|
Spotted this on Jalopnik, the trailer for Rush: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05rzPnZ6lxw Hmm, casting Thor as James Hunt? "This car, I like it!" ~smash~ "ANOTHER!"
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Sad Miura burns in London https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqpa1HB-wOc
|
|
#
?
Apr 8, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Spotted this on Jalopnik, the trailer for Rush: God this looks outstanding.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
God drat the Nissan GTR is a beast. How does the AMS Alpha 12 not own all the production car records? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaYTqAaPD5w
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 10:08
|
|
|
Ak Gara posted:God drat the Nissan GTR is a beast. How does the AMS Alpha 12 not own all the production car records? Because it's not the fastest one. This wouldbe the look on my face if I were driving a 599GTO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEoKmmWn1ZU
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 11:50
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Spotted this on Jalopnik, the trailer for Rush: Now that does look good. Best thing - no matter what they do, they wont top the real story. You could not make up a character like Hunt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
angryhampster posted:Because it's not the fastest one. I'm sure there are special one offs that can do a standing mile quicker than 22 seconds, but which production cars can? Not even a Veyron Super Sport can manage that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 12:56
|
|
|
Ak Gara posted:God drat the Nissan GTR is a beast. How does the AMS Alpha 12 not own all the production car records? Simply put: AMS doesn't manufacture (produce) a car... It's a stretch (in my opinion, as well as terrible pun) that the Hennessey Venom GT could even be considered as it's so closely based upon another vehicle. thealphabetsez fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Apr 9, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 13:19
|
|
|
thealphabetsez posted:Simply put: AMS doesn't manufacture (produce) a car... It's a stretch (in my opinion, as well as terrible pun) that the Hennessey Venom GT could even be considered as it's so closely based upon another vehicle. Ruf is considered a manufacturer even though they just modify Porsches.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 14:30
|
|
|
Motorcycles impede traffic to do wheelies, woman in Volvo learns her car is not an off-road vehicle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rd_5Swd0DCk
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Everyone in that video is a goddamn moron.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 17:05
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:Now that does look good. Best thing - no matter what they do, they wont top the real story. You could not make up a character like Hunt.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
Muffinpox posted:Ruf is considered a manufacturer even though they just modify Porsches. Ruf is lucky enough to be in a country that very specifically defines what constitutes a production car and what it merely modified. They are quite a bit more involved than your average tuning company, though; they buy bodies-in-white from Porsche and install their own stuff in them, giving the cars a Ruf VIN in the process. So technically they are a manufacturer, but the line is awfully blurry in their case as well as Hennessey. This AMS company is not a manufacturer by any stretch; they just bolt on a bunch of go-fast parts and call it a day. If that constitutes a production car, we happen to have a spare Honeywell TFE-731 sitting in the hangar right now; perhaps I should bolt it up to my
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
thealphabetsez posted:Simply put: AMS doesn't manufacture (produce) a car... It's a stretch (in my opinion, as well as terrible pun) that the Hennessey Venom GT could even be considered as it's so closely based upon another vehicle. Ummm..... I wouldnt exactly call the Venom GT close to ANY vehicle. It might look like a Exige but there is so much customized you would be pushing poo poo uphill to find much OEM. I would go further and use the Venom as exactly the kind of vehicle that would 100% qualify Hennessey as a producer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Tuners are doing some really amazing poo poo now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQy336FAmHE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crQI78sDVPg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1N7hDUVCz4 This monster makes around 3200hp while meeting emissions and being tame enough to drive daily. While it's tuned for the quarter mile, I'd love to see it on a long strip to see what speed it can hit with enough road to reach its peak.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
Cat Terrist posted:Ummm..... I wouldnt exactly call the Venom GT close to ANY vehicle. It might look like a Exige but there is so much customized you would be pushing poo poo uphill to find much OEM. I would go further and use the Venom as exactly the kind of vehicle that would 100% qualify Hennessey as a producer. Still uses Lotus registration. I understand your point though. e: to contribute here are a bunch of idiots around a bunch of cars https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mADkP_RkAw4 I liked the old Caddy ....low and slow. angryhampster fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Apr 10, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 01:42
|
|
|
The Enzo WRC guy abuses two F50s and it's pretty awesome https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PQ4VGMDMQU
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 21:19
|
|
|
The new Chris Harris in which he explores the electric SLS! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IElqf-FCMs8
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQ1mUvHRE1w Found this as a related video to something posted in the awesome pics thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMU6ziTLAow
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 03:08
|
|
|
thealphabetsez posted:The new Chris Harris in which he explores the electric SLS!  is about all I can say. The part where the benz engineer is explaining it to him is super interesting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 04:12
|
|
|
VanNuys posted:
The torque vectoring is interesting but I dont see why that should be exclusive to electric cars. I may know nothing about physics but I'm wondering if through using magnets you could apply instant "negative torque" to separate axles on a normal AWD car.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 04:36
|
|
|
I think that's how Honda's SH-AWD works. There's an electromagnetic clutch pack for each rear axle, not sure if the diff is just a spool or some sort of a clutch setup.
jamal fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 04:39
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsTiPhcaeus Moving Forward and Backward  & 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
Preoptopus posted:The torque vectoring is interesting but I dont see why that should be exclusive to electric cars. I may know nothing about physics but I'm wondering if through using magnets you could apply instant "negative torque" to separate axles on a normal AWD car. Electronic stability control applies "negative torque" aka drag/resistance with brakes to help steer the car. A car with a left-right torque vectoring AWD system in combination with brake based ESC has exactly what the engineer was describing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:06
|
|
|
jamal posted:I think that's how Honda's SH-AWD works. There's an electromagnetic clutch pack for each rear axle, not sure if the diff is just a spool or some sort of a clutch setup. AYC on the Evo is the same I think, and some of the high end Audis. Is there any actual performance benefit to it though? I don't really see how it could make a car go faster, it seems to be just a gimmick to make a FWD car more tail happy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:07
|
|
|
astropika posted:Electronic stability control applies "negative torque" aka drag/resistance with brakes to help steer the car. A car with a left-right torque vectoring AWD system in combination with brake based ESC has exactly what the engineer was describing. I figured its the same principle however Harris mentioned that by using the brakes and not stopping the source of the power itself, the input is not as instant. Im sure the difference is negligible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
KennyLoggins posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsTiPhcaeus ONLY HAD CONTROL OF THE PRNDL how about she use the N part of that?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:20
|
|
|
D C posted:ONLY HAD CONTROL OF THE PRNDL But how are you going to get your sweet payday from Toyota without a little drama?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
Preoptopus posted:I figured its the same principle however Harris mentioned that by using the brakes and not stopping the source of the power itself, the input is not as instant. Im sure the difference is negligible. I'm not sure how much quickly you could safely chop power to a big electric motor. On the order of 10s of ms, probably. Wonder what the the actuation response of ABS/ESC controls are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:AYC on the Evo is the same I think, and some of the high end Audis. Is there any actual performance benefit to it though? I don't really see how it could make a car go faster, it seems to be just a gimmick to make a FWD car more tail happy. No with that the hydraulics are in the differential itself, so AYC is only controlling the amount of lockup. I just read up and SH-AWD and what it actually does is use a planetary gear set to control power split between the rear wheels, so kind of like how a prius switches between gas and electric but in the other direction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 06:11
|
|
|
kimbo305 posted:I'm not sure how much quickly you could safely chop power to a big electric motor. On the order of 10s of ms, probably. Wonder what the the actuation response of ABS/ESC controls are.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 07:21
|
|
|
Lowclock posted:Modern (and even ancient) transistor tech is way way way faster than that. More like nano or even picoseconds. I couldn't tell you how exactly how fast traditional "mechanical" traction systems respond, but I'm sure it's at least 100x slower than what you can do electrically. I'm not worried about the ECU sensing the need to adjust the drivetrain; I'm worried about whether the power electronics could handle that sudden a signal change safely. Wouldn't stopping voltage instantly (instead of ramping it) cause some sort of serious back-emf in the motor? Maybe that's a primitive DC motor, and not a fancy phase-induction motor. And even then, maybe that back-emf has no long term stress to the motor or the drive components. We should probably continue the discussion at here: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3541899
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 07:29
|
|
|
KennyLoggins posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsTiPhcaeus That looked like a LOT of fun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 11:53
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:It seems to be just a gimmick to make a FWD car more tail happy. Believe it or not, but that can help you get around a corner quicker. More to the point though, in a corner, due to weight transfer, some wheels have more grip than others. It's a waste to send the same amount of torque to a wheel with less grip available. The most common behavior of these systems is accelerating the outside rear wheel in a corner (the wheel that's the most loaded with weight, and therefore grip) which helps push the car around the corner without pushing the car out from it's intended line.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 13:26
|
|
|
Ziploc posted:Believe it or not, but that can help you get around a corner quicker. But that stuff can all be dialed in with proper suspension tuning, no? If the car is set up to handle from the start then it shouldn't need anything like that. Sort of like rear wheel steering.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 13:40
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:But that stuff can all be dialed in with proper suspension tuning, no? If the car is set up to handle from the start then it shouldn't need anything like that. Sort of like rear wheel steering. Dial all that in, and tune the suspension properly, then add torque vectoring in on top of it. It doesn't need it, it's just more on top of what it already has.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:But that stuff can all be dialed in with proper suspension tuning, no? If the car is set up to handle from the start then it shouldn't need anything like that. Sort of like rear wheel steering. It usually is. The new Focus ST has been praised for its handling and ability to rotate almost like RWD through corners. From my own experience, moving from a car with a twist beam rear axle (Fiat Panda) to a car with fully independent rear suspension with a touch of passive rear wheel steering (Peugout 406) was an eye-opener. Sure, you can get twist beam suspension to rotate and handle well, but there's a definite compromise between comfort and handling. With the Peugeot, despite the comfy suspension setup, there is a definite sensation of the car wanting to rotate when pushed in the corners. Until you run out of traction, of course. It's still FWD and will understeer if you push it beyond its limits. If you design your car from the start having to rely on torque vectoring and electronics to handle well, you'll end up with a compromised product. On the other hand, if you design your car right from the beginning to work right without those systems, and then add them afterwards, you can make a good car even better. Doesn't the Mclaren MP4-12C do some kind of torque vectoring in effect, by braking the inside wheels during cornering? I bet the car still handles amazingly well if you didn't have that system, but by adding it, they made the car able to corner even sharper than it already could. KozmoNaut fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 14:09
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:If you design your car from the start having to rely on torque vectoring and electronics to handle well, you'll end up with a compromised product. On the other hand, if you design your car right from the beginning to work right without those systems, and then add them afterwards, you can make a good car even better. I would only disagree with this to the extent that at the extremes of performance I could see some possible benefit to a modern fighter jet style intentional instability that actually requires computers to be usable, but by doing so allows for faster direction changes than an inherently stable design. That said, for things like that we're only talking about top class racing and possibly some wild supercars. As a general rule you're right on the money, electronics should be used to make an already well-tuned system better rather than as a bandage to make up for a bad design. edit: vvvv The '04 Ford Lightning concept basically had this in the form of a rechargable "supercooler" feature which used the A/C to chill some fluid which was then dumped in to the intercooler on demand to enable another 50 HP. A few modern turbocharged cars also offer an "overboost" feature which adds an extra few PSI for short bursts under WOT with a timeout between uses. wolrah fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Apr 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
How many years until we have that sweet "Push to Pass" button on entry level sports cars? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2013 20:31
|
|
