Aston Martin wants hyper-car to be faster than F1 cars

[SR71]

Inevitable the goal posts would be moved.

Get those excuses ready!

(its impossible to be faster than an F1 car) LOL.

[Nickel]

… but we can assume with the track time goal set by the project that the car will be in the ball park total weight of an F1 car - perhaps +200kg.

F1 car mandated weight with driver is 700kg, set to move up to 710 next year. The average driver weight based on last year's figures sits somewhere near 65kg.
Let's call the cars 630kg.

+200 kg... 830kg ish weight.

I was going to call this unrealistic, but I suppose cars like the radical rxc come in around 900kg, so not that unrealistic at all really.

[GrayGreat]

Inevitable the goal posts would be moved.

Get those excuses ready!

(its impossible to be faster than an F1 car) LOL.

What excuses? If the track version can lap Silverstone quicker than F1, then it is no longer a road car which is opposite to the claims of RB/AM/SR71 that road car will be faster than F1. So if anyone is wrong and needs to get excuses ready, its You. Foxhound is right. Goalposts are being moved and we don't know how far will they move in future, but the omens are not looking good for you.

Road car faster than F1 means if I buy a road car, its upto me if i want to drive it faster than F1 on a track, which is not the case here. Buying the road version means you can no longer drive it faster than F1, and if someone buys the track version, they can no longer take it to the streets so in either case, the claims that were made sometime ago and supported and defended by some people here extensively and mindlessly, are not going to be met.

[SR71]

… but we can assume with the track time goal set by the project that the car will be in the ball park total weight of an F1 car - perhaps +200kg.

F1 car mandated weight with driver is 700kg, set to move up to 710 next year. The average driver weight based on last year's figures sits somewhere near 65kg.
Let's call the cars 630kg.

+200 kg... 830kg ish weight.

I was going to call this unrealistic, but I suppose cars like the radical rxc come in around 900kg, so not that unrealistic at all really.

Given the new information about a track specific version - I see a sub 1000kg goal as realistic.

as far as I know there hasn't been confirmation on the power unit but I wonder if the track version will include a hybrid system.

The batteries on the Regera are extremely light (comparatively) so if anything I can see Adrian demanding the same F1 spec batteries if we see a hybrid system.

[No Lotus]

… but we can assume with the track time goal set by the project that the car will be in the ball park total weight of an F1 car - perhaps +200kg.

F1 car mandated weight with driver is 700kg, set to move up to 710 next year. The average driver weight based on last year's figures sits somewhere near 65kg.
Let's call the cars 630kg.

+200 kg... 830kg ish weight.

I was going to call this unrealistic, but I suppose cars like the radical rxc come in around 900kg, so not that unrealistic at all really.

The Caparo T1 is only 470 kg dry according to its Wiki page. The AM-RB 001 can be as light as F1. Newey said it'll be small.

[SR71]

Inevitable the goal posts would be moved.

Get those excuses ready!

(its impossible to be faster than an F1 car) LOL.

What excuses? If the track version can lap Silverstone quicker than F1, then it is no longer a road car which is opposite to the claims of RB/AM/SR71 that road car will be faster than F1. So if anyone is wrong and needs to get excuses ready, its You. Foxhound is right. Goalposts are being moved and we don't know how far will they move in future, but the omens are not looking good for you.

Road car faster than F1 means if I buy a road car, its upto me if i want to drive it faster than F1 on a track, which is not the case here. Buying the road version means you can no longer drive it faster than F1, and if someone buys the track version, they can no longer take it to the streets so in either case, the claims that were made sometime ago and supported and defended by some people here extensively and mindlessly, are not going to be met.

This thread quickly devolved into F1 fanboys screaming no car could be quicker in any sense.

As far as I've been able to tell there has been no official confirmation that a track only version will be offered - it would be great if we could get a link. New information always helps with sources.

I don't need excuses, I don't care if it's a road car or a track only version.

[SR71]

I'm guessing you missed the time consuming bit....

Or that Newey probably had a crystal ball and knew Aston Martin would come calling. Hence he would have full scale mock up ready for sim tests and a mule being built as we speak.

So not only are you suggesting they can build this dream machine, hitting all it's design targets, within an economic remit suitable to the ailing Aston Martin, but also that Newey can overcome the laws of Physics and development procedure to already have a mule knocking about in a corner somewhere.

SR71, you have provided no evidence to suggest they are in advanced development stages.
You also should know...the project was only announced 2 weeks ago!

Have you learned how press releases work? Usually when a joint venture like this is announced its actually been a year or more in the making.

In this case, looks like it's been about a year. Either that or newey has broken those "laws of physics" that you mentioned (which laws are those again?).

Prototype at Goodwood in June! Here I was thinking it would be Geneva '17 before we saw anything. I guess they want those pre-orders fulfilled by July

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/a ... 72844.html

[DiogoBrand]

Wow quite the pissing match.

There is no law of physics that says a street legal car can't be much faster than is currently the case. The personal attacks relating to this are terrible.

I've read through the whole damn thread and no one has put forward a single reason why it can't be done. Oh there's loads of reasons why it shouldn't be done, but those literally don't matter.

Those claiming that it's impossible should just remove themselves from the thread. It's patently false that it's impossible. Debating the likelihood that RB and AM will follow through is one thing, but labeling it impossible shows some interesting mental traits.

Diogo and foxhound, I know no one in this thread, or even on this site on a personal level, so take this as you will. As an outsider, it is your discourse that I find deplorable as you've decided what is possible and condemn dissent. Get a grip, you've provided no proof that it can't be done, other than that it has not yet been done.

Mods should shut this thread down. It could be a great discussion but frankly it's just a terrible display of bickering.

I've never ever said it's impossible. But it's one thing to be possible, and another to be viable.

[Just_a_fan]

It would be 'disingenous' except for the fact that it came directly from Christian Horner, one of the few people on the planet that could confirm this.

Look up what disingenuous means...

[FoxHound]

Wow quite the pissing match.

There is no law of physics that says a street legal car can't be much faster than is currently the case. The personal attacks relating to this are terrible.

Have you read the thread from the outset?

When someone makes statements like....and I quote..

On the very real issue of tyres:

the car will be plenty quick on road legal tires. Those tires will STILL be specially developed for this specific car. I dont see any problems with regards to the tires.

Having the audacity to question whether a road car can lap Silverstone quicker than an F1 car.

Really? very tired, old, and predictable negative comment.

Leading us to be told to apply this thinking to all facets of the forum.

Please apply that thinking towards F1 in general and then question why you're reading this forum

Ridiculing "80%" without 1 shred of evidence as to how AM-RB are going to get this done. Yet still has the stones to berate anyone that has the sheer madness to question the claims.

3 pages on this thread so far, 80% negative and naysayers. Reminds me of the two types of engineers in this world, ones that say no and ones that say yes.

And accusing those that have reservations about this as "Anti Red Bull".

If Ferrari/merc/Mac said they were going to make a car with these stats I know this thread would expose itself in 1 minute for its anti-red bull bias...

With not 1 bit of evidence? Come on Nickel....It aint worth a dime if you haven't evidence to overcome objections.

I've read through the whole damn thread and no one has put forward a single reason why it can't be done. Oh there's loads of reasons why it shouldn't be done, but those literally don't matter.

If I raise objections to anything, must I be subjected to accusations, derision and told to change my mindset?
Or should those objections be met with factual evidence, and thereby overcome?
Tyres have been raised, as has costs, as has mass, as has aero.

Is it possible? Of course it is.

America plonked some dudes on the moon 50 years ago. But then they didn't change the goals posts to merely orbiting the moon.
Landing it safely, and getting it off the rock and back to the planet would require way more expertise.
Hence the cost of the missions were in the region of 110 billion dollars and yielded over 6000 patents.

As an outsider, it is your discourse that I find deplorable as you've decided what is possible and condemn dissent. Get a grip, you've provided no proof that it can't be done, other than that it has not yet been done.

The car sure as hell will need to get grip....
I don't decide what is possible. But I do get to voice an opinion when someone comes out to say "our road car will lap silverstone quicker than an F1 car".

Remember, this wont be stripped out racer....AM CEO states it will have luxurious trappings.

So off I go to Silverstone in my air conditioned, leather clad, titanium embezzled, carpet lined, cross stitched, perfume enhanced interior.
On Tyres that will not work on the road, only on a track. With aero sensitive to the tiniest inputs, bringing tons of downforce through Maggots/Becketts complex. The car's handling characteristics changing in the transition. Average Billionaire has this covered.
For ground effect, the car will not be correctly usable on the road, something I'd want from a roadcar.
It could be rather unsafe if there was a loss of force from the floor, unless the ground effect if for track only spec and "sign your life away" disclaimer.

So a lot of us have raised the problems that will be encountered by this project. Already there is now a split in the "road car" claims, with a track only special and a production version. This is justification if it were needed of peoples objections.

As a final measure of my own objection, I will point to Laguna Seca lap record of 1m05.7 by an F1 car in 2003.
A track ready McLaren P1 GTR(not the every day P1), complete with race spec aero, tyres and weighing in at 1440kg, with 685bhp to the tonne(986bhp) did 1m27.

Or 21 seconds difference.

At Barcelona that same car did 1m51 seconds in comparison to Rosberg's 1m24.6 or a difference of 26 seconds.

My objection is rightfully sustained.

[Just_a_fan]

According to an interview in Top Gear magazine, they are looking for something starting at 1000bhp/tonne. Assuming, not unreasonably, a car weight of 1000kg, that in itself, will be some achievement because that much power takes a lot of cooling; especially if you've got to cool it whilst it's in traffic in somewhere hot like Dubai. Look at the trouble VW had getting the 1000bhp engine in the Bugatti cool. That all adds weight. It's an ambitious target - I hope they get there as 1000bhp/tonne is so gloriously stupid. Cool as hell, yes, but ridiculous all the same.

[FW17]

According to an interview in Top Gear magazine, they are looking for something starting at 1000bhp/tonne. Assuming, not unreasonably, a car weight of 1000kg, that in itself, will be some achievement because that much power takes a lot of cooling; especially if you've got to cool it whilst it's in traffic in somewhere hot like Dubai. Look at the trouble VW had getting the 1000bhp engine in the Bugatti cool. That all adds weight. It's an ambitious target - I hope they get there as 1000bhp/tonne is so gloriously stupid. Cool as hell, yes, but ridiculous all the same.

The engine is not doing 1000hp when in traffic in Dubai.

[SR71]

I'm guessing you missed the time consuming bit....

Or that Newey probably had a crystal ball and knew Aston Martin would come calling. Hence he would have full scale mock up ready for sim tests and a mule being built as we speak.

So not only are you suggesting they can build this dream machine, hitting all it's design targets, within an economic remit suitable to the ailing Aston Martin, but also that Newey can overcome the laws of Physics and development procedure to already have a mule knocking about in a corner somewhere.

SR71, you have provided no evidence to suggest they are in advanced development stages.
You also should know...the project was only announced 2 weeks ago!

Have you learned how press releases work? Usually when a joint venture like this is announced its actually been a year or more in the making.

In this case, looks like it's been about a year. Either that or newey has broken those "laws of physics" that you mentioned (which laws are those again?).

Prototype at Goodwood in June! Here I was thinking it would be Geneva '17 before we saw anything. I guess they want those pre-orders fulfilled by July

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/car-news/a ... 72844.html

Foxhound, any response?

Or do you agree you misjudged this project and the actual timeline massively?

What else could you be wrong about?

The projects only a few weeks old so probably not much right

[SR71]

According to an interview in Top Gear magazine, they are looking for something starting at 1000bhp/tonne. Assuming, not unreasonably, a car weight of 1000kg, that in itself, will be some achievement because that much power takes a lot of cooling; especially if you've got to cool it whilst it's in traffic in somewhere hot like Dubai. Look at the trouble VW had getting the 1000bhp engine in the Bugatti cool. That all adds weight. It's an ambitious target - I hope they get there as 1000bhp/tonne is so gloriously stupid. Cool as hell, yes, but ridiculous all the same.

It's interesting they quote a '/tonne' number instead of a peak hp number.

I believe that article also says extreme lightweight materials and manufacturing. I wouldn't be surprised if it is under 1000.

Side note, the Agera one:1 already achieves this right?

[Just_a_fan]

The engine is not doing 1000hp when in traffic in Dubai.

True, but VW still struggled to cool the Veyron...