F1technical.net

SR71

SR71

Seriously man, it's not even funny anymore.
Why the hell do you have to reply to every post in an attempt to "prove" that they will achieve what they're saying?
As far as I'm concerned, you haven't showed anything that proves you work for either RB or AM, or any car maker for that matter. There's people showing tons of data to argument that this is an impossible concept, and yet you defend Red Bull's claims with your life.
I'm not saying it is possible or not to make a road car faster than F1, but unless you show some data to prove once and for all that this concept will definitely be achieved, by defending your point so 'violently', you're just looking childish and annoying.

Elaborate on everything you wrote SR71.

Because all your reply boils down to is...."no it doesn't".

And to be pedantic, the Huayra is not a hybrid car, nor does it approach anything like 250mph. Nor will it come within 15 seconds of an F1 car at Silverstone.
The Koenigsegg is a Hybrid and weighs under 1500kg's. It is also not at any stage intended to cosset it's customers in luxury, a missive given to us by Aston Martin in their PR spiel.
Nor will it come within 15 seconds of an F1 car around Silverstone.

Is a bell ringing?

1:32.2 Silverstone lap time for 2015.

If you truly believe a roadworthy production car is capable of beating this, and not losing it's producers a ton of money in the process, and still be the fastest in a straight line as well as "luxurious" instead of stripped out racer, carrying tons of downforce, on fantasy rubber..... then....




.....Suddenly I'm a believer!

SR71 wrote:

DiogoBrand wrote:SR71

Seriously man, it's not even funny anymore.
Why the hell do you have to reply to every post in an attempt to "prove" that they will achieve what they're saying?
As far as I'm concerned, you haven't showed anything that proves you work for either RB or AM, or any car maker for that matter. There's people showing tons of data to argument that this is an impossible concept, and yet you defend Red Bull's claims with your life.
I'm not saying it is possible or not to make a road car faster than F1, but unless you show some data to prove once and for all that this concept will definitely be achieved, by defending your point so 'violently', you're just looking childish and annoying.

Not ONE person has put up a single piece of data to suggest this is an impossible concept.

Horner has said their development is already showing more DF than any race spec F1 car RB has ever produced. You're saying every naysayer in here is correct and AN is wrong? Talk about looking childish.

'violently' - LOL i think we have a new definition of hyperbole

I agree, Newey has form, if he thinks he can do this then I reckon he's thought it through and can at least get danged close to his goals.

As you say, this isn't a top speed record car, it's a Thinly disguised ultimate track car like the McLaren F1 was.

SR71 wrote: Foxhound, can you show me where RB/AM has said this car will go 250+ mph?

Please, just 1 link to help me understand your point.

If you're having a hard time providing this link to back up your false argument, the reason might be"

"I am sure there are other cars that can go in straight lines quicker than this. " -Andy Palmer

Funny, when you're using false arguments to back your position, "no it doesnt" is all thats needed. Simple isnt it?

False arguments? Did you miss this?

“This is a no excuses halo car – the most luxurious car in its class, but also the quickest and the fastest.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/aston-mart ... 1-road-car

And another link.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/17/11250 ... artnership

Talk to Aston Martin personnel privately, though, and they say they are gunning for the fastest car, period — potentially encompassing both 0 to 60 and overall top speed. They’re even entertaining the idea of outdoing the new Bugatti Chiron, which will be electronically limited to 261 mph on the street.

"No it doesn't" will not suffice, geezer.

Bring me an argument why "the most luxurious car in its class, but also the quickest and the fastest" hypercar will not do 250mph+, and not need an order of magnitude better tyres, due to it being able to "lap silverstone quicker than an F1 car".

If you don't see a problem with these claims, others will. And if you lay faith in quotes, then you should wind your neck in and see Palmer stating his vision for AutoExpress is equally as valid.

SR71 wrote:You also assume that with a limited production run of 99 cars, they intend to make massive profits. Do you have a source to base this assumption on? If a loss on 99 cars propels AM's image forward those things can be deemed worth it. Just as Bugatti (your example).

I got sauce.

VW make profits. $12 Billion dollars of it last year.
They can afford to sell white elephants at a 6 million dollar losses apiece! Now the way this thread has gone, I'll paint a picture. They cost 2 million each, but lose 6 million. Meaning an 8 million total cost of production.
And Aston want a piece a that...

Some sauce....http://jalopnik.com/volkswagen-loses-a- ... 1426504241

Bugatti would not survive a year without VW, and Aston Martin do not have money. They already lose money on cars they should be making money on...$100 million loss in 2014.

Sauces:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6402a54a-73f9 ... z449B4bmlQ

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31727799

And then blood letting...Job losses.
Sauce:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... erate.html

SR71 wrote:One more thing. You're all effectively saying that no road car will ever be able to lap silverstone under 1:31. Is that really the side of history you want to be on? It's not an intelligent one if you use history as perspective.

You're the people telling the Wrights they were chasing an impossible dream. I identify myself more with the Wrights I guess, that's just me though.

I'm not telling you it's impossible. I'm telling you this is expensive, and can bury Aston Martin.
It reeks of desperation.
Forget the romance, the Wright's did not need to spend a loss making companies money and risk it's future in the process.

Not one of us here want this to fail either, quite the contrary. It would be amazing if this actually worked out.
But you need to pull your head out your a$$ to see that this project creates multiple problems for the one it solves.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Bugatti will make a profit on the Chiron.

McLaren made a profit off the P1 so it is possible to make money in this area. Certainly Pagani and Koenigsegg make a healthy profit off their cars.

I'm with SR71. The doubters are going to look the fools here. The AM hypercar may also not be the only car in this area. McLaren is doing a new hypercar with midline driver position. Possibly others have the same ambition.

I'm very skeptical of this lap time goal. But could both sides at least agree that if this car does attempt an F1 rivaling lap at Silverstone, it would not be doing so on street legal tires?

Seattle wrote:I'm very skeptical of this lap time goal. But could both sides at least agree that if this car does attempt an F1 rivaling lap at Silverstone, it would not be doing so on street legal tires?

Exactly, dont try to convince this crowd though. they know everything.

SR71 wrote:

Seattle wrote:I'm very skeptical of this lap time goal. But could both sides at least agree that if this car does attempt an F1 rivaling lap at Silverstone, it would not be doing so on street legal tires?

Exactly, dont try to convince this crowd though. they know everything.

Well... We know physics.

Some us have built racecars in real life. Some of us have engineering degrees and a select few have actually worked in tyre companies and pro race teams.

So yeah... We definitely know physics

flmkane wrote:

SR71 wrote:

Seattle wrote:I'm very skeptical of this lap time goal. But could both sides at least agree that if this car does attempt an F1 rivaling lap at Silverstone, it would not be doing so on street legal tires?

Exactly, dont try to convince this crowd though. they know everything.

Well... We know physics.

Some us have built racecars in real life. Some of us have engineering degrees and a select few have actually worked in tyre companies and pro race teams.

So yeah... We definitely know physics

Sorry but if Newey takes this to car the extreme with full active aero and suspension plus they do the run on proper racing slicks there is no reason he can't meet his goals.

Those who underestimate Newey do so at their own risk.

djos wrote:

flmkane wrote:

SR71 wrote:
Exactly, dont try to convince this crowd though. they know everything.

Well... We know physics.

Some us have built racecars in real life. Some of us have engineering degrees and a select few have actually worked in tyre companies and pro race teams.

So yeah... We definitely know physics

Sorry but if Newey takes this to car the extreme with full active aero and suspension plus they do the run on proper racing slicks there is no reason he can't meet his goals.

Those who underestimate Newey do so at their own risk.

Hah.

Full active aero meaning moving wings and diffuser? Sure you can do that safely, but the changing grip levels can wreak havoc with the driver's car control reflexes. You need an f1 driver for that car.

A fan would be deadly on a real road. Bird hits are bad enough for an aircraft jet engine. What happens when the fan socks in pebbles? Furthermore, there will be deadly debris being blown out behind the car.

Excessive ground effect downforce will cause changing grip levels depending on surface conditions. It'd bad enough on racetracks, on a real road you would kill the driver if he loses downforce mid corner (Senna).

Tyres would need to be container truck tyres to handle download, bumps and power delivery without exploding. But those tyres would not have high grip at all.

This aint happening. It's possible if you put all of Ford or Toyota behind the project, with government test facilities and taxpayer money. Not with Newey and Aston Martin

flmkane wrote: Hah.

Full active aero meaning moving wings and diffuser? Sure you can do that safely, but the changing grip levels can wreak havoc with the driver's car control reflexes. You need an f1 driver for that car.

A fan would be deadly on a real road. Bird hits are bad enough for an aircraft jet engine. What happens when the fan socks in pebbles? Furthermore, there will be deadly debris being blown out behind the car.

Excessive ground effect downforce will cause changing grip levels depending on surface conditions. It'd bad enough on racetracks, on a real road you would kill the driver if he loses downforce mid corner (Senna).

Tyres would need to be container truck tyres to handle download, bumps and power delivery without exploding. But those tyres would not have high grip at all.

This aint happening. It's possible if you put all of Ford or Toyota behind the project, with government test facilities and taxpayer money. Not with Newey and Aston Martin

If i'm wrong i'm wrong, however Newey's history in F1 has more credibility than anonymous naysayers on the internet.

djos wrote:

flmkane wrote: Hah.

Full active aero meaning moving wings and diffuser? Sure you can do that safely, but the changing grip levels can wreak havoc with the driver's car control reflexes. You need an f1 driver for that car.

A fan would be deadly on a real road. Bird hits are bad enough for an aircraft jet engine. What happens when the fan socks in pebbles? Furthermore, there will be deadly debris being blown out behind the car.

Excessive ground effect downforce will cause changing grip levels depending on surface conditions. It'd bad enough on racetracks, on a real road you would kill the driver if he loses downforce mid corner (Senna).

Tyres would need to be container truck tyres to handle download, bumps and power delivery without exploding. But those tyres would not have high grip at all.

This aint happening. It's possible if you put all of Ford or Toyota behind the project, with government test facilities and taxpayer money. Not with Newey and Aston Martin

If i'm wrong i'm wrong, however Newey's history in F1 has more credibility than anonymous naysayers on the internet.

Newey didn't make any such claim, neither did Horner or Red Bull. Your references therefore are imaginary

SR71 wrote:

DiogoBrand wrote:SR71

Seriously man, it's not even funny anymore.
Why the hell do you have to reply to every post in an attempt to "prove" that they will achieve what they're saying?
As far as I'm concerned, you haven't showed anything that proves you work for either RB or AM, or any car maker for that matter. There's people showing tons of data to argument that this is an impossible concept, and yet you defend Red Bull's claims with your life.
I'm not saying it is possible or not to make a road car faster than F1, but unless you show some data to prove once and for all that this concept will definitely be achieved, by defending your point so 'violently', you're just looking childish and annoying.

Not ONE person has put up a single piece of data to suggest this is an impossible concept.

Horner has said their development is already showing more DF than any race spec F1 car RB has ever produced. You're saying every naysayer in here is correct and AN is wrong? Talk about looking childish.

'violently' - LOL i think we have a new definition of hyperbole

The fact of the matter is: all of these 'naysayers' have shown data to back their claims up. Data which you choose to ignore and replace with your blind belief funded in god-knows-what. Even if that concept is possible, the least I expect is that someone defending it so firmly as you are would at least show the data to prove it is possible. If we are gonna argue based on belief, then I can say I believe McLaren will win the constructors' championship this year simply because I believe so.

This is getting daft, but I'll wade in with some suggestions of possibility. We know from the link that they have a $99m budget to develop and produce 99 cars. The story directly quoted "As we sit here today, the raison d'etre that we've given the team is to be faster than an F1 car around Silverstone – or indeed any other F1 track". It also quoted "I am sure there are other cars that can go in straight lines quicker than this. We don't make drag cars, we make cars you can use." They have stated that ground effects will be used, which they probably mean a full floor and probably means fans won't be used.

Let's just check the Aston Martin press release to ensure we're not missing any requirements. Nope, nothing about the car in there at all, so we're working with the elaborated requirements from the original article and the caveats associated with that.

So we want a road car that can out-perform an F1 car on track, but we don't care about straight line performance targets. Can we develop something that exceeds F1 levels of aerodynamic performance for not a lot of cash? The Empire Wraith is a good example of a car that has greater efficiency than an F1 car and costs just £55k, despite being sold in quantities of, I think, four so far. So we can reasonably assume that we can shove a V8 in the back of that and be as fast as an F1 car; it weighs just 300kg when fitted with a 450bhp supercharged bike engine. Factor in additional weight for lights and other necessary road items and it seems feasible. Don't forget that Aston Martin is British, so getting a car on the road here might be a little different to outside Europe - Ford made a roadgoing version of my race car and Radical have no problem registering their SR3/SR8 cars across Europe.