Turbo Twin versus Mclaren Mp4-12c

[DAEMANO]

To bring the conversation back on track. This is actually the second or third time around for this video.

Here are the facts from the previous go-arounds:

Originally Posted by AVOturboworld

The lap times were set independently with the same driver. The video segment we see with both cars on the track, that was with the smaller worn out 225's on the GT86 because it was more interesting to watch.

Magazines know how to test properly, and they do. However, the fast lap videos were not nearly as interesting, so they don't show them.

Originally Posted by AVOturboworld

Just an update from Adrian at Fensport:
"The car set its lap time on 245 new toyo r888 and the video was made using worn out 225s and drifting just for fun!"

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Timed laps saw the GT86R put in a faster lap time.

Adrian posted them on the UK forum:
Std 86 51.9
Street Turbo 49.1
Mclaren MP4 46.2
.GT86R ..... 45.9

Clearly it was a short and twisty circuit and he admits that the McLaren was faster on the straights. The R was also on 888's and all the sideways action was for the camera and not on the timed laps.

It does indeed look like the driver was Steve Sutcliffe himself, who is likely a more skilled and experienced driver than anyone on this board. He knows how to drive. Has raced at a very high level, and hot lapped in machines well above that Mclaren. Notably:

Originally Posted by wikipedia

Steve Sutcliffe (born in 1968) is a former British auto racing driver who now works as a motoring journalist.

His first serious racing took place in 1993 in the Caterham K Series Championship, where he finished the season second in points.

In 1998 he raced in the TVR Tuscan Challenge, finishing eighth. He finished fourth in the 1999 season, and sixth in 2000 with two poles and three race wins.

In 2001 he got a drive in the British Touring Car Championship, replacing Thomas Erdos for the final two races at Brands Hatch, in a Lexus IS200 for ABG Motorsport/Total Motorsport.

In 2007, Sutcliffe set competitive times around the National Circuit at Silverstone in Honda's RA 107 Formula One car, and managed speeds of 178 mph along the back straight. He did it in 48.58seconds compared to Honda F1 test driver James Rossiter 48.18 seconds

He is currently editor-at-large of Autocar magazine

For comparison, the fastest speed of any road car at Silverstone's main circuit was 144 mph (Lamborghini Murcielago LP 670-4 SuperVeloce) http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/silverstone.html . No, this isn't brought up as a comparison of a road car to an F1 machine, but instead to reflect the degree of skill Sutcliffe brings to the table when piloting any car. The test might have been silly, but the results were legit to the point of the test.

Since the test, Fensport has developed the car quite a bit more. The build log is fascinating. Fensport is so open about their direction. They bust some myths with certain components. Most importantly, Fensport campaigns and wins with their cars.

http://www.fensport.co.uk/FensportCars/GT86_Race.aspx

Fensport GT86R ... Race Project 2014



After finishing 2nd overall in the Toyota Sprint Series last year, Team Fensport have been very busy over the winter "off season". The aim was always to make the car significantly faster at the end of each year so changes for the 2014 season had to include more grip before more power!!

First and most obvious is the fabulous Blitz Aerospeed wide arch kit as used on the Blitz Racing project Time Attack car and also Ken Nomura's Blitz Drift car in Japan. The kit was shipped over and we were so pleased with the perfect fit straight from the box! The Blitz kit allows for an 120mm track width on the rear and 110mm on the front. The arches have been cut out to provide more space for the new Rota 18 x 9.5" wheels which are clad in 265 wide Toyo R888's all round. Additional aero parts include custom front and rear canards, TRD aero fins, a higher rear wing and custom rear diffuser.

With the new found grip the team have also increased spring rates on the BC Racing external reservoir coilovers.

Also upgraded is the Avo turbocharger to the billet version which offers the same incredible response alongside a 20% increase in airflow.

The car has also been re mapped using Ecutek software to get the most out of the 108 ron race fuel, along with electronic "in gear" boost control which helps with traction in the lower gears.

An M Factory Carbon propshaft has been fitted to reduce rotational mass.

2014 Tech Specs
Engine: Standard internals. Avo Billet turbo kit with custom 3" Blitz Nur Spec exhaust. Fensport Lightweight Pulley kit. Mapped by Fensport using Ecutek and Race Rom. Millers Nanotec 0w30 oil. Hel Oil cooler. Mishimoto radiator, Samco hoses.

Drivetrain: Helix lightweight steel flywheel, Helix uprated clutch cover and 4 paddle cerrametalic clutch plate, M factory carbon propshaft, M factory 4.4 final drive and 1.5 way plate LSD. Standard Gearbox.

Chassis: BC Racing external resevoir coilover kit. S Wave adjustable rear suspension arms and front roll centre adjuster. SuperPro polyurethane bushes all round. Summit 3 point strut brace and 4 point lower brace, rear anti roll bar braces.

Brakes:
Front: Stoptech 4 pot calipers and 328mm discs with Ferodo DS2500 pads
Rear: Stoptech grooved discs and Stoptech pads
Hel brake lines and Millers racing brake fluid.

Body:
Blitz Aerospeed wide arch kit with side skirts. Custom front and rear canards, custom rear diffuser. carbon rear spoiler and carbon mirrors. Seibon carbon bonnet and boot lid. Plastics 4 Performance perspex windows.
Track increased 110mm front and 120mm rear.
Wheels & Tyres
Rota Grid Drift 9.5 x 18 with Toyo R888 265/35/18 tyres.

Safety:
Custom Cages full FIA weld in cage. Corbeau Revolution seat. Luke 3" harness. Electric cut off, Racecar lithium battery, plumbed in extinguisher.

[industrial]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

To bring the conversation back on track....

No that flys in the face of conventional ft86 forum "wisdom". Everyone knows you have to use the Essex bbk kits to touch the track. Also, the only track worthy FI kit is the jrsc. The vendorship/censorship model of this forum has distorted everything. Just like real life!

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by industrial

No that flys in the face of conventional ft86 forum "wisdom". Everyone knows you have to use the Essex bbk kits to touch the track. Also, the only track worthy FI kit is the jrsc. The vendorship/censorship model of this forum has distorted everything. Just like real life!

My favorite BBK is actually a Brembo, but I don't know very many people that are willing to spend 1/3 of the price of the car on brakes...

[DeeezNuuuts83]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

My favorite BBK is actually a Brembo, but I don't know very many people that are willing to spend 1/3 of the price of the car on brakes...

That's another thing... typically cars that already come with a good amount of punch under the hood from the factory will also have Brembos (or at least large enough brakes), which is one less thing that absolutely needs to be upgraded for a track toy (meaning you are going for lap times and not just car/parts reviews). Yes, there are always going to be better brakes and room for improvement, but they're far from inadequate, even as power levels increase. (Keep in mind that all of the Evo FQ models still keep the stock Brembos. Same thing with the Prodrive STIs. I'm not 100% sure but I think that the Brembo-equipped Mustangs have the same hardware regardless of the model.)

I've always liked the twins, just like everyone here. But when money is a factor and you are building a track toy out of a brand new car (just so we can stay out of the argument of buying a used whatever car and spending the money saved on buying used on mods), factory forced induction and big brakes are a huge plus and will get you to your goals much quicker.

So basically if a BRZ STI comes out (provided it gets the proper STI treatment and gets the 2.0T and not the 2.5T)... then I would definitely lean toward that car taking the crown and I wouldn't argue against it. There would be few criticisms of something like that.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DeeezNuuuts83

That's another thing... typically cars that already come with a good amount of punch under the hood from the factory will also have Brembos (or at least large enough brakes), which is one less thing that absolutely needs to be upgraded for a track toy (meaning you are going for lap times and not just car/parts reviews). Yes, there are always going to be better brakes and room for improvement, but they're far from inadequate, even as power levels increase. (Keep in mind that all of the Evo FQ models still keep the stock Brembos. Same thing with the Prodrive STIs. I'm not 100% sure but I think that the Brembo-equipped Mustangs have the same hardware regardless of the model.)

I've always liked the twins, just like everyone here. But when money is a factor and you are building a track toy out of a brand new car (just so we can stay out of the argument of buying a used whatever car and spending the money saved on buying used on mods), factory forced induction and big brakes are a huge plus and will get you to your goals much quicker.

So basically if a BRZ STI comes out (provided it gets the proper STI treatment and gets the 2.0T and not the 2.5T)... then I would definitely lean toward that car taking the crown and I wouldn't argue against it. There would be few criticisms of something like that.

I find most factory Brembo brakes rather lacking. They're there for "cred" more than actual performance. If you've ever seen an entry level Brembo GT caliper against a OE Brembo caliper, it's not even a comparison.

This is where the Essex kit comes in. It's a race part for the people who want a very focused, cost effective upgrade. @industrial You should count how many times I recommend that someone NOT get the Essex kit. It's a lot.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

This isn't the era of overbuilt iron blocks. This is the era of "lets make the car 'just good enough' to minimize cost". If a part is too strong, it's too expensive, and needs to be made more cheaply. Unless it's a part's bin part that makes up for the expense in sheer volume. Like the differential in the twins.



You talk the talk, but you don't walk the walk. Come back to me after running your 400bhp setup for 40k miles, and we can chat.

I feel like this fact is lost on the vast majority of younger tuners. They just assume modern engines are better, but in most cases they are not. Is Toyota's hottest current engine (V8 in Lexus F models) able to handle power like their 2JZ? Not a chance. Does Honda equip the Civic Si's engine with forged internals? Something that every GS-R model had...nope. Heck, even Subaru stopped putting forged internals in their WRXs a decade ago.

Its all about cost cutting and shorter vehicle lifespans these days - perpetuation of the throw away culture.

Crying shame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

I feel like this fact is lost on the vast majority of younger tuners. They just assume modern engines are better, but in most cases they are not. Is Toyota's hottest current engine (V8 in Lexus F models) able to handle power like their 2JZ? Not a chance. Does Honda equip the Civic Si's engine with forged internals? Something that every GS-R model had...nope. Heck, even Subaru stopped putting forged internals in their WRXs a decade ago.

Its all about cost cutting and shorter vehicle lifespans these days - perpetuation of the throw away culture.

Crying shame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i think you took a thought about half as far as it should have gone. no doubt the era of invincible steel block four figure hp madness was something amazing. these current motors are usually lighter and not sticking out the front of the car like those inline sixes. if you look at a motors performance maybe things arent that great but when assessing the complete car, the motors today arent that bad.

people are never satisfied with what oems do. our community complained when we got fuel injection...

[WolfpackS2k]

Overall cars today are better, sure. But drivetrains? Nope. I've heard from many long time mechanics that today's Japanese engines/transmissions aren't as durable or robust as those of 20-25 years ago. And I'm not talking about modified vehicles - stock for stock. There's no money in it for automakers to build cars that last more than 150-200k.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Overall cars today are better, sure. But drivetrains? Nope. I've heard from many long time mechanics that today's Japanese engines/transmissions aren't as durable or robust as those of 20-25 years ago. And I'm not talking about modified vehicles - stock for stock. There's no money in it for automakers to build cars that last more than 150-200k.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

was there ever any money in it for automakers for cars to last more than 150-200k? im not even saying i disagree with your point. im just saying that your evidence doesnt make any sense.

[WolfpackS2k]

Things are more competitive now. And with computer modeling you can design vehicles and their operating parts more efficiently; I mean a greater degree of certainty and less reliance on overbuilding something to ensure success. That's my guess at least (and not sure if I'm using the right words to explain my thought on this).

My evidence is anecdotal, but I can't determine any financial reason to explain why my Integra is so overbuilt in every way. I mean even the wiring of this car must be top notch, lol.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Things are more competitive now. And with computer modeling you can design vehicles and their operating parts more efficiently; I mean a greater degree of certainty and less reliance on overbuilding something to ensure success.

Goddamn I wish I could find the video from the 80's I saw with Mercedes using computer analysis to design their suspensions but I think it was on vhs...

[WolfpackS2k]

Not sure where you're going with that? Though on a related note the last great Mercedes models (until the current S & C Classes) were the '87 E Class and '91 S class, both designed (obviously) in the 80s 😁


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

Not sure where you're going with that? Though on a related note the last great Mercedes models (until the current S & C Classes) were the '87 E Class and '91 S class, both designed (obviously) in the 80s 😁


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That computer simulation and analysis has been used in modeling vehicle dynamics and strength and reliability for parts in the automotive industry for at least 35 years, and we're using material properties and methods that have existed for 70+ years.

Pointing to a single tool and saying 'that's the reason' is like saying the president is responsible for the laws that are passed. There are many more socioeconomic factors that have driven us to where we are today along with a multitude of technological advancements.

After all, as someone put it, we got a man on the moon with a slide rule and a casio calculator. The computer is not some super-tool that has elevated us beyond our forefathers, all it does is speed up the rate of trivial tasks, i.e. don't read this message for a week and I'll wait to read your response for a week.


You're not wrong, newer cars are built to tighter tolerances and slimmer margins because we can do so successfully. But if people didn't want cheaper cars, didn't want to treat their cars as disposable appliances to be traded in every 3-5 years we'd still be buying overbuilt cars like the 60's-80's Germans and 80's-90's Japanese and lusting over cars that stretched reliability to the limit like 60's-90's Ferrari's and Lamborghini's.

[tahdizzle]

The moon landing was staged. It was a studio somewhere in New Mexico.