RE: Ferrari FXX-K Evo - official
Sunday 29th October 2017
All Ferraris are special in their own way - yes, all of them now, because you can't make California jokes anymore - but there remains a hierarchy, and some are still more, um, Speciale than others.
CrikeyThere's the limited-run cars, the Apertas and the TdFs, then the Tailor Made ones, and then, when you're really playing with the big boys, the XX models. Think 599XX and FXX, track only hypercars which few of us will ever even see in the metal. The XX Evo cars, though, are Ferraris for a truly elite few, representing the very peak of what Maranello can accomplish at the time. This, the FXX-K Evo, is just the third such car ever produced, and is as predictably outrageous as you might expect; it is the evolution of the track version of Ferrari's 1,000hp hybrid hypercar, after all.
Really crikeyIt's achieved by a fixed rear wing with a central fin (that complements the reprogrammed active spoiler), modified bumpers, "hollowing out the surfaces beneath the headlights", more aero flics (this is a track car, after all) and another front intake. There are vortex generators on the undertray too, contributing 30 per cent of the extra downforce, and the suspension has been recalibrated to take advantage of the new aero prowess as well.
Ferrari FXX-K Evo - official
Less weight, more downforce and a larger rear video screen too - the Evo takes the FXX-K to new extremes
Crikey
Interestingly power is unaltered from FXX-K to Evo, this car surviving with 1,150hp. The main changes are aerodynamic, announced in a very prosaic manner by Ferrari as "an innovative new package for the laboratory car."
Developed over the past year with the Ferrari style centre and Maranello's engineers, it's claimed the Evo delivers aero figures comparable with GT3 cars (with at least 500hp more, don't forget) and also "exhilarating driving pleasure." Which is encouraging. Numbers-wise, because Ferrari loves its numbers, it's incredible: the downforce co-efficient is improved by 23 per cent over an FXX-K, and overall downforce "exceeds 830kg at the car's red-line speed."
Really crikey
The FXX-K Evo has made its debut at the Ferrari World Finals at Mugello, presumably making a great deal of noise and leaving paupers in their Superfasts feeling inferior. The car is being made available both to those customers already with an FXX-K and as an "extremely limited-run model", and will be involved in next year's XX programme from March-October. Should you want one, Ferrari has probably already been in touch. Not one of those people? Let's hope there's one on YouTube soon!
Discussion
It's been on Youtube for a while!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qK_wsFHY3J8&
I will still never forgive the use of the "mule" term though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qK_wsFHY3J8&
I will still never forgive the use of the "mule" term though.
brayash said:
Forgive my naïveté, but if this car has no limits in terms of specifications or regulations, why is it impressive that it has aero/downforce comparable with a gt3 car - which most certainly do?
They say it's all about aero etc but let's face it, this is also influenced by the marketing team to ensure the ultimate Ferrari also LOOKS like the ultimate Ferrari. Looks and pure aero performance don't always go hand in handbrayash said:
Forgive my naïveté, but if this car has no limits in terms of specifications or regulations, why is it impressive that it has aero/downforce comparable with a gt3 car - which most certainly do?
They could go all out on he aero but don’t forget this car still has to make rich people feel like driving gods. If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car DanielSan said:
They could go all out on he aero but don’t forget this car still has to make rich people feel like driving gods. If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car
AgreedI also think this might make the Valkyrie an irrelevance (all be it a lovely irrelevance) as their quoted 1800kg of downforce will be far too much for the average punters neck to withstand.
Who knows?
Will be fun to find out though.
In my view they need to move away from the pure numbers.
It has to be a mix of speed and driver engagement - unless you are racing.
It will be difficult though as blokes will always chase ‘the ultimate’.
I’d rather have something devastatingly quick on track which you can also drive on the road.
DanielSan said:
brayash said:
Forgive my naïveté, but if this car has no limits in terms of specifications or regulations, why is it impressive that it has aero/downforce comparable with a gt3 car - which most certainly do?
They could go all out on he aero but don’t forget this car still has to make rich people feel like driving gods. If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car DanielSan said:
brayash said:
Forgive my naïveté, but if this car has no limits in terms of specifications or regulations, why is it impressive that it has aero/downforce comparable with a gt3 car - which most certainly do?
They could go all out on he aero but don’t forget this car still has to make rich people feel like driving gods. If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car A real GT3 car with its peak downforce is a very difficult beast to tame - you can't just jump in it as an amateur and make it all work, you have to be absolutely committed and on it as a pro.
struggling to understand this:
so it's extra downforce by adding new /different wings, revised suspension and a different steering wheel / screen
yet it reduces the weight of the car somehow?
also what's so special about these modifications that they couldn't put them on the original car? they don't seem particularly innovative
so it's extra downforce by adding new /different wings, revised suspension and a different steering wheel / screen
yet it reduces the weight of the car somehow?
also what's so special about these modifications that they couldn't put them on the original car? they don't seem particularly innovative
WCZ said:
so it's extra downforce by adding new /different wings, revised suspension and a different steering wheel / screen
yet it reduces the weight of the car somehow?
downforce != weight, they will have shaved away some weight in other areas, unrelated to the aeroyet it reduces the weight of the car somehow?
WCZ said:
also what's so special about these modifications that they couldn't put them on the original car? they don't seem particularly innovative
They arent road legal, unless you mean the original FXX-K, in that case its just a matter of further development, probably driven by telemetry coming from the original cars out there.Maldini35 said:
DanielSan said:
They could go all out on he aero but don’t forget this car still has to make rich people feel like driving gods. If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car
AgreedI also think this might make the Valkyrie an irrelevance (all be it a lovely irrelevance) as their quoted 1800kg of downforce will be far too much for the average punters neck to withstand.
Who knows?
Will be fun to find out though.
In my view they need to move away from the pure numbers.
It has to be a mix of speed and driver engagement - unless you are racing.
It will be difficult though as blokes will always chase ‘the ultimate’.
I’d rather have something devastatingly quick on track which you can also drive on the road.
Maldini35 said:
DanielSan said:
...If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car
... their quoted 1800kg of downforce will be far too much for the average punters neck to withstand. It raises the limits of grip, which means it might become more tiring to exploit fully, but you don't [i]have[i/i] to brake and corner faster, just because the car would allow you to.
Even then there's a difference between road use or half a dozen track day laps at a time, and a 305 kilometre Grand Prix driving flat out for an hour and three quarters.
Equus said:
Maldini35 said:
DanielSan said:
...If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car
... their quoted 1800kg of downforce will be far too much for the average punters neck to withstand. It raises the limits of grip, which means it might become more tiring to exploit fully, but you don't [i]have[i/i] to brake and corner faster, just because the car would allow you to.
Even then there's a difference between road use or half a dozen track day laps at a time, and a 305 kilometre Grand Prix driving flat out for an hour and three quarters.
Of course downforce acts on the car but to what benefit?
I would hazard a guess that it primarily helps you go around corners a little faster.
Higher corner speeds will generate lateral G and that can be a right pain in the neck.
You don’t need to drive for 90 minutes either, just a handful of laps in a proper wings & slicks car on track can knacker your Gregory.
I know from (painful) first hand experience.
Aside from goading me into stating the bleedin’ obvious I now have to address your 2nd point:
‘but you don't [i]have[i/i] to brake and corner faster, just because the car would allow you to.’
If we were talking about a regular car intended for the road I would agree...but the Valkyrie?
Begs the question why bother spending the £2m+ on the ultimate track car with Le Mans prototype levels of downforce, designed by aero genius Adrian Newey, capable of lapping faster than anything else, if you just want to pootle around.
Perhaps you’re like my Grandmother who never felt the need to use 4th gear in her Renault 5?
Yes, the Valkyrie is is a track car first and foremost. I take it you’ve seen the pictures?
They will make a few road legal versions but it can’t really be described as a road car.
What do you think the design brief was? A road car first and foremost than can handle a few laps on circuit ....or.....a full blown track car with huge levels of downforce and the bare minimum concessions to make it road legal?
Ultimately we’ll have to wait and see how it performs but I maintain that 1800kg of downforce will break most amateurs.
Edited by Maldini35 on Tuesday 31st October 23:08
Edited by Maldini35 on Tuesday 31st October 23:32
Maldini35 said:
Equus said:
Maldini35 said:
DanielSan said:
...If they went to F1 levels of downforce most wouldn’t be able to drive the car
... their quoted 1800kg of downforce will be far too much for the average punters neck to withstand. It raises the limits of grip, which means it might become more tiring to exploit fully, but you don't [i]have[i/i] to brake and corner faster, just because the car would allow you to.
Even then there's a difference between road use or half a dozen track day laps at a time, and a 305 kilometre Grand Prix driving flat out for an hour and three quarters.
Of course downforce acts on the car but to what benefit?
I would hazard a guess that it primarily helps you go around corners a little faster.
Higher corner speeds will generate lateral G and that can be a right pain in the neck.
You don’t need to drive for 90 minutes either, just a handful of laps in a proper wings & slicks car on track can knacker your Gregory.
I know from (painful) first hand experience.
Aside from goading me into stating the bleedin’ obvious I now have to address your 2nd point:
‘but you don't [i]have[i/i] to brake and corner faster, just because the car would allow you to.’
If we were talking about a regular car intended for the road I would agree...but the Valkyrie?
Begs the question why bother spending the £2m+ on the ultimate track car with Le Mans prototype levels of downforce, designed by aero genius Adrian Newey, capable of lapping faster than anything else, if you just want to pootle around.
Perhaps you’re like my Grandmother who never felt the need to use 4th gear in her Renault 5?
Yes, the Valkyrie is is a track car first and foremost. I take it you’ve seen the pictures?
They will make a few road legal versions but it can’t really be described as a road car.
What do you think the design brief was? A road car first and foremost than can handle a few laps on circuit ....or.....a full blown track car with huge levels of downforce and the bare minimum concessions to make it road legal?
Ultimately we’ll have to wait and see how it performs but I maintain that 1800kg of downforce will break most amateurs.
Edited by Maldini35 on Tuesday 31st October 23:08
Edited by Maldini35 on Tuesday 31st October 23:32
So that's 830kg at c.220mph. That'll be in a straight line with virtually zero lateral G. My 5 year old son's neck would cope fine.
As for cornering, well we don't have any stats for that ??
Edited by adingley84 on Wednesday 1st November 07:29
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff