Lancia S4 0-100mph time 6.1seconds..

[Welshbeef]

janesmith1950 said:

Welshbeef said:

Forgot to add Tony Ponds Rover 827i vitesse 174bhp achieved 146mph I just don't get how a car with >>500bhp and geared to 185mph can only get 6mph more than that commuting vehicle?

Gear ratios.

I posted up the gear ratios in a link previously hence the 185mph top speed - 151mph would mean not being able to hit max revs in 4th gear and clearly not in 5th also which is bizarre and not correct.

[Welshbeef]

s m said:

Bit of blurb here












Thank you that is a great read

[SteveSteveson]

janesmith1950 said:

Gear ratios.

And drag coefficient. 0.36 for the rover. 0.415 for the Lancia Delta HF, which does not have the aero and air intake bits on the S4.

[Meridius]

Theres a few used in anger on the Euro hill climb circuit. They look more than a handful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MOsMXQGxHk

[Welshbeef]

SteveSteveson said:

And drag coefficient. 0.36 for the rover. 0.415 for the Lancia Delta HF, which does not have the aero and air intake bits on the S4.

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

[viscountdallara]

Welshbeef said:

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

Not as low as a grey Porsche 944 !

[SteveSteveson]

Welshbeef said:

I posted up the gear ratios in a link previously hence the 185mph top speed - 151mph would mean not being able to hit max revs in 4th gear and clearly not in 5th also which is bizarre and not correct.

Your fixating on the 151. The site gave 161 as the theoretical top speed based on the acceleration. The 151 was just a little less than this because the numbers suggest 161 is probably generous. Perhaps it was 161, or 158, or something else, but there is no way it would reach 185. Not being able to hit max revs in 4th and 5th is not unusual.

[poing]

Welshbeef said:

SteveSteveson said:

And drag coefficient. 0.36 for the rover. 0.415 for the Lancia Delta HF, which does not have the aero and air intake bits on the S4.

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

0.32

[SteveSteveson]

Welshbeef said:

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

The MK2 is listed as 0.33. I can't find a value I trust 100% for the MK1, but the number I did find was 0.32, but it may well be wrong as the site it came from is not very reliable.

For reference the MK1 Range Rover and the Dodge Ram had a drag coefficient of 0.45. The S4 is in that sort of range, but slick aerodynamics were not the point.

Edited by SteveSteveson on Saturday 15th October 22:49

[Welshbeef]

SteveSteveson said:

Welshbeef said:

I posted up the gear ratios in a link previously hence the 185mph top speed - 151mph would mean not being able to hit max revs in 4th gear and clearly not in 5th also which is bizarre and not correct.

Your fixating on the 151. The site gave 161 as the theoretical top speed based on the acceleration. The 151 was just a little less than this because the numbers suggest 161 is probably generous. Perhaps it was 161, or 158, or something else, but there is no way it would reach 185. Not being able to hit max revs in 4th and 5th is not unusual.

In all the cars I've owned (excluding current 8 speed which I've not tried) they have all been able to hit max rpm /limiter in the last but one gear ie 4th in a 5 speed or 5th in a 6aspeed. Never have I heard of only being able to hit max rpm 2 gears down especially in a 5 speed or 6 speed gearbox. Moreso in a car with >500bhp and it's only trying to hit 185mph in 5th. As I keep saying the brick shape E60 M5 with 507bhp derestrocted hits 207mph. E36 M3 3.2evos with 321bhp could hit 161mph comfortably. The E39M5 with only 400bhp hits 175mph

I'm really struggling with this - a car geared to 185mph yet somehow it cannot get remotely close yet pretty much any other road car with drastically lower power levels can match it?? Doesn't make sense.

If 5th was geared to 400mph I'd understand but it's only 185mph. So given it is 8,300rpm @ 171mph it's only pulling 7.200rpm smack in the big power zone of the rev range

[Simes205]

This story I heard years ago, fact or fiction who knows!

http://www.redbull.com/uk/en/motorsports/offroad/s...

[Welshbeef]

SteveSteveson said:

Welshbeef said:

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

The MK2 is listed as 0.33. I can't find a value I trust 100% for the MK1, but the number I did find was 0.32, but it may well be wrong as the site it came from is not very reliable.

For reference the MK1 Range Rover and the Dodge Ram had a drag coefficient of 0.45. The S4 is in that sort of range, but slick aerodynamics were not the point.

Edited by SteveSteveson on Saturday 15th October 22:49

Ok so let's be silly the Range Rover sport treats is limited to 155mph. The drag coefficient of a Range Rover is clearly dramatically worse than an S4 - so at best 6 mph more(and the 155mph is going to be electronically limited too soeed forthe Range Rover).

http://fastestlaps.com/models/range-rover-sport-5-...

[Gary C]

Loved the S4, was a real privilege to see them where they belonged, in the forests, flat out in the mid 80's.

Loved the engineering details, with the supercharger and turbo working to give power and minimal lag. As I remember, the valve arrangement had opposing inlets/exhaust valves such that each side of the head had an exhaust port, so both sides of the head had an exhaust manifold with the inlet in the middle feeding opposing valves.

Don't know what power they delivered, but rumours were really wild.



IfI you like the idea of the S4, look up the lancia ECV

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:11

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:13

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:15

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:16

[wiliferus]

Meridius said:

Theres a few used in anger on the Euro hill climb circuit. They look more than a handful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MOsMXQGxHk

That is absolute car p0rn.
I need one in my life.

[Welshbeef]

Gary C said:

Loved the S4, was a real privilege to see them where they belonged, in the forests, flat out in the mid 80's.

Loved the engineering details, with the supercharger and turbo working to give power and minimal lag. As I remember, the valve arrangement had opposing inlets/exhaust valves such that each side of the head had an exhaust port, so both sides of the head had an exhaust manifold with the inlet in the middle feeding opposing valves.

Don't know what power they delivered, but rumours were really wild.



IfI you like the idea of the S4, look up the lancia ECV

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:11

What is the 0-100mph time of the ECV?
S4 1985/86 year was 6.1sexojds.

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:13

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:15

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:16

[poing]

Welshbeef said:

SteveSteveson said:

Welshbeef said:

What's the drag coefficient of a Mk1 Leon Cupra 1.8Turbo

The MK2 is listed as 0.33. I can't find a value I trust 100% for the MK1, but the number I did find was 0.32, but it may well be wrong as the site it came from is not very reliable.

For reference the MK1 Range Rover and the Dodge Ram had a drag coefficient of 0.45. The S4 is in that sort of range, but slick aerodynamics were not the point.

Edited by SteveSteveson on Saturday 15th October 22:49

Ok so let's be silly the Range Rover sport treats is limited to 155mph. The drag coefficient of a Range Rover is clearly dramatically worse than an S4 - so at best 6 mph more(and the 155mph is going to be electronically limited too soeed forthe Range Rover).

http://fastestlaps.com/models/range-rover-sport-5-...

Why do you think the CD of the RR is worse than the S4? The S4 has downforce because it needs that more than it needs top speed. The RR might be a big lump but I'd bet the CD is better than the S4 still.

[Gary C]

Mind you, talking about 80's tech, the s1 e2's umluft system was epic. On a closed throttle, a second "'dump valves' opened under electronic control and dumped compressor outlet into the turbine inlet, coupled with a small amount of air via the engine and no spark meant the fuel was combusted in the turbo which continued to run at full boost meaning that as soon as the throttle was opened, instant power.

Similar to modern anti lag, but instead of bangs, you got the turbo running well past its surge line leading to the characteristic 'squeak'

Back to S4's, I met Henri tovenen once, on a single track road, head on. I accelerated at him to nip into a gap to let him past, made him jump until he realised where I was going and he gave a thumbs up as he passed.

[Gary C]

Welshbeef said:

janesmith1950 said:

Welshbeef said:

Forgot to add Tony Ponds Rover 827i vitesse 174bhp achieved 146mph I just don't get how a car with >>500bhp and geared to 185mph can only get 6mph more than that commuting vehicle?

Gear ratios.

I posted up the gear ratios in a link previously hence the 185mph top speed - 151mph would mean not being able to hit max revs in 4th gear and clearly not in 5th also which is bizarre and not correct.

Remember the "road" version might have had that gearing, but had nowhere near the power of the full works cars [about 250hp] whereas a stage version was only geared to about 120.

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:33

[Gary C]

ECV was 0-60 in 2.5 seconds

Problem was, group s would have limited the power from the original 600hp, to 300. Which would have been a pity because I believe they got 1000hp out of the triflux engine under test once , not sure how long it would have lasted

ECV stood for experimental composite vehicle as I recall, I think even the wheels were carbon.

Edited by Gary C on Saturday 15th October 23:40

[SteveSteveson]

Welshbeef said:

Ok so let's be silly the Range Rover sport treats is limited to 155mph. The drag coefficient of a Range Rover is clearly dramatically worse than an S4 - so at best 6 mph more(and the 155mph is going to be electronically limited too soeed forthe Range Rover).

http://fastestlaps.com/models/range-rover-sport-5-...

Not really relevant, but the outgoing Range Rover Sport produces 302bhp has a drag coefficient of 0.34 (the new one is even lower). Where as the Range Rover MK1 (the one I quoted) managed 110mph from 200bhp.