Mac F1 filmed at the 'ring
Discussion
PHer Flemke has had some of his old vids put online for us so we can see him doing some gentle hooning round the 'ring. It was shot a couple of years back before the ban on filming was introduced.
3 vids now available at www.pistonheads.tv
3 vids now available at www.pistonheads.tv
Marki said:
Ted , i can not open save or play any of the vids on PHTV
If i try to play them i am asked for a password , if i try to save i am told the site can not be opened ?
Im really stuck here mate , any clue`s ???
I'm guessing that it's something to do with your PC's setup as you're the only one reporting the problem. Sorry I can't be more help.
Stig said:Better than no gloves, and at least they'll be somewhat designed for driving. Feeling defensive on his behalf after plenty of blisters from the SR3 without!
Always makes me chuckle when I see drivers wearing nomex gloves.... and no helmet or overalls.
Helps when 'patting' out the fire I suppose
An explanation of the idiotic-looking gloves (feeling defensive here):
I hate using driving gloves because they're hot and take away a bit of feel, not to mention the fact that they look pretentious.
In the F1 for some time I have been using a suede-covered wheel because suede gives better grip than alcantara or various leathers. The car requires quite an effort to turn the wheel and I am not a strong guy, so the extra grip somewhat eases that effort.
Whether it be in shoes or on steering wheels, suede loses its tactility quickly. Most PH'ers will have felt an well-used suede wheel and would agree, I trust, that it looks and feels pretty awful and also will have lost its grippiness.
To delay the deterioration of the suede I wear gloves, which in my case keep oil from my skin off the suede.
I have found it difficult to locate gloves that fit well, have outer seams on the fingers, and are made from thin material that does not blur too many of the messages that are coming through the wheel. What you see in the video are the best that I could come up with. The Nomex and the large gauntlets are nuisances that I tolerate.
The morning that the video was shot we had fitted an after-market steering wheel in order to experiment with its large (380mm) diameter (this is why the spokes have things temporarily taped to them). Although the wheel is covered with suede, it will be going in the bin after the experiments are done, so there was actually no need to wear gloves to protect it. They were just sitting on the seat and out of habit I put them on.
I'd just like to add my plaudits to the fanfare accorded viz a vis the engine sound: the overall 'meld' of this car genuinely seems to be perfection.
It should be fascinating to hear about how this stacks up against the Carrera GT, Rowan Atkinson's excellent dissection notwithstanding.
The F1 may be at the pinnacle for a long time yet.
Total, undiluted rapture.
It should be fascinating to hear about how this stacks up against the Carrera GT, Rowan Atkinson's excellent dissection notwithstanding.
The F1 may be at the pinnacle for a long time yet.
Total, undiluted rapture.
I understand a Journo from Germany has lapped the ring in a Carerra GT in a 7:32, which is being proclaimed as the actual lap record for a "true" production car(Flemke will probably agree).
Mac F1 in the 7:45's anyone?
Maybe after Flemke's mod's he could go for the record, but would his time be allowed?
Mac F1 in the 7:45's anyone?
Maybe after Flemke's mod's he could go for the record, but would his time be allowed?
I don't know that I could drive a 7:45 in a 956.
You raise a good question about what is a record, as we discussed on another PH forum. It seems to me that my modified F1 wouldn't be eligible, although a standard LM would be.
I spoke to a chap at the McL factory. It was his recollection that there were no lap times taken when G. Murray and team took a prototype to the 'Ring prior to production.
He also resolved for me a slight puzzle regarding how J Palmer drove a prototype at 231 at Nardo even though it was rev-limited to 7500 (the same as standard production car, which at that rpm will not go as fast). He said that the Nardo car had prototype gear ratios which were not used in production. Indeed, he said, it was the uncertainty of what the production car's actual top speed would be with standard ratios that catalysed the factory's max. speed run in '98.
By the way, on Nick Mason's new edition of "into the red" there is a recording of his F1 GTR, both from inside and as it drove past the microphone. The former is much like what one can hear on PH tv, except that the GTR has less induction noise and a lot more gearbox whine. The latter sounds quite like my car going past at 150-175. I suppose that copyright law prevents our posting of this recording. That's a pity, because it and many other selections on the disk are superb.
You raise a good question about what is a record, as we discussed on another PH forum. It seems to me that my modified F1 wouldn't be eligible, although a standard LM would be.
I spoke to a chap at the McL factory. It was his recollection that there were no lap times taken when G. Murray and team took a prototype to the 'Ring prior to production.
He also resolved for me a slight puzzle regarding how J Palmer drove a prototype at 231 at Nardo even though it was rev-limited to 7500 (the same as standard production car, which at that rpm will not go as fast). He said that the Nardo car had prototype gear ratios which were not used in production. Indeed, he said, it was the uncertainty of what the production car's actual top speed would be with standard ratios that catalysed the factory's max. speed run in '98.
By the way, on Nick Mason's new edition of "into the red" there is a recording of his F1 GTR, both from inside and as it drove past the microphone. The former is much like what one can hear on PH tv, except that the GTR has less induction noise and a lot more gearbox whine. The latter sounds quite like my car going past at 150-175. I suppose that copyright law prevents our posting of this recording. That's a pity, because it and many other selections on the disk are superb.
flemke said:
I don't know that I could drive a 7:45 in a 956.
You raise a good question about what is a record, as we discussed on another PH forum. It seems to me that my modified F1 wouldn't be eligible, although a standard LM would be.
I spoke to a chap at the McL factory. It was his recollection that there were no lap times taken when G. Murray and team took a prototype to the 'Ring prior to production.
He also resolved for me a slight puzzle regarding how J Palmer drove a prototype at 231 at Nardo even though it was rev-limited to 7500 (the same as standard production car, which at that rpm will not go as fast). He said that the Nardo car had prototype gear ratios which were not used in production. Indeed, he said, it was the uncertainty of what the production car's actual top speed would be with standard ratios that catalysed the factory's max. speed run in '98.
By the way, on Nick Mason's new edition of "into the red" there is a recording of his F1 GTR, both from inside and as it drove past the microphone. The former is much like what one can hear on PH tv, except that the GTR has less induction noise and a lot more gearbox whine. The latter sounds quite like my car going past at 150-175. I suppose that copyright law prevents our posting of this recording. That's a pity, because it and many other selections on the disk are superb.
I would say (you may actually agree with me on this), that 231mph is therefore not indicative of the production car. When advertising the fact McLaren should maybe have pointed out the speed was achieved with experimental non-standard gearing. Maybe in McLaren's defense (I simply don't know the answer) this was not widely reported at the time as it was not a true reflection. Ultimately the car went faster than this, with the limiter removed/raised. Probably fair to say that the "actual" top speed of the McLaren F1 is 221mph(?), with production gears and the standard limiter. A figure, you achieved in your car presumably (without reading through your first thread again) with the engine bouncing/touching the limiter. All the same, quite an achievement and needless to say, one to be extremely proud of. Any update on the mods?
Will look up "Into the Red" with much interest. Thanks.
Bugger can't seem to run it
The page “PistonHeads.TV” has content of MIME type “application/x-mplayer2”. Because you don’t have a plug-in installed for this MIME type, this content can’t be displayed"
Computer illiterate so whats that mean in real language, im on a mac if it makes any difference.
The page “PistonHeads.TV” has content of MIME type “application/x-mplayer2”. Because you don’t have a plug-in installed for this MIME type, this content can’t be displayed"
Computer illiterate so whats that mean in real language, im on a mac if it makes any difference.
Iguana,
It's encoded in Windows Media format so you need the Windows Media Player for the Mac to play it. If you already have the Windows Media player for Mac, you might need to update it to the latest version.
www.microsoft.com/mac/otherproducts/otherproducts.aspx?pid=windowsmedia
HTH,
Roop
It's encoded in Windows Media format so you need the Windows Media Player for the Mac to play it. If you already have the Windows Media player for Mac, you might need to update it to the latest version.
www.microsoft.com/mac/otherproducts/otherproducts.aspx?pid=windowsmedia
HTH,
Roop
anniesdad,
You raise an interesting question, "What is the actual top speed?"
For what little it's worth, my take on it is:
- assume for sake of argument that with fresh tyres (mine were worn) the standard production car will do 223
- what happened at Nardo is irrelevant
- therefore valid max is either 223 or 241
- assume reference point for our methodology is Enzo's 219 (I think a magazine achieved this in a test). Other references could be PFF's 233 (I think it was), Ruf R Turbo 200-plus-something, XJ220's 213 or whatever, etc.
- to my knowledge, all the reference speeds were achieved at rpm's that were not at the engines' rev limits. Rather, they were at each engine's inflection point where there was no further power to propel the package against the ever-increasing aerodynamic resistance. To put it another way, no matter what the gearing, the reference cars could go no faster unless they had more power, lower Cda, or were going downhill.
- BMW decided to rev-limit the F1's motor because they were either worried about someone's messing up and over-revving it, or wanted to ensure their 250,000+kms usage-to-rebuild. I should think that the Enzo, PFF, etc. would need to be rebuilt a few times before they will have done 250,000kms.
- if an M5, say, is factory-limited to 155, we don't think of that car's max speed as 155. We estimate the true max speed, or hope to hear the facts about one that's been de-restricted. We think of 155 as an artificial point that is an unnecessary intrusion upon the car's capabilities.
- all this leads me to believe that the F1's max speed is not the artifically-limited 223. If I was desperate enough, I could engage a software genius (yoo-hoo, Ted?) to lift the limit and do a faster run.
- apart from raising the F1's rev-limit, one could achieve 241 (or something like it) simply by fitting larger diameter tyres. Again, attempting this with one of the reference cars would be futile.
- some may disagree, but I think that raising a rev-limit to liberate a package from an imposed constraint is not the same as bolting on a turbocharger to create more power
- I think that the main argument against the validity of anything over 223 would be: perhaps BMW was afraid to allow the engines to rev over 7500 lest they would be too fragile. This would mean that lifting the rev-limit is something like having one of the 2003 Formula One cars with a short-life qualifying engine.
It is certainly correct that you could not drive an F1 in standard production form faster that 223. I am suggesting that that is a slightly different question from, "What is the actual top speed?"
But reasonable people can disagree.
BBS now has a standard front and rear wheel from the car for measuring and soon, I hope, will be making centres for three-piece experimental wheels. The likely tyres are M. Pilot Sports for C. GT (19" front, 20" rear).
>> Edited by flemke on Wednesday 20th October 20:13
You raise an interesting question, "What is the actual top speed?"
For what little it's worth, my take on it is:
- assume for sake of argument that with fresh tyres (mine were worn) the standard production car will do 223
- what happened at Nardo is irrelevant
- therefore valid max is either 223 or 241
- assume reference point for our methodology is Enzo's 219 (I think a magazine achieved this in a test). Other references could be PFF's 233 (I think it was), Ruf R Turbo 200-plus-something, XJ220's 213 or whatever, etc.
- to my knowledge, all the reference speeds were achieved at rpm's that were not at the engines' rev limits. Rather, they were at each engine's inflection point where there was no further power to propel the package against the ever-increasing aerodynamic resistance. To put it another way, no matter what the gearing, the reference cars could go no faster unless they had more power, lower Cda, or were going downhill.
- BMW decided to rev-limit the F1's motor because they were either worried about someone's messing up and over-revving it, or wanted to ensure their 250,000+kms usage-to-rebuild. I should think that the Enzo, PFF, etc. would need to be rebuilt a few times before they will have done 250,000kms.
- if an M5, say, is factory-limited to 155, we don't think of that car's max speed as 155. We estimate the true max speed, or hope to hear the facts about one that's been de-restricted. We think of 155 as an artificial point that is an unnecessary intrusion upon the car's capabilities.
- all this leads me to believe that the F1's max speed is not the artifically-limited 223. If I was desperate enough, I could engage a software genius (yoo-hoo, Ted?) to lift the limit and do a faster run.
- apart from raising the F1's rev-limit, one could achieve 241 (or something like it) simply by fitting larger diameter tyres. Again, attempting this with one of the reference cars would be futile.
- some may disagree, but I think that raising a rev-limit to liberate a package from an imposed constraint is not the same as bolting on a turbocharger to create more power
- I think that the main argument against the validity of anything over 223 would be: perhaps BMW was afraid to allow the engines to rev over 7500 lest they would be too fragile. This would mean that lifting the rev-limit is something like having one of the 2003 Formula One cars with a short-life qualifying engine.
It is certainly correct that you could not drive an F1 in standard production form faster that 223. I am suggesting that that is a slightly different question from, "What is the actual top speed?"
But reasonable people can disagree.
BBS now has a standard front and rear wheel from the car for measuring and soon, I hope, will be making centres for three-piece experimental wheels. The likely tyres are M. Pilot Sports for C. GT (19" front, 20" rear).
>> Edited by flemke on Wednesday 20th October 20:13
Thanks for replying, just a small point, you refer to PFF(?), I'm assuming you mean 9FF (Porsche 996 Turbo), the car used in the recent Continental tyre testing at Nardo. Having read about this car in an EVO article, you are absolutely correct suggesting the engine requires rebuilding. IIRC, it was something like every 5-10K miles. I believe that they are working on a GT3 variant, with some 800bhp.
9FF is indeed correct, thanks. (So much for a memorable name for a company, eh?)
I don't know if I mentioned this before, but last year I had a chat with a senior gearbox engineer at Porsche (he designed the ceramic clutch on CGT, for example). He said that Porsches are designed so that, when used with each other, all the pieces and systems will last for a very long time. However, they are close to their operative limits when used with each other. Ergo, if you add 200 lbs ft to the engine, you put an intolerable load on the gearbox, driveshafts, etc.
He went on to say that Gemballa, TechArt et al are aware of this, but perhaps only 5% of their customers ever exploit the extra potential of a tuned car. Their business model includes the expectation that they will have to cover under warranty rebuilds for the 5% who really use the cars.
I don't know about 800 bhp in a GT3, but a friend was commissioned twenty years ago to install in a 911 one of the actual Porsche turbocharged Formula One engines that were winning races for McLaren at that time. It produced over 1000 bhp. He said that the installation was straightforward in the packaging sense, but the amount of power and the binary quality of its delivery made the car undrivable. That car today has barely 100 miles on the clock.
I don't know if I mentioned this before, but last year I had a chat with a senior gearbox engineer at Porsche (he designed the ceramic clutch on CGT, for example). He said that Porsches are designed so that, when used with each other, all the pieces and systems will last for a very long time. However, they are close to their operative limits when used with each other. Ergo, if you add 200 lbs ft to the engine, you put an intolerable load on the gearbox, driveshafts, etc.
He went on to say that Gemballa, TechArt et al are aware of this, but perhaps only 5% of their customers ever exploit the extra potential of a tuned car. Their business model includes the expectation that they will have to cover under warranty rebuilds for the 5% who really use the cars.
I don't know about 800 bhp in a GT3, but a friend was commissioned twenty years ago to install in a 911 one of the actual Porsche turbocharged Formula One engines that were winning races for McLaren at that time. It produced over 1000 bhp. He said that the installation was straightforward in the packaging sense, but the amount of power and the binary quality of its delivery made the car undrivable. That car today has barely 100 miles on the clock.
Gassing Station | Track Days | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff