13 replies to this topic

[slipstream]

This a great forum , so much better than the other Forums I have seen. I hope some of You can answer my Question on which F-1 Car has or had the quickest Acceleration ? Could the Turbo Cars of the mid 1980's out accelerate the current F-1 cars of Today ? A friend of mine says they could because of their great power to weight ratio but I am not so sure because the Turbo Charged cars had very poor Engine response .

[Ray Bell]

Remembering just how little time they spent in each gear, I don't think they suffered too much. That was the main thrust of development with the turbos - getting response, although a lot of time went into sensors etc so they could keep the detonation down and make the engines live.
I think 1100hp beats 740 any day, but I may be wrong..

------------------
Life and love are mixed with pain...

[MN]

I don't know it for sure but I would guess Turbo, late 80's F1 cars were equiped with traction control(I think) and it would helped as well.(I might be wrong)

Here is the accelerration test data for the 88 McLaren-Honda MP4/4.(Chassis No. MP4/4-3)
The model which won 15 races out of 16 between Senna and Prost.
If someone could find a magazine crazy enough to test today's N/A V10 F1 car then we can make a comparison.

Circuit, Suzuka November 1988
Engine, Honda RA168E 1.5 liter V6 Turbo
(They had three different versions, this is fuel efficiency version XE2, estimated bhp 650 - 700)
Turbo boost, 2.5 bar
Rev limit, 13500rpm
Driver, McLaren test driver Pillo(not sure spelling)

0 - 040km/h 1.2sec
0 - 060km/h 1.9sec
0 - 080km/h 2.2sec
0 - 100km/h 2.8sec
0 - 120km/h 3.2sec
0 - 140km/h 3.9sec
0 - 160km/h 4.3sec
0 - 180km/h 4.9sec
0 - 200km/h 5.5sec
0 - 220km/h 6.4sec
0 - 240km/h 7.3sec



[This message has been edited by MN (edited 03-15-2000).]

[Ray Bell]

Stunning numbers. Remember when - was it an E-type - did 0 - 100 - 0 (mph) in 30 secs and everyone thought it was great?
Wonder what the braking figures would be. Wonder if they could measure them?

------------------
Life and love are mixed with pain...

[Blackhawk]

As far as I understand from articles I've read todays cars blow the most powerful turbos of that 80's away totally in acceleration. Not topspeed mind you. That has something to do with the responstime of the turbos. Remember the turbo doesn't kick in before a certain rpm.

[MN]

Maybe, but mid 80's 1.5 turbo had 4.0bar boost until FIA ruled it down to 2.5bar.
Over 1000bhp for qualify sprint....
Turbo fin's are very light weight ceramic for quick response....
I'm not sure.....


[This message has been edited by MN (edited 03-15-2000).]

[tak]

The turbo cars were famous for accelerating from 100 kph to 200 kph faster than from 0 to 100. This was attributed to turbo lag and lack of traction (by 100 kph the turbos were spun up and there was significant downforce to assist traction).
Horsepower is horsepower, and in a similar weight vehicle with similar traction, the more horsepower should always win.
In terms of throttle response though, they sucked... It was extrememly difficult to steer the car with throttle because it was so non-linear...

[Yelnats]

Comeon guys, since when doe increased HP equal LESS acceleration! In an acceleration run the turbo never comes down off boast so so turbo lag is not an issue. It was only when modulating the throttle at partial boast when exiting the corner that turbo lag was a problem. And this lag lasted less than a half of a second and was anticipated by the drivers so didn't reduce performance significantly but required superb anticipation by the drivers of the time.

The qualifying turbo setups of the mid eighties were the fastest accelerating road race cars of any description including the current F1 cars with their slippery grooved tires.

[Blackhawk]

Actually I read a article in F1 Racing or was it in F1 News. Anyhow it was Berger compairing the old turbo engines with the new ones. He said that the response of 3 litre V10 made them accelerate faster than the V6 turbo's.

[This message has been edited by Blackhawk (edited 03-14-2000).]

[slipstream]

I think for the Turbo F-1 Cars it depends on which one you are talking about. I have Read about Ayrton Senna's 1987 Lotus Honda with it's active Suspension and how it was alot faster out of the corners than the other Cars because it could put its power down better. ButIt seems that the answer to this question may not be so easy. I think that the Newer F-1 cars with their NA V-10 would have the Advantage coming out of the Corner because of it's better Engine Response but once the Turbo cars start going through the gears on full boost they would have the Advantage. Just how long would it take the Turbo Engine cars to catch up and pull away ?

[IndyIan]

Yelnats,
I agree with you that a turbo car never comes off boost in an accelation run but a NA car may still accelerate quicker due to it's power delivery.
Here's an example, I don't know if you have ever ridden dirt bikes but my buddy had a 200cc four stroke bike (NA F1 Car)and I had a 200cc two stoke (turbo F1 car). On dry dirt or gravel (grippy)I could easily out accelerate my friend due to extra hp, but on wet grass (slippery) he could easily beat me because he could modulate the power better. As soon as the two stroke bike spun it's back tire it would rev up quickly, spin more, and lose even more acceleration.

I think that an F1 car on clean pavement is probably atleast as tricky to get going as a dirtbike on wet grass so I think the comparison is valid.

Also I haven't heard of the top speeds in the turbo era but I don't think they were much faster than today, so maybe the cars really weren't that much more powerful, kind of like how 300hp in 1969 compares to 300hp today.

Just a guess until we see the numbers.

[davo]

I belive that the turbo cars were ultimately the faster vehicles. 200k up I think the extra horsepower (1000+ in race trim) more than made up for the draggy older shapes.

The throttle response becomes a non-issue in the top gears and certainly at 300k there is no drifting out of corners. The turbos really were sledge hammers of vehicles.

I have a recollection of a Brabham BMW (The lay down one) doing 345kph at Oesterich (sp?) during a race.

320-330 seems to be the top speed now, although of course this is limited by the downforce/drag compromise

[Blackhawk]

I think it was 1998 or 97 when Coulthard had fastest speedtrap at Hockenheim just before the Clark curve chicane he hit 352kph.

[This message has been edited by Blackhawk (edited 03-15-2000).]

[Yelnats]

Blackhawk, It was 1998. The speeds in 98 were higher due the reduced drag of the narrower cars and tires and top speeds went up to 234 mph at Hockenhiem to the FIA's consternation. But cars were running more wing in 1999 to compensate for the harder tires needed due to the four grooves so speeds were down slightly last year.