Lambos in this weeks Autocar

[traxx]

So the 0-100-0 tests:

LP640 Roadster 12.7 sec
Gallardo SL 12.9 sec
997 GT3 13.65 sec
Audi R8 15.5 sec

But they then quote
0-100 times
Gallardo SL 7.81 sec
LP640 Roadster 8.22 sec

I don't get it, since when has the LP640 had better brakes (not even mentioning the weight difference) than the SL?


The 0-150-0 numbers make more sence:
LP640 Roadster 23.44 sec
Gallardo SL 27.79 sec
997 GT3 29.85 sec
Audi R8 33.49 sec


So after all the positive stuff written in the press about the R8, it's not actually very fast

[andysv]

it's fast for it's power output but not fast against proper supercars. i recently drove an rs4 (same engine) it felt about right for 400ish bhp.

[markbe]

traxx said:

So the 0-100-0 tests:

LP640 Roadster 12.7 sec
Gallardo SL 12.9 sec
997 GT3 13.65 sec
Audi R8 15.5 sec

But they then quote
0-100 times
Gallardo SL 7.81 sec
LP640 Roadster 8.22 sec

I don't get it, since when has the LP640 had better brakes (not even mentioning the weight difference) than the SL?


The 0-150-0 numbers make more sence:
LP640 Roadster 23.44 sec
Gallardo SL 27.79 sec
997 GT3 29.85 sec
Audi R8 33.49 sec


So after all the positive stuff written in the press about the R8, it's not actually very fast

Well sometimes strange figures show up;
LP640..0-30=1.8secs
GSLeg'.0-30=1.16secs!!!!!

Different fig' accounted for the amazing traction of the GSLeg'.
Or Autocar cocked up.

Mark.

[jonny5]

Simon George has driven that Superlegover and thinks it's brakes are toast . There is no way a LP640 has better braking power than a SL... If you take out reaction time the SL was quicker than the LP640. 100-->150 LP is quicker granted ... That'll be that extra 100bhp

[traxx]

jonny5 said:

Simon George has driven that Superlegover and thinks it's brakes are toast . There is no way a LP640 has better braking power than a SL... If you take out reaction time the SL was quicker than the LP640. 100-->150 LP is quicker granted ... That'll be that extra 100bhp

What is their definition of reaction time?

[Lamboandy]

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

[markbe]

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

I think it would be reasonable to say Ferrari's road test cars are a Little bit enhanced. Autocar's road test car 0-100=8.8secs, all other tests on 360's were in the 10sec bracket.
Ford are not shy either; Ford GT [550bhp] 0-150=17.5sec.
Ford GT Roush RE [600bhp],0-150=20.61.
There are many examples so dont get me started.

Mark.

[traxx]

markbe said:

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

I think it would be reasonable to say Ferrari's road test cars are a Little bit enhanced. Autocar's road test car 0-100=8.8secs, all other tests on 360's were in the 10sec bracket.
Ford are not shy either; Ford GT [550bhp] 0-150=17.5sec.
Ford GT Roush RE [600bhp],0-150=20.61.
There are many examples so dont get me started.

Mark.

iirc the main exception to this rule being the FerrariUK Grigio 430 spider "press car" which consistently had aweful preformance times

[markbe]

traxx said:

markbe said:

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

I think it would be reasonable to say Ferrari's road test cars are a Little bit enhanced. Autocar's road test car 0-100=8.8secs, all other tests on 360's were in the 10sec bracket.
Ford are not shy either; Ford GT [550bhp] 0-150=17.5sec.
Ford GT Roush RE [600bhp],0-150=20.61.
There are many examples so don't get me started.

Mark.

iirc the main exception to this rule being the FerrariUK Grigio 430 spider "press car" which consistently had awful performance times

Not awful, truthful, gives you an idea of how ridiculas the 360 figures
were.

Mark.

[AKA8]

traxx said:

So the 0-100-0 tests:

LP640 Roadster 12.7 sec
Gallardo SL 12.9 sec
997 GT3 13.65 sec
Audi R8 15.5 sec

But they then quote
0-100 times
Gallardo SL 7.81 sec
LP640 Roadster 8.22 sec

I don't get it, since when has the LP640 had better brakes (not even mentioning the weight difference) than the SL?


The 0-150-0 numbers make more sence:
LP640 Roadster 23.44 sec
Gallardo SL 27.79 sec
997 GT3 29.85 sec
Audi R8 33.49 sec


So after all the positive stuff written in the press about the R8, it's not actually very fast

That sounds fairly quick to me, it isn't a racing car like the GT3 after all and has an inferior power to weight ratio too.

If you look at Evo's track times, it seems pretty quick to me

[bromers2]

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

Depends who's driving

The G is definately quicker to 100 than the 360.

[simonspider]

jonny5 said:

Simon George has driven that Superlegover and thinks it's brakes are toast . There is no way a LP640 has better braking power than a SL... If you take out reaction time the SL was quicker than the LP640. 100-->150 LP is quicker granted ... That'll be that extra 100bhp

I haven't seen the Autocar test but if its that grey SL with Italian plates then its not so much that the brakes are crap, there is just no consistancy. About an inch of dead pedal travel then you are catapulted forward so hard it almost gives you a nosebleed. Ceramics have their place in my humble opinion but they take some getting used to. Dave's Stradale brakes are far superior so I don't think that was a good example.

[Funky]

jonny5 said:

Simon George has driven that Superlegover and thinks it's brakes are toast . There is no way a LP640 has better braking power than a SL... If you take out reaction time the SL was quicker than the LP640. 100-->150 LP is quicker granted ... That'll be that extra 100bhp

I tell you what jonny i'll have a go in your sl and then i'll tell you if the brakes are the same in the press mules

[ScottL]

simonspider said:

jonny5 said:

Simon George has driven that Superlegover and thinks it's brakes are toast . There is no way a LP640 has better braking power than a SL... If you take out reaction time the SL was quicker than the LP640. 100-->150 LP is quicker granted ... That'll be that extra 100bhp

I haven't seen the Autocar test but if its that grey SL with Italian plates then its not so much that the brakes are crap, there is just no consistancy. About an inch of dead pedal travel then you are catapulted forward so hard it almost gives you a nosebleed. Ceramics have their place in my humble opinion but they take some getting used to. Dave's Stradale brakes are far superior so I don't think that was a good example.

Wrong forum I know but try the latest PCCB as fitted to 997 GT3/RS. Best brakes I've ever experienced on a road car - mega powerful, brilliant feel, no dead travel. Having said that never tried a 430 or Gallardo with Ceramics.

Have any of you Ferrari or Lambo owners had to replace a set of ceramics yet? Is the replacement cost as horrific as it is on a Porsche?

[tony h]

ccm replacement on ferrari is about £10 k

[andysv]

sidetracking a bit, i had no experience of ceramic brakes until i recently drove an 997gt3, hell they STOP, but take some getting used to

[traxx]

andysv said:

sidetracking a bit, i had no experience of ceramic brakes until i recently drove an 997gt3, hell they STOP, but take some getting used to

As many have already said, once you have had CCB you will never go back

[sjn2004]

markbe said:

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

I think it would be reasonable to say Ferrari's road test cars are a Little bit enhanced. Autocar's road test car 0-100=8.8secs, all other tests on 360's were in the 10sec bracket.
Ford are not shy either; Ford GT [550bhp] 0-150=17.5sec.
Ford GT Roush RE [600bhp],0-150=20.61.
There are many examples so dont get me started.

Mark.

Lets not forget the "SL55" with SLR engine!

[markbe]

sjn2004 said:

markbe said:

Lamboandy said:

I think you have to take some of these figures with a pinch of salt sometimes. In the performance tables at the back of Autocar it states that a Standard 360 is nearly 1.5 secs quicker to a hundred than a gallardo. From my experience its more like the other way round.

Andy.

I think it would be reasonable to say Ferrari's road test cars are a Little bit enhanced. Autocar's road test car 0-100=8.8secs, all other tests on 360's were in the 10sec bracket.
Ford are not shy either; Ford GT [550bhp] 0-150=17.5sec.
Ford GT Roush RE [600bhp],0-150=20.61.
There are many examples so dont get me started.

Mark.

Lets not forget the "SL55" with SLR engine!

Ok you you started it.

NARDO 2001;

SL55............ SLR engine or similar.
Murcielago......LP640 engine or similar.

Silly old Ferrari sent sent a standard 550 Maranello [they wouldn't do that again],as did Aston with their Vanquish and Porsche with their GT2.

Mark.

[GALLARDOGUY]

the figure that astonished me was the lambo SL's 0-60 time.

3.36 seconds?!?