280 MPH corvette
08-10-2006, 06:49 AM
#41
TECH Enthusiast
chicane: I think you meant drag increases (not drag coefficient). 
RussStang: Don't underestimate the value of AWD at top speed. That's the Z06's biggest challenge at 220+. The Bugatti also has active aero parts to help with traction and kill lift.
RussStang: Don't underestimate the value of AWD at top speed. That's the Z06's biggest challenge at 220+. The Bugatti also has active aero parts to help with traction and kill lift.
08-10-2006, 08:41 AM
#42
On The Tree
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Iranndia
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.popularmechanics.com/auto...tml?page=1&c=y
http://bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
It only takes 1800 HP to go over 300 MPH in a car with a Cd of .29 (3rd gen Firebird) case closed.
http://bankspower.com/im_SuperRod_Sept04.cfm
It only takes 1800 HP to go over 300 MPH in a car with a Cd of .29 (3rd gen Firebird) case closed.
08-10-2006, 12:54 PM
#43
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Exton, Pennsylvania
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chicane
There is a formula that has been proven several times and it is what most open road racers know that as the speed doubles, drag coefficient increases by the “SQUARE” (2X2=4). But what is also true, is that the horsepower requirement to double your speed, increases by the “CUBE”.
That means that if it requires100 horsepower to run 100+ mph in a specific vehicle”, it will take 800 hp (2X2X2=8) to push the “same car” to 200+ mph..... etc, etc.
That means that if it requires100 horsepower to run 100+ mph in a specific vehicle”, it will take 800 hp (2X2X2=8) to push the “same car” to 200+ mph..... etc, etc.
Originally Posted by LTSpeed
RussStang: Don't underestimate the value of AWD at top speed. That's the Z06's biggest challenge at 220+. The Bugatti also has active aero parts to help with traction and kill lift.
08-10-2006, 06:17 PM
#44
TECH Enthusiast
RussStang: Just to be clear, I don't believe Bugatti's claims. That's too little power for that speed range given the drag.
As for AWD, the problem with many very high-speed cars is that as they get over 250mph they want to lift. The more they lift, the harder it is to put power to the ground. If you try for downforce to offset this, you add drag. AWD cars, while much less efficient mechanically, can put power down more evenly and the natural downforce on the nose is already there to help.
Quick1998Z28: Good references! They kind of back up what we've been talking about and point out stuff we've totally ignored: weight and torque. The Z06 should be airborne at 280mph without mods. And even if it isn't, most of us wouldn't want to be in it as it starts to float around 240!
As for AWD, the problem with many very high-speed cars is that as they get over 250mph they want to lift. The more they lift, the harder it is to put power to the ground. If you try for downforce to offset this, you add drag. AWD cars, while much less efficient mechanically, can put power down more evenly and the natural downforce on the nose is already there to help.
Quick1998Z28: Good references! They kind of back up what we've been talking about and point out stuff we've totally ignored: weight and torque. The Z06 should be airborne at 280mph without mods. And even if it isn't, most of us wouldn't want to be in it as it starts to float around 240!
08-10-2006, 10:15 PM
#45
TECH Fanatic
Originally Posted by LTSpeed
chicane: I think you meant drag increases (not drag coefficient).
I will make that correction in my explaination.
08-11-2006, 10:15 AM
#46
TECH Enthusiast
One really interesting aspect of all this is how modern supercars have active aerodynamics. I've long been a proponent of active aerodynamics in racing. From my point of view, it's the rules restrictions banning them that have lowered top speeds in all forms of racing (except drag racing maybe!).
It's really killed the idea of using racing to develop new technologies for the street. For me, it takes a lot out of motorsports. Imagine a 300mph Indy car! It would have intelligent moving control surfaces and suspension. Perhaps even the driver's tub would rotate to help handle g-forces. The argument that speeds must be kept low for safety are BS. That technology would improve as well--like it always has. Who knows what great minds could come up with?
It's really killed the idea of using racing to develop new technologies for the street. For me, it takes a lot out of motorsports. Imagine a 300mph Indy car! It would have intelligent moving control surfaces and suspension. Perhaps even the driver's tub would rotate to help handle g-forces. The argument that speeds must be kept low for safety are BS. That technology would improve as well--like it always has. Who knows what great minds could come up with?
08-12-2006, 11:05 AM
#47
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Exton, Pennsylvania
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LTSpeed
One really interesting aspect of all this is how modern supercars have active aerodynamics. I've long been a proponent of active aerodynamics in racing. From my point of view, it's the rules restrictions banning them that have lowered top speeds in all forms of racing (except drag racing maybe!).
It's really killed the idea of using racing to develop new technologies for the street. For me, it takes a lot out of motorsports. Imagine a 300mph Indy car! It would have intelligent moving control surfaces and suspension. Perhaps even the driver's tub would rotate to help handle g-forces. The argument that speeds must be kept low for safety are BS. That technology would improve as well--like it always has. Who knows what great minds could come up with?
It's really killed the idea of using racing to develop new technologies for the street. For me, it takes a lot out of motorsports. Imagine a 300mph Indy car! It would have intelligent moving control surfaces and suspension. Perhaps even the driver's tub would rotate to help handle g-forces. The argument that speeds must be kept low for safety are BS. That technology would improve as well--like it always has. Who knows what great minds could come up with?
08-12-2006, 04:46 PM
#48
TECH Enthusiast
Originally Posted by RussStang
Yeah, the technology to handle the car at 300mph would improve, but a human's ability to react at that speed wouldn't. That is probably way too fast for me to ever believe it will be down in auto racing in it's current form. How hard would it be to build a car with safety in mind with the thought of wrecking at 300mph? I am not saying it wouldn't be cool to see a race car do speeds like that, and the technology is definetly there, I just wouldn't count on rule makers like the FIA to ever sanction technologies to push a vehicle to those limits.
08-12-2006, 06:55 PM
#49
Launching!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Exton, Pennsylvania
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LTSpeed
I agree that the sanctioning bodies today won't do it. But I bet someone will. Scientists used to say the human body couldn't withstand speeds over 35mph...then 50mph...then 100mph...and so on. No one should survive crashes over 200mph--even 300mph (top fuel!), but they do. Today's racing will seem antiquated if people ever regain the vision to push the envelope again. Just my opinion.
