Comparison tests Porsche 918 vs McLaren P1 vs LaFerrari

[boyko23]

For me the 918 graph is almost stable as hell and I see bigger problems for the P1 in the corners?

 

[kingjr9000]

For me the 918 graph is almost stable as hell and I see bigger problems for the P1 in the corners?

Same thing I thought. But maybe when the article and video shows up they'll explain exactly where it went wrong and clarify what we're seeing.

 

[DeDe]

The braking results do seem to suggest that the Turbo S coupe in the Sachsenring rest was on Dunlop Sport Maxx Race rather than PZeros, as stated though.

The author even stated at the end of the article that the record-run at Sachsenring was done on stock P Zeros, instead of the semi-slick Dunlops.

 

[Emu]

Oh yes Really. I ‘don’t understand physics. What is youreducation ?
I’m automotive engineer, you what ? Micky mouse personal assistant ?

MEng FIRST, PhD Physics, CEng.

All this babblings about same day, same surface test or tyre pressures and so on, are perfectly applicable to any table you are showing
And it was you that claimed the the P1 was in inferior tire compared to the 918 pointing to the 60 mph – 0 braking TOP GEAR Castelloli test. It’s all mechanical grip due to the tires you said, Disavowed with the same tables data, You came out with questions ?

Well that is the problem and the problem with the Chris Harris test. Pirelli fitted the TRs but the MPSC2s arrived on the car at an unknown pressure and its time relative to the 458S suggests it was the wrong pressure.

Treynor's instructor, a GT3 driver attempted a hot lap on Laguna Seca previously. Factoring out the slight bit of traffic it was well over a second slower than Randy Pobst because they had the tyres over-inflated and the car was over-steering more. So having different pressure in the same tyre on the same car can cause a difference of >1s on a 90s lap. So unless you get Michelin to fit the MPSC2s and Pirelli the TRs on the same, ensuring correct pressure, your test is basically bollox!

In the mean time telemetry between the two cars is the best thing we have to go on. Both companies know a lot about setting a car up and car design, so there's no reason to suspect massive differences.

Your knowledge on the field is virtually nothing. The lateral (turn) and longitudinal (braking) grip of a tires is provided on opposite sides of the shoulder and the tread.

As is yours if you hold Chris Harris's bollox test in any regard. Just because a tyre give X% better performance in lateral g, it doesn't mean it gives X% better performance in longitudinal g, so what were you trying to prove with your data? It can be a reasonably good indicator of compound but that's about it.

Only Pirelli or Michelin technicians know how tire contact patch changes because they know radial stiffness of the tires at given pressure. And this is on static. Tires work in dynamic under load transfer and camber variations due to body roll.

Yes and Michelin and Pirelli are best placed to know the correct pressure for optimal performance. Chris Harris's test only provided this opportunity to Pirelli. Hence, worst test ever. Is the 2s down to the tyre, the ambient conditions, or the tyre pressures? Maybe Pirelli even changed the alignment too. The entire test was bollox.

The customer P1 was with Road wheel alignment, so stop the BS. Trofeo R need form 2 to 3 degrees of camber to work properly.

Yet another reason why they don't make much difference in these test.

A Gallardo SC fitted TROFEO R and improved lap time but not braking distance in comparison to PZCS. Done in the same condition. To confirm once again the braking test did not show if a tire have more lateral grip compared to another. We can get it by yourself arrive if stop to assume drugs

What don't you understand. X% increase in lateral != X% increase in longitudinal. Hence day to day track temp variation, or tyre pressure, could leave you with better lateral but worse braking.

See above genious. And try to understand that if using a more aggressive camber for the track were do you not need to stop completely, your braking distance up to 0 could be compromise.
Trolling on Forum doesn't help you to understand these concept

As it could be due to track temp, the bit of the track you use, a bit of dust/loose stones, or.... tyre pressure.

No Dude. You see ? You don't like results because is against your biased theory and so you try to turn the tables.
In that test 911 turbo S used Pirelli Pzero N0 as the Audi R8 that performed at the same level of the Porsche. See the BMW on Michelin Pilot Supersport that you affirm to be much better.
Check better on tyrereviews again next time !!!

I don't much like any of the results in German tests, because they're nonsense, e.g. removing a kerb on Sachsenring for all the 911s. There are other factors at play, yes but it's amazing that we've had to come this far for you to admit to these factors, which were also present in the Chris Harris test, yet went unmentioned.

Chris Harris offered circumstantial evidence that Trofeo Rs were better with a multitude of variables uncontrolled, I did the same to prove the opposite. You ear-bashed me because you didn't like my conclusions, but said nothing about him, because you liked his conclusions, even though both comparisons were equally flawed. Hence you are biased, thank you.

 

[Emu]

Oh well finally we agree the P1 PZCS MC is a complety new tire.
So may you avoid to post link of years ago or from tyrereviews that have zero relevance ?
You have wrote above the the PZCS of the P1 is better than that one on the 650S that match the PSC2 N0 of the GT3.
What else ? End of discussion

Here we go again, with your different day, unknown temperature, unknown suspension geometry, unknown pressure comparisons. And since all figures are rounded to 0.05g, we don't even know if they were the same, or not. Mid-engined car vs rear-engined car? No ignore that. At least my Aventador vs 918 (1.45 vs 1.65) had a substantial margin and used cars of similar weight, layout, with both AWD.

I think it's best we agree that the MPSC2 vs Trofeo R delta is unknown, because no test of adequate control has been done yet.

 

[Emu]

The author even stated at the end of the article that the record-run at Sachsenring was done on stock P Zeros, instead of the semi-slick Dunlops.

Why would any manufacturer send a car to a track test on PZeros, when they aren't even standard on that car. The author also stated that all 6 cars ran on the same track layout. The videos prove otherwise.

 

[Emu]

The author even stated at the end of the article that the record-run at Sachsenring was done on stock P Zeros, instead of the semi-slick Dunlops.

Unfortunately the author also stated that all 6 cars ran on the same track layout but the videos proved otherwise wrt missing kerb.

 

[Emu]

From treynor on mclife:
Yow. I see this thread remains in full swing.

Let me add some data. Here in a nutshell is why I prefer the P1 to the 918 despite the now-ample evidence that they are closely matched in track performance when fully charged:

For me the 918 graph is almost stable as hell and I see bigger problems for the P1 in the corners?

The P1 trace shows variance in the corners, which is down to the driver. The 918 trace shows variance in the straights, which is down to the charge. Despite this significant variance in the corners, the P1 was still lapping within 0.3s of it's hot lap consistently. Hence why the P1's 'ideal lap' was almost a second faster than it actually achieved.

E.g. Look at the blue trace on the P1 graph. Note T5 - slow. Note T6 - fast. Take red T5 and add to blue T6 and you have a much faster lap.

The really interesting thing to note is T6 and the straight that follows. Downforce is allowing the P1 to match and better the 918 on this high speed corner, and as a result the difference in peak speed on the uphill straight that follows is massive, even with the 918 in HL mode.

T4-T5 Peak Speed (Best)
P1 - 141.5mph (+6.3mph)
918 - 135.2mph

T5-T6 Peak Speed (Best)
P1 - 128.5mph (+5.9mph)
918 - 122.6mph

T6-T7/8 Peak Speed (Best)
P1 - 136.4mph (+5.0mph)
918 - 131.4mph

T5 Apex Speed (Worst)
P1 - 58mph (-6.2mph)
918 - 64.2mph

T5 Apex Speed (Best)
P1 - 62.9mph (-3.3mph)
918 - 66.2mph

'Trofeo R tyre advantage' - Hohoho.

T6 Apex Speed (Worst)
P1 - 71.8mph (-4.1mph)
918 - 75.9mph

T6 Apex Speed (Best)
P1 - 78.0mph (+1.1mph)
918 - 76.9mph

Aero advantage. (78/62.9)^2 = 1.54 times downforce of T5 available to P1 on T6. Circa 150kg (600/4).

Friction = uN

N ~ mg + downforce ~ 1.1mg for P1 (+10%)

sqrt(1.1) = 1.049 (+4.9%) in cornering speed. @~80mph = +4mph.

T7-8 Apex Speed (Worst)
P1 - 41.6mph (-1.2mph)
918 - 42.8mph

T7-8 Apex Speed (Best)
P1 - 39.0mph (-2.8mph)
918 - 41.8mph

Cornering Variance

T5 Apex Speed (Variance)
P1 - 4.9mph
918 - 2.0mph

T6 Apex Speed (Variance)
P1 - 6.2mph
918 - 1.0mph

T7-8 Apex Speed (Variance)
P1 - 2.6mph
918 - 1.0mph

Variance shows driver is struggling to get to grips with P1 but is fairly much on top of 918.

Peak Speed Variance.

T4-5 Peak Speed (Variance)
P1 - 1.0mph
918 - 3.9mph

T5-6 Peak Speed (Variance)
P1 - 1.0mph
918 - 3.5mph

T6-7/8 Peak Speed (Variance)
P1 - 1.0mph
918 - 4.0mph

Variance shows battery is struggling in 918 with HL mode. P1 with higher cornering variance still manages less variance in peak straight speed. This also shows that cornering speed has limited affect on peak straight speed.

 

[Emu]

How come the 918 is so fast on the corners but so slow on the straights? Previous testing has only shown a few mph difference over the quarter, where cars accelerate to the same point, whereas on track, a car going faster has to brake sooner. Castelloli only showed a 1.6mph difference, even if we assume the speeds were transposed.

Surely this couldn't be a suspension geometry issue???

 

[Rolf]

Same thing I thought. But maybe when the article and video shows up they'll explain exactly where it went wrong and clarify what we're seeing.

Looking at the graphs the 918 seems to have more consistent speeds through corners than the P1 but on the straights the 918 fluctuates more with its speed than the P1

 

[Emu]

Best I could do. Y-axis is correct. X-axis may not be.

Y-axis scale is 0-72-77-144-154mph

It looks like the 918 basically has a full 900+hp for the first part of the straight after recharging via braking into T6, but then at ~105mph, battery is dead. As you can see, it's still more effective to use full HL power in first part of straight to gain the speed jump. In RH mode, you would lose less at the top end, but more at the start of straight, so it may even be slower than running HL when battery is depleted.

 

[lbonu1967]

Well that is the problem and the problem with the Chris Harris test. Pirelli fitted the TRs but the MPSC2s arrived on the car at an unknown pressure and its time relative to the 458S suggests it was the wrong pressure.

Maybe. Maybe the 918 spyder could go back Anglesey Costal like the P1 and lap in 1.11 dead with fresh tire, pressure adjustaments and the roof up. Who Knows ?
I don't know why you always see fishy things in test disavowing your biased theory.

As is yours if you hold Chris Harris's bollox test in any regard. Just because a tyre give X% better performance in lateral g, it doesn't mean it gives X% better performance in longitudinal g, so what were you trying to prove with your data? It can be a reasonably good indicator of compound but that's about it.

Oh really ? no because we've exhausted to see uploaded the same Autobild data panel with braking test. Your chart proves nothing, I posted my data to prove you this point. Plain and simple

Yes and Michelin and Pirelli are best placed to know the correct pressure for optimal performance. Chris Harris's test only provided this opportunity to Pirelli. Hence, worst test ever. Is the 2s down to the tyre, the ambient conditions, or the tyre pressures? Maybe Pirelli even changed the alignment too. The entire test was bollox

Another test was done on a Renault. See above. You don't like the results and than it's fishy

As it could be due to track temp, the bit of the track you use, a bit of dust/loose stones, or.... tyre pressure

Oh listen if we have so much variables in magazine test we can sto to discuss right now.
Do you realize you are the guy posting tirereviews as proof than a tire is better than another ? Do you know the 90% of drivers are running with wrong tire pressures or they use UHP tire at 0° degrees arguing about grip ?
This is you Emu.
Test result is good for your biased theory, it becames the bible
Test result is not good for your biased theory, then came the physics, incompetent magazine tester and the position of uranium

I don't much like any of the results in German tests, because they're nonsense, e.g. removing a kerb on Sachsenring for all the 911s. There are other factors at play, yes but it's amazing that we've had to come this far for you to admit to these factors, which were also present in the Chris Harris test, yet went unmentioned.

I don't understand you.
See above.
You posted the same Autobild chart for days.
Disavowed with the same table, then German test are nonsense.
Lol

 

[lbonu1967]

At least my Aventador vs 918 (1.45 vs 1.65) had a substantial margin and used cars of similar weight, layout, with both AWD.

You are a keen observer, you will certainly remember the lay-out of the 1992 the Lamborghini Diablo VT is almost the same of the Aventador.
Mister MEng FIRST, PhD Physics, CEng,
Do you hear someting about center of mass, moment of inertia, unsprung mass etc etc
May same readings of vehicle dynamics publication can be a better way to understand how a car perfom.

 

[Unotaz]

EMU/MYCROFT/LMFAO/MugabeRobert,
How many personalities do you have dude?!

On FChat, you created another user (MugabeRobert), came up with a bogus graph and then argued with yourself (LMFAO) on the very same graph you created yourself??!!

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/288...918-a-816.html

Now you post the same final graph here on Mclarenlife? What exactly are you trying accomplish? You need to go see a doctor, seriously!

I'm losing count.....EMU.....MYCROFT.......LMFAO.......SROSE. ......and the latest.....MugabeRobert!!

 

[boyko23]

And now...

After all the bashing and leaked DATA regarding depleting batteries of the 918 and mainly after reading that Laguna Seca is slow for the P1, bla bla... I decided to look back at a track, which even Mycroft/LMFAO/Emo, etc. preferred for the P1 - Big Willow.

Same driver, same magazine, probably same car.
BW is 1.23m track, LS is 1.29m track and fast enough for the P1 (Emo The Great said this ).

So... three screen shots from the hot lap:

Pic.1: just before the start/finish line - 88% battery charge.

Pic. 2: let's see what happens in the middle of the lap - 72%

Pic. 3: finish line - 65%. Wow!!!

So, without being mathematician like some others:

88-65=23% loss per one HL.
OR MORE THEN 4 (FOUR) HOT LAPS WITHOUT CHANGING MODES AND IN THE HANDS OF A PRO!

Good luck to Lmfao, Treynor and all the DATA carriers, who believe, that 918 will deplete in a single lap.

That's what a call real life TELEMETRY

 

[kingjr9000]

And now...

After all the bashing and leaked DATA regarding depleting batteries of the 918 and mainly after reading that Laguna Seca is slow for the P1, bla bla... I decided to look back at a track, which even Mycroft/LMFAO/Emo, etc. preferred for the P1 - Big Willow.

Same driver, same magazine, probably same car.
BW is 1.23m track, LS is 1.29m track and fast enough for the P1 (Emo The Great said this ).

So... three screen shots from the hot lap:

Pic.1: just before the start/finish line - 88% battery charge.

Pic. 2: let's see what happens in the middle of the lap - 72%

Pic. 3: finish line - 65%. Wow!!!

So, without being mathematician like some others:

88-65=23% loss per one HL.
OR MORE THEN 4 (FOUR) HOT LAPS WITHOUT CHANGING MODES AND IN THE HANDS OF A PRO!

Good luck to Lmfao, Treynor and all the DATA carriers, who believe, that 918 will deplete in a single lap.

That's what a call real life TELEMETRY

Post that on mclife and see what happens with all the macboys; I dare you.

 

[boyko23]

Post that on mclife and see what happens with all the macboys; I dare you.

Haha, sorry, but not possible.

Last time I said something completely unharmful and true, resulted in a ban for 2 months...

Will send you a link later.. haha

 

[Emu]

You are a keen observer, you will certainly remember the lay-out of the 1992 the Lamborghini Diablo VT is almost the same of the Aventador.
Mister MEng FIRST, PhD Physics, CEng,
Do you hear someting about center of mass, moment of inertia, unsprung mass etc etc
May same readings of vehicle dynamics publication can be a better way to understand how a car perfom.

What?! Almost the same, as in, just because it's mid-engined?

 

[Emu]

Maybe. Maybe the 918 spyder could go back Anglesey Costal like the P1 and lap in 1.11 dead with fresh tire, pressure adjustaments and the roof up. Who Knows ?
I don't know why you always see fishy things in test disavowing your biased theory.

Another test was done on a Renault. See above. You don't like the results and than it's fishy

It's fishy because the maximum time delta between the GT3 and 458 on any other track has been 1.2s. Now suddenly it's 4s.

The degradation in the P1's lap times at Anglesey relative to Laguna Seca, tells me that it too, could go back with the right tyre pressures and run 1:10. When Treynor's instructor (GT3 driver Mikel Miller) attempted a hot lap at Laguna Seca, the tyres were over-inflated by a couple of psi and the car over-steered, they were >1s slower than Pobst, even factoring out traffic. Hence, pressure can cause >1s difference on a 90s lap, even with the same tyre. Hence Harris's test is bollox because tyre pressure alone could cause most of that 1.5-2s difference on a 2:00 lap. That's just a plain fact. You want a proper test, you get Michelin to fit the MPSC2s and Pirelli to fit the Trofeo Rs on the same day and do 5 hot laps with each twice, reversing the order on the second time round.

Oh really ? no because we've exhausted to see uploaded the same Autobild data panel with braking test. Your chart proves nothing, I posted my data to prove you this point. Plain and simple

And it also proves that Chris Harris's test is invalid, so here we are, not knowing, with a bunch of invalid tests. Braking can be influenced by a variety of things but usually 60-0mph is a good indicator of compound. Other things can screw around with this, but ball-park, it isn't bad.

Oh listen if we have so much variables in magazine test we can sto to discuss right now.
Do you realize you are the guy posting tirereviews as proof than a tire is better than another ? Do you know the 90% of drivers are running with wrong tire pressures or they use UHP tire at 0° degrees arguing about grip ?
This is you Emu.
Test result is good for your biased theory, it becames the bible
Test result is not good for your biased theory, then came the physics, incompetent magazine tester and the position of uranium

I already said that other factors can affect things, hence when Harris's test is bollox. It is nevertheless odd that I can't find Trofeo Rs beating MPSC2 anywhere on 60-0mph braking. There are always exceptions, but in this case the MPSC2 is always beating the Trofeo R. Even in this Laguna test, even though the P1 brakes better at 120mph, the 918 brakes better at 60mph.

I don't understand you.
See above.
You posted the same Autobild chart for days.
Disavowed with the same table, then German test are nonsense.
Lol

Well that's true enough, I did assume they could run a braking test properly though.

 

[Emu]

EMU/MYCROFT/LMFAO/MugabeRobert,
How many personalities do you have dude?!

On FChat, you created another user (MugabeRobert), came up with a bogus graph and then argued with yourself (LMFAO) on the very same graph you created yourself??!!

http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/288...918-a-816.html

Now you post the same final graph here on Mclarenlife? What exactly are you trying accomplish? You need to go see a doctor, seriously!

I'm losing count.....EMU.....MYCROFT.......LMFAO.......SROSE. ......and the latest.....MugabeRobert!!

I am not MugabeRobert. I did pinch his graph though, because it's clearer than mine (after he eventually got it right).