Enzo, Carrera GT & SLR

0-60 tests are irrelevant. Too much HP, too little grip, too dependant on the surface where the cars were tested, too much an "art" of getting the perfect wheelspin vs the perfect movement forward, etc.

A Murcielago turns a 0-60 of 3.5 seconds in the hands of their test driver Valentino. Is it faster than the SLR or Carrera GT? Nope. It's just better at getting a jump off the line.

Instead of using this obsolete "junior high" metric to evaluate cars that are capable of speeds above 200mph, turn your attention to the popular 0-186mph test (0-300kph) that many European magazines and shows perform at various large scale ovals overseas, particularly Nardo.

In that test (0-186mph) the results are as follows:

AUTO MOTOR und SPORT MAGAZINE (Germany)
26.1 - Ferrari Enzo
30.6 - MB SLR McLaren
34.2 - Porsche Carrera GT
37.6 - Lamborghini Murcielago

All the cars were tested on the same day, at the same track (Nardo), by the same driver, and using the same timing gear.

In the event that a 0-186mph test isn't available (say stateside where we're lucky if our rags take it over 130mph) then use the venerable 0-150mph test that Car and Driver and a few others sometimes offer.

FINAL NOTE: The base McLaren F1 road car (non LM or other race versions) performs the same test in 21.5 seconds.

Best.

 

Excellent post, thank you for the stats.

 

something was wrong with this CGT, that or it just launched terribly, it really is neck and neck with the Enzo, it will normally only lose by a second or two in even the long distance tests...as a measure, realize that both are in the mid 6's-7 second range to 100 MPH...

 

The NNO could be at the bottom of that list and i'd STILL want one... So bad... Ooooooooooooh, i love that car...!

 

Is it me or the german car magazine always tend to have not so great results when they test supercars?

 

The CGT results are dead on, and match other magazine results. To 100mph it's within a 10th of a second in this test as well, but from there on it's allllllllllll Enzo.

Why?

Drag.

The CGT is setup as a track car, i.e. the car that has the most downforce in the range that drivers would like see on circuits, 100mph to 175mph. It's drag coefficient is massive at .39 Cd, and the high speed grip must be colossal because of it. The CGT has already turned a 7:39 time at the ring in the hands of Sport Auto, and that time was corrupted by weather. They're trying to re-test and get it even lower.

In a straight line, the CGT loses. That wasn't a design goal. But put it on a track and the Enzo would have extreme difficulty in matching it, let alone beating it. This is why Ferrari does not allow the Enzo press car to be included in any track tests when reviewed, and why the press car events are held at their own facility exclusively.

 

I won't comment about other previous test results, but in this case the numbers are dead on for all four of the cars. Their 1/4 mile, 0-160kph, standing KM, 0-200kph, 0-300kph, and other tests all match every other previous test I've seen, from the UK, to the US, to Italy.

Great test, would have liked to see the S7 and Zonda S included, but it's getting nearly impossible to assemble that much talent on the same field at the same time in perfect working order.

 

Though I have not research the issue, your comments strike me as rather dubious specifically regarding the Enzo. The car was designed in part by M. Schumaker and for him to give his blessing to a car that cannot cut it on a track seems far fetched. The Enzo has been put through the paces by several magazine focusing on performance measurements other than acceleration. It has beaten the numbers of all the supercars though some have been close.

Finally regarding not racing the other supercars, Ferrari probably concluded it proves nothing.

 

LOL, I guess that's one way to look at it. "Yeaaaah, let's purposely put a BAN on all Enzo track tests in which the magazine/reviewers are comparing the car to other external competition. In fact, let's actually PUT THAT IN THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE CAR IN WRITING just so no owners get cute and let their Enzo be tested in that way."

Sure sounds to me like Ferrari "concluded it proves nothing." Wake up man.

And bringing Schumacher's endorsement into the discussion makes even less sense. He's paid $20M a season to two the Ferrari line, he sure as hell isn't going to speak out against the Enzo (plus why would he, the car is incredible). Also, his own personal involvement with the Enzo was extremely limited, regardless of what their PR machine would like you to believe. Ferrari and Porsche don't need the feedback of F1 pilots to develop near-perfect supercars. They have fantastic engineering teams that are used to competition at a much higher level than that of a pedestrian road car.

Aside from all that nonsense and spin on the part of Ferrari, the Enzo is a fantastic car in its own right. I'd love to see how one would do at the Nurburgring, but Ferrari won't allow it. I'd love to see how one would do at Hockenheim, but Ferrari won't allow it. I'd even love to see how one would do on Top Gear's little old Lotus test track....









....but Ferrari won't allow it.

Meanwhile everyone else, including Lamborghini, Porsche, Mercedes Benz, Zonda, etc, have actually paid to ship press cars to each of those locations, regardless of the competition present, to see how their cars stack up.

Come on Ferrari, let the Enzo stretch its magnificent legs. Let it run. If it's F1-inspired, then let's see how it beats down some F1 tracks. Why not? What is there to lose? They're such a tease...But the more aggressive of the Enzo owners won't stand on the sidelines forever. Sooner or later one is going to slip through and we'll see just how great the Enzo can be.

Until then, the CGT reigns without peer.

 

nicely put esp for a 6th overall post. glad to see others can criticize ferrari and not be nutty like allanlambo

 

Since your so intent on claiming how good the CGT is possibly an example will help prove my point and clear your head.

The Top Gear test showed that the CGT ended up with the best time recorded to date. It beat the SLR by almost a second. However are you aware that the professional driver driving the CGT spent the entire moring spinning out and almost crashing the CGT before he was able to complete a lap with the best time? How wonder how many chances the other car were given? What did that prove?

I will concede that the CGT is set up for a track but I also will state the car is not for the non professional. It is a track car which is squirrelly, hard to drive and unpredictable. If that is your definition of a great car then keep sucking on that thought.

Judging cars on performance is as unpredicatable as trying to drive a CGT at speed around a circuitious track.

 

Good God... How is that thing so much faster than the Enzo?

 

LOL, I don't need "head clearing", but thanks anyway. Both the CGT and Enzo are absolutely spectacular supercars. based on everything I've seen I'd take the Enzo for the road and the CGT for the track. Just my opinion.

It proved that the CGT is the fastest car they've tested on that track. No more, no less. It spun? Oh gee that must make it a real handful! LOL, any of these cars is a handful at the limit, particularly if you shut off the traction control and stability systems. I would turn this question around to you and say "Are YOU aware that the MB in the Top Gear test had all of its electronic assist gear ON during that lap? And that Ferrari specifically instructs reviewers to NOT turn off ASR or any other system when they test the car?"

Sounds to me like all these rides get a little wee bit tricky without Mr. CPU helping them out.

Sounds good so far, but you have no wheeltime in a CGT to make that judgement, nor do I, so the point is moot.

On that single day, with that particular driver, the CGT looked in my eyes as being as hard to drive well as any other RWD only 600HP supercar. Porsche's supercars have never been for the inexperienced, going all the way back to the 930 Turbo. And I'm sure the CGT is EASY compared to that "widowmaker" and its tendency to swap ends.

Depends on the test. Horst von Saurma drove the CGT to that 7:39 time I mentioned on the Ring and never mentioned a peep about it being hard to control. Now he's a pro's pro, so it's all relative, but the point is that you don't make snap judgements about a car just from one single test. Particularly one done on a run down and abandonded airstrip "track" as Top Gear uses.

The Enzo is superb. The CGT is its equal. The differances between the two are relegated to your specific tastes, i.e. topless or not, F1 gearbox or not, electronic assists or not, etc. For me as I said before, given the choice I'd definitely take an Enzo for the road, and a CGT for the track based on third party reports. But until I actually drive them, it's all just magazine bench racing.

 

Nearly identical engine output with 700 fewer pounds.

Also less downforce I'd imagine based on the Enzo's technical design docs, but that would be pure speculation on my part since I haven't seen any measurements of the F1's downforce at speed.

 

Hear, hear... i know the NNO isn't the fastest, best car ever according to the figures... It's my favorite of all time, but my head isn't in the clouds as far as where it stands amongst the supercrowd...

...it IS the most beautiful, though.

 

Man, I am having a hard time keeping myself from tearing you apart for this. That post was the most conjuncted bullsh*t I have heard in a while. You dismiss the validity of his post because you think that car might be too difficult for a non-professional to drive?!?!

Put down the crack pipe.

 

Oh, good, you're still up; i'll call you in a few...

 

If anything you are entertaining. Porsche has had all test on the CGT done a
on an abandoned airfield in formerly E. Germany. Why?? Because prior to that time three CGT's were crashed by the press core in test driving the vehicle on public roads.

The fact that the Enzo and SLR have stability controls only proves that they built the car for public use and not track use by a professional driver. Do you know what their time would be without the contols? Tiff indicated in the video that the CGT was so difficult to drive that the professional driver literally spent the entire morning trying to get the CGT under control in order to enable him to make a decent run around the track. It was not only one spinout but many.

Anyone can set up a car to just track use for a professional driver. The true test of a cars ability is whether the driving public can use the car for its intended purpose. The SLR and Enzo clearly meet that criteria. The CGT is a car for a few professional drivers who can contol it and thus allow Porsche to tell its customers "we can build a world class race car so stop badgering us regarding our failure to participate in a legitimate race program."

This much I know. It would be highly unlikely I would get into a CGT with someone driving it who does not have substantial race driving experience. Hopefully for you and your family, you arrive at the same conclusion.

 

Im impressed.Very nice.

 

WOW! Yet again, PUT DOWN THE CRACK PIPE! HAHAHA...so you think Porsche doesn't participate in any "legitimate" race programs? Please define legitimate, a lot of us would love to hear more of your delusions!

HAHAHA!!!! Better yet! The Carrera GT is unsuitable for road use and is not mean to be driven on a road! You are a danger to yourself and others while driving it!


Wow man, on second thought...keep right on smoking that pipe! I love your stories, tell us some more!

 

"The true test of a cars ability is whether the driving public can use the car for its intended purpose."

This is a great thread! Two questions (and I apologize in advance if they are stupid questions):

What is an NNO?
And what IS the true "intended purpose" of these 500HP+ streetlegal supercars?

 

Although I haven't seen a scan of this mag I believe something to be very wrong with the time for the CGT. Maybe they tested with the roof off? Don't know but Porsche is one of the few car makers I believe to test and not fudge the numbers of their cars and they stated that the time should be 27.0

 

at this test, auto motor + sport made also a max speed test at the nardo ring, which was clearly dominated by the enzo (something over 350 km/h), the CGT disappointing below 330 km/h. and finally a track test on the very narrow and tight track in bari, which was won by the CGT, followed by the enzo (+1 second), the rest was quite far away.