qtrrmile

wow that looks great! it will cost a t $407k? that's a lot, but with that,, its all worh it..

_________________
Taylor Cable Distributor Cap

Bill S.

I has a chance to meet niche today. Great guy and great car! It's a special Ruf Turbo R with the center exhaust. It was single plug. It seemed faster than my Turbo R.

I raced him in my CGT. We both started in 3rd gear and we both had 100 octane. I was at about 5k RPM. He immediately pulled me by about 2 car lengths. Then, as the CGT tach reached 8K, I quickly caught up (still in 3rd) while he was shifting into 4th. Then the CGT continued to pull several car lengths as I shifted into 4th and took it to 8400.

Because the CGT does not have much power below 6K RPM, it will appear a bit sluggish in any race that doesn't let the CGT reach redline and stay above 7500 rpm throughout most of the race. The turbo has plenty of power at low RPM, so it will appear faster in shorter races.

niche

+1 on Bill. Another great rennlister! His yellow CGT is incredible! Just listening to that sound is enough to want to buy one. Wow!

As far as our little "test." He cheated. Everyone knows yellow cars are the fastest so it wasn't fair...

Seriously, though, it was a big difference going against someone who knows how to drive the CGT. Made me nervous enough to keep missing my gear.

I think the other fellow was afraid of spinning it since he had done that a few times... that and it was silver so I'm sure that had something to do with it.

I look forward to driving with Bill in the future and making another rennlist friend.

nicu

I can confirm that my ctr2 (583 HP with a noticeable turbo lag) pulls harder/equal to the cgt in a straight line up to 180 km/h,after that the cgt just edges a bit,over 230 km/h my ctr 2 struggles a bit on acount of the short ratio gearing.
What i do not agree with is that the cgt does not have much power below 6k,it's exactly the the other way around - it's power band is at the lower revs,for example if you race the cgt against the SLR at high speed,the cgt will struggle at abt 1.5 car lenghts behind the SLR @ top end side by side over 260 km/h.

Now realize this: the Tubo R and the ctr2 were fast,the Rt12 is a lot faster(no point to even comparing with the cgt ) and now the ctr3 tops them all and in a very balanced and convincing manner.

Bill S.

I respectively disagree. I've driven both cars (including a CTR2) and can tell you the CTR2 and SLR have much more power than the CGT at low RPM. For example:

SLR: 575 lb-ft @ 3,200 - 5,000 rpm
CGT: 435 lb-ft @ 5750 RPM

Since HP = (TQ x RPM)/5,252, you may calculate HP from TQ and compare the cars. Or just compare their HP vs. RPM graphs. The CGT makes its power by revving high, unlike the supercharged SLR and turbocharged CTR2 which do not need to rev high to make power. The CGT was designed very specifically for very fast engine/driveline response, which is why you see it jump most cars at the shift points.

What you're seeing at high speeds is the aerodynamic part of the equation kicking in. If a recall, the CGT generates much more downforce at speed than the SLR, which also results in more frontal resistance.

bbs993tt

Great discussion guys, keep it up! I just wish I had the roads y'all out there in CA land have!

Bill S.

Here is the CGT HP vs MPH (assuming you shift at redline). The CGT does not generate much power under 60 MPH. After that it's pretty strong.

It would be interesting to compare this with the Ruf cars.

JET951

i dont know if this is a apples to apples comparison. you guys are trying to compare a stock production car(CGT) to a modified Car (RUF). i do realise that RUF is in itself a production plant but its just not the same. What if a CGT owner took his car to a company like RUF and had it modified? imagine that a low compression twin turbo CGT. then it would most likely be a hell of a lot faster then the RUF you guys are talking about.
dont try to bring money into the equation because the cars are completly diffent animals, the CGT has a carbon fiber monocoque. excuse my ignorance but i believe the RUF you guys may be talking about use the standard steel body? besides some carbon here and there(hood etc). in my view i think they are both great cars but completly different.
Sean

eloyex

me too ....

TB993tt

Very relevant to the above interactions.

These tuned turbo cars will always have more torque lower down than the CGT but as Bill says keeping the revs up by changing at the red line and the CGT will hold its own until the drag really takes its toll, over 170mph the downforce of 300+kg is really holding the CGT back, but the upside is its incredible stability.

Checkout the vid, I did get the "drop" on the CGT in second but the instant throttle response of the CGT compared to the RT12 also played a significant part. Terminal speeds at 1.6 mile mark were:
CGT 193mph
RT12 210mph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae2PAOMBSZ8

Bill S.

Outstanding video. That's exactly what I would expect when the CGT is kept in its power band. As you say, the fast throttle response on each CGT shift also adds up as the RT12 has some turbo lag on each shift. Too bad they didn't make a CGT with a dual-sequential transmission, like the GT-R. The CGT engine and transmission are really setup for that. The RT12 eventually caught up because of its higher HP and less air resistance.

niche

Great video... Bill, that's the place to "test" cars out!

Bill S.

Yes! I recall seeing a runway for sale somewhere near Southern Cal. Maybe we can get it cheap!

niche

May not be a bad idea! Create a new event?

niche

Look what I found!
http://www.teamspeed.com/forums/supe...-supercar.html