Shoomakan

Please give Darwin a chance to prove himself yet again.

Jim's500E

You can't lower a 500E 2.3"...the suspension won't take it; the camber could not be corrected without huge modifications.

Have you seen a Veryon in person?...they are about the size of an Audi TT...ie: its not that wide as you think. Yes, I've seen one myself...and driven one ! The tires are massive tho for such a small frame. 1000+ hp will propel a brick to 200mph.

A 500E with less than third of that hp will get it almost 3/4s of the way there. And my Rs6 with about half that 1000+ hp will get it to 185-ish.

It's not really about believeing you...I think no one truly cares about how fast a 20+ year old car can really go verses a similar newer car. Most folks never approach a car's top speed anyway, so its all just talk. Entertaining? maybe !...but all just lip flappin'.

RBYCC

By the time the kid is old enough to afford a 500E, he'll have so much hair on the palms of his hands that he won't be able to grip the steering wheel...and of course his eye sight will be diminished..
But he'll have amazing muscular development in his forearms..

Jim's500E

Saijin_Naib

Thanks for that Jim. I never had an actual idea of the Veyron's dimensions. It sounds like it is much like the Viper in that it looks like it has a very large size and width, but in person is absolutely tiny. The Viper is about breast height, maybe lower, and seemed about Civic Del Sol sized, though obviously wider and longer by a bit.

neanderthal

AMG kit? Empirically "yes."
Just the wheel deflectors? Theoretically "yes."

Remember, the AMG kit is comprehensive; it really cleans up the turbulence and dirty air coming under the vehicle and wheels. The body of the vehicle is otherwise the same.

Just the wheel deflectors would make a slight difference. You still have a lot of aero drag to overcome and you need more and more horsepower to keep going faster. Stick a big air dam on the front and you'd get pretty big (ugly) difference. Add side skirts and you've manipulated the air nicely around the car. Add a rear air dam that cleans up the air coming around the car and voila; suddenly you're going ~15mph faster on the same horsepower.

zach1328

Seriously???

You're going to tell me a 6 speed manual tranny and a 2" lowering kit won't increase the top speed from 165mph to 180mph...?
And then sit there and say a body kit will add 15mph to your overall speed.

Doesn't make sense.
Almost seems like you truly think I'm correct, yet you just don't want to admit it. Unless you're 15 MPH statement was supposed to be sarcastic, but I couldn't sense you sarcasm so I doubt it.

And anyways...
To whoever said that a bugatti is about as wide as an Audi R8.

Yes, you are correct.
The veyron is close to 79" wide and the Auti r8 5.2 is around 80", so the audi is actually slightly wider.
Although, you're wrong about that not being very wide. The 500e is close to 71" in width, giving the veyron 8" in width. Thats a lot IMO.

RBYCC:
I actually do have enough money at this moment to go out an buy a 500e. But I've got other things to save for.

neanderthal

I said in my last post that you shouldn't post anything as though you know something, unless you actually know something. You clearly have a problem with comprehension, or you are stupid. I'm starting to lean towards the latter.

A full body kit will alter a cars cd. A lowering kit will only lower its cda. And only slightly. The cd is far more important than the cda. There are buses, trucks, big rigs with cds in the low 40s. The GM Sierra XFE is .41 and the 2nd gen Ford Lightning is .36 yet their cda is significantly higher because of their greater frontal area. Why do you think that a Suzuki Hayabusa with a 160hp engine, propelling a 400lb motorcycle, with a dramatically smaller frontal area than every car still barely tops 180mph.

Area is less important than the actual drag.

Your 6 speed scenario will add how much hp to the wheels? Given that it takes the 70 additional horsepower to get from 160 to 170 (hypothetical) do you think the additional 13 horsepower from your transmission is going to take you to 15 miles an hour faster? Did you even factor if the 6th or 5th speed is going to take you out of your powerband?

Get a clue.

Shoomakan

As a previous Hayabusa enthusiast, I applaud your knowledge.

It is said that the newer ones without a speed limiter are good for 200mph or so.

And +1 on the Veyron being TT sized. I always thought it was huge, until I saw it in front of me. It's TINY. Almost squarish. :P

And then he floors it.

bsmuwk

I want 5 minutes of my life back. I can't believe I have just read this thread.

neanderthal

Yeah, but only in the most ideal conditions. 190s if you're just gonna go out there and wind it out.

the_widebody

i have a gsxr 1000 k7.

it has a number of mods, including the over 300 module, and i have regularly had it at an INDICATED 191mph. (speedo may not be accurate, but it is the same speedo each time)

i was recently traveling home from work, and got involved in a game of 'lets drive/ride like loons, until a car pulls out in front making us both brake widly and nearly causes a massive accident' with a nissan gtr.

i had a large bag on my back, with my 'stuff' for work in it, weight only maybe 50lbs, but size; very large.

the extra drag caused by the bag made it impossible for me to exceed 160, on the same speedo, with the same rider and the almost same weight.

It felt like the air was going to rip me from the bike, and the buffeting was crazy.

on the occasions when we slowed to 50/60 mph, then went for it, the bike still felt almost as fast as normal, but as the speed rose, the airs effects became exponentially more intrusive. (and massive respect to the gtr, at highway speeds they can change speed at a frighteningly fast rate)

so, the point is, drag makes a massive massive huge enormous difference to top speed, so the effect of a body kit on a car cleaning up the air flow would easily add significant top speed increases and stability with the same power/weight, imho.

neanderthal

Tell that to the juvenile who thinks a lowering kit decreases aero drag enough to add 15mph to the top end of a 500E.

Whose conspicuously absent (again. And thank God....)

RBYCC

You also have to consider not just the frontal area that the young stroker thinks lowering will alter, but the overall aerodynamics of he vehicle.

The ducktail was an attempt to achieve a Kamm effect.

Aero kits should reduce lift and in doing so reduce induced drag

Ed A.

Shoomakan

Ed, it's important that you should know that if you lower your car a couple of inches, with that awesome turbo kit of yours, you should be able to hit 200mph.

Give it a shot!

190E 16V

Consider us lucky, he's found a new group of "friends" to impress/pander to/ suck up to/ share his insight and visions with...

If we were to check the Bimmer sites we might see how his fellow enthusiasts are faring. :-)

I'm sure he'll never get a 500E. That's "just a phase".

RBYCC

RHW

Best line in this thread.

zach1328

You're right guys. Lowering a car does nothing to top end performance.
The bugatti veyron just sits 2" lower in sport mode for nothing, right?
And Formula 1 cars practically ride on the ground just to make them look cool?
Ofcourse, these cars don't sit that low to improve performance. That would just be insane to think anyone would lower a car to improve performance.

And also, nice sarcastic 200mph comment. But that doesn't make any sense cause his Turbocharged 300ce doesn't even have much more power than a bone stock 500e.

In addition, a 6 speed manual transmission probably won't add any performance over the stock 4 speed auto box.
Thats why lamborghini's and ferrari's now days still use the 4 speed tranny's over the 6 speed auto/manual tranny.

It all makes sense now, I'm sorry guys.
You're all right.

Did anyone even consider that when you lower a car there is less drag on the tires because the front bumper will cover more of the bottom of the tires. Which will reduce the Frontal Area. So, yes, lowering a car does reduce the frontal area.

EDIT:
All sarcasm aside, here is my evidence..
http://vlsicad.ucsd.edu/~sharma/Potpourri/perf_est.html
This is a graph I did to figure out the top speed/acceleration times etc.
I couldn't find a good dyno graph of a 500e so my Self made dyno graph on there is probably slightly off, but the point is I got the graph to estimate the top end power at 323hp, 1 more than a 500e.
I kept the Cd at .30, and added the 2 extra gears. This graph shows the top speed of a 500e being 181mph. The acceleration times seem to be accurate, so I would assume this thing is legit.

http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/...top-speed.html
This forum says the factory got a 500e up to 180mph when they geared it for top end. That means the stock Cd does support a top speed in the 175-180mph range with proper gearing.

Shoomakan

Let's start with the fun...

1. His turbocharged 300CE is about 300 kilograms lighter, and probably has more torque. BIG difference.

2. Really? A 6 speed manual won't add any performance? Automatic transmissions have way more oil and moving parts, which is why they sap (on average) around 10% MORE than a manual tranny. On my W124, I went from around 165whp to 190whp JUST by installing the 5 speed. Which, incidentally, gives me more gears ie a better powerband. It's a HUGE difference. My car felt so much faster.

3. Lamborghini has NEVER used a 4 speed automatic transmission, buddy. The first production Lambo with an automatic was the Murcielago. The Diablo was strictly a 5 speed manual, as was the Countach. I'm sure Ferrari's are the same. And if there is a 4 speed auto Ferrari, it's probably a pedestrian one. IF there is.

I'm really starting to believe that you're simply trolling. Get off this forum.

zach1328

Shoomakan:
Thank you for supporting what I've been saying all along.

My comment about the Tranny was meant to be sarcastic. Originally in this thread I stated how a manual transmission increases the RWHP as well as top speed because it would have 2 extra gears and more RWHP.
I was making a point that a 500e with a 6 speed manual transmission is obviously faster.

And I never said Lambo's ever used a 4 speed tranny. I was also being sarcastic in this comment to make a point.
I was trying to say obviously a 500e would be faster with the 6 speed tranny, and I was using a lambo to support the fact that high performance cars use tranny's with 6 or more gears. (therefore increasing performance).


In addition, weight does not affect flat out top speed. Yes it will have a small effect but not much at all.
A stock 500e can hit about 165 w/ the speed limiter removed, put in a few passengers in with the same conditions and it will still get to 165mph.

What I've been saying all along is that a 500e with a lowering kit AND 6 speed manual tranny could possibly reach 180mph.

neanderthal

Hey dumbass.

How about you come back when you've gone to college and actually studied physics, and maybe got some life experiences under your belt (preferably in the arena of high performance automobiles and aerodynamics) then you can talk.

You keep postulating and theorising and insinuating. And each time you manage to display just how [strike]ignorant[/strike] stupid you are. I'm wondering if you're being deliberately obtuse or if you really are this stupid.

Mass absolutely affects top speed. It affects acceleration. It affects braking. It affects turning.
Momentum. Inertia. Newtons 2nd law of motion. Go look those up. Basic high school physics.

I'll save you the read by simply stating that it takes more and more power to accelerate an object as it gets heavier, but that even though inertia (the resistance of a body to a change in its physical state or motion) would tell us that once it's going it's easier to keep it going than to start it going again, newtons second law (f= ma) clearly tells us you can't add mass to the equation (thats the m in that little equation there) without a change in either the acceleration or the force. (the A and F respectively.)

That means, in order for your heavier 500E to maintain the same top speed it needs to do so with more force. Force being power.

Wrong. Again.

Aren't you tired of this yet?

RBYCC

Zach is an immature young boy who believes he has gained knowledge by reading...
Incredible that he thinks he can make a convincing argument....

Reading is great as long as one understands and comprehends what they read.
But even with knowledge of the written word it means not a thing if you never apply in a practical sense what you have learned...

He plugs into his calculator BHP and doesn't realize that it should be RWP.
Has no knowledge that the quickest accelerating cars in the world use only at the most a two speed transmission...
Zach's belief that weight has minimal impact on top speed is inane...
So why doesn't an EMD SD70 with a 5000HP diesel engine go 0-300mph in 4 seconds, like a top fuel dragster does ???
Perhaps because it weighs 197 tons ?

So many errors on his part and not enough time to correct him...

A sorry little boy who never turned a wrench and doesn't realize how much of a fool he appears to others....

Sad but typical of today's spoiled youth who are sheltered from the real world by their parents, by not showing him the error of his ways...
Life will be a rude awakening when he realizes that his will only get him laughs in his life...

zach1328

Perhaps because a 197 ton vehicle isn't going to be as aerodynamic as a car. Weight has a minimal affect on top speed, assuming the frontal area and Cd remain the same.

http://forum.miata.net/vb/archive/index.php/t-3620.html

Read that for valid explanations.

I agree adding 2,000 pounds will affect the top speed, but adding 500 pounds or so will have a minimal affect on top speed.
Weight affects acceleration, but not top speed. Its been scientifically and mathematically proven.

I don't know why most W124 owners think its impossible to increase power, speed, and acceleration on their cars. Open your eyes to the real world, its 2011, not 1990.
There are plenty of parts out there that are much more efficient, therefore, increasing power and speed. Its not on average $100 per 1 hp, thats Bullsh**.
I may be younger than you all but that just means I'm probably better with technology that most of you older guys. Half of you act like its still 1990 when it was probably much harder to increase top speed or add power.

EDIT:
More evidence
http://www.rx8club.com/archive/index.php/t-126929.html
Read the post by dmp, he even says adding 3 fat guys to the car may help because its lower to the ground. That comment supports my reasoning on the lowering kit increasing top speed and on weight affecting it. Im really having fun with this.

Saijin_Naib

Miata & RX8 forums? Yeah, scientific proof for sure. Peer reviewed even.