and early 348s, for instance.
Loti and Caterhams tend to be benign to high power weight ratios due to their great suspension design, but for some reason VX220s were very crash prone.

hondansx

4,570 posts

225 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
The issue with the VX220 is that it was very accessible. It has/had a low insurance group compared to the Elise and so quite young drivers could buy them (i was one of them!). Going from a FWD hot hatch to a mid-engined car with no traction or stability control is quite a jump.

I sold mine to a 19 year old and it was written off on the journey home.

NotNormal

2,359 posts

214 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
bigvanfan said:
I have a road test of the Carlton against various other super saloons, the Carlton made 169 mph the e39 v8 b10 did about 0.7 mph faster, there's no way an e34 bi turbo would do 12mph more
Did the road test say whether the LC was in 5th or 6th, most I've seen have put into 6th and it just stops accelerating.

If you find a long enough stretch (which is normally the problem) the top speed in an LC is achieved in 5th. Its officially reported that LC did achieve 187 during development testing in Italy. GM tried dropping all mention of the cars top speed due to the publicity that was festering around the car.

aeropilot

34,633 posts

227 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
NotNormal said:
bigvanfan said:
I have a road test of the Carlton against various other super saloons, the Carlton made 169 mph the e39 v8 b10 did about 0.7 mph faster, there's no way an e34 bi turbo would do 12mph more
Did the road test say whether the LC was in 5th or 6th, most I've seen have put into 6th and it just stops accelerating.
Would make sense, as IIRC.....the LC used the same 6-speed 'box as used in the 4-cam Corvette ZR-1 of the day, with 6th having some sort of monster tall 0.6:1 ratio overdrive to give favourable US highway fuel consumption figures.

DavidJG

3,547 posts

132 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
dme123 said:
Not massively powerful but the 1990s Rover 220 turbo coupe was comically overpowered for the very floppy chassis. They put a Torsen diff in it, but it didn't seem to work as well as in the heavier 800 Vitesse Sport. That really was a very ragged thing to try and drive fast.
The only front wheel drive car I ever owned was a 220 turbo coupe. I kept it for 6 weeks before deciding that the chassis was just too poor for the power it deployed. Quite possibly the worst handling 'performance' car I've ever driven.


geeks

9,194 posts

139 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Didn't the Lancia Stratos have a reputation for trying to kill people?

F1GTRUeno

6,356 posts

218 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
Mermaid said:
glazbagun said:
Porsche Carrera GT? Mega performance and a reputation for being unforgiving near the limits.
Still too fast for most people, the more powerful 918 is faster but easier to drive.
It's not the power but the chassis that bites hard with the Carrera GT though isn't it?

Hair trigger of a back end (though obviously the power would add to this).

FiF

44,097 posts

251 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
geeks said:
Didn't the Lancia Stratos have a reputation for trying to kill people?
The problem it has is a VERY low polar moment of inertia. So when it starts to go, it's gone, at least for mere mortals. So unless your name is Sandro Munari you just don't go there, and to be honest even such as he treated it with respect.

No doubt today it could be tamed by stability control and masses of electronics. Which one supposes could be an interesting technical exercise, but not particularly rewarding.I think that removal of the risk of being bitten on the arse without warning were removed would anyone put up with the discomfort of using a Stratos? I know the noise and performance is fabulous but a big part of it all is the risk element.

Which sort of opens up another question as I still feel the definition is one where the chassis is not capable of handling the performance especially in hands of mere mortals.

With the power race that we see even in quite modest everyday vehicles, would removal of driver aids make many modern seemingly innocuous vehicles qualify for this thread?

ChemicalChaos

10,395 posts

160 months

Monday 1st June 2015
quotequote all
FiF said:
The problem it has is a VERY low polar moment of inertia. So when it starts to go, it's gone, at least for mere mortals. So unless your name is Sandro Munari you just don't go there, and to be honest even such as he treated it with respect.

No doubt today it could be tamed by stability control and masses of electronics. Which one supposes could be an interesting technical exercise, but not particularly rewarding.I think that removal of the risk of being bitten on the arse without warning were removed would anyone put up with the discomfort of using a Stratos? I know the noise and performance is fabulous but a big part of it all is the risk element.

Which sort of opens up another question as I still feel the definition is one where the chassis is not capable of handling the performance especially in hands of mere mortals.

With the power race that we see even in quite modest everyday vehicles, would removal of driver aids make many modern seemingly innocuous vehicles qualify for this thread?
to be fair, the Stratos was, as you've said, not so much a case of the chassis not handling the power, more of the wheelbase being too short for anything other than flicking around the Monte-Carlo rally....