SSC Tuatara hits 331mph top speed!

[Greg Locock]

I was comparing the claimed top speed for this one-off, to the world record for the fastest piston engined, wheel driven, one-off car. Seems to me that's the only logical comparison if you are going for bragging rights.

https://www.racecar-engineering.com/new ... .183%20mph.

[P.S.]

Well, that's kind of a nice coincidence. So the speed difference Julian Thomas (Racelogic) calculated for the Tuatara "record-run" is 107 mph. And that's basically the difference between the claimed 331 mph and the 437 mph of the Speed Demon.

That almost gives room for speculation... . Maybe SSC has a plan. At least they have some attention for a second attempt.

[OO7]

I still don't understand and haven't seen a reason given, as to why SSC claimed a Dewetron representative was present to verify the run and that they had also officially corroborated those runs?

[graham.reeds]

No. They verified the setup but no representative was present and did not verify the run. Deweton stated this to Engineering Explained.

[FrukostScones]

Hi guys I'm Shmeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...

[OO7]

No. They verified the setup but no representative was present and did not verify the run. Deweton stated this to Engineering Explained.

But SSC falsely claimed they did?

[graham.reeds]

No. They verified the setup but no representative was present and did not verify the run. Deweton stated this to Engineering Explained.

But SSC falsely claimed they did?

Stretched the truth. All in all it is very fishy.

[Phil]

What i find astonishing is that they obviously ran a car with different (shorter) gearing and the GPS’s offset corraborated the reading of exactly the gearing of the vmax version. As if they matched/configured the gps to match exactly what they were expecting based on their gearing.

But in a run like this, isnt the point to have multiple sources to cross check and thus the validy of the runs...

I can understand that mistakes happen - but these are two mistakes that match perfectly: wrong gearing and wrong GPS that match the expected VMax perfectly. That seems a bit far fetched IMHO.

[Big Tea]

What i find astonishing is that they obviously ran a car with different (shorter) gearing and the GPS’s offset corraborated the reading of exactly the gearing of the vmax version. As if they matched/configured the gps to match exactly what they were expecting based on their gearing.

But in a run like this, isnt the point to have multiple sources to cross check and thus the validy of the runs...

I can understand that mistakes happen - but these are two mistakes that match perfectly: wrong gearing and wrong GPS that match the expected VMax perfectly. That seems a bit far fetched IMHO.

As you say, one would expect a watcher with at least a 'radar gun' type instrument (with a camera) at the point they expected max speed. For very little cost compared to the over all.

[nzjrs]

What i find astonishing is that they obviously ran a car with different (shorter) gearing and the GPS’s offset corraborated the reading of exactly the gearing of the vmax version. As if they matched/configured the gps to match exactly what they were expecting based on their gearing.

Exactly - I wonder why the engineering explained video didn't make this 'coincidence' even more clear or explicit. What are the chances the 'correction factor' nearly matched the ratio difference between the gear sets.

The most charitable interpretation is they turned up to the test with the wrong gear set, thought 'oh ---' and then thought they would fake it with the GPS correction factor - all the while thinking to themselves 'we will pack the correct gear set next time'

[P.S.]

Hmm. Maybe I got it wrong, but I don´t get it. If the actual speed was 223 mph, it means the offset was 1.48. (At least I trust J.T. analyses the most)

The estimated actuall gearing ratio was : 3.454 and 0.784 but they claimed 2.92 and 0.757...
That offset would be 1.23. And this would get a speed of about 270 mph. Even the faster reversed engineered speeds are lower than that??

Cheers

[variante]

Hmm. Maybe I got it wrong, but I don´t get it. If the actual speed was 223 mph, it means the offset was 1.48. (At least I trust J.T. analyses the most)

The estimated actuall gearing ratio was : 3.454 and 0.784 but they claimed 2.92 and 0.757...
That offset would be 1.23. And this would get a speed of about 270 mph. Even the faster reversed engineered speeds are lower than that??

Cheers

Different RPM is the answer.
SSC claimed to have reached that 331mph record speed near the rev limiter (8800rpm), but from the video you can see that the rev counter wasn't doing more than 7500rpm, which translates into 233mph in 6th gear (using the 3.454 0.784 gearbox). Quite close to that 223mph.

At this point, it is clear that the SSC guy either is utterly incompetent or lied about nearly everything.
What a shame.

[P.S.]

Different RPM is the answer.

Ahhh. Thanks! But that also means the "most charitable interpretation" from nzjrs seems not sufficient as they clamed 331 insteat of 270. Though it would have been a nice interpretation indeed.

Hope they are somehow able to fix the situation. That Tuatara exterior deserves it imho.

[nzjrs]

Different RPM is the answer.

Ahhh. Thanks! But that also means the "most charitable interpretation" from nzjrs seems not sufficient as they clamed 331 insteat of 270. Though it would have been a nice interpretation indeed.

Hope they are somehow able to fix the situation. That Tuatara exterior deserves it imho.

You are correct (except for the exterior look, lol ).

I took EE's 1.36 correction factor as 'close enough' to the ratio difference with the RPM also accounted for. But like you I now also think the 1.46/1.48 factor is more accurate - so I agree that is probably is too far away. Just a coincidence I guess. My bad!

[P.S.]

You are correct (except for the exterior look, lol ).

exterior... Maybe another colour?

I took EE's 1.36 correction factor as 'close enough' to the ratio difference with the RPM also accounted for. But like you I now also think the 1.46/1.48 factor is more accurate - so I agree that is probably is too far away. Just a coincidence I guess. My bad!

But it is also not satisfying that the factor of 1.46~1.48 should be completely random... any other ideas??