The Porsche vs Ferrari (or Badger vs brielga) thread

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by arakis

my 2011 le mans analasys.

Corvette , best reliability very good speed.
BMW, Best Speed poor reliability,
Ferrari, Also, Best Speed, very poor reliability.
Porsche, slowest speed poor reliability.



I wont coment the BMW couse they anoy the hell out of me, I'll just add, I am glad those cheating $@# will never win le mans, and we wont see them next year.

Ferrari, I complement their speed, expecialy the AF corse, witch was 10kmh down on the straights, but the quckest in the corrners. the realiability was awfull, 2 engine/electrical failiures 59, and 89. many transmision/clutch/differental problems. Hats off to the AF crew for bringing it in 2nd .
-most reliability issues are from the engine electrial and transmision, ferrari switched from MM to Bosh for engine electrics, and the transmision is brand new, they shoud phone up the suplier and stick one of those Diff/transmison assemblies right up their arse.

Concolusion, Corvettes kicked ass, Ferrari has some serius isues to work trough before Pettit, and porsche wil most likely get performance adjustments.

Please pay careful attention to the true information before you make such assertions.
1. BMW is only stopping the factory support but Schnitzer is still coming back without factory support.

2.The Ferrari reliability was not awful. It was quite impressive considering first time at the LM24. Are you for real your saying the 458 is a stepdown? In one car they accidentally set off the fire extinguisher which has a corrosive powder that ate through all the circuitry causing the electrical gremlins. The car has only race for half a year and your saying it's been done all wrong? You cant be serious on this one.

How did BMW cheat. Thats just disrespectful. Keep those thought to yourself. Your basically telling me and other people on this thread that they cheated.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Thanks - I get it now.

If 2 seconds is considered BoP, then perhaps they need to change its name .
Especially irritating is that the fastest cars (BMW's) are in that position due to the numerous waivers and huge restrictor breaks received (i.e BoP). The ACO have obviously been overly generous with some makes and extremely stingy with others. BoP is not meant to make a slow car (and the BMW's were slow before the avalanche of waivers and huge restrictor breaks)and make it the quickest out there.

If you were running the ACO there'd be no manfacturer's in any class. thank god.

Let me teach you a little lesson about homologation.

The Porsche is based off of a road going 911 GT3 RS. They dont need waivers for that chassis.

The Corvette GT2 doesnt even use the same engine as the road car. Why dont you complain about tha?


Here's how homologation and waiver work. You take your road car and you turn it into a race car. The Porsche 911 GT3 and the Ferrari 458 might as well be RAce cars which is why they dont eve Need waivers. The BMW M3 is a mass produced coupe/sedan. Of course they are going to change alot of things to turn it into a race car hence wh ythey get waivers. The waivers are mostly chassis realted and done to the very nitty gritty stuff ence the large number for the bMW and corvette.

[Audi Racer]

Make sure you revisit the previous page and read the DAta before bringing up anything about BMW's again.

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

Im confused by all of these arguments. You guys are saying the BMW has a straightline speed advantage because of restrictors. Look at the Data. It does not....T


Someon feel free to show me numbers that say that i am wrong. Otherwise you have no point and even if you argued to the ACO they wouldn't even show an eye.

If the BMW was reaching the same top speed as the other cars but also the fastest in the Porsche Curves. Then, only then could you say that they have the advantage. But thats simply not true. Ive shown you the numbers now it's up to you to change your mind or show me something that proves otherwise!

I dont get it. Stop saying things without the numbers to back it up Spyderman! If you want i will provide you with the link to all the the race,qualy,and practice data. Only after you find something in that to show me can i agree with you.

First - Look, I don't know how old you are but I'll assure you that I'll continue to say exactly what I like. If you don't like it - don't read it.
Second: It is not just me saying this. There are people that are much better qualified than you that are saying this.
Third - No matter what you try and prove from a set of incomplete data, you can not alter the fact that the BMW's were as quick as they were due to their restrictor break. If it wasn't due to a restrictor break, the BMW's would have been far slower.Why do you think the ACO gave it to them in the first place?
If you want to continue to believe that the restrictors did not play a part in their speed, then that fine, but please dont tell people what they can or cannot write and think.

[Audi Racer]

n

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

...I'm not stopping you from saying what you like. In fact ive been saing in previous post to "say what you like". You say i have an incomplete set of data. Tell me what i am missing and i will dig it up for you.


One car is always going to be the fastest after performance balanceing.. The cars will never be equal down to the tenth. The BMW Corvette and the Ferrari are basically all new cars. Heavily developed in the off season. the porsche 911 is an outgoing model and porsche will probably bring something enw to the table if they want to keep their customers. Regardless of the performance balancingn on the engine side. Tire wear had always been an issue on the Porsche that will handicap them. Something like that can;t be fixed with performance balanceing. The porsche is old. Chassis wise as well that chassis doesnt have the newest technology when it comes to stiffening. The Ferrari, corveette, and BMW are much stiffer cars.


I take the time to read your post. Im not convinced you read mine

Again - the setup of the car (which effects the tire ware) is also dependent on the power. The Felbermayr guys told me that they would be 2 seconds faster if they had the same restrictors as the BMW - As I posted earlier - they were probably being rather conservative. They would have probably been a lot quicker than that.
Porsche had a plan for their tire ware , and found that they were unable to comply with the plan. They did not go into the reasons why, but it is highly likely that it was due to the setup choice that was required to be minimally competitive.
We all know the limitations of the old 997 - but I suggest you look at their performance at the ring to see just how competitive they still are. (and BTW - There is BoP there as well)

[Audi Racer]

The solution:




Analyse this photograph of the performance adjustments.

The Jaguar has the second largest restrictor 30.9 mm in addition to -10mm on the gurney flap. The Lamborghini runs 1200kg as opposed to 1245kg and runs a large restrictor at 30.9mm. The Aston martin gt2 has -10mm on the gurney flap. The Porsche in ALMS only runs 1225 restrictor

I hope your getting at what i' trying to say. Look at all of these cars that have been much larger breaks than the BMW M3 yet ehy are slower than the BMW M3.

That ends this argument because it proves that the large restrictor does not gurantee that you will be the fastest. Car. Sypderman and Arakis say that the BMW M3's performance is down to the restrictor break. Then please tell me why the Jaguar and the Lamborghini are not faster than the BMW M3 since they have larger restrictors.?

I have poked a hole in your logic haven't I. YOu say the BMW M3 is fast because of the larger restrictor. I provide you with two cars that have much large restrictors and are much slower. Logic is flawed.

I'm curios. Why didnt they say that if they had the Jaguar or the Lambo's restrictor they would be much faster. If i was them i wouldn't want the M3 restrictor. I would want the Lambo's restrictor

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

The solution:




Analyse this photograph of the performance adjustments. Plese ignore the + signs as the breaks have already been added to the numbers.

I made the same mistake as you when I first read the table. The + signs cannot be ignored! The breaks have not been added to the numbers! The numbers you see are the Base numbers. You then have to add the numbers in the udjustment column to get the final restrictor sign.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

I made the same mistake as you when I first read the table. The + signs cannot be ignored! The breaks have not been added to the numbers! The numbers you see are the Base numbers. You then have to add the numbers in the udjustment column to get the final restrictor sign.

WEll whats the problem. it only supports my point even more. Why isn't the Evora or the Lamborghini faster than the M3 They now have even larger restrictors now. compared to BMW. Why aren't they running 3:57's?(lambo not at lemans)

Let's not even use the BMw in this case. The Ford GT has a larger restricotr than the Porsche, ferrari, corvette. Why isnt it faster than those cars. Your logic is still flawed


The evora is only 145kg and has a larger restrictor than the BMw at 29.9mm. Why isn;t the Evora setting the GTE field alight? I've still proved my point.

YOu said BMW's speed is because of the restrictor. WEll then what about the Ford GT, Lotus Evora, Lamborghini? they have larger restrictors and even less weight and less gurney. Why aren't they blazing the track?

[Spyderman]

No - The fact is that it was originally calculated that the BMW engine would require the same BASE sized restricotr as the Porsche and the Ferrari 430. The fact is that they then required another whole 1.2mm restrictor break (or so the ACO determined) in order to make them competitive. By the same token- the ACO reckoned that the old 997 only required a 0.3mm restricotr break in order to remain competitive. They were wrong on both counts!

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

No - The fact is that it was originally calculated that the BMW engine would require the same BASE sized restricotr as the Porsche and the Ferrari 430. The fact is that they then required another whole 1.2mm restrictor break (or so the ACO determined) in order to make them competitive. By the same token- the ACO reckoned that the old 997 only required a 0.3mm restricotr break in order to remain competitive. They were wrong on both counts!

Yeah but look at the chart again. It shows the original calculations for the Ford GT and Lotus Evora as well. They then added 1.2 and 1.4mm to those restrictors as well. Why aren't those cars blazing the track like the BMW? Maybe we should broaden the view because focusing in on BMW distracts us you from seeing things from the other side. Look at the cases for the Evora and the Ford GT. They had calculated restrictors as well....... Then they got large restrictor breaks as well. Yet they are still not competitive. Taht shows you that the BMW speed is more than just restrictor break.


In addition the aston martin vantage got a -10mm gurney reduction as well as -50kg wieght. Why wasn;t it at the top of the speed trap charts?

[Spyderman]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

WEll whats the problem. it only supports my point even more. Why isn't the Evora or the Lamborghini faster than the M3 They now have even larger restrictors now. compared to BMW. Why aren't they running 3:57's?(lambo not at lemans)

Let's not even use the BMw in this case. The Ford GT has a larger restricotr than the Porsche, ferrari, corvette. Why isnt it faster than those cars. Your logic is still flawed

There is no floored logic. The devlopment of the Ford GT is nowhere near that of the Porsche Ferrari's or Corvettes. Without that restrictor break they would completely lost.

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

The evora is only 145kg and has a larger restrictor than the BMw at 29.9mm. Why isn;t the Evora setting the GTE field alight? I've still proved my point.

For the same reasons as the Ford GT. The Evora is a new car that has very little development work done to it.

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

YOu said BMW's speed is because of the restrictor. WEll then what about the Ford GT, Lotus Evora, Lamborghini? they have larger restrictors and even less weight and less gurney. Why aren't they blazing the track?

BMW is a Factory entry that has enormous resources behind it. They were fast to start off with - but not quite as fast as the Ferrari's Vettes and Porsches. What the ACO decided was that in order to make them competitive, they would increase their restricotr size. That is what has put them on the top. If you take away their restrictor gain they would be well behind the Porsche's - which in turn are behind the Ferrari's.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

There is no floored logic. The devlopment of the Ford GT is nowhere near that of the Porsche Ferrari's or Corvettes. Without that restrictor break they would completely lost.

No offense to David Robertson and his effort but. lol they would be lost.

[Audi Racer]

n

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

There is no floored logic. The devlopment of the Ford GT is nowhere near that of the Porsche Ferrari's or Corvettes. Without that restrictor break they would completely lost.


For the same reasons as the Ford GT. The Evora is a new car that has very little development work done to it.


BMW is a Factory entry that has enormous resources behind it. They were fast to start off with - but not quite as fast as the Ferrari's Vettes and Porsches. What the ACO decided was that in order to make them competitive, they would increase their restricotr size. That is what has put them on the top. If you take away their restrictor gain they would be well behind the Porsche's - which in turn are behind the Ferrari's.

?? You just admitted what i have been trying to say all along! I am so glad people can here it from you. You said that the Evora and the Fod GT lack development work. You implicitly therefore imply that the BMW has had development work. That explains why it's fast.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

?? You just admitted what i have been trying to say all along! I am so glad people can here it from you. You said that the Evora and the Fod GT lack development work. You implicitly therefore imply that the BMW has had development work. That explains why it's fast.

you are one seriosly anoying little camper.
He never said the BMW didnt have development work ,
try to read closely he said the only reason they are asw fast as they are is because of BoP. He also said that the ACO messed it up because they only gave Porsche a 0.3mm keeping them among the slower cars, and BMW 1.2mm making them the fastest car. HE, as well as I , are ****ed off the ACO decided to chose witch car should be faster witch should be slower, it has nothing to do with BMW own performance but with ACO adjustments.

PLZ Answer this and dont ignore it.
How would you like TATA to enter LMP1, and be so painfully slow the ACO has to implement BoP and give them 2mm restricors more then Peugeut and Audi, and as a result they take qulifying and best laps, and everry one starsts dissing Audi how Tata cam make faster cars then them. I chose Tata to Audi, because that is what a BMW is compared to a corvette, ferrari , or porsche.
BTW once the Manufacturer suport goes you can forget about the bmws...

[Victor_RO]

Damn, this BoP discussion really has opened a massive .

[Spyderman]

Oh! Have you seen the BoP for the VLN 24H?
ADAC is wanting it's main sponsor (Audi) to win big time!

[arakis]

Originally Posted by Spyderman

Oh! Have you seen the BoP for the VLN 24H?
ADAC is wanting it's main sponsor (Audi) to win big time!

can you post a link to it plz.
--nvn found it in another thread-it was called 24h Nring/VLN, imagine that

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by arakis

you are one seriosly anoying little camper.


PLZ Answer this and dont ignore it.
How would you like TATA to enter LMP1, and be so painfully slow the ACO has to implement BoP and give them 2mm restricors more then Peugeut and Audi, and as a result they take qulifying and best laps, and everry one starsts dissing Audi how Tata cam make faster cars then them. I chose Tata to Audi, because that is what a BMW is compared to a corvette, ferrari , or porsche.
BTW once the Manufacturer suport goes you can forget about the bmws...

1.Stay classy.

2. The Tata situation is not applicable to this situation. I know that you are trying to relate Tata to BMW but that is an incorrect comparison. I am trying to have an honest discussion over these BoP. The BMW is not painfully slow. So please do not vociferously insist that the BMW is comparable to a slow Tata. I would prefer if we atleast kept the discussion on GT cars please. The performance from the BMW is more than the restrictor.

During the aound race around hour 2. One of the Corvette drivers said that the the Corvette was struggling on tires in the second stint Compared to the BMW which had better tires in the second stint. That tells you that the BMW has better tire wear which is another performance attribute of the BMW M3.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by arakis

you are one seriosly anoying little camper.
He never said the BMW didnt have development work ,
try to read closely he said the only reason they are asw fast as they are is because of BoP. He also said that the ACO messed it up because they only gave Porsche a 0.3mm keeping them among the slower cars, and BMW 1.2mm making them the fastest car. HE, as well as I , are ****ed off the ACO decided to chose witch car should be faster witch should be slower, it has nothing to do with BMW own performance but with ACO adjustments.

Are you not belaboring a point that I already addressed. He says the BMW is only fast because of the balance of Performance. Then why aren't the Ford GT and the Lotus Evora as fast as the BMW. Big restricotrs doesnt mean youll be fast as has been shown with the Ford GT and the Lotus Evora. And the Lamborghini in ALMS. They run 30.9.

It is painfully clear what is being said here.

Your Argument : You argue that the BMW speed is because of the large restrictor break as opposed to what was originally calculated as the appropriate restrictor size.

The Flaw in your argument:: I have shown you two other cars. The Lotus Evora and the Ford GT that have also had calculated restrictor and have been given even larger restricotr breaks than the BMW. Yet they are not as fast as the BMW. That proves that the restrictor break doesnt mean you'll be fast.

[arakis]

Originally Posted by Audi Racer

Are you not belaboring a point that I already addressed. He says the BMW is only fast because of the balance of Performance. Then why aren't the Ford GT and the Lotus Evora as fast as the BMW. Big restricotrs doesnt mean youll be fast as has been shown with the Ford GT and the Lotus Evora. And the Lamborghini in ALMS. They run 30.9.

It is painfully clear what is being said here.

Your Argument : You argue that the BMW speed is because of the large restrictor break as opposed to what was originally calculated as the appropriate restrictor size.

The Flaw in your argument:: I have shown you two other cars. The Lotus Evora and the Ford GT that have also had calculated restrictor and have been given even larger restricotr breaks than the BMW. Yet they are not as fast as the BMW. That proves that the restrictor break doesnt mean you'll be fast.

your flaw is that neither lotus nor ford have anything near the budget of BMW for one, and bouth are fully gte rule compliet wihte the BMW has nothing to do with the GTE rules, it was outlawed by the fia while there was a gt2 class, and it runs under a exp clas in the nurbergring 24. because if the ACO didnt takle a special notice of them and alow them to race without being rule compliat theny wouldnt race. and even that wasnt enough for them because ieven with theyre protoype gte car they was slow as ****, so the ACO gave them every break in the book to make them the fastest car in the world. All this doesent matter because the BMW is gonne to history and may they never return. those privateer that do race them will slow and unrilibale and they will fail.

BMW has the big bucks so they can run what ever the hell they want, while Aston martin, Lotus, spyker, ford have to run by the rules. and all those cars are real sports cars, while the m3 is not. BTW you are still avoinding my TATA argument, witch just shows you have no idea what to say, thanks.

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by arakis

BTW you are still avoinding my TATA argument, witch just shows you have no idea what to say, thanks.

I answered your question about Tata in post number #4970. This tells you me aren't reading my post. If you don;t read my post im going to stop reading yours. I have taken the time to examine each and everyone one of your post. I atleast expect you to read mine before you say that i have not responded to you!

[Audi Racer]

Originally Posted by arakis

your flaw is that neither lotus nor ford have anything near the budget of BMW for one, and bouth are fully gte rule compliet wihte the BMW has nothing to do with the GTE rules, it was outlawed by the fia while there was a gt2 class, and it runs under a exp clas in the nurbergring 24. because if the ACO didnt takle a special notice of them and alow them to race without being rule compliat theny wouldnt race. and even that wasnt enough for them because ieven with theyre protoype gte car they was slow as ****, so the ACO gave them every break in the book to make them the fastest car in the world. All this doesent matter because the BMW is gonne to history and may they never return. those privateer that do race them will slow and unrilibale and they will fail.

So you are saying that Schnitzer motorsport will be slow and unreliable. You say anything dont you.
And for god sakes bmw is going to enter the next World endurance series without a doubt in GTE. They are not leaving. The person who IS leaving is Mario Theissen because Mario Theissen is retiring.

So....A restrictor is a restrictor. All it does is control the Air into an engine. Air is air. the AIR that flows into the BMW V8 is the exact same air that flows into the Ford GT engine and Lotus Evora engine. Im so confused as you are practically doing the argument for me. You and spyderman keep saying that the Ford Gt and the Lotus Evora dont have the big bucks. What in gods name does the Big bucks have too do with the Air restrictor. Air is Air. BMw isn't using nos.

YOu are implicating yourselves and contradicting yourselves. You say the BMw is only fast because of the Air restrictor.

That is clearly not true because i have given you examples of two cars that have also recieved huge air restrictor breaks yet are not fast like the BMW. You implicate yourself when you say that the Ford and Lotus have not recieved development. That implicitly means that the BMW has indeed recieved development. BMW does not develop air restrictors!. They develop aerodynamics,brakes,chassis,suspension!. That is why they are fast.


explain to me why you think that when BMW gets a restricotr break they go fast but when Ford and Lotus recieve air restrictor breaks it does nothing to their cars.

[Audi Racer]

IN addition. to add even more to my repsonse about
can you actually be serious on this argument. BMW sells more cars than Porsche, FErrari, and Corvette,( probably combined). BMW makes the best handling coupes and sedans for a realtively low price range compared to porsche, ferrari, and corvette. Think about this. Any car can be good handling if it is expensive(that jus tmeans that they bought better equipment to be standard on the car.


now look at BMW. Fantastic handling M3 and the 1 series M for less than 50,000


How can you say that BMW is to corvette/porsche/ferrari What Tata is to Audi. . BMW COMPETES DIRECTLY AS A GERMAN RIVAL TO AUDI