Announcement

**Sip** · 12-01-2004, 07:02 PM

269.1 mph in 1938 ????

**Porsche** · 12-01-2004, 07:34 PM

Yeah, I found it hard to believe too.

**NarEkoO** · 12-01-2004, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by Seapahn

269.1 mph in 1938 ????

concept car completely lighter than xxxx....

**TeamSTEALTH** · 12-01-2004, 11:22 PM

heres what the record holder looks like...

404 Not Found

http://fantastic-cars.xt-design.de/marken/m/mercedesbenz/rennwagen/38w125.html

**Turbo Bill** · 11-02-2006, 09:19 PM

Re: Top Speed Supercars

When someone ask: what is "The Fastest Production Car" there are obvoius and hidden qualifiers. Production itself is a qualifier. So is Fastest... and in the U.S. "fastest" is OFTEN CONFUSED with "quickest" (as in fastest accelerating). Fastest and quickest are NOT the same. Zero to 60 mph times and the quarter mile have NOTHING to do with the fastest. Although over the last 20 years I admit it is a little less confusing for most Americans who are drag strip happy... not that there is anything wrong with that, its just one narrow window of performance.

The new Barabus TKR, the Veryon, and McClaren F1 are often mentioned in Fastest production car forums. They are production cars in the since that with enough money and patience... they can be purchased with possibly a year or more wait to have it built... However, in sanctioned road racing, 200 is often mentioned as the minumum yearly production number to be considered a "production car"... which means the three super exotics listed above would NOT qualify (under the 200 a year rule).

Since I am building a "production" based car to run at Bonneville to set a land world speed record or two, this is interesting to me. Currently, at Bonneville, the "fastest Production based car running in a Production class is John Rains modified 20th Anniversary Turbo Trans-Am with a 272 cubic inch V-6 Turbo. This car's top speed is well above the three super Exotics listed above. Yes, this car does have an absolutely stock factory body... it is lowered though and generates far more horsepower than it did stock. However, the rules by the sanctioning body at Bonneville DO NOT allow engine configurations that were not originally available that year make and model... You for instance could not take a turbo charged engine if not originally a factory option... and the engine must use the same number of cylinders and basic block configuration. Well, the 1989 Turbo Trans-Am was based on a stage 2 indy racing block which was not acually used in most production units BUT a few test models... that's enough. So John Rains car produces more horsepower than a Veryon and an McClaren F1 COMBINED (it actually does). This 4.5 litre v-6 producing close to 2000 sea Net hp in a Trans-Am went 303 mph out the back door at Bonneville and averaged over 297mph in a flying mile. What would happen if you geared up a Barabus TKR, or the Veryon, and McClaren F1 and increased horse power to = John Rains car... then of the four, which would be the fastest... I already know the answer, it would still be John Rains Turbo Trans-AM, even though the total aerodynamic drag on the Trans-Am is slightly higher than the Ultra-exotics. Why ??? hint... believe it or not, the Trans-Am is more stable across multiple dementional axis, which is whyit can achieve higher top speeds at ultra high horsepower levels.
iN a nutshell, at Bonneville and when your shootiing for 300 mph, Ultra exotics, Fararris, Lambos, etc HAVE BEEN TRIED and ... they suck at land world speed records.

Announcement

Top Speed Supercars

Top Speed Supercars

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment