251–260 of 302 posts
I'm sad that, on HN, I had to read thru 50+ comments about how impractical 300 mph is, before I found any discussion of the engineering challenges.
HN has become extremely negative in the last couple of years. I came over here when I got sick of Reddit's negativity in ~2013. What's the next alternative?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the Veyron I know they developed special tires with Michelin to be able to handle the extreme high speeds. Such development might help "normal" tires improve in durability. I can imagine this is something that happens in a lot of area's. Pushing every part to the extremes might help make them more reliable under normal usage. Ultra high speeds also require efficient aerodynamics, which in turn helps reduce drag/f…
It wasn’t just tires, but rims as well. If I recall correctly for the original at top speed the useful life of rims was about 30min, tires about 15. You on my had 12 min of fuel at that rate though. Rim + tire replacement was something like 100k USD. Not that anyone was going to be able to put many top speed minutes together in practice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has a horrendous drag coefficient, worse than a prius (not that they are a the worst car, but they're not sporty). It needs this to cool and feed the engine.
I hate to nitpick, but a Prius isn't a great comparison since they have pretty good drag coefficients.
It's pretty impressive. In terms of a daily driver, I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce. My daily driver is a Mazda 3 / Mazda Axela, which comes with 200 Newtonmeter torque at 6400 rpm. It's ok, it's fun, but yeah. So the other day I drove a 2013 Nissan Leaf (BEV), which gives you ~250 Nm torque right at the beginning. This was so much fun to drive. So for me, a car does…
I’m the complete opposite. I hate cars that have loads of torque on the low end then go down from there, it gives me the feeling that they get out of breath on the top half of the rev range. My daily driver FN2 Civic Type-R (stock, except for brake lines and pads) and whatever preconceptions are had about Honda, this is an engineering marvel. Torque is mostly linear, slightly going up on the top half, with a slight d…
I might argue that there is no such thing as an engine (assuming reasonably modern and N/A) that has "a lot of low end torque"; rather that kind of engine should be described as "lacking high end torque".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are missing the forest from the trees. If we want to truly reduce climate change we should start by reducing international shipping, consumerism, and non-essential air travel for both pleasure and business. A 300MPH speed run in an ultra low production Bugatti car is more or less insignificant in the fight against climate change.
Why international shipping specifically? It’s extremely efficient and currently accounts for only around 3% of global CO2 emissions. (Compare to roughly 50% for electricity production, 20% for manufacturing, and 20% for transportation as a whole.)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_shippi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I love acceleration but there’s also jerk - the rate at which acceleration builds up. It is is also a factor of the torque curve.
Big-engined high performance sportsbikes really demonstrate this well. Rolling on the throttle in a high gear at a lowish speed results in a ride up the torque curve; the effect is the faster you get the harder the acceleration becomes. It's an exciting demonstration of positive-feedback.
I did some calculations once to relate sportbike performance to cars. People usually think about performance in terms of peak power on paper, which is not where you are most of the time on the street.
I estimated that if you are riding a 600cc bike at roughly car-like rpms, then the power to weight ratio is comparable to a car with a 3.5L V-6. But if you are using the upper range, then it's more comparable to a Ferrari.
With a literbike, if you are at car-like rpms, the power to weight is like a street car with a fairly large V-8, but if you are using it at high speeds, then it's comparable to a F1 car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Top Gear actually did a road test of a Tesla S vs an Aston Martin starting at 30 MPH and the Tesla dusted the Aston Martin. Considering electric motors start with max torque, and the stats that are easily googlable, the Tesla would have no problem with the Bugatti. Never mind the Tesla is smaller, has a lower center of gravity, and costs 15x less and has more range. And it's probably worth noting that the Tesla is al…
Apples and oranges. Stats alone are pretty meaningless when comparing what's basically a mass produced commuter car that had to meet a price point with a limited production luxury super car built without budget constraints. The Bugattis and Aston Martins alike are engineered to lap tracks or do speed runs over and over again in comfort and luxury without any reduction in acceleration or braking performance while Tesl…
Well, I don't doubt they are more capable than a Tesla, but I don't think any ultra-high performance car can sustain high speeds indefinitely. The Bugatti Veyron has tires that last for about 15 minutes at top speed, but then again, the fuel will run out in 12.
It also seems like you see supercars on fire a lot, also hinting that they are not that durable when you push them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
a standard Porsche 911 is not really a racecar. it can be really fun to drive on a track and it will get good lap times, but no one would race this car in a serious competition. this type of car will mainly be driven on the street and in amateur races. now there are certain racing series like FIA GT3 where manufacturers are required to make a certain number of street-legal vehicles to qualify that car for the competi…
I get that the Porches in races are not exactly like the Porches on the street. But how does that work for Bugati, Ferrari, Lamborghini (and McLaren, Pagani, Koenigsegg)? Are the street cars (more or less) the same as the ones in races? Do they even race? And in conclusion, how accurate is the statement that (production models of) Ferrari, Bugatti, Lamborghini are focused on race track performance?
The word for "road car exactly like a race car" is "homologated". It's done in some racing series, basically forcing manufacturers to build 200 copies of the car, making it road legal, and putting at least some of those on the market.
It's pretty impressive. In terms of a daily driver, I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce. My daily driver is a Mazda 3 / Mazda Axela, which comes with 200 Newtonmeter torque at 6400 rpm. It's ok, it's fun, but yeah. So the other day I drove a 2013 Nissan Leaf (BEV), which gives you ~250 Nm torque right at the beginning. This was so much fun to drive. So for me, a car does…
This is why I've always loved big turbos. A little bit of lag, followed by being thrown in your seat like a rocket taking off. You can get the same with a big naturally aspirated engine, but a turbo is often cheaper and more feasible than an engine swap. The biggest problem with this is having too much torque. If the car isn't designed for it, you'll just spin the tires at full throttle, and you'll have to settle for…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why international shipping specifically? It’s extremely efficient and currently accounts for only around 3% of global CO2 emissions. (Compare to roughly 50% for electricity production, 20% for manufacturing, and 20% for transportation as a whole.)
For starters, because shipping CO2 emissions are rising fast [0], and CO2 is by far not the only concern. Ships burn unrefined "bunker oil," emitting proportionally huge amounts of particulate pollution, sulphur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides, which harm people and other organisms [1, 2]. For example, back in 2009, the 15 biggest ships emitted as much SO2 and NOx as all the cars on earth: https://www.theguardian.com/en…
The articles about SO2 and NOx emissions are clickbait. They compare to cars, which are extremely clean in this respect. In any case, the subject here is climate change and these pollutants are irrelevant. (Strictly speaking, they slightly mitigate warning.)
I’m not saying we should ignore shipping, but I don’t see why it should be anywhere close to first on the list of things to focus on when fighting climate change.