High speed test of the Enzo in Nardo

I wouldn't have expected there to be such a difference to 300km/h between the Enzo and the Carrera GT. Also, I wouldn't have expected the SLR to pull ahead of the Porsche. Very interesting.

 

Despite Ferrari's valiant effort the Enzo is still destroyed in a straight line by the McLarens 0-200mph time of 28s....

 

If the McLaren does 0-300km/h (188mph) in 30.6 seconds, where do you get a time of 28 seconds to 200mph?

 

LOL^^ way to call b******t on him.

 

i'd guess he's referring to the F1 not the SLR.

doody.

 

Mr Doody saves the day!

I was referring to the McLaren F1... not the overpriced and rather pointless "Mercedes-Benz SLR" (the Mclaren badge is a marketing ploy).

I sure a "breathed-on" SL65 AMG (soon to be released - the CL65 IS available) would render the SLR somewhat irrelevant.

 

That may be the case but would the Mclaren F1 beat the Enzo around a race track?

 

917-30 0-200 11 sec.
McLaren F1 finished 1,2,3,4,5 at LeMans.
When the Maser/Enzo starts racing later this year we'll find out how it is on the track.
BTW did you notice the Nardo run speed of the New Ford GT?
212mph (338 kmh) at 6500 rpm.
BTW 2. 37 years ago my MK-IV went 223mph (356kmh) at LeMans at 6250rpm.

 

Jim: McLaren didn't have a clean sweep 1-5. They qualified 1,4,6,7,8,9,10. They won positions 1,3,4,5,13 overall, with a 1,2,3,4 class (GT) win.

--Dan

 

Not too bad none the less. Think the Maser/Enzo will do as well?

 

I do not believe this....conservative Porsche says they get a 9.9 to 120 (200 kph)....A CGT has to be neck and neck with an enzo, 2 seconds behind at most right?

 

Aerodynamics and downforce make that difference. Remember, the F1 had next to none.

Considering the Enzo's extreme downfroce effects, I'm surprised the Carrera GT isn't much closer if not faster.

Forza,


Cavallini

 

This makes more sense, although the track must have been very small for the Murci to beat the SLR by 2 seconds. Vmax must not have been anywhere near.

Cavallini

 

Another message board speculated that the CGT was tested with the top off, thereby increasing drag significant, which is crucial for the 200 to 300kph dash. But 7sec from Porsche's claim is quite a margin.

Baron

 

I call BS with the Enzo...........
Heres proof.....
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

There is a secret to the Enzo's supernatural speed...

 

That test was pretty good, the acceleration stats were pretty slow, but I guess it was conditions because all the cars were like that.

The thing that is a little odd is the braking. The Carrera GT has awesome brakes which we all know, but the Enzo was 24m longer. That was from 250kph, but from 160kph in the 0-100-0 test they were neck and neck. In the R&T, and C&D tests they were also very close.

This wouldn't be so apparent, but the Murceilago outbraked the Enzo from 250kph. At that point weight and downforce are important. The Enzo has a significant advantage.

In R&T for example the Enzo beats the Murceliago by 25ft from 80mph. At lower speeds perhaps by some miracle the Murcielago might have really well done brakes and compete(which it doesn't quite do), but at higher speeds the Enzo's advantages just get bigger.

Even the F50 was tested with better braking from 200kph than the Murcielago.(quatroroute I believe)(sp)

The F50 is a fairly good braking car, but it doesn't quite match up to the Enzo.

So all I'm saying is that though there ware obviously a lot of variables I don't think that Enzo's brakes or possibly tires were quite up to par.

 

Considering how much cheaper the murcie is...it sure competed well with the big boys!
-jt

 

Absolutely brillaint finish, IMO. Maser/Enzo? I fear not...but who will? Superlatives aside, Macca did things right.

--Dan

 

I am! You can upload the vid in 1MB parts (use WinRAR) on
http://www.125mb.com

125 MB of free webspace... not bad!

 

Did the R&T and C&D test have the same figures? Those might just be the Ferrari test figures.