Vmax today ultima
Discussion
Ultima factory said:
Hi 845ste,
A standard Ultima GTR with no wing or splitter but with standard grills, door mirrors, wiper and standard ride height variation front to rear is 0.336.
For an Ultima with an Ultima front splitter and with the standard wing set at zero degrees without the flap the rear wheel bhp required to overcome the wind resistance alone is 404 rear wheel bhp according to our wind tunnel results. .
The best combination for a balanced front and rear down force was achieved using the front splitter and the rear wing set at zero degrees with no flap. This is our recommended settings for high speed 200+mph runs.
_Incidentally the power to overcome the wind resistance with the same configuration at 100mph is only 50bhp.
Hope this helps.
Regards to all,
this is very very interesting.A standard Ultima GTR with no wing or splitter but with standard grills, door mirrors, wiper and standard ride height variation front to rear is 0.336.
For an Ultima with an Ultima front splitter and with the standard wing set at zero degrees without the flap the rear wheel bhp required to overcome the wind resistance alone is 404 rear wheel bhp according to our wind tunnel results. .
The best combination for a balanced front and rear down force was achieved using the front splitter and the rear wing set at zero degrees with no flap. This is our recommended settings for high speed 200+mph runs.
_Incidentally the power to overcome the wind resistance with the same configuration at 100mph is only 50bhp.
Hope this helps.
Regards to all,
Very thanks Factory.
ste
Incidentally the power to overcome the wind resistance with the same configuration at 100mph is only 50bhp
I'm not sure this can be right. The predominate drag forces are aerodynamic with rolling resistance must less in total. The power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to the speed cubed. So the power difference between 100 mph and 200 mph is a factor of 8. If the power for 100 mph is 50 bhp that would mean only 400bhp for 200mph. Obviously additional power is required for the rolling resistance but not 240bhp. The power for 100mph is more like just under 80bhp.
I'm not sure this can be right. The predominate drag forces are aerodynamic with rolling resistance must less in total. The power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to the speed cubed. So the power difference between 100 mph and 200 mph is a factor of 8. If the power for 100 mph is 50 bhp that would mean only 400bhp for 200mph. Obviously additional power is required for the rolling resistance but not 240bhp. The power for 100mph is more like just under 80bhp.
does anyone know the measured track for vmax?
im told they dont start on the slip road any more but a standing start at the main runway.. how far along the 2 mile runway is the timing lights?
when the factory cars tested there what mph did you achieve please?
is it best without splitter and rear top wing?
and tyres? Mitchelin told me not to go 200 mph on my PS2 as only one axle is speed tested to that speed. what are suggested pressures please?
im told they dont start on the slip road any more but a standing start at the main runway.. how far along the 2 mile runway is the timing lights?
when the factory cars tested there what mph did you achieve please?
is it best without splitter and rear top wing?
and tyres? Mitchelin told me not to go 200 mph on my PS2 as only one axle is speed tested to that speed. what are suggested pressures please?
Was about 1.3miles I believe from a standing start. Could have pushed the lights further but I suppose they have to play safe.
We did 213mph in a 996 turbo last time and it was getting too close for comfort under braking, we were past the turn off and into the last bit of parked cars before stopped.
We did 213mph in a 996 turbo last time and it was getting too close for comfort under braking, we were past the turn off and into the last bit of parked cars before stopped.
Hi Chaps / Factory,
For what its worth, I have in car footage of 0 to 170 (using a G52/50 standard top and 7300 limit) in 17s dead.
The 1/4 mile times I did on you tube "peppermann" were improved several times by starting in second and full throttle, rather than easing in first. But I never got within 0.6 of the factory's 9.9 time. Great fun though.
Best wishes all.
Peppermann (Tony).
For what its worth, I have in car footage of 0 to 170 (using a G52/50 standard top and 7300 limit) in 17s dead.
The 1/4 mile times I did on you tube "peppermann" were improved several times by starting in second and full throttle, rather than easing in first. But I never got within 0.6 of the factory's 9.9 time. Great fun though.
Best wishes all.
Peppermann (Tony).
actuary said:
Hi Chaps / Factory,
For what its worth, I have in car footage of 0 to 170 (using a G52/50 standard top and 7300 limit) in 17s dead.
The 1/4 mile times I did on you tube "peppermann" were improved several times by starting in second and full throttle, rather than easing in first. But I never got within 0.6 of the factory's 9.9 time. Great fun though.
Best wishes all.
Peppermann (Tony).
Hi Tony,For what its worth, I have in car footage of 0 to 170 (using a G52/50 standard top and 7300 limit) in 17s dead.
The 1/4 mile times I did on you tube "peppermann" were improved several times by starting in second and full throttle, rather than easing in first. But I never got within 0.6 of the factory's 9.9 time. Great fun though.
Best wishes all.
Peppermann (Tony).
I hope you will be pleased to hear that the car you built lives on through my ownership. As well as the odd high speed run or track day it helps to raise a lot of money for children's charities through www.sportingbears.co.uk and www.thesupercarevent.com. Maintained rigorously by Charles Dunn It has had a number of evo upgrades to help with cooling as well as a new quick fuel carb and G50/50 box to better handle the tasks I ask of it above. Visually it's unchanged but underneath it has come a long way!
Do feel free to pm if you would like to know more.
Regards Michael
Edited by Ultimike on Monday 10th April 23:50
The ultima is superb car for doing the Vmax. 
I managed 203.5mph vbox verified at bpg. The car was very stable and you don't need a front splitter but you do need to reduce the downforce on the rear wing as much as poss - the factory will advise.
My problem was actually not starting the acceleration run until coming parallel with the shed on the main runway, otherwise I was hitting the rev limiter well before the timing beam - in the end I gave up and used the vbox instead.
You also need to use tyres with the right speed rating e.g. Mitchelin SSPs not Kumhos.
What impressed me most about the Ultima was its rock solid stability at speed - even in the wet with cut slicks! Bruntingthorpe runway is very rough - the Porsche 997.2 I drove subsequently, didn't like the bpg surface requiring some significant steering inputs at speed (205mph)
I managed 203.5mph vbox verified at bpg. The car was very stable and you don't need a front splitter but you do need to reduce the downforce on the rear wing as much as poss - the factory will advise.
My problem was actually not starting the acceleration run until coming parallel with the shed on the main runway, otherwise I was hitting the rev limiter well before the timing beam - in the end I gave up and used the vbox instead.
You also need to use tyres with the right speed rating e.g. Mitchelin SSPs not Kumhos.
What impressed me most about the Ultima was its rock solid stability at speed - even in the wet with cut slicks! Bruntingthorpe runway is very rough - the Porsche 997.2 I drove subsequently, didn't like the bpg surface requiring some significant steering inputs at speed (205mph)
tjlees said:
Ls7+supercharger and 996 TT standard gearbox with some cms strengthening and redline at 7500 (soft redline set at 7200) - though I achieved vbox verified 203.5mph at indicated 6950rpm on Michelin SSPs
Horsepower north of 800
Got any pics of this setup? Sounds interesting! Horsepower north of 800
deadscoob said:
What were the conditions like tj?
Richard what were the conditions on your run? Interesting to went similar speed but with 160hp less.
Headwind and tailwind play a part?
damp/Wet!Richard what were the conditions on your run? Interesting to went similar speed but with 160hp less.
Headwind and tailwind play a part?
http://www.vmax200.com/films/quicksilver/
impressive speed Pagani with only 427hp.
and the speed of 996 with "only"1350hp.
I believe that Pagani is very aerodynamic, differently that of 996 with more than triple the hp, does not reach a great speed.
excellent result for the Ultima
TILEES: but on circuit for 1 hour, resists without breaking anything?
no problem with the temperature in the summer on circuit?
and the speed of 996 with "only"1350hp.
I believe that Pagani is very aerodynamic, differently that of 996 with more than triple the hp, does not reach a great speed.
excellent result for the Ultima
TILEES: but on circuit for 1 hour, resists without breaking anything?
no problem with the temperature in the summer on circuit?
845ste said:
impressive speed Pagani with only 427hp.
and the speed of 996 with "only"1350hp.
I believe that Pagani is very aerodynamic, differently that of 996 with more than triple the hp, does not reach a great speed.
excellent result for the Ultima
TILEES: but on circuit for 1 hour, resists without breaking anything?
no problem with the temperature in the summer on circuit?
Since I've had the exhaust coated the temp stays at 84c in traffic and on circuit, though it did break the only hose that I didn't replace with a silicone one when I was at wings and wheels and the speed of 996 with "only"1350hp.
I believe that Pagani is very aerodynamic, differently that of 996 with more than triple the hp, does not reach a great speed.
excellent result for the Ultima
TILEES: but on circuit for 1 hour, resists without breaking anything?
no problem with the temperature in the summer on circuit?
Gassing Station | Ultima | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff