0-100 KM/H for a V8

twig · 18 Oct 2002, 12:40 (Ref:407183)

Just quickly, how quickly can a V8 Supercar do 0-100 Km/H???

Preferably without much fuel.

Tom.

kmchow · 18 Oct 2002, 19:30 (Ref:407438)

I have a confirmed test of a ST car going 4.9sec from 0-96km an hour. Perhaps the 2000 spec ST cars could have done somewhere between 4.5-4.7sec. Don't know about the V8 supercars though. Surely they must be faster than a ST car?
But I don't think they are any less 4 sec?

marcus · 18 Oct 2002, 22:34 (Ref:407591)

I have no idea either but it would be interesting to find out.

if thats true about the super tourer then thats rather impressive.

Forbesy · 19 Oct 2002, 02:00 (Ref:407718)

I heard that it was around 3.5 - 4 seconds, not bad for a car of that weight...

Onlooker · 19 Oct 2002, 09:13 (Ref:407813)

Forbsey is pretty on the money.The teams practice 0-100 all the time as the starts are so important and the 0-100 time determines the run to turn 1.
I believe 3.25 is a real top start.

kmchow · 19 Oct 2002, 22:42 (Ref:408240)

1997 Dodge Stratus Supertouring car (and it was supposed to be slower too!)

0-30mph 2.0sec
0-40mph 3.5sec
0-60mph 4.5sec (INCREDIBLE!!!)
0-100mph 11.9sec

Standing 1/4 mile 13.9sec at 108mph.

spook · 19 Oct 2002, 23:15 (Ref:408256)

So how do we convert these stats to know how fast a car is at 10m/20m/50m/100m/200m/250m from the start. Can anyone do the math for me. Speed = Distance/time and all that. I know the FIA rule book says there has to be a minimum of 250m from the Start Line to the first corner. So how do these figures shape up against the current F1.

05forever · 20 Oct 2002, 02:09 (Ref:408295)

Dude, I got the slide rule out and unfortunatly the basic year 12 Physics rules I studied many moons ago are based on constant acceleration and frictionless surfaces. In reality the Drag building (squaring for each doubling of speed) and the power curve and gearing of the engine delievering a non linear delivery of power and also the grip of the tyres/road being non constant and or variable delivering a diminishing rate of return for effort means that the answer I got after an hour is so is not be accurate. (what a waste of time)

If they are then the 3.25 secs for 100m cannot be accurate, The extension of this to a 400 m time would also be around 8.5 seconds

3.25 seconds for 100 m = Linear Acceleration of Approx 19 m/ps2 (about 2G)

Time Taken for 20M = 1.48 sec, 50M = 2.29sec, 100m = 3.25 sec 200M = 4.95sec
Speed at 20M= 101kMH, 50 M = 155kmh, 100M = 222.3km/h

This indicated 0-100 at < 1.5seconds therefore not possible

So the linear stuff doesn;t work sorry

Jack racer · 20 Oct 2002, 08:40 (Ref:408386)

The tranz am cars car go from 0-100 and back to 0 in under 4 secons with about the same amount of horses but rear tyre and brakes are twice the size. Done with a corrovet.

alfasud · 20 Oct 2002, 09:30 (Ref:408408)

Some sports prototype/GT's can do 0-60mph in under 3 seconds, with a number of road legal "production" sports cars (Ferrari F50, Porsche 911 GT2 etc) claiming 0-60mph in under 4 seconds:
http://www.universalauto.com/speedtimes.html

The spaceframe Trans Am cars would also have quite a bit less weight (any idea how much Jack?) than the Aussie V8 supercars.

The Panoz LMP-01 Evo 2002 claims 0-60mph in 2.28 seconds. Similar power, but once again, light weight (900kg) helps a lot:
http://www.panozmotorsports.com/7f_specs.html

Crash Test · 20 Oct 2002, 10:49 (Ref:408440)

I've been jotting down speeds of late taken from the speed trap at the start/finish line at QR for the QRDA newsletter:
Sports Sedans (police radar, 1/2 way down back straight)- 255
Bernie Gillon (Mustang)- 226
Kerry Bailey (Nissan 300ZX)- 225
V8 Supercars (end of front straight)- 225
Andrew Fawcett (Jaguar)- 224
Jeff Barnes (Pontiac)- 222
Darren Hossack (Saab)- 222
Rodney Forbes (V8 Falcon, unconfirmed speed)- 220
Tony Ricciardello (Alfa)- 219
V8 Supercars (several)- 217
Stephen Voight (Chev Monza)- 209
John Good (Porsche)-193
Wayne Hennig (Porsche)- 190
Dean Grant (Porsche)- 189
Peter Fitzgerald (Porsche)- 182
Marcus Marshall (Formula Ford)-175
Scott Nicholas (Falcon Saloon Car)- 161

kmchow · 21 Oct 2002, 02:51 (Ref:408991)

According to Guiness Book of Records, the fastest production car is a Ford RS200 that did 0-60mph in 3.08sec. However, it was achieved on a track. I don't know if that greatly affects the results though.

Crash Test · 21 Oct 2002, 05:46 (Ref:409024)

It would probably be significant if it was achieved on a ski slope or a cliff

... btw, define 'production' car.

kmchow · 21 Oct 2002, 06:51 (Ref:409033)

I believe production car is one that any customer with the money can buy. More than one must have been produced. The car must be the same as the customer one, not reworked or "improved" in any way. Suprising that a RS200 can beat a Mclaren F1 in terms of acceleration. Though of course, the Mclaren F1 still holds the top speed record at something like 242mph!

Is the RS200 based on the Escort?

Getting back to the original poster, if a slower/bigger car like the ST Stratus can do 4.5? Surely the ST BMW and cars like the Primera can do 4.0-4.5sec? And so a V8 supercar could do 3.5-40sec?

Rhys_00 · 21 Oct 2002, 11:18 (Ref:409144)

well, my kmart racing poster says 0-100k in 3.4, 0-400m in 9.6. not the most accurate, but has 2 be at least a ballpark number...

woodbine · 21 Oct 2002, 11:34 (Ref:409159)

The RS200 was Ford's Group B rally car and as such was a brand new design I believe. After all in the mid 80s, when it was developed Ford weren't even rallying!

I think that the Ford Escort Group A car might have been based on it (2litre turbo engine & 4 wheel drive sound familiar?) but I could be wrong

Jack racer · 21 Oct 2002, 11:34 (Ref:409160)

RS200 more like a full on mid mounted race car. Tranz am are the same wieght as the V8 supercars but carry around 100kg of lead that goes where ever you need it. 49% on rear wheels.

Jack racer · 21 Oct 2002, 11:37 (Ref:409162)

I had a look at a RS200 in Tim Allen's (Home improvment) shed they are bloody orsome cars and have a amazing history.

spook · 23 Oct 2002, 11:21 (Ref:411100)

Well 05forever, you are right it is not linear. Spoke to a friend who knows a bit about circuit design and he gave me these figures which are from a 1982 Ferrari F1 car. These are the figures used for the design speed calculations for racetracks around the world. Interesting to note they are speed/distance/time.
Speed(km/h) Distance(m) Time(secs)
0 0 0
50 6.6 0.9
70 12.9 1.3
100 26.2 1.9
160 72.4 3.2
200 129.1 4.3
250 260 6.4
300 606.5 10.8
Wow - standing start to 300km/h in 10.8 seconds covering 606.5m.
And this is a 1982 Vintage F1 car !!!
Braking is pretty good too
Speed Distance Time
300 177.2 4.3
250 123.0 3.5
200 78.7 2.8
160 50.4 2.3
100 19.7 1.4
50 4.9 0.7
Good enough to make your eyeballs pop.

Mattracer · 24 Oct 2002, 10:09 (Ref:411970)

I heard or read somewhere that a V8 supercar will do the 0-100 in about 3-4secs and the standing 400m in about 11 seconds. A few years back in one of the mags (Wheels/Motor?) Dick Johnson ran the EF Falcon down the quarter mile at Calder in about 11 secs I think.

kmchow · 24 Oct 2002, 23:06 (Ref:412752)

According to a recent test I read, it turns out a Nascar car takes 6.2sec to reach 0-60mph. That's significantly slower than both a ST and V8 Supercar. Despite Nascar using the 5.7L pushrod 8 cylinder, they weigh in at 1590Kg versus the V8 Supercar's 5L pushrod 8 cylinder but which have a minimum weight requirement of only 1350kg.
Can V8 Supercar's 200kg weight advantage and better gearing account for the big 2.5-3 sec difference??

alfasud · 25 Oct 2002, 03:52 (Ref:412842)

Quote:

Originally posted by kmchow
According to a recent test I read, it turns out a Nascar car takes 6.2sec to reach 0-60mph. That's significantly slower than both a ST and V8 Supercar. Despite Nascar using the 5.7L pushrod 8 cylinder, they weigh in at 1590Kg versus the V8 Supercar's 5L pushrod 8 cylinder but which have a minimum weight requirement of only 1350kg.
Can V8 Supercar's 200kg weight advantage and better gearing account for the big 2.5-3 sec difference??

Hmmm, I don't think 200kg makes that much difference. What's the source of this 0-60mph time? If I had to guess, then I'd say that it's either incorrect, OR the NASCAR was set up with SuperSpeedway gear ratio's. If it was geared for Short Track or Road Course races, then I would have thought it would have been within a second of the Aussie V8.

Dazz · 25 Oct 2002, 04:18 (Ref:412856)

If I can manage to find it, or if anyone else has access to old Auto Actions, find the report on the Winfield Triple Challenge where they ran a few of the V8's over the 1/4 mile.

I seem to recall Gardiners car running an 11.9 and think Seto managed an 11.1 at about 127mph (204km/h).

Now having a little experience with some very fast road cars that we have raced at Eastern Creek, an 11.1@127mph would place a 0-100km/h time around the high 3 to low 4 second mark depending on initial traction. I would think low 4's on average would be about the mark for the V8's concidering they are not set up to be quick off the mark.

But as I said, if anyone can find the actual Auto Action report it would help.

Rob Wilk · 1 Nov 2022, 04:28 (Ref:4132286)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dazz

If I can manage to find it, or if anyone else has access to old Auto Actions, find the report on the Winfield Triple Challenge where they ran a few of the V8's over the 1/4 mile.

I seem to recall Gardiners car running an 11.9 and think Seto managed an 11.1 at about 127mph (204km/h).

Now having a little experience with some very fast road cars that we have raced at Eastern Creek, an 11.1@127mph would place a 0-100km/h time around the high 3 to low 4 second mark depending on initial traction. I would think low 4's on average would be about the mark for the V8's concidering they are not set up to be quick off the mark.

But as I said, if anyone can find the actual Auto Action report it would help.

The 11.1 @ 127mph (204kph) Glenn seton 1/4 mile at Winfield Triple Challenge, what year and race car are you referring ?

In a Wheels Mar 1991 article I saved from Bauer media Group, it had Mark Skaife's 1991 Skyline Doing a 10.9 sec @ 204kph 1/4 mile, 0 -100kph in 3.2 secs and 0 - 160kph in 6.7 secs , so I would say 11.1 @ 204kph could be 0 - 100 kph in around 3.3 to 3.4 secs.

That 11.1 sec @ 204 kph seems rather quick for the early 90's (unless it was Skyline), Glenn Seton never had a Skyline, so could've it been a Ford Sierra Group A touring car in 1992 ?

I think the 11.9 second 1/4 mile for Gardiner's car could be during 1993 Winfield Triple Challenge.
I say this because in my Modern Motor Oct 1992 issue, it has Dick Johnson 1992 Falcon EB, which I believe is the car that raced at 1992 Nissan Mobil 500 in Wellington, NZ, that wasn't raced much.

In that mag it was estimated that it could do 0 -100kph in 4.25 secs, 0 - 160kph in 7.71 secs and 0 -200 kph in 11.26 secs.
This was with 394 kW @ 7500 rpm (nearly 530 hp) and 1300 kg minimum weight.
They didn't give 1/4 mile time for it, but I reckon that 1992 Falcon EB could probably do an 11.9 secs quarter. Assuming it may average 9.2kph per sec for the last 0.64 sec after 200 kph, that would mean it may of been capable of an 11.9 sec @205.9kph.

1993 Winfield Triple Challenge was only a couple of months later, so high 11.8 closer to 11.9 seems believable.

Not sure what edition of Auto Action you are referring to, I am thinking it may be around 1992 to 1993.
When I typed 1993 winfield triple challenge" on google search , I could find the 1993 racing programme on picclick and there was a link to ebay for it.

On You Tube, I found lots of drag racing on "1993 Winfield Triple Challenge | Eastern Creek", but I couldn't find any Australian Touring Cars being tested.

Is there a video on You tube of Gardiner running this 11.9 sec 1/4 mile ?

Rob Wilk · 1 Nov 2022, 11:56 (Ref:4132310)

Quote:

Originally Posted by spook

Well 05forever, you are right it is not linear. Spoke to a friend who knows a bit about circuit design and he gave me these figures which are from a 1982 Ferrari F1 car. These are the figures used for the design speed calculations for racetracks around the world. Interesting to note they are speed/distance/time.
Speed(km/h) Distance(m) Time(secs)
0 0 0
50 6.6 0.9
70 12.9 1.3
100 26.2 1.9
160 72.4 3.2
200 129.1 4.3
250 260 6.4
300 606.5 10.8
Wow - standing start to 300km/h in 10.8 seconds covering 606.5m.
And this is a 1982 Vintage F1 car !!!
Braking is pretty good too
Speed Distance Time
300 177.2 4.3
250 123.0 3.5
200 78.7 2.8
160 50.4 2.3
100 19.7 1.4
50 4.9 0.7
Good enough to make your eyeballs pop.

Is this a Ferrari 126C2 Formula 1 race car that you have given these acceleration and braking figures for ?

When I did a google search on 1982 Ferrari F1 car , I found technical data of it on https://www.f1technical.net/f1db/cars/494/ferrari-126c2 .

It didn't have any acceleration and braking figures like you have given, but it had engine, specs and dimensions.

I can see that it would be as quick as you have shown, as it had 580 bhp @ 11,000 rpm from a car that was 595 kg with water and oil.

I wonder what the quarter mile for this 1982 Ferrari F1 race car was ?
I am thinking it could be close to 8.3 secs at 275 kph

It has a massive 240 litres fuel tank.
Do you know what the fuel consumption was like with it during racing ?

One trend I can see from braking figures you have given, is that when you brake from 300kph it takes about 9 times the distance than it does to brake from 100kph to a stop.
So this follows ratio squared formula.

You have given braking from 100 kph to a stop in 19.7 m
If you were to use that formula to calculate distance from 300kph for braking,
then 19.7 * 3^2 = 19.7 * 9 = 177.3 m
and this is very close to 177.2 m you have given.