VMAX IV - Speed table results are here!!!!!!!!
Discussion
ehasler said:
[quote=craigw]
Did Nick really hit 179 as well?
Yep!
I guess that just shows how much difference there is between the Red Rose and the S!
Also, without wishing to poo-poo Tony's efforts in the Cerbie, I think his 178 may have been one of my runs, as it looked like they got our speeds mixed up when we ran together (I did 178, he did 160something).
Maybe next time....
I'll leave you to sort that out between yourselves but it looks like his 178 run was against a 360
ehasler said:I can see this rapidly progressing to having unique beacons in each car so that results are logged automatically....
Also, without wishing to poo-poo Tony's efforts in the Cerbie, I think his 178 may have been one of my runs, as it looked like they got our speeds mixed up when we ran together (I did 178, he did 160something).
I am glad to see i got the same speed as Panis 360 without all the mods or a tubi. next time i will aim for 180! Big difference this time round VMAX3 i was able to stop for the bend no problems, this time round that extra 8mph meant i was having to go straight on towards the end as the brakes had had enough 
must get some bigger disks on it something like Kevin has on his car ( I wish)
Big difference this time round VMAX3 i was able to stop for the bend no problems, this time round that extra 8mph meant i was having to go straight on towards the end as the brakes had had enough must get some bigger disks on it something like Kevin has on his car ( I wish)jeremyc said:
Also, without wishing to poo-poo Tony's efforts in the Cerbie, I think his 178 may have been one of my runs, as it looked like they got our speeds mixed up when we ran together (I did 178, he did 160something).
I can see this rapidly progressing to having unique beacons in each car so that results are logged automatically....
Good idea!
I'm actually surprised they managed to log any speeds vs the correct driver, as it couldn't have been easy reading smudged numbers on the backs of cars travelling at nearly 200mph, especially when it was wet!
craigw said:Yeah I remember that ED but that was early on when I was going easy on you
Also, without wishing to poo-poo Tony's efforts in the Cerbie, I think his 178 may have been one of my runs, as it looked like they got our speeds mixed up when we ran together (I did 178, he did 160something).
I'll leave you to sort that out between yourselves but it looks like his 178 run was against a 360
Later in the dry I was really giving it some and managed a few in the 170's. I also remember giving it some on a run against a 360 too, so I think we'll leave it at 178 Mr
Big T said:
Also, without wishing to poo-poo Tony's efforts in the Cerbie, I think his 178 may have been one of my runs, as it looked like they got our speeds mixed up when we ran together (I did 178, he did 160something).
I'll leave you to sort that out between yourselves but it looks like his 178 run was against a 360
Yeah I remember that ED but that was early on when I was going easy on you
Later in the dry I was really giving it some and managed a few in the 170's. I also remember giving it some on a run against a 360 too, so I think we'll leave it at 178 Mr
Fair enough, although I was going easy on you during our run!
I reckon I'd have gone even quicker in the dry later on if my engine had lasted a bit longer!
Still, it was very close, even though mine was quicker!
derestrictor said:
167 for an M5 - excellent.
What was the speedo reading at this speed (I ask entirely for reasons of private land-based experimentation, you understand!)
Arthur C Clarke.
This was in the wet in the morning coming out of the hairpin completely sideways, fun, but not the best way to achieve max MPH, 170 would have been acheivable in the afternoon, (bl**dy mothers day,(love you really Mum) still, 167 not bad as you say (169 on speedo), but if you know you could have done better.....
excuses, excuses, I know
can't beleive how much quicker the Ruff was! wish I'd got a ride in yours Der!
Nik
craigw said:
Interestingly, the VX220 boys who assured me they would take it "easy" on the way out, posted between 117 and 130mph!
mach
vmax15000bhp
OOPS
You didn't say how easy??
Will be entering next time after all the mods have been done
Although I think it will run out of revs at 155 
Gazboy said:
This was in the wet in the morning coming out of the hairpin completely sideways
So was it just me who had chronic understeer on the second half of the hairpin?
Nah, I had chronic understeer in DeR's 993tt there and then spun it when I tried to tighten the line with 490bhp
According to my Bumper Book of Racing Driver excuses (foreword by N Mansell) this is because 'the second part of the turn has deposits of rubber on it, left over from standing starts down the 2 mile straight. Plus the surface is utter sh1t and it was raining.'
Nothing to do with me being a rubbish driver at all
Nik,
169 on the dial reflecting a real 167 is massively encouraging; does this mean that indicated speeds in the region of, say, 180, are equally accurate in reality?
If so, the awe rightly accorded must needs be considerable.
What a phenomenal sports saloon: data like this reassures me greatly along the harsh roads of badly surfaced Albionism that characterises a post-Lexian existence.
By the way, do you know how to restore the chrome ends of the quad exhausts? Mine look perpetually fried?
169 on the dial reflecting a real 167 is massively encouraging; does this mean that indicated speeds in the region of, say, 180, are equally accurate in reality?
If so, the awe rightly accorded must needs be considerable.
What a phenomenal sports saloon: data like this reassures me greatly along the harsh roads of badly surfaced Albionism that characterises a post-Lexian existence.
By the way, do you know how to restore the chrome ends of the quad exhausts? Mine look perpetually fried?
Flying Trotter said:
mmmm the sheets I saw at the timing station showed a 160 mph and a 164 mph for the Breadvan which accords with what I saw on the left timing board.......mysterious
Craig - there does seem to be some inconsistencies, not just people wishing they'd gone quicker, they've seen theie toimes on the Trap, me included, any ideas?
Nik
Gazboy said:
This was in the wet in the morning coming out of the hairpin completely sideways
So was it just me who had chronic understeer on the second half of the hairpin?
No that was me as well! Trying to give a Griffifth that necessary amount of throttle to overcome the understeer without going badger hunting is a very fine line indeed. Not one I fancied trying much last sunday!
Cheers Craig,
I am well chuffed with 167, I missed the reading on the board on a few runs 'cos I was concentrating on braking points so I could get round the bend. Saw lots of 165s and 166s so the 167 is a bonus!
I reckon that's pretty much the best I'm going to wring out of the car short of hurricane force tail winds or hitching a tow-rope to the back of Craig's Ruf, though I have to confess I've been having dangerous thoughts since Sunday involving chipping and Tubi exhausts, but I must resist those!
Incidentally I think I've shagged my brakes as they've been really rumbly since Sunday, but it was well worth it!
Cheers again,
Chris
(167mph
)
I am well chuffed with 167, I missed the reading on the board on a few runs 'cos I was concentrating on braking points so I could get round the bend. Saw lots of 165s and 166s so the 167 is a bonus!
I reckon that's pretty much the best I'm going to wring out of the car short of hurricane force tail winds or hitching a tow-rope to the back of Craig's Ruf, though I have to confess I've been having dangerous thoughts since Sunday involving chipping and Tubi exhausts, but I must resist those!
Incidentally I think I've shagged my brakes as they've been really rumbly since Sunday, but it was well worth it!
Cheers again,
Chris
(167mph
)
Assuming you are in a car that can do 180mph,0-100 in 10 secs, and exit the bottom corner at 100mph, you gain 3mph over a standing start taken at the bottom corner exit.
So any, "if I hadn't chased the badger I would have hit 190 million miles an hour" is unlikely....
Tested the theory (intentionally), and practise (accidentally)....
So any, "if I hadn't chased the badger I would have hit 190 million miles an hour" is unlikely....
Tested the theory (intentionally), and practise (accidentally)....
Interesting results on the speed tables.
I find the M5 result interesting, especially since I was seeing similar speedometer readings all day (169 mph) and both my on board GPS systems were saying 161, a figure I have little reason to doubt since the limiter cutting in nearly always with 300 yards to go allowed the GPS devices to finish playing "catch up" well before the timing gear. Timing board concurred. Regularly.
Not sure where the assigned speed was plucked from TBH, so glad I am not the only one bathed in puzzlement!
I find the M5 result interesting, especially since I was seeing similar speedometer readings all day (169 mph) and both my on board GPS systems were saying 161, a figure I have little reason to doubt since the limiter cutting in nearly always with 300 yards to go allowed the GPS devices to finish playing "catch up" well before the timing gear. Timing board concurred. Regularly.
Not sure where the assigned speed was plucked from TBH, so glad I am not the only one bathed in puzzlement!
Gassing Station | Events & Meetings | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff