RE: Huracan Performante clocks 6min 52sec 'ring lap
Discussion
foxsasha said:
Yipper said:
Good post.
Pirelli has double-confirmed Lamborghini broke the Nurb production-car record.
Lambo + Pirelli vs. amateur YouTube conspiracy nuts...
Credible point.Pirelli has double-confirmed Lamborghini broke the Nurb production-car record.
Lambo + Pirelli vs. amateur YouTube conspiracy nuts...
"The Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R tires, in 245/30ZR20 at the front and 305/30ZR20 at the back were designed specifically by Pirelli’s engineers for the record attempt."
gigglebug said:
Credible if the specific tyre used in the attempt is an OEM Pirelli item available to customers and isn't a bespoke item used for the run only. A statement to confirm that an OEM tyre has been used is required, and has been provided (sort of), to qualify for the record.
"The Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R tires, in 245/30ZR20 at the front and 305/30ZR20 at the back were designed specifically by Pirelli’s engineers for the record attempt."
Credible towards a counter argument that the footage wasn't fiddled with is what I meant. Having Pirelli also put their name against the record reduces the possibility of the footage being doctored. Unless, of course, they've also had the wool pulled by Lambo."The Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R tires, in 245/30ZR20 at the front and 305/30ZR20 at the back were designed specifically by Pirelli’s engineers for the record attempt."
There is no doubt in my mind that a super sticky special compound tyre was used that in no way represents what will be fitted to customers car, Pirelli state as much.
foxsasha said:
Credible towards a counter argument that the footage wasn't fiddled with is what I meant. Having Pirelli also put their name against the record reduces the possibility of the footage being doctored. Unless, of course, they've also had the wool pulled by Lambo.
There is no doubt in my mind that a super sticky special compound tyre was used that in no way represents what will be fitted to customers car, Pirelli state as much.
Ah I see. It's a bit confusing really as the Trofeo R is obviously already available to buy but if the design and compound used for the run remains exclusively for that purpose only then it's not really cricket is it? I expect that they will at least have a version of the Trofeo R as an option with the Corsa as standard fit.There is no doubt in my mind that a super sticky special compound tyre was used that in no way represents what will be fitted to customers car, Pirelli state as much.
Let's see a customer car driven from a showroom without any manufacturer involvement with a hand drive it and then I will take it on board.
Right now it's just another hype fest, nothing more and I will lay 10 pounds that a customer car will not get within 10 seconds of that time at anytime.
Right now it's just another hype fest, nothing more and I will lay 10 pounds that a customer car will not get within 10 seconds of that time at anytime.
Let's be honest here. Ring times have always been viewed with scepticism, and for good reason. The unspoken truth within the industry is that everyone 'optimises' their car in some way, so anyone suggesting that Lamborghini are whiter than white here is living in a post Trump 'Fake News' bubble. It's common knowledge that:
- Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
- Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
RacerMike said:
Let's be honest here. Ring times have always been viewed with scepticism, and for good reason. The unspoken truth within the industry is that everyone 'optimises' their car in some way, so anyone suggesting that Lamborghini are whiter than white here is living in a post Trump 'Fake News' bubble. It's common knowledge that:
- Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
Some credible points here - Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
RacerMike said:
Let's be honest here. Ring times have always been viewed with scepticism, and for good reason. The unspoken truth within the industry is that everyone 'optimises' their car in some way, so anyone suggesting that Lamborghini are whiter than white here is living in a post Trump 'Fake News' bubble. It's common knowledge that:
- Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
Amazing how people take all this at face value, they do themselves an injustice. I get that people who consume conspiracy without question are also guilty of idiocy, but things like this that anyone with the ability to pull a few bits together can see don't stand up to scrutiny. To my point above the same car in production form, bought by the likes of me, but driven by someone Ring experienced won't get close to this time. One manufacturers optimised is another mans miles of production.- Nissan GTR Nismo - The 7min 08s time was widely publicised. The wording of the press release (and naming of the car) was very clever though. The actual time wasn't set by a standard GTR Nismo. It was instead set by the GTR Nismo N-Attack which bears about as much resemblance with a GTR Nismo as a 370Z does with a standard GTR. Modifications for the record included: Intercool pipes, ECM Calibration, mechanically adjustable front diff, mechanically adjustable rear diff, Ohlins 4 way dampers with specific N'Ring valving, custom ARBs, uprated brake pads, carbon front wings (fenders if you must!), carbon bonnet, additional front splitter lip, bespoke carbon/aluminium rear wing, full bucket seats, removal of rear seats and sound deadening, carbon fibre rear bulkhead. The full package cost? £65k on top of the base price of the GTR Nismo.
- Honda Civic Type R - Honda describe the time as being set 'during development'. A nice get-out-of-jail-free card to allow them to run significantly more boost than the production car. In independent testing, the Honda sets nearly identical times to the Focus RS in UK spec (with Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres). In independent testing, the Focus managed an 8min06s lap at the 'Ring on Cup 2s!
- Golf GTI Clubsport S - Subtext on video reads 'vehicle not yet for sale and as such doesn't conform to rule 1999/94/EG'. This rule defines emissions. Hence, VW are freely admitting that they 'may' be running a different engine map. In independent testing, the car managed a 7min 56s lap. Still very impressive, but the missing 7s isn't down to the driver....
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
RacerMike said:
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
^ this. If it does transpire that they have doctored this time in some way it would be such a shame.
This is obviously a seriously impressive piece of kit that most car enthusiasts the world over would love to own. If they have bent the truth and they get called on it then it can only reflect badly on a car that should really be taking plaudits.
It will be interesting - and perhaps a little depressing - to see how this pans out when the journalists get their hands on a production model.
This is obviously a seriously impressive piece of kit that most car enthusiasts the world over would love to own. If they have bent the truth and they get called on it then it can only reflect badly on a car that should really be taking plaudits.
It will be interesting - and perhaps a little depressing - to see how this pans out when the journalists get their hands on a production model.
Anyone got a spare Performante they don't mind being thrashed in the interests of science?isaldiri said:
RacerMike said:
For me the issue here, is that they've out and out doctored the video to 'prove' the car did a time it didn't. Why did they not just claim the time and not publish the video? This goes too far. There's no doubt in my mind, having seen the analysis, that they have sped up the video. There is absolutely no way that, whilst obeying the fundamental laws of physics, a car can cover a set measured distance at a known speed in the same time as a car that achieves a higher speed at the entry and exit of this distance. It's basic GCSE....Time = Distance/Speed.
^ this. 1) The video has been sped up. Pretty unequivocal. Also wholly unforgivable.
2) They may well have stitched the video together from different laps. Not as big a deal as #1 as they wouldn't be the first and they'd just be representing the "optimum" possible lap time.
Not sure if it's already been posted but I saw something from Racelogic on Fb earlier saying they believe the footage to be genuine.
It went something along the lines that they know the distance between the bridge and gantry, through previous Vbox customer data and also backed up by Google Earth or something... They then checked the footage frame by frame and worked out the distance as nigh on identical to the known figures. I think it was something like a metre different.
My only thought is that Lamborghini could have planned this would be a popular spot for analysis so have only sped the video up in certain places?
It went something along the lines that they know the distance between the bridge and gantry, through previous Vbox customer data and also backed up by Google Earth or something... They then checked the footage frame by frame and worked out the distance as nigh on identical to the known figures. I think it was something like a metre different.
My only thought is that Lamborghini could have planned this would be a popular spot for analysis so have only sped the video up in certain places?
The funny thing is how completely irrelevant it all is. Do you know how many Performante owners are going to take their car to the Nurburgring?
I do: Zero.
And supposing one of them actually does take it there; are they going to attempt driving it anywhere near as hard as it was being driven in that video? Noooooooooop. Not a chance. At all. Ever.
This is Diver's Watch Syndrome but instead of fat guys in the office saying their watch can survive at 250 metres, far exceeding their co-workers meagre 200 metre watches, very rich people are going to sit around in very expensive cafes and bars around Knightsbridge and compare their Nurburgpenises. When they're finished with the tape measure, they'll drive around town a bit - sometimes even getting them into third gear - and then go home.
I don't blame Lamborghini for this. I don't blame the people who are going to buy it. This is merely an expectation.
The world continues to turn.
I do: Zero.
And supposing one of them actually does take it there; are they going to attempt driving it anywhere near as hard as it was being driven in that video? Noooooooooop. Not a chance. At all. Ever.
This is Diver's Watch Syndrome but instead of fat guys in the office saying their watch can survive at 250 metres, far exceeding their co-workers meagre 200 metre watches, very rich people are going to sit around in very expensive cafes and bars around Knightsbridge and compare their Nurburgpenises. When they're finished with the tape measure, they'll drive around town a bit - sometimes even getting them into third gear - and then go home.
I don't blame Lamborghini for this. I don't blame the people who are going to buy it. This is merely an expectation.
The world continues to turn.
Rawwr said:
The funny thing is how completely irrelevant it all is. Do you know how many Performante owners are going to take their car to the Nurburgring?
I do: Zero.
And supposing one of them actually does take it there; are they going to attempt driving it anywhere near as hard as it was being driven in that video? Noooooooooop. Not a chance. At all. Ever.
This is Diver's Watch Syndrome but instead of fat guys in the office saying their watch can survive at 250 metres, far exceeding their co-workers meagre 200 metre watches, very rich people are going to sit around in very expensive cafes and bars around Knightsbridge and compare their Nurburgpenises. When they're finished with the tape measure, they'll drive around town a bit - sometimes even getting them into third gear - and then go home.
I don't blame Lamborghini for this. I don't blame the people who are going to buy it. This is merely an expectation.
The world continues to turn.
It is however completely relevant if Lamborghini have issued an un achievable, or worse doctored, lap time before the cars official unveiling knowing that a ring record will likely increase sales of the product to the very people you allude to in your post. That's called misselling and is a completely different ball game to mere one-upmanship.I do: Zero.
And supposing one of them actually does take it there; are they going to attempt driving it anywhere near as hard as it was being driven in that video? Noooooooooop. Not a chance. At all. Ever.
This is Diver's Watch Syndrome but instead of fat guys in the office saying their watch can survive at 250 metres, far exceeding their co-workers meagre 200 metre watches, very rich people are going to sit around in very expensive cafes and bars around Knightsbridge and compare their Nurburgpenises. When they're finished with the tape measure, they'll drive around town a bit - sometimes even getting them into third gear - and then go home.
I don't blame Lamborghini for this. I don't blame the people who are going to buy it. This is merely an expectation.
The world continues to turn.
PurpleAki said:
Some of you need to change your tampons.
I'd be amazed if VAG would sanction anything untruthful after dieselgate.
I will take the word of Lamborghini, Pirelli and Race Logic.
Which is well within your rights and I too would like to think it is all above board.I'd be amazed if VAG would sanction anything untruthful after dieselgate.
I will take the word of Lamborghini, Pirelli and Race Logic.
It doesn't stop me taking on what other opinions are though and asking the question myself, I'd rather that than merely dismiss everything else with a flippant comment about tampons.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff