IOM car speed

[Welshbeef]

Well countless threads about how fast a car could do it today 20+ years after tony pond did a 100mph average speed lap on a 174bhp v6 rover vitesse. Well I have the vid he is sat a 145mph for long straletches

Fifthgear today showed a new merc and tiff easily got it up to 160 mph on the not so straight roads and no safety equipment. So on the assumption he did the whole track a mere 20mph faster than tony pond which is very easy to do over that old v6 rover then I guess average speed could easily jump to 110mph.
Then add in the fact that rover did 0-60 in 8-9 seconds while the merc does it in 3 seconds I'd wager the brakes and tyres are leagues ahead to the extent that I'd say a 120mph is quite easily possible in that car without helmet and nutter risk all driver.

One other thing as it is derestricted why not have a timed race on a section go for it given it's clear and check what the bike averaged over that same distance then add on speed for a racing driver over your inferior skill plus the fact the road isn't closed.

Job done

NEXT incest

[jjones]

troll

[Welshbeef]

jjones said:

troll

Johnson

[Gun]

The mountain section of the course is the only place on the track where a car would be fairly equal to a bike in terms of speed and times as it's more flowing and open. The rest is narrow with lots of meandering turns which a bike can just straight line without losing much speed whereas anything but a high down force race car would need to slow down for them.

The race bike are doing 180+ in a number of places on the lap and the record is still only 130, I doubt many cars would be able to keep up that kind of pace on the narrower stuff (I shouldn't think many cars would get past the big compression at race speeds at the bottom of Bray Hill TBH).

[Smiler.]

Gun said:

The mountain section of the course is the only place on the track where a car would be fairly equal to a bike in terms of speed and times as it's more flowing and open. The rest is narrow with lots of meandering turns which a bike can just straight line without losing much speed whereas anything but a high down force race car would need to slow down for them.

The race bike are doing 180+ in a number of places on the lap and the record is still only 130, I doubt many cars would be able to keep up that kind of pace on the narrower stuff (I shouldn't think many cars would get past the big compression at race speeds at the bottom of Bray Hill TBH).

I thought Cronk was actually the fastest bit.

Plus the fact that it's really bumpy in much of the non-mountain section.

Would love to see it done though.

But, what car??

[liner33]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL-7JfsCpBQ&pla...

Seen this video then??

The exact specs of the Tony Pod car are still discussed today few people know for sure

[Welshbeef]

Fact is it is a 2.7 v6 n/a unit STD suspension, straight through exhaust.

So factory spec was 175bhp circa. Back then how far could you tune an engine it did seem very low rent so hardly much spent on the upgrades.

Whatever it's no way more than 200bhp thecorrado vr6 from that era even tuned only managed 220bhp from a 197bhp start point so using that crude scenario I'm hapyit was a poor performance car. I'd say a 330d would totally smash that record

[8400rpm]

[RobM77]

Tony Pond's lap is easily beatable by even a quite modest modern car, let alone a performance car or a racing car.

Regarding the comparison with bikes, you're dead right and that's a foregone conclusion. Ring times are a good comparison with regard to the fast sections, bumps etc. The fastest bike time round the ring that I can find is a 7:17 BTG for a heavily modified road bike (that's about a 7m40 for a full lap). Loads of cars are in the 6s, with the outright lap record a 6m11s for a Porsche 962 (Bellof). Heidfeld had a go at the ring and his engineers estimated that he could have got into the mid 5s quite easily. No contest.

[Welshbeef]

But its with additional info it proved that a high powered car can easily hit 160mph through the non straight parts of the track and he wasnt giving it 10/10th's no helmet/roll cage etc etc.

So given this it proves that car would cruicify the Rover Vitesse 2.7 V6 n/a slicks (on a part damp track) with straight through exhaust. That only managed 145mph and held at that speed for long periods of time throughout the course to nail a 100mph ave speed this Merc easily hit 160mph with out giving it all that could be (Rover was nailed totally - watch parts of the drive he is 11/10th's).

[Rude-boy]

Having driven the derestricted sections of course quite a lot myself, usually at fairly high speed and a few times at 'balls to the wall it's a sunny morning at 4am speed' I would say that there is little or no chance of any car being able to match a top bike time on a closed lap.

Sure you can get so massive speeds but there are a number of places where you would have to be going a good 20mph slower than a half decent bike rider could get up to. Add to this that the bumpy nature of the course in a lot of places it means that anything with serious down force would be massively compromised.

Obviously something like a turbocharged CSR (if anyone has built one yet) might get close but they have massive problems aero wise and getting the top speeds close to bike territory.

About the only thing I can think of that might be up there would be a Superkart, even then that would be tight, and certainly death on a stick!

[Welshbeef]

The statement that a car cannot handle the bumpy nature of the trade just doesnt fit - engineers will change the setup of the car to suit the nature of the circuit not like that of the snooker table smoothness of F1 racing track.


One question here Silverstone GP F1 car hit 1min 32 ish What did Moto GP do? Then what did the Porche Supercup cars manage?

The F1 cars didnt like the bump too much however the 911's certainly handled the bump with ease.

Note Im not talking about smashing the 130mph time here - which a car may well do - just hammering the 100mph average by that vitesse 2.7ltr v6 n/a

[Smiler.]

Welshbeef said:

The statement that a car cannot handle the bumpy nature of the trade just doesnt fit - engineers will change the setup of the car to suit the nature of the circuit not like that of the snooker table smoothness of F1 racing track.......

Except a car will move around a bit (i.e. it's not on rails).

With a bike, there's a bit of width in the road, but only just if you see some of the footage of them rattling through the twisty bits.

And there are kerbs, some quite big.

I think the gap in lap time/av speed will the a bit closer though.

[anonymous-user]

I don't think the bumps would be too much of an issue, as damper technology has moved on a pace in the last 10 years. have a look at the wrc cars and see how they perform:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FppNQYN3cBo

that lands on the back bumper and doesnt even have 1 uncontrolled rebound event!

even the GrpN cars are pretty good now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5n_VDm66no

lands on FNS wheel from about 20 feet in the air, 1 small rebound event, then just gets on with it!


Also, look at the reduction in ride heights for even the gravel events, the damping is now so good they are running gravel cars right down on the floor and keeping them in control.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4vxLuwn2zA

check out how much better the later WRC cars are at landing than anything else in that video.

For a lap of the IOM, i'm sure you could get a wrc layout kinda car to 600 (ish) bhp without the inlet restrictor, and it would have the traction and suspension to easily deal with the tight twisty stuff. And of course, hopefully the necessary level of safety for when you bin it....... ;-)

ETA: the IOM looks pretty dam wide and smooth compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcaFLVaHEH0

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 16th July 13:37

[RobM77]

I don't wish to sound big headed here, but there's some huge assumptions going on here which simply aren't true.

• Bumps do not somehow magically affect only cars, and even cars with downforce can take bumps just as well, if not better than a bike (they've got four wheels after all!). All categories take serious kerb going into and out of corners like Eau Rouge, 130R, the new Abbey etc. The ring, which I quoted times from, is not a polished smooth surface!

• People always say that the bikes are narrower, so they don't need to slow down so much. That's true, but twists and turns exist on all tracks - they aren't unique to the IOM.

• People seem to assume that there are road cars, and then there are F1 cars. There are loads of different categories of car out there racing today. They don't all need billiard table smooth tracks, and the setups can be varied to suit different surfaces.

• People seem to think that a WRC car or CSR Caterham is fast. These people need to have a go in a Radical or an F3 car! Both will out-accelerate, out corner and out brake a fast bike without breaking a sweat.

• Someone quoted the danger of driving a Superkart as a show stopper. Surely this is no more dangerous than riding a bike?!

• Plenty of F3000, FRenault and F3 cars run at hill climbs around Europe and do just fine.

• The fastest recorded bike time around the Nurburgring (which is similar to the IOM course with its hill and fast sections etc) is equivalent to a 7:40 at the most optimistic. 7:40 can be beaten by plenty of big soft road cars on road tyres (even a comfort spec 911 C2S can do a 7:50). Racing cars are much faster still. The fact remains that there is no way on this earth a Porsche 962 (or similar sports racer) capable of 6m11s around the ring is going to lap 1m30s slower if the track got a little bit more bumpy.

Edited by RobM77 on Friday 16th July 13:39

[freecar]

Welshbeef said:

Note Im not talking about smashing the 130mph time here - which a car may well do - just hammering the 100mph average by that vitesse 2.7ltr v6 n/a

Guys, calm down, he's admitted to the trollery! To answer your question yes a newer car could beat the old car's time! FFS

[Welshbeef]

freecar said:

Welshbeef said:

Note Im not talking about smashing the 130mph time here - which a car may well do - just hammering the 100mph average by that vitesse 2.7ltr v6 n/a

Guys, calm down, he's admitted to the trollery! To answer your question yes a newer car could beat the old car's time! FFS

Trollery = feckwit um thanks for that

[Rude-boy]

A Radical would be as useless as an F3 car in a number of places around the course. The only thing that would have the suspension would be a tarmac spec rally car.

In answer to WB's question though, IMO, Pond's time would be beaten by quite some margin if you were able to get something like one of Rod Millan's Pikes Peak cars or an unrestricted WRC car out there.

[Smiler.]

Max_Torque said:

I don't think the bumps would be too much of an issue, as damper technology has moved on a pace in the last 10 years. have a look at the wrc cars and see how they perform:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FppNQYN3cBo

that lands on the back bumper and doesnt even have 1 uncontrolled rebound event!

even the GrpN cars are pretty good now:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5n_VDm66no

lands on FNS wheel from about 20 feet in the air, 1 small rebound event, then just gets on with it!


Also, look at the reduction in ride heights for even the gravel events, the damping is now so good they are running gravel cars right down on the floor and keeping them in control.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4vxLuwn2zA

check out how much better the later WRC cars are at landing than anything else in that video.

For a lap of the IOM, i'm sure you could get a wrc layout kinda car to 600 (ish) bhp without the inlet restrictor, and it would have the traction and suspension to easily deal with the tight twisty stuff. And of course, hopefully the necessary level of safety for when you bin it....... ;-)

ETA: the IOM looks pretty dam wide and smooth compared to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcaFLVaHEH0

Edited by Max_Torque on Friday 16th July 13:37

None of those clips reflect the IOM course.

This argument could go on & on & on. So, until I see it, I won't believe it.

No offence like

[freecar]

Welshbeef said:

freecar said:

Welshbeef said:

Note Im not talking about smashing the 130mph time here - which a car may well do - just hammering the 100mph average by that vitesse 2.7ltr v6 n/a

Guys, calm down, he's admitted to the trollery! To answer your question yes a newer car could beat the old car's time! FFS

Trollery = feckwit um thanks for that

Let's face it, you were trying to start the car v bike age old row, it didn't work properly so you changed it to a totally pointless question. One that isn't worth even answering.