RE: Top Gear Test Track Record Smashed
Discussion
mattikake said:
jagdpanther said:
okgo said:
that got smashed by the caparo today 1.10
Maybe so, but it was taken down as its not deemed to be a roadcar by TG's own rules!!I do hope TG will show the Ultima attempt
So with the official road car record at 1:10. Is this thread kinda redundant?
TG should stick the Ultima out there as its no worse off with ground clearance, than most of your supercars and lets face it, my friends old Orion used to bottom out on sleeping policemen
Have they actually tried taking the Caparo over a speed hump? If it's road legal, why not?
I can't help but think there should be different versions of the T1 - a hardcore track version, ie the one they've got at the moment, then a slightly modified version, maybe with a sliding canopy roof, windscreen wiper, taller ride height and revised aerodynamics that allow it to handle at lower speeds as well - possibly even active aerodynamics that alter depending on the speed for optimum downforce.
I can't help but think there should be different versions of the T1 - a hardcore track version, ie the one they've got at the moment, then a slightly modified version, maybe with a sliding canopy roof, windscreen wiper, taller ride height and revised aerodynamics that allow it to handle at lower speeds as well - possibly even active aerodynamics that alter depending on the speed for optimum downforce.
Twincam16 said:
Have they actually tried taking the Caparo over a speed hump? If it's road legal, why not?
I can't help but think there should be different versions of the T1 - a hardcore track version, ie the one they've got at the moment, then a slightly modified version, maybe with a sliding canopy roof, windscreen wiper, taller ride height and revised aerodynamics that allow it to handle at lower speeds as well - possibly even active aerodynamics that alter depending on the speed for optimum downforce.
I'm sure that lot is probably available from the current options list.I can't help but think there should be different versions of the T1 - a hardcore track version, ie the one they've got at the moment, then a slightly modified version, maybe with a sliding canopy roof, windscreen wiper, taller ride height and revised aerodynamics that allow it to handle at lower speeds as well - possibly even active aerodynamics that alter depending on the speed for optimum downforce.
Regarding the low speed handling, I'm sure that it's fine and we're just seeing a repeat of the Clarkson Mclaren F1/Elise 111S incidents!
Twincam16 said:
Have they actually tried taking the Caparo over a speed hump? If it's road legal, why not?
I've seen one drive places that my Ford GT struggled to go, and made it. It's a very quick and easy change heights once at the track. You should see how much trouble the LP640 and GT3 had in comparison to the T1. Still, doing a 3 point turn in the T1 is another matter....RobM77 said:
Regarding the low speed handling, I'm sure that it's fine and we're just seeing a repeat of the Clarkson Mclaren F1/Elise 111S incidents!
I missed the TG feature last night but it probably handles at low speed like a low-powered car, and that'll be the problem. Most other high performance cars (conventional ones that is) have a lot more rubber and some weight on the front. The Caparo weighs next to nothing and all the weight there is is behind the driver. Those pukka racing V8s are pretty ill-mannered so you can imagine steering into, say, a roundabout and trying to modulate the throttle without inducing one end or the other from being unsettled. It can gather speed at over 20mph/second, throttle response must be pretty extraordinary. I've watched various clips of the car in action and it looks like the power completely overwhelms the mechanical grip, as if the car is entirely dependent on its aero. It looks under-tyred. Consider where its engine comes from ....and look at the tyres/wings on IRL cars. The TYPE of tyres as well as the size.
IMO the Caparo guys lost the plot somewhere between where they started and where they've ended up. For the price of a Caparo you can buy an old F1 car (or indeed an old Indy Car) and enjoy the pantomime of running Judd/DFV engines. At these price points it's not out of the question to hire circuits for yourself and a few friends to play on all day - 'public' trackdays are pointless and arguably dangerous to be mixing a Le Mans prototype-speed featherweight with slower but much heavier stuff like BMW M5s/Merc AMGs. German tanks making contact with a Caparo doesn't really bear thinking about.
When the Caparo née Freestream was conceived it was to be like some sort of uber-Caterham with talk of that little 2.4 litre V8 jewel (based on bike motors) going in the back with a blower to fatten up the torque. Super-low CoG, modern materials etc. etc. ....and all for about half the price of where it's ended up.
The Caparo looks like an engineering experiment that went a bit wrong, kind of Frankenstein-y.
bosscerbera said:
classiccooper said:
Front just looked too stiff to me, hence the lack of front end.
You're right - it'll be expecting xx kg of downforce to load it up. Must be quite a challenge to set up some sort of road speed handling that works AND deal with aero loads.
It was a bit softer with a bit more travel but at over 175mph it was practically totally compressed. Dunno if it can be done IMHO as I seem to remember there's only 28mm of travel to play with, and fitting all the rising spring / damper rate gear in would be a bit of a game.It's one of those cars that doesn't make any sense at all. I'd seen video's and pictures and thought it was a bit of a joke, but you see it in the flesh and start thinking hhmmm ok not 100% mad.
Then you sit in it and press the start button and it all becomes clear. Totally impractical - tick. Waste of money - tick. Want one? - tick squared.
I take back what I said about it being Clarkson's driving then. The trouble is you just never know with him!
Surely though if the front and rear are made equally stiff the handling balance wouldn't be altered? I presume they softened the rear end to make putting the power down easier, but were obviously stuck with the front for the aforementioned reasons.
Surely though if the front and rear are made equally stiff the handling balance wouldn't be altered? I presume they softened the rear end to make putting the power down easier, but were obviously stuck with the front for the aforementioned reasons.
bosscerbera said:
classiccooper said:
Front just looked too stiff to me, hence the lack of front end.
You're right - it'll be expecting xx kg of downforce to load it up. Must be quite a challenge to set up some sort of road speed handling that works AND deal with aero loads.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff