190E 16V

In this last sentence, are you implying that weight has an effect on top speed, because I could swear on the last page you were saying the complete opposite.
Here, the writer states that AMG had the Hammers top speed as "over 190mph." FYI.
That comment was sarcastic.

And yes I have read that article about the AMG Hammer, and if it can truly reach "over 190mph" then I see no problem in a 500e reaching 180mph.
The difference in 180 and 190 is HUGE. Much more than a 40HP difference probably.

And although 500e's are no supercars they sure are very extraordinary cars. Amg Hammers even more so.
I can't think of any other sedan with under 400hp that can reach the 190mph mark.

CTS-V is a 192mph car with its 550hp.
Panemara Turbo S is a 191MPH car with its 550hp.
The 911 Turbo S is only 196mph with its 530hp.
GT3-Rs is 193mph with its 500hp.
Even the 414hp M3 sedan can barely reach 180mph.

Most people would easily assume a Gt2-RS and 911 Turbo S are just as aerodynamic as the AMG hammer, but they're not.
I'm sure their rear wings, the size of a dining table, don't really help much though.
I wonder what kind of damage the AMG Hammer could do with 600+hp?

This is getting too off topic, but my point is
If an Amg Hammer can reach 190mph, why can't a 500e reach 180mph?

And RBYCC:
I've actually been 17 for a while now. And If Nick and I are racers, shouldn't we know more than you?
Its one thing to do the research and read stuff on paper, but its completely different in the real world. You can't make assumptions without testing them.

I would gladly test my 180mph theory if I had a 500e.

And since you seem to hate me for my love for speed, I would like to let you know that I've already had my 535i up to the 155mph limiter countless times.
Actually, I reached 155mph the first time by myself with about 1 mile of road left.
The next time I had 3 passengers and I still got it to 155 but with only about a 1/2 mile to go.
(All of this was performed on the same closed road in the same direction)

Zach ; you're 17? Do your parents know about this??
If they do they're idiots too.
Or... perhaps you're afraid to tell them because you know they'll disapprove of the lives you risk in the car they bought you??

zach1328

Ok, I like this example. Perfect chance for me to prove my point.

So, we've determined that my BMW 535i has the same Cd as a 500e. But the 500e actually has a smaller frontal area by a little.

My 535i can reach 170mph with its 6 speed automatic transmission, and 300hp I-6 TT.

Now, assuming they have the same Cd and CdA (the 500e's is actually slightly better), the 500e has an additional 22Hp at the crank.

Using, your information from 2 cars with the same Cd and different power.
15HP = 7 MPH
Therefore, 2.1HP = 1MPH faster at top speeds.

So 22/2.1 = 10.5 MPH faster

That right there shows that the a 535i with the same HP and same Cd and CdA as a 500e can reach 181mph. Theoretically if all of those numbers are the same, the top speeds should be pretty similar.

And thats excluding the fact that the 500e would actually have more RWHP than the automatic BMW tranny.

190E 16V

Zach's reply;


No my parents do not know that I've gone 155mph in that car, and I'm sure they wouldn't exactly approve.

But all 3 of my passengers have taken me 130+ in their cars too.
Atleast mine was on a closed road an 100% legal.

I know, as well as my friends, the risks involved with driving quickly.
It was a wide, flat, sticky road with plenty of room and no pot holes/bumps.

I assure you going 155mph on this road is safer than going 100mph on the freeway swerving in and out of traffic.
This is beside the fact that just as the 500e, the 535i was engineered to hold triple digit speeds.
***************

Saijin_Naib

Zach, Ed is a very accomplished racer. I think you shouldn't try and hold your little street sprints over him.

Also, the above assumes linear relationship which as posited earlier Drag is not linear.

ptoro01

Will SOMEONE take his driver's license through a shredder!

Zach, there are at least 5 different aspects of this discussion that you are confusing into a pipe dream to fit your outcome. Break it down into small chunks.

Start by understanding each separate concept, understand their graphs. You only understand linear relationships but there are quadratic and exponential graphs. You're comparing apples to oranges.

And for the love of life, if you're really into driving, sign up for track days, get an instructor, and actually develop some skills. That'll give you a place to "get it out of your system" safely while learning to drive properly. Trust me, you're a terrible driver and need years of training to be any good. Right now you're a fool who mashes the pedal. It's unrefined.

neanderthal

ptoro01

He's not comparing apples to oranges. He is comparing apples (the edible kind) to apples (the computing kind.)

Hey dumbass. It's NOT a valid comparison.

And, we've already established that the .25 cd of the Hammer is much lower than the cd of the 500E. So your completely invalid comparison between the 500E and the 535i (which have vastly differing levels of mechanical resistance/ drag BTW) still holds no water.

I'm pretty sure we've had the conversation where we say that you can't just transpose data from one case to another case.

the_widebody

at last some one else is also stating the concepts from which my reasoning is based, even if they still haven't applied it to the process we are discussing.

the air drag increases exponentially, and the (very small in comparison to begin with) friction drag is linear, and to compound its lack of effect at top speed, linear drag is unrelated to increase of speed.

linear drag does not increase by any amount that would effect the overall drag at top speed.

and again, the replies prove understanding is lacking;

a reply above correctly states nothing plus nothing is still nothing.

i point out the equally true fact that and zero divided by zero, being undefined, can equal any thing.

not one of y'all even stop and think "wow, maybe there are things that i dont know yet".


and hears the thing;

nothing plus nothing = nothing

nothing minus nothing = nothing

the relative magnitude of the internal frictional drag to the air drag means the internal frictional drag is almost nothing

reducing weight will reduce almost nothing to very nearly nothing (which are in effect the same) because you are taking something that is, by ratio to its other component, very very small, and making it even smaller.

net result, in the real world?

nothing

you cant own what you cant afford

ptoro01

Quoting yours truly, in full content.

I'm not quite sure I want to afford you, your work is abysmal.

All I need to say, is, your reprimand is directly damaging to any credibility your accomplice in stupidity might have earned. You directly undermine his meticulous calculations through your sloppy dismissal of factors.

Let's go backwards yet another level to understand significant figures and scientific notation and their relevance.




Also, tabarnak!!, HERE'S my ear with which I do not HEAR.

RBYCC

RBYCC

We've gone from science to paraphrasing Billy Preston lyrics

Nick you've been "owned" many times on this thread alone...and it was very affordable !

Keep up the inane ramblings as once again you provided my morning chuckle...

RBYCC

You are growing up young man...soon you will begin to shave every day !
I think I used the term "boy racers" for you and young Nick..as in:

"Boy racers refer to people, usually males in their late teens or early twenties, who "cruise" around in vehicles modified with loud exhausts and stereos, or modified body kits......Car enthusiasts who drive sporty cars, or those modified to perform better, typically seek to distance themselves from the culture"
Quoted from the oft times incorrect "Wikipedia" which is one of your sources of info...


Isn't this exactly what you are doing...you have yet to experience anything in the real world, but yet you proselytize as if you do...

You are making assumptions without any basis of empirical real world data

Quicksilver500

I think some basic issues have been skirted. 155 MPH limiter, why would a car be limited? Maybe mechanical limitations? Wheel bearings, brakes, tires, wheels, negative lift? Weird that a clever auto manufacturer like MB would put a factory limit on their car...almost like they might have had some safety concern or something.

Even cars designed for high speed have trouble sometimes....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQbgSe9S54I

You kill youself, that's your business. You kill someone else with this foolishness that's murder in all 50 states. Ignorance is never an excuse. STOP raising insurance costs for the rest of us young people!

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/conte...tal_accidents/

You want to build a top speed car, go to the Salt Flats or Texas mile. You want a bigger thrill than that sign up at your local army post.

190E 16V

Great post, Quickie.

BMW MB and Audi hade an agreement with the German government to limit the speed of their cars for safety on the Autobahns.

See here:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/200...hall-be-known/


You can bet Zach's parents (Zach being a minor) would have their asses sued off if someone died in his Bimmer. Likely the car is in the parents name and Zach is covered under their insurance. Cheaper that way to prevent the high premiums for a teenage driver, perhaps?

RBYCC

I remember the days when you didn't have to sign up for the army...
Lyndon B. sent the army to get you, train you for six weeks , give you an M16 and send you to a jungle to celebrate the Tet New Year..
Makes one grow up and mature instantly................see death on a daily basis and you respect the value of your life and the lives of others that aren't shooting at you...

Same applies to the highways and byways..
Easy to become involved in controlled environment competitive motorsports events...hence my reference to "boy racers" like Zach and Nick ( who has already crashed a one of a kind piece of AMG history into his mate's car testing his acceleration ) !!!

the_widebody

interestingly, kawasaki claim that by reducing the weigh of their new bike, they have increased its;

acceleration (power to weight)
braking (power to weight)
cornering (second moment of inertia)

http://www.sub5zero.com/motorcycles/...more-forgiving


they dont mention any increase in its top speed, but hint that by increasing the power as well as reducing the weight it performs better in all areas.



could it be because reducing its weight doesn't make it go faster at v max?

aw shucks, they must employ some complete idiots, because every one 'knows' that reducing weight increases top speed (not)

Quicksilver500

I mean weight indirectly does affect things related to speed. Hertzian contact is a good example. More weight, more contact area, more rolling friction lower top speed. Not just for tires, bearings, anything like that. Metals deform too. Wheel and brake package have a lot to do with it also. Rotating inertia has a significant effect on energy transfer.

Shoomakan

Neanderthal and Ed already explained that there is a difference, but it's quite trivial. Kawasaki, since they employ quite intelligent people, didn't feel the need to advertise a 1 mph increase in top speed (if that) as a result of their modifications.

I don't see the point here. Didn't Zach the Great already post statistics on cars and their top speed? According to him, a CTS-V has 550bhp and a 190 mph top speed.

The 500E has 250 (TWO HUNDRED FRIGGIN FIFTY) less horses, and yet he expects it to be only 10 mph slower. Forgetting the fact on how much newer and more efficient the CTS is in EVERY aspect, too.

the_widebody

now you are talking, but the increase wont be 1mph from the weight reduction, it will be something like 0.000001, which as i have been saying all along, in the real world is so small, it is effectively **** all.

do you really think removing say 300lbs from a car will make a noticeable difference in the deformation of its wheel bearings? haha ok.

as for tire patch and more friction, adjusting the tyre pressures can compensate for a gain or a loss on weight, keeping the friction exactly the same.

ptoro01

Why don't you calculate the "weight" of the air acting on the car at speed, it is not only pushing horizontally on it but hopefully vertically as well. Hence the 10psi increase recommended for tires if going over 100mph, and the tires are the most flexible component! Understand the changes in suspension dynamics, the pressure of torque on the chassis etc.

Where do you think all that power goes when its v max, its in equilibrium with the outside forces, thus the car has to absorb it all.

Quicksilver500

I didn't say it would be noticeable, but there will be a difference. Also, 300lbs is the static force, not the dynamic downforce at speed right? Unless the 500E is a zero lift car.

You can only add so much pressure to tires also, they have a pressure limit. Increased speed, increased forces, increase heat, increased tire pressure as a naturally occurring event. Most things take off at ~120 MPH right? Its going to take a certain amount of force to keep that thing on the ground.

I was just saying, that its not accurate to say that weight has no effect, because it does have an effect. And you probably should have said that the 500 has different wheel bearings than a regular w124.

The pieces add up to the whole. You think wheel bearings haven't improved in 20 years? Or that steels haven't?

There is still tirewidth, diameter, tread pattern, weights of tires and wheels, and offsets. All of which affect the top speed.

the_widebody

Quicksilver500

I like this guy ^

the_widebody

so you understand that there is NO NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCE.

so, if you took your car, stripped a load of weight out of it and went for a high speed run, which showed NO NOTICEABLE DIFFERENCE, would you come home and say to your wife;

" well babe, all that work was worth it, because even though the was NO NOTICEABLE difference, i 'know' i was going a tiny weeny small insignificant bit faster" ?


if you go back and read my posts, and actually understand what i have been saying, it will become clear i have been saying all along that lightening a car will make no NOTICEABLE difference to its top end speed. IN THE REAL WORLD

I sent an email to jon at land speed.com, and asked him if he thought lightening an car, by removing seats, interior trim and other stuff would make its top speed faster, and this is his reply;

16 October 2011 06:06
Hi Nicholas,

Assuming you're asking about "street legal" cars and weight reduction to increase performance in terms of the car's top end speed, then there may be a small improvement in the lessened mass (weight) resulting in faster speed; but not by that much due to drag from the air flow over the vehicle. The most noticeable improvement would be in the car's acceleration from a resting state to its top speed. If you research the design of car bodies over the years, you'll notice that the body shape has change to result in less air flow drag and consequently more efficient and improved gas mileage or consumption.

now, if the car you describe is one which is obviously a sports car that most likely has only one other seat to pull out (I seriously doubt the carpets in such a car weigh that much either.), then the increase in measureable speed would be difficult to notice because the amount of mass that was reduced would be so little that it would not significantly change the engine's ability to improve its top speed.

Also, the transmission's gears can only turn the wheels which propell the car so fast. In other words, it can only turn over the wheels in its highest gear as fast as the engine can put torque to them. This is why I believe reducing such a small (or low) amount of weight would make no noticeable difference in the car's top speed.

when using the term "non-street legal cars", I'm assuming you're referring to vehicles which are capable of speeds beyond normal street level speeds; especially those which are able to travel into the transonic (550-660mph)speeds.

An object (vehicle body in this case) which travels through air (a combination of gas molecules) faster begins to build up pressure waves once it reaches the transonic range of speed. This build up results in greater and greater drag on the object's surfaces which are not shaped in a way that allows those molecules of gases (air) to flow over the surface to produce the least amount of resistence (drag). The faster the object encounters these pressure waves, the more power is necessary to compensate for the resulting build up of drag resistence.

I explain all of this because at these speeds where drag affects the vehicle's engine power, the vehicle's shape affects the top speed it can acheive because of the shape of the body which may not result in minimal drag at higher speeds and prevent it from going faster.

I hope this explanation is helpful.

Jon


so, he seems to agree with me, and kawasaki, that IN THE REAL WORLD lightening a road car, that is already capable of traveling at very high speed, by the amount it is reasonably possible to lighten it by will make no noticeable difference to its top speed.

(for ed the old fools benefit, this is what i meant in 'quoting' the song lyrics, a relativity small change in weight leads to a change in friction and so performance that is in effect a nothing amount)

now, if someone was to make all the body parts and fasteners and **** out of ultra lightweight materials, and drop the cars weight by a SIGNIFICANT amount, but make no other changes, then they may see a measurable increase in top speed, but as i have been saying all along, it probably wouldnt be in MPH, it will be in fractions of MPH, WHICH IN THE REAL WORLD, ARE UNNOTICEABLE AND THEREFORE EFFECTIVELY EQUAL NOTHING

so ed and your foolish friends, who choose not to assimilate and understand what you read.

Shoomakan

Widebody,

Stop taking things at the measure where they will support your argument. Nobody is going to think of removing 50 kgs from a car and then measuring its top speed.

A full fat sedan like a 500E can have at least 300 kilograms stripped from it before getting crazy.

300 kilograms would definitely make a measurable difference, no?

More importantly, stop swearing like a child. The person who made this thread happens to be one, and he's too young to swear in front of.

Glyn M Ruck

Enough nonsense!