SF90 [Official] All-new Ferrari SF90 Stradale

[WBarnes]

I know the transmission is rated for about 80lbft(?) more than the one in the F8/Pista.

 

[CrunchSlaughtered]

I know the transmission is rated for about 80lbft(?) more than the one in the F8/Pista.

How much does of the total torque go through the transmission? I'm totally unaware of this construction but suppose that some of the electric motors give their power to the wheels without going through the transmissiin.

 

[Switar]

Isn't 266NM just the rear motor? Believe the 2 front ones make 85NM each.

Yes, you are right, 266 is only the rear motor, but if i correctly understand it's possible to use one, two or three electric motor, but for a total power of 220 cv. So, it's impossible to know the real NM total value, i can suppose it can be over 1000

 

[WBarnes]

How much does of the total torque go through the transmission? I'm totally unaware of this construction but suppose that some of the electric motors give their power to the wheels without going through the transmissiin.

I must first correct my earlier figure, the transmission is rated at 96lbft (130Nm) more. Don't know but total EV output is limited to 220ps and that's the problem, the e-motors may not be spinning at the same speed as the ICE, and the total will therefore vary depending on, which gear you're in, as well as engine rpm. As a wide arse guess, I would estimate about about 800lbft total - 590lbft ICE + 210lbft EV, which is just shy of 1100Nm (811lbft). But this is an equivalent figure, which assumes a torque value at the wheels referred back to the engine as if it were going through the transmission.

 

[igor30041982]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[WBarnes]

How much does of the total torque go through the transmission? I'm totally unaware of this construction but suppose that some of the electric motors give their power to the wheels without going through the transmissiin.

I would assume the rear motor is the only one going through the gearbox, otherwise it would be real complicated, that is also the only one active above 130mph. It produces 201bhp/196lbft. The front two produce 133bhp and 63lbft each and would add only 16bhp under good traction conditions, which given their bhp/lbft ratio, implies about 7lbft extra.

590 + 196 + 7 = 793lbft equivalent.

 

[slicknick]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[bmwz4coupe]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

A nice pair actually, Schmee smiling looks like the back of the SF90....

 

[slicknick]

A nice pair actually, Schmee smiling looks like the back of the SF90....

Hehe yeah...Did you get to warm up to the car a bit btw?

 

[bmwz4coupe]

Hehe yeah...Did you get to warm up to the car a bit btw?

No, still don’t like the rear. Haven’t seen it in real life, but that rear end is hard to like for me

 

[slicknick]

No, still don’t like the rear. Haven’t seen it in real life, but that rear end is hard to like for me

Though I think now we agree about the engineering that went into it

 

[bmwz4coupe]

Though I think now we agree about the engineering that went into it

Ah, you are the guy that I had a little discussion with a while ago, right?
Well, to tell you the truth I haven’t changed so much my opinion about this car. I still think it is a over-rated car, from the reviews I have seen it seems you can have much more fun with a 488 or a 720s. And I expected a better time around Vairano with these Cup 2 R tyres. But the acceleration is impressive!

 

[Mafalda]

I partially agree about hotlap, more about vairano-pro. Gt2RS and Huayra BC are lighter, and they have extremer setup and downforce.
About Cup 2R tires, Qr's explained, during the review of 488 Pista , how the Porsche tire is more aggressive when just fitted, they seems like a qualifing-tyres

 

[Jo_Sta7]

As an owner of these sort of cars I find lap times in magazines irrelevant. Acceleration times matter. Nothing tells the story like getting behind the wheel though.

only caveat about lap times was old Top Gear. Mostly because that show was so damn fun.

 

[Centurion]

I just watched JWW's recent video: Three observations:

1. The car looks sensational in triple layered yellow.
2. The engine sit unbelievably low into the car - borderline as low as a gearbox.
3. Frunk space is shocking poor. With the charging cables inside, there is barely enough space for a bunched up spring jacket. Basically it a car to drive with your phone as the only belonging.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[lbonu1967]

Eh, I am gonna call BS on that 2.2s. Drag Times got 2.45s with a customer car. More suspiciously, though, the video says the peak deceleration from 100-0 was only 1.2G (and 32.8m stopping distance isn't even particularly good). But to accelerate to 100km/h in 2.19s you would need be at 1.29G. It's basically impossible for a road car to accelerate faster than it stops because when you are stopping you are also getting helped by drag. There will definitely have to be more instrumented tests before I believe this result.

The deceleration 'g' is an average value too (1,2g from 100Km/h, 1,3g from 200Km/h). The drag or tires rolling resistance has negligible influence on braking distance from 100Km/h. It has from 200Km/h. The braking perfomance has nothing to do acceleration. It depends from weight distribuition, position and height of center of gravity, Angles fo front tire after weight transfer etc ect. The Bugatti Chiron accelerates faster to 100 Km/h than brakes from the same distance see the graphs of the record https://www.wired.com/story/bugatti-chiron-speed-analysis/ (see graph interactive in the middle of the page)
2,44s at 27,778 m/s versus (41,8-39,16 =2,64s) from 26,66m/s (95,98 m/s so not even 100Km/h )
Regards

 

[Bridster]

The deceleration 'g' is an average value too (1,2g from 100Km/h, 1,3g from 200Km/h). The drag or tires rolling resistance has negligible influence on braking distance from 100Km/h. It has from 200Km/h. The braking perfomance has nothing to do acceleration. It depends from weight distribuition, position and height of center of gravity, Angles fo front tire after weight transfer etc ect. The Bugatti Chiron accelerates faster to 100 Km/h than brakes from the same distance see the graphs of the record https://www.wired.com/story/bugatti-chiron-speed-analysis/ (see graph interactive in the middle of the page)
2,44s at 27,778 m/s versus (41,8-39,16 =2,64s) from 26,66m/s (95,98 m/s so not even 100Km/h )
Regards

Yeah, the drag effect is small, but not "negligible". Might be only about 0.1s either way, but then you are already at 0.2s difference in favor of braking.

The "graphs" you are pointing to are not actual data points from some test. It's just what some dude got from looking at frames of the official Bugatti video - which is heavily edited and could easily be a montage of many different runs loosely put together. Look at actual instrumented tests and I challenge you to find one where the car is accelerating faster than it's braking. Much less 0.09G faster, which is a huge difference.

EDIT: And after looking at the graphs further, there is definitely stuff that doesn't make sense. For example, 1/4 mile time is supposedly 8.8s (9.6s in Car and Driver test), but at only 148mph (158mph in Car and Driver).

 

[dario_scarpa]

 

[lbonu1967]

Yeah, the drag effect is small, but not "negligible". Might be only about 0.1s either way, but then you are already at 0.2s difference in favor of braking.

The "graphs" you are pointing to are not actual data points from some test. It's just what some dude got from looking at frames of the official Bugatti video - which is heavily edited and could easily be a montage of many different runs loosely put together. Look at actual instrumented tests and I challenge you to find one where the car is accelerating faster than it's braking. Much less 0.09G faster, which is a huge difference.

EDIT: And after looking at the graphs further, there is definitely stuff that doesn't make sense. For example, 1/4 mile time is supposedly 8.8s (9.6s in Car and Driver test), but at only 148mph (158mph in Car and Driver).

The example of the Bugatti Chiron was the first I had in mind because in Automotive industry is the first example of car accelerating harder than braking. It’s enough you check the Car and driver 0-60 mph (2,4 s) that means 1,13g in Avg acceleration and the 160 ft from 70 mph braking distance compared to cars like 911 GT2/GT3 doing 130 ft dead and 1,25-1,30g. But the explanation of the results of Quattroruote is very simple. With new AWD technology and Hybrid system (SF90 can distribute torque to each wheels independently ) a lot of incoming cars will easily accelerate harder than braking up to 100 Km/h (Tesla roadster, Rimac Nevera, etc etc). Acceleration and braking are limited by traction and so by tires grip. And even with a perfect balanced car (50/50 front and rear distribution, longitudinal center of gravity perfectly in the middle of wheelbase ) the grip on the rear (on which normally the 70-80% of the torque is sent) is higher than the grip on the front (on which normally the 70-80% of the power brake is applied) due to the size of the tires. Today supercar has from 55 to 60 % of the weight on the rear axle and the consequently the longitudinal center of gravity moved versus the rear axle with increased load transfer and increasing the grip when under longitudinal acceleration.

You can find easily tuned Porsche 991-992 turbo clocking 0-100Km/h in 2,2 seconds (1,3g) with stock tires

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Last but not least. Drag effect is negligible in braking result from 100km/h. You don’t need to flip the coin just simple physic

Using the aero info of a F8 tributo (Cx = 0,32, Sf = 2,04 m^2) and drag resistance formula, the force acting on a SF90 at 100 Km/h is 31 Kg / 303 N while at 50Km/h is 8 kg / 76 N. I will suppose during 100-0 braking to be 15Kg / 147 N in avg (but it is less because proportional to square of speed). The Avg Force to stop a 1821Kg SF90 in 32,8 meters from 100Km/h (using F*S = m*V^2 / 2) is 21423N. If I add 147N of the drag effect the stopping distance (with same formula) became 32,58 m so 0,22 m less (0,67%).

Regards

 

[CrunchSlaughtered]

The example of the Bugatti Chiron was the first I had in mind because in Automotive industry is the first example of car accelerating harder than braking. It’s enough you check the Car and driver 0-60 mph (2,4 s) that means 1,13g in Avg acceleration and the 160 ft from 70 mph braking distance compared to cars like 911 GT2/GT3 doing 130 ft dead and 1,25-1,30g. But the explanation of the results of Quattroruote is very simple. With new AWD technology and Hybrid system (SF90 can distribute torque to each wheels independently ) a lot of incoming cars will easily accelerate harder than braking up to 100 Km/h (Tesla roadster, Rimac Nevera, etc etc). Acceleration and braking are limited by traction and so by tires grip. And even with a perfect balanced car (50/50 front and rear distribution, longitudinal center of gravity perfectly in the middle of wheelbase ) the grip on the rear (on which normally the 70-80% of the torque is sent) is higher than the grip on the front (on which normally the 70-80% of the power brake is applied) due to the size of the tires. Today supercar has from 55 to 60 % of the weight on the rear axle and the consequently the longitudinal center of gravity moved versus the rear axle with increased load transfer and increasing the grip when under longitudinal acceleration.

You can find easily tuned Porsche 991-992 turbo clocking 0-100Km/h in 2,2 seconds (1,3g) with stock tires

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Last but not least. Drag effect is negligible in braking result from 100km/h. You don’t need to flip the coin just simple physic

Using the aero info of a F8 tributo (Cx = 0,32, Sf = 2,04 m^2) and drag resistance formula, the force acting on a SF90 at 100 Km/h is 31 Kg / 303 N while at 50Km/h is 8 kg / 76 N. I will suppose during 100-0 braking to be 15Kg / 147 N in avg (but it is less because proportional to square of speed). The Avg Force to stop a 1821Kg SF90 in 32,8 meters from 100Km/h (using F*S = m*V^2 / 2) is 21423N. If I add 147N of the drag effect the stopping distance (with same formula) became 32,58 m so 0,22 m less (0,67%).

Regards

I suppose that the drag when braking at the Chiron is equalised by the thrust of the exhaust gases of these 1500 ps when accelerating.