Nurburgring - new lap record for a sham road car
Discussion
I'm surprised that no one's begun a thread for this, although joe911 and jacobyte both referred to it on the Your Nurburgring Times Please thread.
On Thursday a car bearing "Edo" livery did a 7:15 lap. You can expect a full report (in German, naturally) in the forthcoming Sport Auto.
The car was on road tyres (Pirelli Corsas), and there were what appeared to be genuine German registration plates affixed front and rear. These features were included, no doubt, to enable the Edo people to claim a new road car record.
PHers should not take this "record" too seriously. In this man's opinion, the Edo car represented a new, Grand Canyon-wide gap between record-breakers and actual road cars.
To wit, is anyone aware of any Porsche 996 road car that came from the factory with:
- a sequential gearbox,
- a fully cross-braced, welded cage, and,
- ahem, air jacks?
In case you were wondering, the car also lacked a handbrake.
The car was, in essence, an RSR with a turbo engine.
These guys might try to claim the record, but if they did they would just be making themselves look silly.
They could, on the other hand, do the honest thing and post the 7:15 time amongst times for other race cars, but then their time would be uncompetitive, and what is the point of running a race car on road tyres anyhow?
This is not to knock the guy (something Simon) who drove it - 7:15 in anything is very impressive.
Maybe this will induce Sport Auto to initiate two or more separate classes of record times for cars bearing licence plates.
>> Edited by flemke on Sunday 7th August 21:57
On Thursday a car bearing "Edo" livery did a 7:15 lap. You can expect a full report (in German, naturally) in the forthcoming Sport Auto.
The car was on road tyres (Pirelli Corsas), and there were what appeared to be genuine German registration plates affixed front and rear. These features were included, no doubt, to enable the Edo people to claim a new road car record.
PHers should not take this "record" too seriously. In this man's opinion, the Edo car represented a new, Grand Canyon-wide gap between record-breakers and actual road cars.
To wit, is anyone aware of any Porsche 996 road car that came from the factory with:
- a sequential gearbox,
- a fully cross-braced, welded cage, and,
- ahem, air jacks?
In case you were wondering, the car also lacked a handbrake.
The car was, in essence, an RSR with a turbo engine.
These guys might try to claim the record, but if they did they would just be making themselves look silly.
They could, on the other hand, do the honest thing and post the 7:15 time amongst times for other race cars, but then their time would be uncompetitive, and what is the point of running a race car on road tyres anyhow?
This is not to knock the guy (something Simon) who drove it - 7:15 in anything is very impressive.
Maybe this will induce Sport Auto to initiate two or more separate classes of record times for cars bearing licence plates.
>> Edited by flemke on Sunday 7th August 21:57
joe911 said:Sorry, old boy. As there have been so many other 'Ring-related threads on TD&DE, I expected any discussion about the record to be here, rather than on a forum that lately has comprised, among numerous other subjects, shooting brakes, favourite driving songs, memorable reg plates and whether diesel is flammable.
I'm surprised that no one's begun a thread for this, although joe911 and jacobyte both referred to it on the Your Nurburgring Times Please thread.
I did - here
kedelbach said:Kurt,
Are the "rules" to this hotly contested NS event online anywhere?
Air jacks would seem to just be ballast, as would an aftermarket cage (extra stiffening a separate matter). Who makes the gearbox? What are the details on the motor?
those are probably the biggest street tires available...
Kurt
I think the point is that this car is and always was a race car, which from its creation had an integral cage and the airjacks.
The rear tyres were, IIRC, 315/30/18. The widest road tyres (for a performance automobile) made are 345, although I think the Veyron's intended spec is 365 for the rears.
kedelbach said:My guess - and this is purely a guess - is that they either took the VIN from a crashed GT3 or they went to someone working at a very low level in the TUV. I have seen a GT3 Cup car (out-and-out race car) with German reg plates for which someone claimed to have paid a grand in return for TUV road approval - without modifications.
There must be a Herr or Frau Edo working at high levels in the TÜV offices to get those things road registered!
Kurt
A bit like when a car in the UK gets an MOT without having been seen by an MOT examiner.
kedelbach said:It can't be the responsibility of 'Ring management to do their own independent TUV inspection of a car. If someone is perpetrating a fraud, that's a job for the police.
Along these lines, it's really quite amazing that N GmbH would allow this car to run during Tourist day, IF something fishy with the plates/registration actually happened (and, being Germany, it's a safe bet that this car didn't travel the same TÜV route as those Golf's with big wheel spacers). Imagine a fatal crash involving a car (driven almost constantly on the NS during TF) registered under false pretenses. The ramifications would be BIG.
the plot thickens...
Kurt
I myself could not say whether the car was road-legal. Perhaps the Edo car has a handbrake lever hidden under the seat, or an electronic actuator on the dashboard.
Maybe handbrakes are not required by the TUV... I don't think that on this forum we should go too far in suggesting that the car was not road-legal. What we can opine on is whether the car ought to qualify for a production road-car record, and it plainly should not.
p490kvp said:p490kvp,
I think Norman Simon drove the car - and fair play. Everyone moans about what does or does not make a road car but lets be honest the car looks perfectly capable of being driven on road and I'm sure it costs a great deal less than a Carrera GT, Zonda or Enzo so whats the problem?
Surely the good thing is that more people are stepping up to the plate to make fast laps?
I'm with Hammerwerfer on this one.
If the car was "perfectly capable of being driven on road" then surely Porsche would have offered it for sale as such - there would have been plenty of potential buyers. The fact that it was built without the numerous compromises that are required (by law or by custom) in a road car has much to do with why it was able to do a 7:15 in the first place. It doesn't make sense to compare it with road cars in a way that flatters it (lap time) while in many other areas the car has major shortcomings that true road cars easily overcome.
This car belongs to a category that is not "Road Car". At least as recently as the early '70s Formula One cars were occasionally driven on public roads for brief tests or to simplify transit from a temporary village garage to a paddock. Indeed Formula One cars even today are driven on public roads in Monte Carlo. Nevertheless these were/are hardly "road cars".
I don't think we know how much the Edo car would have cost, but I believe that a new RSR was about 175 sterling, and with a turbo it surely would have been over 200 - considerably less than the cars that you mention, but still considerably expensive.
This car is simply a silhouette of a road car, which doesn't make it any more of a road car than a DTM car is. The fact that it was on road tyres means nothing more than that. Now Edo's got the record for the fastest lap done by a race car on road tyres - so what? I've got the record for the fastest lap by someone with the user name Flemke, but I don't think that anybody particularly cares about that, nor about lap times for race cars on road tyres.
If you ask me - and with no disrespect to your superb and courageous achievement - the two meaningful lap records are 6:11 and 7:32.
Cheers.
(ps: I believe he's Patrick Simon.)
joe911 said:I guarantee that a standard F1 wouldn't come close to the laptime of a CGT or Enzo (well, I'm assuming that the Enzo could do a full lap without breaking down).
McLaren F1 would still be the daddy, surely?
No. Est. lap time for the F1 is about 7:35 I seem to remember - Flemke?
There are three things that would hold back the F1:
- its tyres, which were designed a decade ago, are, by current standards, crap,
- it has much less downforce (if any) than the other two, and
- its standard suspension is, shall we say, problematical.
On the GTR race cars all three of these areas were addressed. Even amongst the GTRs, the long-tail race car of '97, which was the fastest variation of the F1, could not keep up with the Porsche GT1. Then consider that the CGT was originally going to be the race car that superseded the GT1.
As I say, the tyre and aero issues are overwhelming.
My guess is that a bog-standard F1 road car on Pilot Sports in the hands of a Ringmeister would do...maybe a touch under 8, and that would be one scary ride.
My guess is that the long-tail racer on modern slicks would do maybe 6:40 (in the context that the record for mortals was Ickx's 6:25).
nords said:
Flemke,
How about one of the five Le Mans Macca specials? Less top end but better thru' the gears acceleration and downforce....? Modern tyres and a re-worked brake system and it could be better than the CGT?
Well...
The LMs were a bit heavier than the '95 race cars but they had more powerful engines. Aero-wise they appear to be quite similar, although I couldn't say how effective their aero package was, but there is no way that it was as effective as the '97 long-tail race car's was.
I am fairly confident that the LM's suspension is not adjustable, unlike the race car's. That is definitely a problem.
The LMs had iron brake rotors and fairly heavy aluminium wheels. You could get more-modern tyres for their 18" wheels, whereas with the standard road cars you're stuck with the older design because the spec is unique (315/45/17/Z at the rear).
So, with more modern tyres it definitely would be quicker than the standard F1 road car. In relation to the CGT (or the red cheese wedge), the LM has a considerably better power/weight ratio, less good brakes, an inferior suspension and what is quite likely to be inferior aerodynamics. Let's call it even with tyres.
I believe that the LM's top speed with all that drag is in the 210 range - as you say, not a limiting factor in this case.
The 'Ring is much more of a handling/aero circuit than it is a power circuit, so my money would have to be on the modern cars - by 5-10 seconds.
By the way, if you'd like another possible reference point, the Ringmeister who's been developing my car expects that after its suspension has been substantially reworked and its brakes replaced, and it's got modern tyres, it should be in the 7:45-7:50 range. And no, I'm not going to see if he's right.
>> Edited by flemke on Monday 8th August 22:58
race2the redline said:Suspension is finished, tyres fitted but to temporary 2-piece BBS wheels. The car is much better.
I have been meaning to ask how the modifications have been progressing, but a suitable opportunity had not arisen.
Regards
R2TR
We have been waiting (as in, "forever"
for BBS to get back to us with a proposal for mag wheels that would replicate the originals but in the bigger size. Have also begun discussions with two other places that claim to be able to produce bespoke mag wheels. After the wheels are sorted we'll work on the brakes, although I may wait on that because it seems that the industry is working on several braking systems that would be superior to traditional iron rotors. No sense in slapping on something now if there will be an important technological step forward in the near future.
R2TR,
For brakes, there are three possibilities of which I am aware:
- the carbon-ceramics that are now in their third generation and fairly well sorted. I reckon that I would save about 1.5kg/wheel relative to what's on the car now, maybe 2. This would be the simplest option.
- the Delphi "dual-rotor" system which is like a pair of bike rotors and one caliper with maybe an inch of space between them (the rotors), which are scheduled to be in production next year, and
- a system that is being developed by a chap I know which consists of solid carbon pads and rotors which have a special treatment to get over the low-temp coefficient of friction problem.
As the last two options have some promise, but I would be crazy to use either until it is more developed, it may make sense to be patient, despite the fact that by this point I am very impatient.
nords,
The car looks the same as it has done (pictures of which have been on PH a few times) except that at the moment it is bearing 19" BBS two-piece wheels which, with their gold centres and polished ally rims, look pretty awful.
For brakes, there are three possibilities of which I am aware:
- the carbon-ceramics that are now in their third generation and fairly well sorted. I reckon that I would save about 1.5kg/wheel relative to what's on the car now, maybe 2. This would be the simplest option.
- the Delphi "dual-rotor" system which is like a pair of bike rotors and one caliper with maybe an inch of space between them (the rotors), which are scheduled to be in production next year, and
- a system that is being developed by a chap I know which consists of solid carbon pads and rotors which have a special treatment to get over the low-temp coefficient of friction problem.
As the last two options have some promise, but I would be crazy to use either until it is more developed, it may make sense to be patient, despite the fact that by this point I am very impatient.
nords,
The car looks the same as it has done (pictures of which have been on PH a few times) except that at the moment it is bearing 19" BBS two-piece wheels which, with their gold centres and polished ally rims, look pretty awful.
Actually I prefer the look of tall sidewalls, which remind me of so many gorgeous race cars from the past.
The reasons for 19s relate to why the car needs different tyres in the first place.
They are that both pairs of tyres are too flexible laterally and that the rear tyres particularly need to be stiffer in order induce more below-the-limit understeer.
Then you look at what tyres actually exist that would fit the car, be the correct width, have the correct rolling diameter, have the right sort of tread pattern, and have a sufficient speed rating. This narrows down your choices very sharply.
On top of these considerations, I wanted a tyre that I knew would still be in production ten or twenty years from now.
Without boring you with all the details, the two kinds of tyres that I seriously thought about were the Bridgestones designed for the Enzo (Pirelli now do something similar for the MC12), which are 19 front and rear, and the Michelins for the CGT (19/20). It appeared to be pretty much of a tossup between the two, but I thought that 20" rear wheels would look OTT on the car so I opted for 19s. I may still have BBS do a set of 20" rears to experiment further.
Other things are not equal, but if they were, the main differences between 18 and 19 would be, as you say, more space for rotors with the 19s, but with a weight penalty.
Rotational weight is the absolute worst, so I keep looking for ways to minimise it (recently a PHer pointed me towards a British wheelmaker, which may prove fruitful). You get some more rotational weight with the larger wheels, although the difference obviously depends on how light your wheel design is, as well as the tyre construction.
I don't think that the extra space for brakes is necessary. To wit, the ceramic brakes on a GT3 fit inside 18s, the GT3 weighs about 200kg more than the F1, and that size rotor is more than sufficient for the Porsche. Yes the F1 may have to stop from higher speeds, but not several times in succession, and since the F1 brakes need to be pulling back considerably less weight, I wouldn't be worried about the stopping capacity of the Porsche ceramics. In fact I can imagine using rotors for 18s inside the 19s in order to keep the weight down. We'll see.
The reasons for 19s relate to why the car needs different tyres in the first place.
They are that both pairs of tyres are too flexible laterally and that the rear tyres particularly need to be stiffer in order induce more below-the-limit understeer.
Then you look at what tyres actually exist that would fit the car, be the correct width, have the correct rolling diameter, have the right sort of tread pattern, and have a sufficient speed rating. This narrows down your choices very sharply.
On top of these considerations, I wanted a tyre that I knew would still be in production ten or twenty years from now.
Without boring you with all the details, the two kinds of tyres that I seriously thought about were the Bridgestones designed for the Enzo (Pirelli now do something similar for the MC12), which are 19 front and rear, and the Michelins for the CGT (19/20). It appeared to be pretty much of a tossup between the two, but I thought that 20" rear wheels would look OTT on the car so I opted for 19s. I may still have BBS do a set of 20" rears to experiment further.
Other things are not equal, but if they were, the main differences between 18 and 19 would be, as you say, more space for rotors with the 19s, but with a weight penalty.
Rotational weight is the absolute worst, so I keep looking for ways to minimise it (recently a PHer pointed me towards a British wheelmaker, which may prove fruitful). You get some more rotational weight with the larger wheels, although the difference obviously depends on how light your wheel design is, as well as the tyre construction.
I don't think that the extra space for brakes is necessary. To wit, the ceramic brakes on a GT3 fit inside 18s, the GT3 weighs about 200kg more than the F1, and that size rotor is more than sufficient for the Porsche. Yes the F1 may have to stop from higher speeds, but not several times in succession, and since the F1 brakes need to be pulling back considerably less weight, I wouldn't be worried about the stopping capacity of the Porsche ceramics. In fact I can imagine using rotors for 18s inside the 19s in order to keep the weight down. We'll see.
I am not in the least worried about the Porsche (Brembo, I believe) ceramics.
This year I have done 100ish laps of the 'Ring on a set in a GT3 and they're fine. I've also done about 30 laps in a CGT and again no probs whatsoever.
The 2005 GT3 Cup car comes with ceramics as part of the new formula and I'm unaware of any inherent problems with them.
As I am not on the verge of making a change there is plenty of time to get more information, and, as indicated, for competing developments in other systems. But so far as I am concerned the ceramics are fine and would be the conservative option.
This year I have done 100ish laps of the 'Ring on a set in a GT3 and they're fine. I've also done about 30 laps in a CGT and again no probs whatsoever.
The 2005 GT3 Cup car comes with ceramics as part of the new formula and I'm unaware of any inherent problems with them.
As I am not on the verge of making a change there is plenty of time to get more information, and, as indicated, for competing developments in other systems. But so far as I am concerned the ceramics are fine and would be the conservative option.
Gassing Station | Track Days | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff