700 horsepower

[Norm Peterson]

Yeah I have. And I was successful. And it's completely retarded. Any layout that a kart can run faster than a car is a stupid thing to run a car on.

That's why a Mustang doesn't run directly against the shifter karts at autocross. That's the whole idea behind setting up a racing class system. It's not "run what ya brung and hope ya brung enough" like it is on the street.


What's retarded is to dismiss the whole idea of developing driving skill in a car even though the courses are more friendly to karts up to maybe Miatas. Who knows, maybe some of that autocross skill (the sensing tire slip part, anyway) might even rub off on your hard straight line driving.


Norm

Sponsored

 

[Norm Peterson]

So this is something I need to understand lol . I've never driven in a car with this much power. How does it work... will any car with say 700hp always be faster than a car with 400hp ? is it possible for a lesser horsepower car to feel and be more powerful? A stock s550 vs a supercharged s550

Possible, yes. As long as both cars are either traction-limited or right on the very edge of being traction limited. But they'd also have to be very similar cars where the additional weight of the forced induction being up front would hurt the weight distribution. Tires, gearing, everything else would have to either be equal or favor the NA car.

As soon as the available traction can hold somewhat more than 400 HP it'll be the 700 HP car pulling away every time.


Norm

 

[MaskedRacerX]

Umm, isn't this the same question as these threads ...


https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/how-much-faster-does-a-supercharged-feel.134267/

https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/want-to-make-car-crazy-fast.135528/

https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/supercharged-s550-speed.139916/

https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/how-noticeable-is-100-torque-on-a-car.149686/

 

[oneheadlite]

The only way you can know if your car is faster than another car is
to race them head to head.
The little paper slips are nice and all and I'm sure several of these
guys take great pride in their numbers but, that is all they are; numbers.

If you get on a course or an actual country road with hills, curves and
challenges, you'll never know how fast your car is or how well you can
drive or if it is faster than another.
My Camaro SS would SMOKE the tires off on take-off, the Mustang won't.
However, the Mustang probably would have beaten the Camaro. (?)
The Camaro did handle better and power was constant. (stock)
I wish I could have raced against myself in both cars to see how well
they would paired against each other.

Competition racing is what it is all about.
Not racing a clock............................................................

 

[Coyotes55086]

The only way you can know if your car is faster than another car is
to race them head to head.
The little paper slips are nice and all and I'm sure several of these
guys take great pride in their numbers but, that is all they are; numbers.

If you get on a course or an actual country road with hills, curves and
challenges, you'll never know how fast your car is or how well you can
drive or if it is faster than another.
My Camaro SS would SMOKE the tires off on take-off, the Mustang won't.
However, the Mustang probably would have beaten the Camaro. (?)
The Camaro did handle better and power was constant. (stock)
I wish I could have raced against myself in both cars to see how well
they would paired against each other.

Competition racing is what it is all about.
Not racing a clock............................................................

well said. and I agree

 

[Dfeeds]

I wish I could have raced against myself in both cars to see how well
they would paired against each other.

That's where the little paper slips would come in handy.

I had to. I do agree with what you said.

 

[WildHorse]

will a supercharged s550 basically be faster than any stock car on the road beside you?

Race a Ferrari 812 Superfast and find out. Or a Mclaren 720.

 

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

No, more hp or better lbs/hp ratio doesn't always equal quicker. Aerodynamics plays a major role at higher speeds. This is why the Jeep Grand Cherokee Trackhawk (707 hp) traps lower speeds than a stock 2018 Mustang GT A10 (460 hp) in the 1/4 mile. The trackhawk has a better lbs/hp ratio, 7.8 vs 8.3 in the Mustang, but it's less aerodynamic, so it is slower than the less powerful Mustang at high speeds. Actual data to prove my point: The Trackhawk does 60-100 mph in 5.3 seconds, but the less powerful Mustang GT A10 PP1 does 60-100 mph in only 4.7 seconds. The Trackhawk traps 116 mph in the 1/4 mile, the GT A10 PP1: 120 mph. The Trackhawk is less quick despite having a lot more power, and a better lbs per hp ratio. For reference, the Mustang times are from Car and Driver, and the Trackhawk times are from Motor Trend. Yes, the Trackhawk has a bit better 0-60 and 1/4 mile time, but that was only because of the all wheel drive. That's a different dynamic and drivetrain that others have touched on.

Power to weight ratio is one of the most important factors as previously discussed, but as shown above, it is not everything.

Now, another example: for two cars weighing 4000 and 5000 lbs each, assuming the same lbs per hp ratio (assuming all else being equal including aerodynamics, gearing, rolling resistance, etc.), the higher hp car will trap a higher speed in the 1/4 mile than the lower hp car, due to the wind resistance effect (and to a lesser degree rolling resistance). Essentially, the higher hp car uses a smaller percentage of the total available hp to cut through the wind, which is a big deal at higher speeds. For example, and I'm keeping this very simple for illustrative purposes: Pretend at 100 mph 100 hp is required to push a Mustang through the wind. That means a 400 hp Mustang has 300 hp leftover to accelerate the car and a 500 hp Mustang will have 400 hp leftover to accelerate the car. At high speeds, the higher hp but heavier car is going to pull stronger and trap higher speeds in the 1/4 mile, or be faster in a roll race on the highway (again, assuming all else is equal). The reason: Assume the 400 hp Mustang weighs 4000 lbs, that means at 100 mph, the effective lbs per hp is 13.3 (4000 lbs / 300 hp leftover). Now pretend the 500 hp Mustang has 4 passengers and weighs 5000 lbs, the effective lbs per hp at speed is 12.5 (5000 lbs / 400 hp). As you can see, that heavier, more powerful car will have more hp per pound available and accelerate quicker at high speeds, even though they have the same lbs/hp ratio while sitting still (10 lbs per hp). This is different than the Trackhawk example I first mentioned because the two cars in this example have the same aerodynamics and rolling resistance.

Traction also plays a huge role at lower speeds, as others have touched on.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The only way you can know if your car is faster than another car is
to race them head to head.
The little paper slips are nice and all and I'm sure several of these
guys take great pride in their numbers but, that is all they are; numbers.

I realize that it's common, almost fashionable in some circles, to put down any understanding of vehicle performance from an engineering standpoint. But that's an attitude that usually comes from a lack of understanding of engineering in general and how to use all of the various numbers that are involved.

Nobody here is saying that a mathematical simulation is guaranteed to predict the outcome of every race. But it's a better guideline than you're willing to believe.

Idaho (above) has only scratched the surface of what an engineering approach - like with numbers - can predict here. I know this, because the one thing that's defied me for more years than I care to admit is how to model what happens during the launch.

There is little doubt in my mind that OE engineering knows very close how their yet-to-be-built cars are going to perform. I'm sure it's to within hundredths on the ET.


Norm

 

[oneheadlite]

I realize that it's common, almost fashionable in some circles, to put down any understanding of vehicle performance from an engineering standpoint. But that's an attitude that usually comes from a lack of understanding of engineering in general and how to use all of the various numbers that are involved.

Nobody here is saying that a mathematical simulation is guaranteed to predict the outcome of every race. But it's a better guideline than you're willing to believe.

Idaho (above) has only scratched the surface of what an engineering approach - like with numbers - can predict here. I know this, because the one thing that's defied me for more years than I care to admit is how to model what happens during the launch.

There is little doubt in my mind that OE engineering knows very close how their yet-to-be-built cars are going to perform. I'm sure it's to within hundredths on the ET.


Norm

Ah yea.
However, when you put two guys in cars to race and one has experience and
the other is a novice. Who knows which one will win?

One could miss the gas pedal or for some odd reason be in Third gear instead
of first.
The other car could be breathing HP unknown to the other and spin out off
the line.
I've witnessed both.
You race one time and if you win, there usually won't be another that time.

Or one could have a favorite road that they drive constantly and know
every curve and straight and can just eat up anyone that
wants to test them because; "my car is fast or I can outdrive 'em."

Even this, I've witnessed both.

 

[Nickel]

Stock Mazda Miata will beat 700hp Mustang at a typical autocross course. *With a good driver*

Stock Mustang will beat Miata at a drag strip. *With any driver

Key point there is driver. I've spent 10 years in Miatas on many different courses and it all comes down to the driver. I've whooped Mustangs in a Miata and have whooped Miatas in a Mustang.

 

[Norm Peterson]

Ah yea.
However, when you put two guys in cars to race and one has experience and
the other is a novice. Who knows which one will win?

One could miss the gas pedal or for some odd reason be in Third gear instead
of first.
The other car could be breathing HP unknown to the other and spin out off
the line.
I've witnessed both.
You race one time and if you win, there usually won't be another that time.

Or one could have a favorite road that they drive constantly and know
every curve and straight and can just eat up anyone that
wants to test them because; "my car is fast or I can outdrive 'em."

Even this, I've witnessed both.

Running the numbers only indicates which car should win, given drivers of equal talent (and that neither of them makes a mistake or encounters something that the other driver does not). It would show where to place the smart betting money even though it only amounts to "playing the percentages" rather than a guarantee.

Yup, driver error sure can cost a driver the 'win', as can unexpected situations that only affect one of the cars. But those aren't the cars' fault, so it's reasonable to assume that they either don't happen at all, or happen equally.

"The numbers" are more useful for estimating in advance what you could expect from making changes to your own car (kind of what the OEMs do during their development process). It's quicker and a whole lot cheaper to not have to build every combination if you can demonstrate by analysis that some combinations would clearly be slower. There's no reason to assume that you'll only make mistakes with one combination of parts, though it is possible to account for one combination being more difficult to work with than the other (fussier 2-3 and 4-5 shifts, for example - you'd lengthen the shift times for one of the cars).

The picture below could be part of the process of choosing a transmission and axle gearing for road course use, or it could be the prediction for a roll race between otherwise identical cars. There's a lot more data goes into this than just HP, weight, and an estimate of aerodynamic drag at some speed.

Norm

 

[Shadow277]

For a given level of traction that your tires can achieve (measured in "g"s of acceleration for simplicity) there's only so much horsepower that can be used. That amount is basically proportional to the speed. What this means is that at speeds below about 50mph, factors other than engine power determine acceleration. Things like tire compound and structure, tire pressure, AWD vs RWD, track prep (if on a drag strip), transmission shift time for the 1st to 2nd gear shift etc. Mustangs are not exceptional in any of these attributes off the showroom floor, and as a result you can expect certain cars to beat them to 60mph by a couple of 10ths of seconds. Of course if you want to put on drag radials, use a transmission that can get to 60 without a shift etc. you can do very, very well at 0-60 but by default the mustang isn't special and a supercharger won't help but for the very last bit of it.

As soon as you get to a high enough speed that your tires can hook up at WOT, the supercharger is helping.

Miata > Mustang

 

[bluebeastsrt]

I like pie.

 

[Genxer]

Lots of things go into how fast a car "feels". Weight, seat position, NVH, suspension stiffness, etc. Some small cars with small engines can feel fast because the handling is sharp, precise and you can really rev it out in the the first few gears without being at insane speeds. Lots of sensory things going on with feel, or if you rather "fun factor". It really comes down to driving each car.

Sponsored