SSC Shelby Supercars' Tuatara - 1,350 Hp is born!

[Bucketslash11]

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

This pretty much dispels any remaining doubt I had whether the claimed top speed was legit or not. The GPS overlay matches (in proportion) the in-car speedo and they both match (in proportion) the calculated speed from the revs, gearbox ratio and tires - and that speed then matches the time it took to cover the stretch between the two medians. So the 331mph overlay isn't from a different run, it's from this run, but just with a huge error; the video isn't slowed down and the gearbox data is accurate. 247mph only.

The only question now remains, was it done deliberately, or out of stupidity. I am thinking the former because I can't imagine how you could mess up something as easy as putting a working GPS into your car, especially at such a crucial time. Not to mention that they apparently didn't use any back ups. You don't just accidentally use the least amount of verifiable tracking systems if you want the record to be regarded as legit. But, who knows what kind of mickey mouse operation they are running.

Either way, bizzarely, 247mph is less than what the SSC Aero did in 2007, which was 256mph. Based on the claimed frontal area, Cd and horsepower it should indeed be capable of doing 330mph, never mind more than 247mph. So why didn't it? Was the issue engine overheating (because of very low Cd and resulting insufficient radiator flow)? Are the claimed numbers bunk? Did the car have some other issue? Have they run out of money to stage another record run with the car fixed? Or does the car have some inherent design flaws that they can't easily fix?

seems very unproffesional of him to assume anyone who watches it can't do the math and i would find it strange to falsify a record run when you've already broken the record legit once before

the only logical conclusion i can get is that this record may have been done to provoke koenigsegg into beating their record by not showing the full capabilites of it and then beating koenigsegg when they take the record back, sandbagging basically

 

[tristatez28lt1]

dbl post sry

 

[Bridster]

the only logical conclusion i can get is that this record may have been done to provoke koenigsegg into beating their record by not showing the full capabilites of it and then beating koenigsegg when they take the record back, sandbagging basically

I don't quite understand how that string of sentences connects to the video and to the discussion. Logical conclusion of what? Of them doing 247mph and calling it 331mph?

But to come back to the record run, Dewetron has actually released no statements (that I can find), the statement is from SSC themselves (and the only quote from anyone from Dewetron there doesn't talk about the car or the record at all). And honestly, the whole "verifying" thing is nonsense. If SSC release a statement that they've done a new record then you would hope it had already been verified before they've done that. And what, does it take a week to verify the data? And the verification just happens to get done within a few hours of a major shit hitting the fan? I don't think so. Dewetron hasn't verified anything, they won't, and even if they did that would only mean they are also crooked/incompetent.

 

[TopspeedPT]

Top gear(and Driven Plus) vs SSC North America. Both use the same video BUT it shows different speeds . Audio also seems to be modified.

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

 

[Bridster]

Wow, that article is so embarrassingly bad, in tone, in terms of actual information and in terms of journalistic standards, that it should be retracted immediately and the person who wrote it fired. This supposed journalist not only didn't contact Dewetron for confirmation, he didn't even get as far as to research that the validation statement came from SSC themselves and not Dewetron. And then he has the balls to call people questioning the record dumb, call the "validation statement" coming from the same exact company that did the record "hard data", and then declare the case "closed".

 

[WBarnes]

Top gear(and Driven Plus) vs SSC North America. Both use the same video BUT it shows different speeds . Audio also seems to be modified.

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

I remember having this same issue with a video posted by Alexander West on Anglesey GP with a P1. At face value it looked like a 1.19 lap, thus shattering the lap record, but it turned out that the video wasn't being shown at a one to one speed. I suspect something similar has happened here. If people are measuring times and distances from a YT video, I suggest you stop now before you look an idiot later.

 

[Bridster]

@WBarnes I can understand where you are coming from, but you need to actually watch the videos people have posted. It's a LOT more than just estimating speed from a footage and it involves eliminating possibilities that the video of the run has been slowed down or that it's a video of a different run with superimposed data (of a faster run).

In other news, here is a tweet from Dewetron's CPO (who was quoted in SSC's "validation statement"):

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

Showing both that SSC are straight up lying about the run being validated and also that Dewetron probably had no people present during the run (or it would have been validated/invalidated already).

 

[A.P.]

Like I mentioned before, this is Performante's Ring lap record over again. People analyze a video and then jump to conclusions without actually being there, observing it or recording the data. I suggest to wait and see what this turns out to be. And I suggest especially to wait for the documentary/ official data reveal or Guinness WR approval before jumping to any conclusions.

Happened last time with Lamborghini, where certain Youtubers had to go silent for a while, because they made clowns of themselves when the real data was released.

 

[Bridster]

Like I mentioned before, this is Performante's Ring lap record over again. People analyze a video and then jump to conclusions without actually being there, observing it or recording the data. I suggest to wait and see what this turns out to be. And I suggest especially to wait for the documentary/ official data reveal or Guinness WR approval before jumping to any conclusions.

Happened last time with Lamborghini, where certain Youtubers had to go silent for a while, because they made clowns of themselves when the real data was released.

The conversation has moved on somewhat. The question isn't anymore if the run was real. It wasn't. Neither is the question whether SSC were just incompetently handling the GPS equipment, or whether they were faking it on purpose. It was on purpose. The question now is: How deep does the rabbit hole go?

 

[KiwiRob]

Like I mentioned before, this is Performante's Ring lap record over again. People analyze a video and then jump to conclusions without actually being there, observing it or recording the data. I suggest to wait and see what this turns out to be. And I suggest especially to wait for the documentary/ official data reveal or Guinness WR approval before jumping to any conclusions.

Happened last time with Lamborghini, where certain Youtubers had to go silent for a while, because they made clowns of themselves when the real data was released.

there was nobody from Guinness present at the run to certify it, so it’s not a record even if it’s actually correct.

 

[Bridster]

there was nobody from Guinness present at the run to certify it, so it’s not a record even if it’s actually correct.

You don't need Guinness to be present for it to be a record. You just need an independent, trustworthy third party (more than one ideally). That way the record gains wide recognition and can be said to be a record. Guinness is just a book publisher. They very often don't even have the means to actually verify anything and rely on companies and institutions with actual expertise in the field to do that. They have also done loads of extremely shady stuff in the past, especially recently in some fields.

 

[Joelpeyeye]

all the telemetry data will be presented to the Guinness record people and then they will validate the record or not

Top gear(and Driven Plus) vs SSC North America. Both use the same video BUT it shows different speeds . Audio also seems to be modified.

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

 

[TopspeedPT]

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

Motortrend changed the article tittle. They removed "Dumb" at the start

 

[DeDe]

Fun fact: Bugatti still uses Dewetron GPS-systems for their internal testings. ‍

 

[WBarnes]

@WBarnes I can understand where you are coming from, but you need to actually watch the videos people have posted. It's a LOT more than just estimating speed from a footage and it involves eliminating possibilities that the video of the run has been slowed down or that it's a video of a different run with superimposed data (of a faster run).

It's not a matter of slowing down or speeding up. If you simply get the fps wrong on the upload, the video ends up wrong.

 

[Bridster]

Fun fact: Bugatti still uses Dewetron GPS-systems for their internal testings. ‍

Fun fact: SSC might have actually not even been using it. People who are familiar with the system are saying that the interface you are seeing on the telemetry laptop in the car looks nothing like it. Or they could have been using it, but in any case it's completely unconnected from the "331mph" telemetry data and the whole overlay superimposed on the screen.

 

[KiwiRob]

all the telemetry data will be presented to the Guinness record people and then they will validate the record or not

Who was the independent observer of the run, Bugatti for there run had a representative from TUV present, who did SSC have?

 

[J.E]

I think it's a fake record, because they need MONEY and once they got the money from every rich idiot, they close the factory and f#ck off.

I mean, how come a rubbish car like this can beat a Bugatti? Yes, I did say rubbish car, because it is. I'm certain that this thing is nowhere near as good as Bugatti Chiron.

Feel free to dislike this comment all you want, I don't give a flying blyad' about your feelings.

 

[TopspeedPT]

This gets better every day that goes by.

 

[TopspeedPT]

TLDR: Video edit mistake. Wrong attempt...

...but I still don't understand how the laptop had those high GPS numbers...



Jerod Shelby Explains World Record

The good news: we did it, and the numbers are indeed on our side.


The bad news: only after the fact did we realize that the depiction of the speed run, in video form, had been substantially incorrect.

Somehow, there was a mixup on the editing side, and I regret to admit that the SSC team hadn’t double checked the accuracy of the video before it was released. We also hadn’t realized that not one, but two different cockpit videos existed, and were shared with the world.


Hypercar fans have quickly cried foul, and we hadn’t immediately responded, because we had not realized the inconsistencies -- that there were two videos, each with inaccurate information -- that had been shared. This was not our intention. Like me, the head of the production team had not initially realized these issues, and has brought on technical partners to identify the cause of the inconsistency.


At first glance, it appears that the videos released have differences in where the editors had overlaid the data logger (which displays speed), in relation to the car's location on the run. That variance in ‘sync points’ accounts for differing records of the run.

Tuatara (Top Speed Model) Tech Specs
Ratios/Speed, using the 2.92 final-drive ratio

Gear Ratios/Top Speed (Gears 1-6 have 8,800 RPM REV LIMIT)

1st Gear: 3.133 / 80.56 MPH

2nd Gear: 2.100 / 120.18 MPH

3rd Gear: 1.520 / 166.04 MPH

4th Gear: 1.172 / 215.34 MPH

5th Gear: .941 / 268.21 MPH

6th Gear: .757 / 333.4 MPH @8800 *

7th Gear: .625 / 353.33 MPH (Estimated max @7,700RPM in 7th gear - Designed as mainly an overdrive highway cruising gear)


* FYI: Cross reference validations from data log-


Oliver is travelling at 236mph when he shifts from 5th to 6th at 7,700RPM (which tracks almost exactly to the gear-ratio data) and he pushed close to the top of 6th achieving 331.1 MPH at 8,600 RPM which tracks with our theoretical of 333.4mph @ 8800 RPM.