The Countach Turbo S, was this built by Lamborghini?
Discussion
Ok you Lambo historians, did Lamborghini build a turbo Countach as a factory prototype. I found this info on another site and as you can imagine no one seems to know for certain, here are some pics:
The 4,8 liter V12 with bi-turbo had a power output of 748 hp (!!!!) and 876 Newtonmeter. It managed to do 0-100 km/h in 3,7 seconds and kept going all the way up to 333 km/h.
Beneath the steering wheel there is a turbo adjuster. It could be manually turned to boost the turbo from 0,7 bar to 1,5 bar at which the engine performed its maximum power output.
The Countach rolls on 15" with 255/45 front and 345/35 for the backwheels.
The 4,8 liter V12 with bi-turbo had a power output of 748 hp (!!!!) and 876 Newtonmeter. It managed to do 0-100 km/h in 3,7 seconds and kept going all the way up to 333 km/h.
Beneath the steering wheel there is a turbo adjuster. It could be manually turned to boost the turbo from 0,7 bar to 1,5 bar at which the engine performed its maximum power output.
The Countach rolls on 15" with 255/45 front and 345/35 for the backwheels.
Edited by Streetrod on Sunday 11th July 23:08
... looking for the correct words that aren't too simplistic but they just won't come ...
the answer is an almost certain and very categorical
NO
Automobili Lamborghini moved on from the 4.8 litre engine to the 5.2 litre quattrovalvole and never entertained forced induction or even fuel injection (apart from in the USA) and that poor car, wherever it is, is a brutally raped, needlessly crippled vehicle that never deserved such disgraceful treatment. Whoever did this is a Philistine who'd be better employed doing this to Fords or such where it wouldn't really matter...
Which is all just my 'umble opinion of course as I'm sure the Countach itself will be more than able to exact its own revenge in some way, some how.
countachman said:
yes it looks well done but please....leave alone eh......COUNTACH RULES OK
Why? If you can make better, than make it better and lets be honest improving on the base architecture of the Countach wasnt hard. Objectively they were awful cars and Lambo at the time made Ferrari look like paragons of quality and engineering finesse.http://koenig-specials.com/homepage%20neu/navigati... used to list one, but its not on the web site anymore.
Ray
Ray
DJC said:
countachman said:
yes it looks well done but please....leave alone eh......COUNTACH RULES OK
Why? If you can make better, than make it better and lets be honest improving on the base architecture of the Countach wasnt hard. Objectively they were awful cars and Lambo at the time made Ferrari look like paragons of quality and engineering finesse.
DJC said:
But the Countach wasnt perfection
Sorry i dont understand where you are coming from, possibly the most stunning, beloved, revered, lusted after and influential supercar of the last century (mclaren F1 aside)and you say its far from perfection!!!??? what if anything tops that? I mean its THE supercar to define all supercars.You must have very high standards if you think the Countach is not special, and what may i ask is special in that case?
alan witt said:
DJC said:
But the Countach wasnt perfection
Sorry i dont understand where you are coming from, possibly the most stunning, beloved, revered, lusted after and influential supercar of the last century (mclaren F1 aside)and you say its far from perfection!!!??? what if anything tops that? I mean its THE supercar to define all supercars.You must have very high standards if you think the Countach is not special, and what may i ask is special in that case?
I know we can take what JC says with a pinch of salt most of the time but in this video he is pretty much on the money:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtQPjgzV1kA&fea...
Now just to get back on topic are all you Lambo experts out there saying that Lamborghini never experimented with turbo's and never released any to the public, as that was my original question? Thanks in advance
Agree with DJC and Streetrod.
I've owned a Countach and loved it, but it had a lot of foibles and wasn't perfect. Two simple things that would have made big improvements, IMHO, would have been to give it a set of lights that allowed you to see where you were going when using just some of the performance available, and a decent set of brakes.
I've owned a Countach and loved it, but it had a lot of foibles and wasn't perfect. Two simple things that would have made big improvements, IMHO, would have been to give it a set of lights that allowed you to see where you were going when using just some of the performance available, and a decent set of brakes.
alan witt said:
DJC said:
But the Countach wasnt perfection
Sorry i dont understand where you are coming from, possibly the most stunning, beloved, revered, lusted after and influential supercar of the last century (mclaren F1 aside)and you say its far from perfection!!!??? what if anything tops that? I mean its THE supercar to define all supercars.You must have very high standards if you think the Countach is not special, and what may i ask is special in that case?
I'm sorry, I love the Countach, it is what made me fall in love with Lamborghini's, but to call it perfect is just not true, rear vision is so good the best way to reverse is hang out the car so you can see properly, a couple of inches of window that opens, not good. As owners of Countach's have said it has its idiosyncrasies, but you put up with them because you love the car. I could of bought one but didn't want to meet my hero. Lets be practical about this, no car is perfect or there would be no competition as no-one would intentionally buy something inferior.
I adore the Miura but it is known that due to the placement of the fuel tank with the weight distribution, the front end goes light when is gets low on fuel. I would have one tomorrow (along with a Countach) if I won the lottery and think it is the pinnacle of 60's design, but I could no more call it perfect than I could the Countach.
Love them for their beauty, drive them for their thrill, but be truthful about their flaws.
I adore the Miura but it is known that due to the placement of the fuel tank with the weight distribution, the front end goes light when is gets low on fuel. I would have one tomorrow (along with a Countach) if I won the lottery and think it is the pinnacle of 60's design, but I could no more call it perfect than I could the Countach.
Love them for their beauty, drive them for their thrill, but be truthful about their flaws.
Lambochick said:
Agree with DJC and Streetrod.
I've owned a Countach and loved it, but it had a lot of foibles and wasn't perfect. Two simple things that would have made big improvements, IMHO, would have been to give it a set of lights that allowed you to see where you were going when using just some of the performance available, and a decent set of brakes.
What the girl says.I've owned a Countach and loved it, but it had a lot of foibles and wasn't perfect. Two simple things that would have made big improvements, IMHO, would have been to give it a set of lights that allowed you to see where you were going when using just some of the performance available, and a decent set of brakes.
Though I do have to thank Lisa for one of *those* moments in ones motoring life. I was behind you at the top of the hill exiting Brooklands for one of the Auto Italia shows about 4 yrs ago. David Yu had dragged me down to snap the Saggy on the banking for the Auto-Journals thing and I happened to be leaving the same time as you in the white Countach. Sat behind and get treated to legs and then bird emerging from a Countach. I remember thinking to myself..."well lad, you dont see that everyday!"
Well, it made me chuckle!
DJC said:
But the Countach wasnt perfection, it was a long way from it!
And yes to the earlier post, my first thoughts were Koenig, but the car is missing some suitable Koenig styling clues.
I am obviously biased having a QV, but i have to disagree! The car came out in 1972 and remained in production until 1989. And yes to the earlier post, my first thoughts were Koenig, but the car is missing some suitable Koenig styling clues.
At what point are you comparing it's perfection or lack of it? Compared to a 2010 car?
for it's time it was a very good car. it is still hugley fast and capable, but a 360CS would be better! Having driven it and moderns back to back on country roads etc it is not perfect. However i have yet to find a car that is!
People slagg them off and most have never seen them let alone drive them. JC and the rest have an entertainment program not a driving program. Most people I have met base there views on that!
In answer to the OP question, this is def not by the factory. the factory had a couple of prototypes but they were not turbo charged and the body styling was very different. dont have a pic on this computer.
Lambo never EVER turbo'd a countach or as far as i am aware any other car.
there were a few turbo conversions carried out on standard cars but i think these were all in Germany.
I will check and get the details of this car.
There were only about 2000 built and most are known to someone!!
Paul
xx
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff