Fastest Car down Conrod Straight
Cartman
Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is life
or death.
They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
Which is correct (hopefully neither :P)
Cheers,
Nathan.
GMSSVS
FASTEST POLE TIME
GREG MURPHY, Commodore, 2:06.8594. 2003 (first sub
2:07.000 lap recorded at Mount Panorama).
Fastest race on new circuit
Jim Richards/Mark Skaife
Nissan GT-R 1991
6hr.19m.14.80s - 158.26 Kph
Fastest race on the old circuit
Peter Brock/Larry Perkins
Holden Commodore VK 1984
6hr.23m.13.06s - 145.58 Kph
Sorry, couldnt find a definative conrod fastest time....Maybe someone
else can help out...
Knobdoodle
news:9D49e.16538$5F3....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
It'd have to be the V8 'cause the Nissan's strengths were in it's
traction/cornering....
Knob
John
Depends if you're talking pre kink or post kink...
warrigal
"Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote in message
news:4264cf62$0$27623$61c6...@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au
...
Nissan 300ZX, early 90's
feral
Conrod at close to 200mph in the late 80's. That is well
over 300kph, if true.
--
Take care,
Feral
David
David
budgie
wrote:
Dunno, but I've got the ticket to prove my 180B did 134 in the 60 zone.
Yeah, I know, it WAS downhill.
Toby Ponsenby
Has to be pre.
It ain't a straight any more.
--
Toby.
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur
kevcat
>
> "The Fireworks King" Chev Monte Carlo NASCAR fastest ever race car in
> any division down Conrod straight at Bathurst 200.37 mph, 319kph,
> 1998.(Record still stands) ?
>
It would've been something other than a V8 super car or the old touring
cars
they are slow compared to quite a few other classes of cars that have
raced there
the sports sedans used to do Lakeside track a few seconds quiker than
the old V8 tourers
Kev
Cartman
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:39:11 +1000, feral <plo...@home.ru> scribbled
> thusly:
> any division down Conrod straight at Bathurst 200.37 mph, 319kph,
> 1998.(Record still stands) ?
>
>
>
> I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.
It would be interesting to see if it still stands.
AFAIK the V8s only get to 295 Km/hr down there anyways.
Cartman
Thanks
"John" <nos...@afp.gov.au> wrote in message
news:4264d8d3$1...@mail.netspeed.com.au...
Cartman
news:k5r961l5tvrseo4tb...@4ax.com...
I'd have that framed on the wall :)
Cartman
news:815fj2-...@netserver.oznook.com...
Any more information on that?
Knobdoodle
> It would've been something other than a V8 super car or the old touring
> cars
> they are slow compared to quite a few other classes of cars that have
> raced there
>
> the sports sedans used to do Lakeside track a few seconds quiker than
> the old V8 tourers
>
I'm still backing the V8 Supercar (or the Nascar which I didn't recall ever
racing at Bathurst!)
Knob
Noddy
"kevcat" <kev...@dodo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4264F1B2...@dodo.com.au...
> It would've been something other than a V8 super car or the old touring
> cars
> they are slow compared to quite a few other classes of cars that have
> raced there
V8 Supercars get close to 300km/h down Conrod these days, and it ain't
anywhere near as straight as it used to be.
I wouldn't exactly call that slow :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Cartman
Knobdoodle
> "budgie" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> Dunno, but I've got the ticket to prove my 180B did 134 in the 60 zone.
>>
>> Yeah, I know, it WAS downhill.
>
> I'd have that framed on the wall :)
>
Knob
(Not that I'm willing to try it out at Bathurst though.....)
reg-john
a few years ago.
"Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote in message
news:4264f543$0$27627$61c6...@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
kevcat
and what a rocket the 180B SSS was
had those twin Japanese SU type carbs
woohoo
Kev
Knobdoodle
> Knobdoodle wrote:
>> 180Bs weren't slow. It should be good for 160-170kph at least!!
>
> and what a rocket the 180B SSS was
> had those twin Japanese SU type carbs
>
British SUs on my other 1600!)
They didn't do much extra up-top but they certainly improved low-down
power.
The butterflies would wear elliptical though and you'd get sticky idle
problems.
Knob
Toby Ponsenby
> The butterflies would wear elliptical though and you'd get sticky idle
> problems.
> Knob
Hmm. Adjustment foibles cause that.
Thought I'd beat John Mac to it:-)
DalienX
> no ive seen many of them crack 310 when they do the incar cameras.
> possibly a few years ago.
>
>
Yeah ive seen that also.
--
DalienX
Smee R1100s
My 1972 model hit the imperial ton more than once back in the early 80's
when there were no speed cameras.
Toby Ponsenby
Yes, well...
These days a good car is defined as one that'll nail the old ton
*between* speed cameras.
Oh, and did I tell you that for no readily apparent reasons 180B's
were know to roll over like bitches in heat?
Cartman
"reg-john" <a...@a.com> wrote in message
news:E879e.16808$5F3....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Cartman
:)
"Knobdoodle" <knobd...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:4264...@x-privat.org...
feral
Hazard a guess and say : tallest diff, little fuel,
suspension not set up in race trim. Probably qualifying,
practice or shoot-out. Or are you saying it was during a
race.
I've never seen it claimed that a V8 has done 300kph
down Conrod IN a race. Do you have a reference?
--
Take care,
Feral
a9x5l
The 427 Monaro used in Nations Cup would have been pretty quick too,
although I think they had a fairly low rev limit set on them.
--
a9x5l
a9x5l
> Hey all,
> Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is life
> or death.
>
> They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
> Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
>
> Which is correct (hopefully neither :P)
I don't know what the Skylines top speed was but I thought the following
might be helpful as a guide to the top speed of a V8 supercar down Con-Rod
Straight.
Issue 2 of AMC magazine has an interview with Mark Oastler talking to
Larry Perkins which goes like this...
MO: Your 1993 Bathurst pole time was 2m13.013sec which is still pretty
darn quick by todays standards, given the amount of development that's
occurred in the category over the past decade.
LP: Yes, that VP was a beautiful handling car. I suspect it had a bit more
down-force on it than the one we have today and it was quite slippery
through the air, believe it or not. We were on the rev limiter at the end
of Con-Rod Straight even then, which would have been 291 km/h and that
speed has never been exceeded. There are some who believe others have gone
quicker, but no one has because once you hit the rev limiter, you hit the
rev limiter.
--
a9x5l
Josh
> no ive seen many of them crack 310 when they do the incar cameras. possibly
> a few years ago.
>
>
>>
>>
V8SCs are limited to 297 by control gearbox/diff ratios and rev
limiters, or at least have been for the past few years.
josh
warrigal
"Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote in message
news:4264cf62$0$27623$61c6...@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au
...
> Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is
life
> or death.
>
> They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
> Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
Still reckon the 300ZX, 3ltr twin turbo @ 1000hp and I believe it was Keith
Carling that pushed it to 314k's in a sports sedan class in '92.
He still holds the sports sedan lap record of just under 2m 14sec he set the
same year.
Yes folks, thats 2m 13.8 sec 15 years ago for a lap of the mountain - one
fuggin quick little nissan if you compare lap times V8's of the same era.
Must have been running on overproof Sake.
Toby Ponsenby
> The 427 Monaro used in Nations Cup would have been pretty quick too,
> although I think they had a fairly low rev limit set on them.
.....set??....
Something to do with massive recriprocating mass and of course piston
speed limitations, I believe:-)
>
> --
> a9x5l
budgie
and squat like a crapping dog if you ever put more tha two boxes of tissues in
the boot. That back-end was far too soft and soggy. That was when I discovered
that Monroe ride-levellers were just that - not shocks, just ride levellers.
budgie
>"Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote:
>> "budgie" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>>> Dunno, but I've got the ticket to prove my 180B did 134 in the 60 zone.
>>>
>>> Yeah, I know, it WAS downhill.
>>
>> I'd have that framed on the wall :)
>>
>180Bs weren't slow. It should be good for 160-170kph at least!!
Yep, so was mine when not carrying all our touring gear including two spare
wheels on the roof-rack. And with that light_and_hairy back-end I wasn't flat
chat over the hump.
>(Not that I'm willing to try it out at Bathurst though.....)
I did. $40 and no points ;-)
And the funny part was the car that clocked me was one of those L34/SLR5000-ish
machines the Bathurst boys had. He turned on his lights/siren just before the
end of the straight, and we pulled up in pit straight. The LHS cop got out to
talk to me, the driver jumped out and slid under the front to see where all the
smoke was coming from. His front brakes ....
Knobdoodle
news:42659902$0$32637$c30e...@ken-reader.news.telstra.net...
years ago at Bathurst?
They must hold the record!
Knob
Adam Gibson
"Toby Ponsenby" <to...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:78ymhur5n92u.187leulwm7ope$.dlg@40tude.net...
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 07:55:58 +1000, a9x5l wrote:
>
> > The 427 Monaro used in Nations Cup would have been pretty quick too,
> > although I think they had a fairly low rev limit set on them.
>
> .....set??....
> Something to do with massive recriprocating mass and of course piston
> speed limitations, I believe:-)
Er, no. But *a lot* to do with sandbagging and marketting. Unlike you to
be so far off the mark Toby, especially something so befouled with the
stench of intentional deception.
Compare the rev limit holden put on it with the same engine in Le Mans
corvettes. I was at both 24 hour races and most of the time they were
really just rolling around racking up laps, those mongrels shouldn't have
been there.
Toby Ponsenby
Aww, you missed the smilie.
Never mind.
Rev limiters are like most other rules I guess, existing for the sake
of their exceptions.
I saw one of the Supercar drivers on In Car Camera furiously pressing
a button on the wheel on a trip back to the pits after a race the
other day and wondering WTF was so important it had to be reset at
that point.
And another :-)
So what was the published Le Mans limit for the engine anyway?
I recall the GT40 'large engine' joke limit years back was 4500 or
something silly like that.
reg-john
remarking on it sometime in the past 5 years. no idea if it was the race or
not.
"feral" <plo...@home.ru> wrote in message
news:4265799e$0$27865$61c6...@un-2park-reader-01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
Scotty
at 308 khr. The production cars are geared more for top speed I believe and
the supercars only just get to 300.
Hopefully someone out there knows exactly.
"Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote in message
news:4264cf62$0$27623$61c6...@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au...
> Hey all,
> Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is
> life
> or death.
>
> They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
> Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
>
> Which is correct (hopefully neither :P)
> Cheers,
> Nathan.
>
>
Brad Hogan
>> It would've been something other than a V8 super car or the old touring
>> cars
>> they are slow compared to quite a few other classes of cars that have
>> raced there
>>
>> the sports sedans used to do Lakeside track a few seconds quiker than
>> the old V8 tourers
>>
> But we're not talking lap-times; just highest speed on Conrod.
> I'm still backing the V8 Supercar (or the Nascar which I didn't recall
> ever racing at Bathurst!)
well you would be wrong.
obviously the v8 supercar also does quite well at CORNERING at the corners.
The fastest down the straight will be a vehicle with no steering ability
Knobdoodle
news:426625c5$1...@news.comindico.com.au...
the straight?
Knob
('cept maybe for the corner ONTO the straight!)
Nige
> "Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote in message
> news:4264cf62$0$27623$61c6...@un-2park-reader-02.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au
> ...
>
>>Hey all,
>>Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is
>
> life
>
>>or death.
>>
>>They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
>>Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
>
>
Fastest V8Supercar was Glen Seton @ 301kph, can't remember the year but
must have been before the current diff, tyre and rpm limit combo came
into effect. I think the NASCAR claim is correct for the fastest speed.
You'd be best to ask at one of the motorsport forums (ie.
http://www.ten-tenths.com/forum) as those guys know all this type of stuff!
Cheers, Nige
Smee R1100s
lol
they were shocking on corners i'll vouch for that too.
Although i never rolled it, I had one uncontrollable fishtail in the wet
doing a rather sedate corner.
Frightened the bejesus out of me as i didn't see it coming.
Reason i think was that the fuel tank was mounted behind the parcel
shelf in the boot lifting the whole car's C.O.G
Cartman
news:4265aa7b$1...@news.iprimus.com.au...
>
> Still reckon the 300ZX, 3ltr twin turbo @ 1000hp and I believe it was
Keith
> Carling that pushed it to 314k's in a sports sedan class in '92.
> He still holds the sports sedan lap record of just under 2m 14sec he set
the
> same year.
> Yes folks, thats 2m 13.8 sec 15 years ago for a lap of the mountain - one
> fuggin quick little nissan if you compare lap times V8's of the same era.
> Must have been running on overproof Sake.
>
That was pretty impressive in her day, I will agree with that!!!
Cartman
news:42663305$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Thanks for the link
Albm&ctd
says...
Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
Kieron
>Hey all,
>Just after an answer to a question that 2 of my mates seem to think is life
>or death.
>
>They want to know what the fastest car has been down conrod straight at
>Mount Panorama. One claims Nissan GTR, other claims Holden V8 Supercar.
>
>Which is correct (hopefully neither :P)
I'd be backing the GTR. V8SC's are rev limited to 7,500 and with the
control diff ratio, the cars are on the rev limiter at circa 297 km/h.
Johnsons Cossie Sierra had a top speed there of 305 iirc and the GTRs
were a quicker car.
tla...@visto.com
boost pressure out the wazoo, right top gear... 320km/h should be
possible.
T.
Noddy
"Kieron" <kiero...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:426717c5...@203.50.2.233...
> Johnsons Cossie Sierra had a top speed there of 305 iirc and the GTRs
> were a quicker car.
Not on the straight sections they weren't.....
--
Regards,
Noddy.
budgie
>they were shocking on corners i'll vouch for that too.
>Although i never rolled it, I had one uncontrollable fishtail in the wet
>doing a rather sedate corner.
>Frightened the bejesus out of me as i didn't see it coming.
>Reason i think was that the fuel tank was mounted behind the parcel
>shelf in the boot lifting the whole car's C.O.G
That tank position was *supposed_to* be a safe location, between the wheel
arches and away from crushing in the event of a tail-end or side crush.
But it did raise the CofG ona car with an already soft_as_shit rear suspension.
budgie
wrote:
>In article <4265212a$0$79457$1472...@news.sunsite.dk>, M...@nothere.net
>says...
>> Knobdoodle wrote:
>> > "Cartman" <magnaboy-at-westnet-dot-com.au> wrote:
>> >
>> >>"budgie" <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Dunno, but I've got the ticket to prove my 180B did 134 in the 60 zone.
>> >>>
>> >>>Yeah, I know, it WAS downhill.
>> >>
>> >>I'd have that framed on the wall :)
>> >>
>> >
>> > 180Bs weren't slow. It should be good for 160-170kph at least!!
>> > Knob
>> > (Not that I'm willing to try it out at Bathurst though.....)
>> >
>> >
>> I'll vouch for the 180b being fast for it's time.
>> My 1972 model hit the imperial ton more than once back in the early 80's
>> when there were no speed cameras.
>>
>At that lowly speed a mates rotary had another gear left.
and probably a few thousand k's to the mandatory 30,00o rebuild. Those Rx2/4
engines were a PITA - shower of shit and then a rebuild ....
Albm&ctd
says...
>
> and probably a few thousand k's to the mandatory 30,00o rebuild. Those Rx2/4
> engines were a PITA - shower of shit and then a rebuild ....
>
didn't last that long, a power pole got it... damned poles.
I thought he might crash it one day after being a passenger at 90 mph
sideways in the rain. He was being careful too, going slower, under 100
mph, driving to conditions when it broke away :-) Damned Dunlop
Aquajets, just add water for zero traction.
He died a few years later in an accident near Cowra in a Charger and I
think he only died to piss us all off, making us feel mortal and because
funerals were much cheaper back then and to avoid the debt collectors
that used to ring me up and ask if I knew where he was.
Kieron
wrote:
What was there speed then?
Noddy
> What was there speed then?
They were around the same as the Sierra's on the flat, but lightning quick
out of the corners.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Kieron
wrote:
Quick out of Forest Elbow means a better speed down Conrod if the
revs/grunt is there, which of course the GTR had in spades.
But you have proved what I said by saying the GTR was as quick as a
Sierra down Conrod :)
Noddy
> Quick out of Forest Elbow means a better speed down Conrod if the
> revs/grunt is there, which of course the GTR had in spades.
No, it means it reaches it's top speed faster :)
> But you have proved what I said by saying the GTR was as quick as a
> Sierra down Conrod :)
*Agreed* with you, but just because I do so doesn't prove shit :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Neil Gerace
news:00he61db44u2dc8vp...@4ax.com...
> But it did raise the CofG ona car with an already soft_as_shit rear
> suspension.
Soft as shit new, or soft as shit 30 years old?
budgie
From new. They certainly didn't improve with age.
Mine was first registered Feb 75, the ticket was Dec '75.
Neil Gerace
> From new. They certainly didn't improve with age.
> Mine was first registered Feb 75, the ticket was Dec '75.
Well that surprises me, as I thought the IRS would be pretty good. Perhaps
they didn't beef it up from the setup on the 1600.
budgie
It was waaaaay softer than the two 1600's I'd owned prior. The
squat_when_you_fang_it was far more pronounced.
Kieron
wrote:
>
>"Kieron" <kiero...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4270495d....@203.50.2.233...
>
>> Quick out of Forest Elbow means a better speed down Conrod if the
>> revs/grunt is there, which of course the GTR had in spades.
>
>No, it means it reaches it's top speed faster :)
No, it means a better speed down Conrod as I said. Its not guaranteed
that a car would hit its theoretical top speed down Conrod.
Fraser Johnston
John Bowe said the Sierra still held the record in his column in Speed
magazine.
Fraser
Noddy
> No, it means a better speed down Conrod as I said. Its not guaranteed
> that a car would hit its theoretical top speed down Conrod.
You must have learned physics from a different book than the rest of us :)
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Kieron
wrote:
It ain't physics. Your assuming the car ALWAYS reaches its theoretical
top speed down conrod regardless of corner exit speed.
I'm assuming that it doesn't necessarily do so and a faster corner
exit speed means a higher top speed.
Noddy
> It ain't physics. Your assuming the car ALWAYS reaches its theoretical
> top speed down conrod regardless of corner exit speed.
What the fuck are you talking about "theoretical"? :)
Conrod straight is long enough for *any* race car to reach it's top speed,
even with the chase.
> I'm assuming that it doesn't necessarily do so and a faster corner
> exit speed means a higher top speed.
No it doesn't :)
A faster corner exit speed simply means you get to your top speed in a
shorter distance. It can't magically add to your overall top speed ability.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
Kieron
wrote:
>
>"Kieron" <kiero...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:427585ee....@203.50.2.233...
>
>> It ain't physics. Your assuming the car ALWAYS reaches its theoretical
>> top speed down conrod regardless of corner exit speed.
>
>What the fuck are you talking about "theoretical"? :)
revs/final drive ratios/power etc
>Conrod straight is long enough for *any* race car to reach it's top speed,
>even with the chase.
Big call. If a car reaches its top speed earlier down conrod due to
better corner exit speed, then you change diff and/or top gear ratios
to allow it to reach a higher speed.
This is sorta whats happend in the V8SC's, they are banging on the rev
limiter earlier down Conrod and from this year, get a higher ratio
diff.
>> I'm assuming that it doesn't necessarily do so and a faster corner
>> exit speed means a higher top speed.
>
>No it doesn't :)
>
>A faster corner exit speed simply means you get to your top speed in a
>shorter distance. It can't magically add to your overall top speed ability.
Mark Skaife could do with a good laugh ATM, go tell him that :)
Noddy
> Big call. If a car reaches its top speed earlier down conrod due to
> better corner exit speed, then you change diff and/or top gear ratios
> to allow it to reach a higher speed.
*If* you're allowed to, and *if* doing so doesn't fuck up the drivability of
the car in other areas.
> This is sorta whats happend in the V8SC's, they are banging on the rev
> limiter earlier down Conrod and from this year, get a higher ratio
> diff.
That's a ruling adjustment.
> Mark Skaife could do with a good laugh ATM, go tell him that :)
Sure.
--
Regards,
Noddy.
edgewa...@gmail.com
David Richards
> Christ my Sunbird was good for the ton.