Breaking news, useful data or technical highlights or vehicles that are not meant to race. You can post commercial vehicle news or developments here.
Please post topics on racing variants in "other racing categories".
Which press release was that then? You posted a link to a third party web site. And you accused AM's CEO of being drunk.
Which you might say is kinder than saying he failed, as seems to be the running theme in this thread. It's a joke on the claims he's known for f.e. go watch the GT-R LM introduction video. Similarly, on wikipedia he's sourced as the 'godfather of EVs' due to his involvement with the Nissan Leaf. As for the link, there is a certain genre of auto websites that hosts press releases; they copy paste the text and host the images contained in the zip/rar files that press departments issue. If the AM press website still has it accessible you will find verbatim text.
Faster as in top speed. I very much doubt it will be doing over 260mph like the Chiron can. That's just down to pure power where the Bugatti has c.400bhp more than the Valkyrie.
As for acceleration, it'll be interesting to see whether it can match / beat the Chiron's current records. The Chiron's 4wd means it has ridiculous acceleration thanks to its traction advantage.
It´d be an interesting comparison, I´ve always wondered how much lighter a 2wd car must be to match a 4wd car in acceleration, it´s comparing apples to oranges but fun anycase
I'd be interested to know the real situation with the loads / tyres. I've seen suggestions that the Bugatti produces half a tonne of downforce. Add that to its weight and you have loads of 2.5t on the tyres. Tyres that can take that and do a speed of 260mph ought to be good enough for the Valkyrie to produce much more downforce given its much lower kerb weight. As always, getting real figures is very difficult for we in the general public.
No necessarily. Problem with tires is not the vertical load at max speed, wich in both cars must be around 3 tonnes as the Bugatti higher weight will compensate the lower DF (more or less).
Problem comes when, at that max speed, with around 750kg on each wheel, you turn the wheel and the weight transfer increase the load in the outer tires. That increase will depend on the DF produced by the car, higher DF, higher load will be transfered to the outer tires, so the Valkirie will load those tires significantly more than any Bugatti.
Moreover, appart from the vertical loads, there will also be some huge lateral forces into those tires wich will directly depend on the DF and max lateral Gs, so also here the Valkirie will stress the tires much more than any Bugatti.
My wild guess is these lateral forces are the limiting factor, no road legal tire is designed to support any significant lateral force (> 1G), even if they can take the necessry weight/vertical force
First of all, I stated PHILOSOPHY based upon your claim, not application. Secondly, the AMR Pro makes 2000 kg of downforce as stated here
The road car makes significantly less than that. And weighs more than twice what the Caparo weighs, so in terms of downforce/kg mass, the Caparo is actually superior, significantly so in terms of the PHILOSOPHY of a high revving, lightweight, micro two seater cockpit Formula car with semi-closed pontoon wheels.
Don't worry, Rodin will come out and absolutely smash Valkyrie too, philosophically AND in application
Really, it's just about every statement of performance that they've missed. Road car on regular Michelin Cup 2 was stated to be faster than LMP2 on video, AMR Pro was stated to be close to/faster than F1, car was told to customers that it would have 1:1 power to weight. Now Adrian Newey himself is distancing himself from the car.
Could be, I'm not familiar with the other claims. Where are the statements though. LMP2 seems more realistic. Regardless, who will be setting the lap times? Can the average buyer drive an LMP2 type car at 10/10ths? Without going off track. Lap times for headlines usually involve pro drivers of some sort, test drivers or racers. Has a known figure wheeled one yet?
Right here "without track pack"
Now the car is said to be barely faster than a GT3 car. Also it's hundreds of kg heavier than originally stated to customers. The car can barely drive on the road without breaking down. It also sounds god awful in town under low load
The AMR Pro was said to be F1 or LMP1 speed. Well, it's lapping several seconds off of LMP2 times at Laguna (at 800 hp tune and not fully pushed, but still), though it is really just a rebodied LMP2 car with the Valkyrie engine after all
Also it's hundreds of kg heavier than originally stated to customers.
What weight was originally stated to customers? Hundreds of kg would be an unrealistic error in this context considering the metrics below.
There's a still older press release. This one's from 2016, same year as this thread's namesake article. No mention of F1 speeds nor curb weight, same as the 2018 statement. It does mention: "For those who crave an even more intensely focused driving experience, a track-only AM-RB 001 is also in development, the projected performance of which is in line with that of today's LMP1 Le Mans sports prototypes." Seems to be on track for that. In the Shmee video during the press ride with passenger they mention telemetry readout of 3.2g during cornering, and top speeds 10 mph over a DPi at the same track is mentioned in the comments, although they said the car wasn't fully set up for seeking lap times, so the metrics are piecemeal still.
The same PR mentions: "...naturally aspirated V12 engine with the potency to achieve a 1:1 power-to-weight ratio; 1 bhp per kilo of weight." On wikipedia the kerb weight is listed as 1200-1275 kg with power at 1160 hp / 1176 ps. Which is .91 - .97 hp/kg. Which would only yield 40-100 kg excess.
Also it's hundreds of kg heavier than originally stated to customers.
What weight was originally stated to customers? Hundreds of kg would be an unrealistic error in this context considering the metrics below.
There's a still older press release. This one's from 2016, same year as this thread's namesake article. No mention of F1 speeds nor curb weight, same as the 2018 statement. It does mention: "For those who crave an even more intensely focused driving experience, a track-only AM-RB 001 is also in development, the projected performance of which is in line with that of today's LMP1 Le Mans sports prototypes." Seems to be on track for that. In the Shmee video during the press ride with passenger they mention telemetry readout of 3.2g during cornering, and top speeds 10 mph over a DPi at the same track is mentioned in the comments, although they said the car wasn't fully set up for seeking lap times, so the metrics are piecemeal still.
The same PR mentions: "...naturally aspirated V12 engine with the potency to achieve a 1:1 power-to-weight ratio; 1 bhp per kilo of weight." On wikipedia the kerb weight is listed as 1200-1275 kg with power at 1160 hp / 1176 ps. Which is .91 - .97 hp/kg. Which would only yield 40-100 kg excess.
Original weight stated to customers who made deposits was in the range of 1000-1100 kg for the road car. It is now in the range of 1320-1400+ kg.
This is not an "error". But mass growth from using heavier materials rumored to save cost (after acquisition by Lawrence Stroll, deviating from original vision by Newey) or reinforce areas that were failing.
The AMR Pro btw ran 1'19 at Laguna. Yes, with all the caveats, but that's 9 seconds a lap slower than LMP2. And even its stated lap time at LeMans is slower than LMP1 by 6 seconds and only faster than LMP2 by 4 seconds. Remember, the road car was supposed to be faster than LMP2, lol.
The AMR Pro doesn't even use the same chassis as the road car, it's a Multimatic LMP2 chassis now which was not the original plan
Right but if it's a laptime with caveats then what use does the delta value serve? 3.2g cornering and a +10 top speed delta to DPi is in the ballpark as far as individual metrics go, and you could hit both of those metrics if you wanted to on a 3 minute laptime in between talking to your passenger. Seems unlikely it has an off the shelf LMP2 chassis, the roofline and door openings would be different. The dutchman in your vid stated 1400kg although I can't find this figure anywhere else except some reference to someone running the plates, which implies an MOT inspection which might imply an in situ measurement i.e. presence of fuel or even occupants. Maybe he mispoke?
About the Valkirie, I´ve read same numbers posted just above, so the Valkirie produce around 2.5-3.5 (depending on the source) more DF than the Caparo, since I guess those numbers (875kg DF) are with the race-car wing set-up, so it musst be compared with the AMR Pro
The numbers aren't official. That's the problem. So one can't say what downforce the Pro develops.
If you are more fortunate than others, build a larger table not a taller fence.
Right but if it's a laptime with caveats then what use does the delta value serve? 3.2g cornering and a +10 top speed delta to DPi is in the ballpark as far as individual metrics go, and you could hit both of those metrics if you wanted to on a 3 minute laptime in between talking to your passenger. Seems unlikely it has an off the shelf LMP2 chassis, the roofline and door openings would be different. The dutchman in your vid stated 1400kg although I can't find this figure anywhere else except some reference to someone running the plates, which implies an MOT inspection which might imply an in situ measurement i.e. presence of fuel or even occupants. Maybe he mispoke?
It's an EU registration weight, which includes 90% fuel and I believe one 75 kg occupant, which is why I stated 1320 kg in my post to subtract out occupant. That said, that is quite standard quoted for wet weights. Much higher than what was originally promised.
About the Valkirie, I´ve read same numbers posted just above, so the Valkirie produce around 2.5-3.5 (depending on the source) more DF than the Caparo, since I guess those numbers (875kg DF) are with the race-car wing set-up, so it musst be compared with the AMR Pro
The numbers aren't official. That's the problem. So one can't say what downforce the Pro develops.
Well, their video says 2000 kg downforce for the AMR Pro, but the car also weighs 2* what the Caparo does and that figure is likely at top speed.
Wow seems like a dumpster fire! Thanks for the link.
The investment companies who walked away in 2018 are laughing while Stroll carries the can. Always sounded like Aston bit off more than they could chew with this, and while it may still work out and be a great car... it may bury Aston for good if Stroll walks away.
A damn shame.
Faster as in top speed. I very much doubt it will be doing over 260mph like the Chiron can. That's just down to pure power where the Bugatti has c.400bhp more than the Valkyrie.
As for acceleration, it'll be interesting to see whether it can match / beat the Chiron's current records. The Chiron's 4wd means it has ridiculous acceleration thanks to its traction advantage.
It´d be an interesting comparison, I´ve always wondered how much lighter a 2wd car must be to match a 4wd car in acceleration, it´s comparing apples to oranges but fun anycase
I'd be interested to know the real situation with the loads / tyres. I've seen suggestions that the Bugatti produces half a tonne of downforce. Add that to its weight and you have loads of 2.5t on the tyres. Tyres that can take that and do a speed of 260mph ought to be good enough for the Valkyrie to produce much more downforce given its much lower kerb weight. As always, getting real figures is very difficult for we in the general public.
No necessarily. Problem with tires is not the vertical load at max speed, wich in both cars must be around 3 tonnes as the Bugatti higher weight will compensate the lower DF (more or less).
Problem comes when, at that max speed, with around 750kg on each wheel, you turn the wheel and the weight transfer increase the load in the outer tires. That increase will depend on the DF produced by the car, higher DF, higher load will be transfered to the outer tires, so the Valkirie will load those tires significantly more than any Bugatti.
Moreover, appart from the vertical loads, there will also be some huge lateral forces into those tires wich will directly depend on the DF and max lateral Gs, so also here the Valkirie will stress the tires much more than any Bugatti.
My wild guess is these lateral forces are the limiting factor, no road legal tire is designed to support any significant lateral force (> 1G), even if they can take the necessry weight/vertical force
First of all, I stated PHILOSOPHY based upon your claim, not application. Secondly, the AMR Pro makes 2000 kg of downforce as stated here
The road car makes significantly less than that. And weighs more than twice what the Caparo weighs, so in terms of downforce/kg mass, the Caparo is actually superior, significantly so in terms of the PHILOSOPHY of a high revving, lightweight, micro two seater cockpit Formula car with semi-closed pontoon wheels.
Don't worry, Rodin will come out and absolutely smash Valkyrie too, philosophically AND in application
About the bolded part, what numbers you´re considering? Because at first, according to the manufacturer the Caparo weight 470kg dry, and produce 875kg of downforce
That is under 2/1 ratio (DF/weight), while the AMR pro produce over 2000kg of DF for under 1000kg weight, so over 2/1 ratio. That is superior to the Caparo.
Note the Caparo manufacturer states there are road and track versions for the wings
...allowing it to create 875 kilograms (1,929 lb) of downforce at 240 kilometres per hour (150 mph). The wings are replaceable with road and track variations
So I guess their numbers of maximum DF are those achieved with the track version, wich means it must be compared with the AMR pro, comparing the road legal Valkyrie with the track version of the Caparo will be comparing apples to oranges
Do you have any info about DF produced by the road legal Caparo?
Edit: Also, Caparo manufacturer states it produces up to 3G of lateral acceleration, depending on the tire and wing setups, wich sounds like the max Gs it can produce with track version of tires and wings. From the link above:
It is also capable of an estimated lateral acceleration of up to 3g and braking deceleration of 3g , depending on tyre setup
While the AMR Pro produce 3.2Gs in the video you posted, wich is running on used tires and a higher than ideal ride height, so it can produce even more than 3.2Gs, higher than the caparo
Right but if it's a laptime with caveats then what use does the delta value serve? 3.2g cornering and a +10 top speed delta to DPi is in the ballpark as far as individual metrics go, and you could hit both of those metrics if you wanted to on a 3 minute laptime in between talking to your passenger. Seems unlikely it has an off the shelf LMP2 chassis, the roofline and door openings would be different. The dutchman in your vid stated 1400kg although I can't find this figure anywhere else except some reference to someone running the plates, which implies an MOT inspection which might imply an in situ measurement i.e. presence of fuel or even occupants. Maybe he mispoke?
It's an EU registration weight, which includes 90% fuel and I believe one 75 kg occupant, which is why I stated 1320 kg in my post to subtract out occupant. That said, that is quite standard quoted for wet weights. Much higher than what was originally promised.
Fuel weight anywhere from 75-150 kg, passenger weight 75-150 kg, 5-10 kg for fluids. Which could bring it nearer to the weight posted on wikipedia. Min 1100 kg assuming the rumored starting figure of 1400 kg is a real number. +40% weight increase would be a massive discrepancy on any automotive project and I doubt it could be explained by cost cutting on a carbon tub. Doesn't make sense to me.
Interesting article on the finances, btw. It still lacks vehicle metrics though. Only one was mentioned, a single goodwood hill run, not sure which year. Goodwood is a mixed bag times wise. Rally and GT3 cars often post the fastest times year to year, outpacing open wheelers, due to the nature of the course and who's driving and whether or not the vehicle owner is okay with a potential crash. A kei class sized car currently holds the record.
It´d be an interesting comparison, I´ve always wondered how much lighter a 2wd car must be to match a 4wd car in acceleration, it´s comparing apples to oranges but fun anycase
No necessarily. Problem with tires is not the vertical load at max speed, wich in both cars must be around 3 tonnes as the Bugatti higher weight will compensate the lower DF (more or less).
Problem comes when, at that max speed, with around 750kg on each wheel, you turn the wheel and the weight transfer increase the load in the outer tires. That increase will depend on the DF produced by the car, higher DF, higher load will be transfered to the outer tires, so the Valkirie will load those tires significantly more than any Bugatti.
Moreover, appart from the vertical loads, there will also be some huge lateral forces into those tires wich will directly depend on the DF and max lateral Gs, so also here the Valkirie will stress the tires much more than any Bugatti.
My wild guess is these lateral forces are the limiting factor, no road legal tire is designed to support any significant lateral force (> 1G), even if they can take the necessry weight/vertical force
First of all, I stated PHILOSOPHY based upon your claim, not application. Secondly, the AMR Pro makes 2000 kg of downforce as stated here
The road car makes significantly less than that. And weighs more than twice what the Caparo weighs, so in terms of downforce/kg mass, the Caparo is actually superior, significantly so in terms of the PHILOSOPHY of a high revving, lightweight, micro two seater cockpit Formula car with semi-closed pontoon wheels.
Don't worry, Rodin will come out and absolutely smash Valkyrie too, philosophically AND in application
About the bolded part, what numbers you´re considering? Because at first, according to the manufacturer the Caparo weight 470kg dry, and produce 875kg of downforce
That is under 2/1 ratio (DF/weight), while the AMR pro produce over 2000kg of DF for under 1000kg weight, so over 2/1 ratio. That is superior to the Caparo.
Note the Caparo manufacturer states there are road and track versions for the wings
...allowing it to create 875 kilograms (1,929 lb) of downforce at 240 kilometres per hour (150 mph). The wings are replaceable with road and track variations
So I guess their numbers of maximum DF are those achieved with the track version, wich means it must be compared with the AMR pro, comparing the road legal Valkyrie with the track version of the Caparo will be comparing apples to oranges
Do you have any info about DF produced by the road legal Caparo?
Edit: Also, Caparo manufacturer states it produces up to 3G of lateral acceleration, depending on the tire and wing setups, wich sounds like the max Gs it can produce with track version of tires and wings. From the link above:
It is also capable of an estimated lateral acceleration of up to 3g and braking deceleration of 3g , depending on tyre setup
While the AMR Pro produce 3.2Gs in the video you posted, wich is running on used tires and a higher than ideal ride height, so it can produce even more than 3.2Gs, higher than the caparo
The Caparo "track wing" is like the track pack of the Valkyrie. It's still road legal and no wider than the original wing. It's just double element and fully adjustable unlike the original clean single element road wing.
The Caparo downforce is at 150 mph, not 200+ mph which due to lack of information, I'm assuming is for the AMR Pro's quoted value. And again, we should be comparing the Caparo to the Valkyrie road car. It bitch slaps the Valkyrie in downforce to weight, not to mention weight alone, which PHILOSOPHICALLY MAKES THE VALKYRIE NOT UNIQUE, which is the point I've been trying to start with. I can hardly care that a car made over a decade later is faster, crazier, etc, that is expected, that's called progress.
