TMC M5

What does 280 represent? The 456 has a p/w ratio of about 8.6lbs per HP while the SL65 has around 7.5lbs per HP. 1.1lbs isn't insignificant...as the 456 would have to have 507hp (an increase of 65hp) to match the SL65's p/w ratio. A straight out comparison of p/w doesn't factor in the 456's chassis development and braking technology. The 456 is at a distinct disadvantage to the much newer chassis/brakes of the SL65 (literally 10 years apart). Once again, I didn't start this "unfair" comparison. The 456's successor, the 612 S actually has a similar p/w ratio as the SL65 (4,056lbs/540hp = 7.5). But the further development of its chassis/brakes allows it to lap Ferrari's test track (Fiorano) faster than a 360 Modena and 575M (both with around a 7.6 p/w ratio).

What gets a little frustrating is that you provide not an iota of evidence to back up your assertion that a 456 is quicker around any track than an SL65. As stated before, the SL65 has lapped the Ring in 8:13...while the only 456 time I could find was 8:31. Please find something to support your conclusion.

Tom

sound 8

Come on Tom, you know exactly what 280 represents. Divide the bhp by the weight of the car. The 456 has about 450 bhp divided by 1.6 ( 1600kgs) gives 281 bhp per ton. I get my info from the same source as you ( you have given me quarter mile figures in the past from a magazine ) and that's the INTERNET. Despite your equation being over complicated I don't think it;s right that you assume because the 65 is ten years newer it will be better going round bends. In fact a basic car lowered,stiffened, very old technology with
a reasonably powerful engine will slaughter a high tech super car with the right driver. As for the Nur/ring, I don't think that a 18 seconds win means it's the fastest. Depends on whose driving and could go the other way, not convincing enough my friend, plus when you refer to the track most people have an idea of something very much smaller.To most of the drivers ( professional) all these driver aids are hated. The increase in technology which
you refer are for keeping old duffers on the road when they have 500 bhp
under their right foot, I certainly appreciate them.

TMC M5

Here in the US we do not normally use metric...nor do we refer to things by the "ton" unless it means 2,000lbs. Granted I do frequently read many UK based car mags (CAR, Autocar, EVO and Top Gear), but your "280" was not calculable given your errors in HP and weight. So 280 had absolutely no meaning to me. You are very "selective" in how you err (inflating hp and making the 456's weight nearly 200lbs lighter). The 456 has 442hp (PS) or 436hp SAE and weighs in at 3,726lbs. So 442hp / 1693kg = 261.1 per "ton". If we use the same methodology for the SL65 612hp PS/ 2,070kg = 295.6 per "ton". Once again...that is a not so insignificant difference.....

Once again not a shred of evidence...unless you come up with something outside of your gut feeling...there isn't much more to talk about...

Tom

sound 8

As I have said in the past, you are a very intelligent person, so you replies are bound to be more complex. It doesn't help that I tend to use British terms in a basically US forum so there will always be room for error. However my ball park!! way still gives a 90% right conclusion. However I brought up several points which you haven't replied to. I doubt whether you have ever
driven a 456, I certainly haven't , so were both guilty of comments without
the experience of driving which is the ultimate test,to make up your
mind without the use of specs. I think it's unfair that you treat my information as just a "gut feeling", at the end of the day, like you I am only
quoting figures I read about, which is basically what you do, albeit in greater detail, so I would appreciate a little more respect.
Paul.