Sunday, June 9, 2013
Import To Euro
Hey whats goin on guys, i just bought a 97 2.8 quattro 5 speed. I love the thing, its got a lowered german racing suspension, short throw, intake, deleted res with true dual delta flow 44 and the most amazing momo racing seats. I had a 95 accord before this but i killed it racing. ive been into cars for a while, my accord had 300 hpw before i killed it which is pretty good considering everything was done by me. It had i/e/h, short throw, bored tb, h22 head swap, f23 intake man, centerforce clutch, and Jspec tuned Ecu. My audi is slower but i like it a lot, im looking at getting a tap chip, and eventually boost it. I have some crazy ideas about doing a twin turbo, with the way the V engine is facing it would be perfect minus the weak internals. Its got a strong head but weak bottom, if i swaped the S4 bottom it could work, I think. But thats just a fantasy for now. Me and my cousin are hopefully gonna open a performance shop with in the next couple months and we are both gonna take out loans for the business and our cars. We figure that way if the shop doesnt go over well and we fail atleast we got fast cars.
Friday, June 7, 2013
Specification Honda Absolute Revo 110 CC
Specifications Honda Absolute Revo 110 cc
* Dimensions: 709 x 1925 x 1084 mm
* Distance axle: 1221 mm
* Type front suspension Teleskopik
* Type the rear suspension: swing arm with twin shock absorbers
* Size of front tire: 70/90 - 17 M / C 38P
* The size of rear tire: 80/90 - 17 M / C 44P
* Brake front: hydraulic disc with single piston
* Brake rear: Tromol
* Fuel tank capacity: 3.7 lt
* Type of engine: 4 steps, SOHC, air cooling
* Diameter x measures: 50 x 55.6 mm
* Volume step: 109.1 cc
* Compression ratio: 9.0: 1
* The capacity of the engine lubricating oil: 0.8 lt at the turn of the periodic
* Automatic Clutch: Centrifugal, wet type, and double
* Gigi transmsi: 4-speed fixed mesh
* Pattern pengoperan teeth: Centrifugal, wet type, and double
* Starter: Pedal and Electric
* Aki: MF 12 V - 3 Ah
* Busi: U20EPR9S ND, NGK CPR6EA-9S
* Ignition system: AC-CDI, Battery
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
Audi A6 Brake Modification
The rear rotors are also slotted. The electronic parking brake proved to be a bit of a challenge as my VAG-COM kit had not arrived. After some headscratching, we figured a solution to the problem and the brakes were installed without further drama.
The brakes were installed with no drama and they fitted perfectly.
It was time to replace the brake rotors on my Audi A6 that were wearing thin after 90,000 km. Instead of replacing with OEM rotors, I decided to replace with OEM sized two piece rotors. I also opted to continue with the EBC Red Stuff pads which had served me well when I replaced the OEM brake pads at 50,000 km.
Review of the EBC Red Stuff brake pads.
OEM brake pads lasted for 50,000 km for the first time and the EBC Red Stuff brake pads which I swapped to lasted 40,000 km before I changed it along with the rotors. At both instances, I had both the front and rear sets changed at the same time. The brake oil was replaced at the 50,000 km change but this time, they did not appear to need a change and so I did not.
I chose to swap the EBC Red Stuff pads primarily because I was mainly looking for a small increase in braking performance, and a huge reduction in brake dust. And the EBC pads did all that. Braking was sharper compared to the OEM pads which were quite inadequate for emergency braking. Braking on the OEM pads felt vague and you never got the feeling that you would stop in time when you needed to as the Audi A6 is a heavy car. As a result, I tended to brake early, just in case. The dust from the OEM pads was quick to appear as well. The swap to the EBC pads was just what I was looking for. Naturally, one cannot expect a change of brake pads to instantly produce massive stopping power. And I was not looking for that. Braking was improved slightly, and it was enough to be noticeable. And the brake dust was gone, thanks to the ceramic compound on the EBC pads. Sure, if you looked hard enough, there is still a coating of brake dust on the rims, albeit a light coloured layer.
On the surface, it would appear that the EBC pads had a shorter lifespan - 10,000 km less than the OEM pads. In fact, it is hard to make a comparison as I was driving harder on the EBC pads. In the first 50,000 km, I was mostly doing short trips within the city and at most a 150 km run to Zhuhai or a 120 km run to Guangzhou. All of which was on flat ground and decent roads. After I made the change to the EBC pads, I had made a total of 6 long trips that were between 1200 km to 1500 km each way round and along the way there were long mountainous stretches with long stretches of downhill runs where opportunities to use the brakes were plentiful. In addition, I had also started to drive the car harder.
In all, I was very satisfied with the EBC Red Stuff brake pads.
Replacement Two Piece Rotors
In a luxurious sedan like the Audi A6, you cannot and should not turn it into a sports car. What you can do is to make small improvements so that it becomes a little more fun to drive. My modifications have centred around improving the handling of the car slightly with small adjustments. Even then, I have mostly adhered to the principle of replacing OEM parts with lighter and stronger aftermarket parts as the time for replacement comes. With the brake rotors wearing thin, it also presented me with an opportunity to swap the OEM rotors with something lighter. Swapping out for lighter rotors reduces unsprung weight. A reduction in unsprung weight theoretically leads to lighter load on the suspension and this translates to better suspension response and subsquently, better ride comfort and ability to soak up the irregularities on the road surface. In addition, the loss in unsprung weight also reduces the moment of inertia which means less energy is required to get moving. And in theory, this leads to faster acceleration and throttle response. In practice, the weight reduction from taking a kilogramme off each corner could well be meaningless, or virtually impossible to detect. Experts or enthusiasts tell me that I would expect to see greater improvement if I were to swap rims and tyres for lighter versions since the weight loss at each corner would be more like 3-4 kg or more. I couldnt agree more. However, it is not the time to replace the rims or the tyres and it is the time, however, to have the rotors changed. As such, I chose to go ahead and replace the OEM rotors with lighter aftermarket ones anyway. And even if it did not produce a noticeable effect, when the time comes to change the rims and tyres, I believe the effect certainly would be very noticeable when the aftermarket rotors were paired with lighter rims and wheels.
This is the front rotor and I have also opted for a slotted rotor since it looked nice and sporty too. I do not expect to need the slots to help counter brake fade since even with the hardest driving I have done so far, I have not had any problems with brake fade. The hub is aluminium alloy and lifting it and comparing it with the OEM rotors, the weight difference was obvious. Unfortunately, I did not have a scale on hand to measure the weights but I would put it as about 1-1.5 kg weight savings.
Review of the EBC Red Stuff brake pads.
OEM brake pads lasted for 50,000 km for the first time and the EBC Red Stuff brake pads which I swapped to lasted 40,000 km before I changed it along with the rotors. At both instances, I had both the front and rear sets changed at the same time. The brake oil was replaced at the 50,000 km change but this time, they did not appear to need a change and so I did not.
I chose to swap the EBC Red Stuff pads primarily because I was mainly looking for a small increase in braking performance, and a huge reduction in brake dust. And the EBC pads did all that. Braking was sharper compared to the OEM pads which were quite inadequate for emergency braking. Braking on the OEM pads felt vague and you never got the feeling that you would stop in time when you needed to as the Audi A6 is a heavy car. As a result, I tended to brake early, just in case. The dust from the OEM pads was quick to appear as well. The swap to the EBC pads was just what I was looking for. Naturally, one cannot expect a change of brake pads to instantly produce massive stopping power. And I was not looking for that. Braking was improved slightly, and it was enough to be noticeable. And the brake dust was gone, thanks to the ceramic compound on the EBC pads. Sure, if you looked hard enough, there is still a coating of brake dust on the rims, albeit a light coloured layer.
On the surface, it would appear that the EBC pads had a shorter lifespan - 10,000 km less than the OEM pads. In fact, it is hard to make a comparison as I was driving harder on the EBC pads. In the first 50,000 km, I was mostly doing short trips within the city and at most a 150 km run to Zhuhai or a 120 km run to Guangzhou. All of which was on flat ground and decent roads. After I made the change to the EBC pads, I had made a total of 6 long trips that were between 1200 km to 1500 km each way round and along the way there were long mountainous stretches with long stretches of downhill runs where opportunities to use the brakes were plentiful. In addition, I had also started to drive the car harder.
In all, I was very satisfied with the EBC Red Stuff brake pads.
Replacement Two Piece Rotors
In a luxurious sedan like the Audi A6, you cannot and should not turn it into a sports car. What you can do is to make small improvements so that it becomes a little more fun to drive. My modifications have centred around improving the handling of the car slightly with small adjustments. Even then, I have mostly adhered to the principle of replacing OEM parts with lighter and stronger aftermarket parts as the time for replacement comes. With the brake rotors wearing thin, it also presented me with an opportunity to swap the OEM rotors with something lighter. Swapping out for lighter rotors reduces unsprung weight. A reduction in unsprung weight theoretically leads to lighter load on the suspension and this translates to better suspension response and subsquently, better ride comfort and ability to soak up the irregularities on the road surface. In addition, the loss in unsprung weight also reduces the moment of inertia which means less energy is required to get moving. And in theory, this leads to faster acceleration and throttle response. In practice, the weight reduction from taking a kilogramme off each corner could well be meaningless, or virtually impossible to detect. Experts or enthusiasts tell me that I would expect to see greater improvement if I were to swap rims and tyres for lighter versions since the weight loss at each corner would be more like 3-4 kg or more. I couldnt agree more. However, it is not the time to replace the rims or the tyres and it is the time, however, to have the rotors changed. As such, I chose to go ahead and replace the OEM rotors with lighter aftermarket ones anyway. And even if it did not produce a noticeable effect, when the time comes to change the rims and tyres, I believe the effect certainly would be very noticeable when the aftermarket rotors were paired with lighter rims and wheels.
This is the front rotor and I have also opted for a slotted rotor since it looked nice and sporty too. I do not expect to need the slots to help counter brake fade since even with the hardest driving I have done so far, I have not had any problems with brake fade. The hub is aluminium alloy and lifting it and comparing it with the OEM rotors, the weight difference was obvious. Unfortunately, I did not have a scale on hand to measure the weights but I would put it as about 1-1.5 kg weight savings.
Monday, June 3, 2013
2012 Cadillac Srx
2012 Cadillac Srx
2012 Cadillac Srx
2012 Cadillac Srx
2012 Cadillac Srx
2012 Cadillac Srx
Saturday, June 1, 2013
BMW May Outsource the Production of the Upcoming MINI Colorado SUV to Magna
Currently the MINI plant in Oxford, England is running at full capacity, so it will not be possible for BMW to build another version at that plant. Magna on the other hand has extra capacity at its Graz, Austria plant where the Chrysler 300 was built until recently when Chrysler decided to move the production to its Brampton, Ontario plant. Also the next BMW X3 will not be built at the Magna plant as it is switching to BMWs South Carolina plant. The Magna plant built 26,400 Chrysler 300s and 113,000 X3s last year. The company is trying to work with BMW to build 65,000 MINI Colorados to make up for the loss of the X3 and 300 sedan.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Best CRS DUU Motorcycles Concept
Called the DUU Concept, the naked ride is a aggregate of "a adventurous European rolling anatomy powered by a able-bodied American big-twin." The agent is a 1.9-liter (117 cu. in.) X-Wedge supplied by S&S. Wrapped about that powerplant is a anatomy that CR&S says can be tailored by the chump – although they dont announce how above presenting the best of distinct or two-seater versions.
But back anniversary DUU will be fabricated by hand, one-at-a-time, we brainstorm theyll be blessed to do annihilation your wallet will allow. The DUU Concept is actuality apparent November 10 at the Milan International Bike Show. CR&S said it has affairs to body them from abutting year, at €20,000 ($30,000 U.S.) apiece. Check it out in the arcade of high-res images below.
Speaking about the cultures of moto-structure of compounds in this motorcycle, implying the existence of a European sports chassis and a large, traditionally-unit type of the American V-Twin. The engine will have a capacity 1.926ss, but data on the power and weight of the motorcycle is not yet known. Design DUU swift and aggressive, though, unwittingly, an association with Ducati Streetfighter, if that was designed Harley-Davidson, with the use of design elements from musclebike Yamaha VMax and MT-01.
The company CR&S plans to begin selling «Duu» in Europe by 2011 at a price which starts from 20 000 Euro (29 500). Each year, will be made by hand, only a few motorcycles.
# Duka Electric Cruiser Concept
# NaSty Concept by GPDesign
# Harley-Davidson Concept 2020
# Igor Chak: 2012 Izh-1 motorcycle concept
# Monobike – original electric threecycle concept
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Suzuki GSX R1000
This bike, simply put, is a brute force in a very manageable package. Typical Suzuki. It produces 192 bhp at the crank and yet its not scary at all. It competes with the Kawasaki Ninja ZX-10R, Yamaha YZF R1, Honda Fireblade, MV Agusta F4, BMW S1000RR, etc. It is a bike from Suzukis GSXR range of bikes, which includes the Suzuki GSX-R600 and the Suzuki GSX-R750.
History
2001
For 2001, Suzuki introduced a new GSX-R model that replaced the largest and most powerful model of the GSX-R series sport bike, the GSX-R1100, with the all new GSX-R1000. As the model name revealed, the engines cylinder displacement was roughly 1,000 cc (61 cu in), about 100 cc smaller than its predecessor. The GSX-R1000 was not just an enlarged version of the GSX-R750, although it shared many features with its little brother. The main frame is the same in both models, but the material used on the big brother was .5 mm (0.020 in) thicker. Suzuki claimed the torsional rigidity of the frame had increased 10% in comparison with the GSX-R750.
The GSX-R1000 engine was a redesigned GSX-R750 engine. The R1000 had a 1 mm (0.039 in) bigger bore and 13 mm (0.51 in) longer stroke, newly designed pistons with lower crown, and gear-driven counter balancer. The engine weighed 130 lb (59 kg) which was slightly heavier than the 750 engine but 31 lb (14 kg) lighter than the engine of the GSX1300R. The performance of the engine is a peak of 160 bhp (120 kW) at 9,500 rpm, as measured on the crank and 143 hp (107 kW), when measured on the rear wheel with small variations between different instances of the same model. The redline is set at 12,000 rpm. The maximum torque of the engine is 80 ft·lbf (110 N·m) at 8,000 rpm. Combined with a total (dry) weight of 374 lb (170 kg) this gives the GSX-R1000 a top speed of 179 mph (288 km/h), a 1/4 mile time of 10.1 seconds at 141.7 mph (228.0 km/h), and a 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) time of 3 seconds.
Using titanium for the exhaust down pipe(K1 model link pipe is black, K2 model link pipe is polished titanium) and the inside of the silencer, enabled the 1000s exhaust system to become 4 lb (1.8 kg) lighter than that of the 750. Titanium was also used in the front fork(Titanium-nitride) to coat the stanchions. An exhaust tuning valve had been mounted inside the exhaust pipe. Using a servo the system dynamically adjusted the exhaust back pressure, according to engine speed, throttle position, and gear selection for increased torque, lower emissions, and decreased noise—the (stock) exhaust noise of the GSX-R1000 is notably lower than that of the GSX-R600.
With the 2001 model of the GSX-R1000, the 1998 Yamaha YZF-R1 was finally surpassed with the GSX-R being lighter and more powerful.
The 2001 model carried over to 2002 with minimal changes. 2002 introduced i.a. modifications to the fuel pump, clutch, front axle, torque link, mirrors, and luggage hooks. The manual fast-idle was replaced with a computer operated implementation (the "STV servo"). New colors, and new GSXR stickers.
2003
After the GSX-R1000 had been three years on the roads and race tracks, Suzuki put out a new version of the model in late September 2002. Suzuki engineers had been working on the three things that made a fast bike faster; weight, power and handling. The 2003 years GSX-R1000 was improved in all three counts. It weighed less, had more power/torque and handled better.
The physical dimensions of the bike were almost identical with the previous years model. The seat height and the overall height were somewhat lower but the geometry of the bike was exactly the same as before. The already rigid aluminum alloy frame was newly designed and enforced with internal ribs. The frame as well as the wheels were now coated black.
The front brakes were also new. Suzuki decided to drop the six-piston calipers. The new radially mounted four-piston calipers weigh 30 grams less and grip smaller 300 mm (12 in) discs that save another 300 g (0.66 lb). Though smaller, Suzuki claimed that the new brakes provide better stopping and turn-in performance.The headlights of the 2003 years GSX-R1000 were mounted vertically to enable the ram-air intakes in the front to be placed 20 mm (0.79 in) nearer the bikes center line. The new design was very much inspired by the look of the Hayabusa. The instruments were also redesigned.
The cylinder displacement of the engine remained the same 988 cc (60.3 cu in), but more power/torque and better throttle response had been achieved by adding four ventilation holes between the cylinders to equalize crankcase pressure beneath the pistons, moving the air intake nearer to the centerline and upgrading the engine management system from a 16-bit to a 32-bit ECU. The entire exhaust system was now made of titanium to save an additional 1.32 lb (0.60 kg) and the tail light was replaced with LEDs.
The 2003 model carried over to 2004 without any significant improvements.
2005
The 2005 model year GSX-R1000 had a redesigned engine and chassis. It had 4.4 lb (2.0 kg) lower weight than the previous model and the engine had an 11 cc (0.67 cu in) larger piston displacement. It had a totally new frame reducing the total length of the bike by 1.6 in (41 mm) but reducing its wheelbase only 0.02 in (0.51 mm). There were new brakes with radial mounted calipers and 310 mm (12 in) discs at the front. The new catalytic titanium silencer was said to be designed to reduce turbulence to minimum.
The 2005 model has a tested wet weight of 444 lb (201 kg). Power output is tested 162.1 hp (120.9 kW) at 11,500 rpm and peak torque is 79.9 ft·lbf (108.3 N·m) at 8,500 rpm. The 2005 model carried over to 2006 without any significant improvements.
2007
On September 22, 2006, Suzuki revealed a significantly updated GSX-R1000 for 2007 at the Paris motor show. The new bike gained 14 lb (6.4 kg) over the 2006 model which was due to its new exhaust system and new emissions regulations. To counter this weight increase, Suzuki claimed improved aerodynamics along with a faster revving engine and larger throttle body to increase power to 168 hp (125 kW) @ 11,500 rpm. Although not a completely new model, the engine and chassis have been updated. It also featured three different engine mapping configurations, selectable via two buttons located on the right handlebar. One up, and one down arrow to cycle between Mode A (Unrestricted), Mode B (Reduced power until 50% throttle is applied), and Mode C (Reduced power throughout the rpm regardless of throttle application). It also received a Hydraulic clutch.
The 2007 model carried over to 2008 without any significant improvements.
2009
Specifications
All specifications are manufacturer claimed and estimated.
| 2001–2002 | 2003–2004 | 2005–2006 | 2007–2008 | 2009–2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Engine | 988 cc (60.3 cu in), 4-stroke, four-cylinder, liquid-cooled, DOHC 16-valve, TSCC | 998.6 cc (60.94 cu in), 4-stroke, four-cylinder, liquid-cooled, DOHC, 16-valve, TSCC | 999 cc (61.0 cu in), 4-stroke, four-cylinder, liquid-cooled, DOHC, 16-valve, TSCC | ||
| Bore Stroke: | 73.0 mm (2.87 in) x 59.0 mm (2.32 in) | 73.0 mm (2.87 in) x 59.0 mm (2.32 in) | 73.4 mm (2.89 in) x 59.0 mm (2.32 in) | 74.5 mm (2.93 in) x 57.3 mm (2.26 in) | |
| Compression Ratio: | 12.0:1 | 12.0:1 | 12.5:1 | 12.8:1 | |
| Power (crank) | 160 hp (120 kW) @ 10,800 rpm | 162 hp (121 kW) @ 10,800 rpm | 178 hp (133 kW) @ 11,000 rpm | 185 hp (138 kW) @ 12,000 rpm | 191 hp (142 kW) @ 12,000 rpm |
| Fuel System: | Fuel Injection | ||||
| Lubrication: | Wet Sump | ||||
| Ignition: | Digital/transistorized | ||||
| Transmission: | 6-speed, constant mesh | 6-speed, constant mesh, Back-torque limiting clutch | |||
| Final Drive: | #530 chain(110 links) 17T / 42T | ||||
| Overall Length: | 2,045 mm (80.5 in) | 2,070 mm (81 in) | 2,030 mm (80 in) | 2,045 mm (80.5 in) | |
| Overall Width: | 715 mm (28.1 in) | 715 mm (28.1 in) | 710 mm (28 in) | 720 mm (28 in) | 710 mm (28 in) |
| Overall Height: | 1,135 mm (44.7 in) | 1,145 mm (45.1 in) | 1,130 mm (44 in) | ||
| Seat Height: | 830 mm (33 in) | 820 mm (32 in) | 810 mm (32 in) | ||
| Ground Clearance: | 130 mm (5.1 in) | 125 mm (4.9 in) | 120 mm (4.7 in) | ||
| Wheelbase: | 1,410 mm (56 in) | 1,405 mm (55.3 in) | 1,415 mm (55.7 in) | 1,405 mm (55.3 in) | |
| Dry Weight: | 374 lb (170 kg) | 370.4 lb (168.0 kg) | 365 lb (166 kg) | 379 lb (172 kg) | |
| Wet Weight: | 443 lb (201 kg) | 444 lb (201 kg) | 446 lb (202 kg) | 448 lb (203 kg) | |
| Suspension Front: | Kayaba 43 mm (1.7 in) Inverted telescopic, coil spring, oil damped, spring pre-load fully adjustable, rebound compression damping force adjustable. | Kayaba 43 mm (1.7 in) Inverted telescopic forks with DLC coating, spring preload, rebound and compression adjustment | Inverted telescopic, coil spring, fully adjustable spring preload, compression and rebound damping | Inverted telescopic, coil spring, fully adjustable spring preload, high & low speed compression and rebound damping | Showa Inverted telescopic, coil spring, fully adjustable spring preload, high & low speed compression and rebound damping/New electronically controlled steering damper uses a solenoid valve to move a tapered needle reducing or increasing oil flow to adjust damping force. |
| Suspension Rear: | Link type, gas/oil damped, coil spring, spring pre-load fully adjustable, rebound damping force and compression damping force adjustable | Link type, coil spring, oil damped, adjustable spring preload, compression and rebound damping | Link-type, gas/oil-damped, fully adjustable spring preload, compression and rebound damping | Link-type, gas/oil-damped, fully adjustable spring preload, high & low speed compression and rebound damping | |
| Brakes Front: | Twin semi floating stainless disks 320 mm (13 in) and Tokico 6 piston calipers | Twin 300 mm (12 in) semi floating stainless disks and Tokico 4 piston radial mounted calipers | Dual hydraulic disc | ||
| Brakes Rear: | Single disk 220 mm (8.7 in) and Tokico dual piston caliper | Single 220 mm (8.7 in) disk and a dual piston caliper | Single hydraulic disc | ||
| Tires Front: | 120/70-ZR-17 | ||||
| Tires Rear: | 190/50-ZR-17 | ||||
| Fuel Tank Capacity: | 18 L (4.0 imp gal; 4.8 US gal) | ||||
McLaren MP4 12C
This is McLarens answer to Ferrari and also the legendary F1s succesor. It looks good, performs great and handles very well. It will be the smaller car in McLarens range, after the highly aniticipated McLaren P1. This product by McLaren competes with established cars such as the Ferrari 458 Italia and the Lamborghini Gallardo.
The McLaren MP4-12C is a sports car designed and manufactured by McLaren Automotive. It is the first production car wholly designed and built by McLaren since the McLaren F1, which for a long time held the record for the fastest production car in the world. The cars final design was unveiled on 8 September 2009, and it is set to be launched in 2011. The MP4-12C will feature a carbon fibre compositechassis, and will be powered by a mid-mounted McLaren M838T 3.8-litre V8 twin-turbo engine developing approximately 592 bhp (441 kW; 600 PS) and around 443 lb·ft (601 N·m) of torque. The car will make use of Formula 1-sourced technologies such as "brake steer ", where the inside rear wheel is braked during fast cornering to reduce understeer. Power will be transmitted to the wheels through a 7-speed Seamless Shift dual-clutch gearbox. When tested on the British motoring show Top Gear, the MP4-12C completed a lap of the test track in 1:16.2 to become the second fastest car on the lap board, 1.1 seconds slower than the Ariel Atom 500, and 3.1 seconds faster than its key performance rival, the Ferrari 458 Italia. However it was slower at three other comparisons: at an EVO magazine test it was over a second slower than the Ferrari around the Bedford Autodrome West track, it was also slower in Fifth Gear and Car Magazine. The MP4-12C will be sold at a price of £168,500 in the United Kingdom., and $229,000 for the US market. To celebrate the launch of the car, McLaren F1 partner Tag Heuer will release the limited edition Carrera MP4-12C watch, available only at McLaren dealers.
Specifications
Design
As with the McLaren F1, carbon fibre (Carbon MonoCell) is used extensively in the vehicle to minimize weight. The MP4-12C will weigh only 1,300 kg (2,866 lb) dry. The chassis is based around an F1 style one-piece carbon fibre tub, weighing only 80 kg (176 lb).
The car will have a conventional two side-by-side seating arrangement, unlike its predecessor the McLaren F1 which featured an irregular three seat formation (front center, two behind either side). To make up for this however, the cars central console is narrower than in other cars, seating the driver closer to the center.
Interior trim and materials can be specified in asymmetric configuration - known as "Driver Zone".
Engine
The car is powered by the M838T 3.8 litre twin-turbo V8 engine, McLarens first ever engine design. It was designed and developed by McLaren in partnership with Ricardo. The design of the engine was based on the Nissan VRH35 racing engine used in Le Mans in 1998. However, other than the 93 mm bore, little of that engine remains in the M838T. It produces 592 bhp (441 kW; 600 PS) and 443 lb·ft (601 N·m) of torque. It has a redline of 8,500 rpm, with 80% of torque available at just 2,000 rpm. When first announced McLaren claimed that it would have a higher horsepower to carbon dioxide emission ratio than any internal-combustion engine available at the time.
Transmission
The engine is connected to a 7-speed automatic dual-clutch gearbox made in Italy by Graziano. Dubbed the "Seamless Shift Gearbox" or SSG, the gearbox features a system dubbed "Pre-Cog" that allows the driver to preselect the next gear by lightly tapping the paddle.
Performance
McLaren have stated the MP4-12C can accelerate from 0 to 200 km/h (124 mph) in 8.9 seconds. The car will have a top speed in excess of 322 km/h (200 mph) and will be able to brake from 200 km/h (124 mph) to a complete stop in under five seconds. Braking from 100 km/h (62 mph) to zero can be done in under 30 metres (98 ft), around seven car lengths. It is expected the 12C will complete the standard quarter mile in slightly less than 11 seconds.
On July 10, 2011, on the BBC programme Top Gear, the MP4-12C set the second fastest lap around the Top Gear Track, posting a time of 1:16.2 The car was developed and tested on the Top Gear test track before its appearance on the show. The MP4-12C finished second behind the Ferrari 458 Italia in Car MagazinesJuly 2011 group test. It was also beaten into third by the Porsche 911 GT2 in the lap times set at Rockingham Speedway by racing driver Ben Collins.
Nomenclature
The name of the new McLaren sports car is MP4-12C. MP4 has been the chassis designation for all McLaren Formula 1 cars since 1981. Since 1997, "MP4" has stood for McLaren Project 4 (from 1981 to 1996, when McLarens title sponsor was Marlboro, the "M" stood for this), resulting from the merger of Ron Dennis Project 4 organisation with McLaren. The 12 refers to McLarens internal Vehicle Performance Index through which it rates key performance criteria both for competitors and for its own cars. The criteria combine power, weight, emissions, and aerodynamic efficiency. The coalition of all these values delivers an overall performance index that has been used as a benchmark throughout the cars development. The C refers to Carbon, highlighting the unique application of carbon fibre technology to the future range of McLaren sports cars. The elements of this name represent everything that the McLaren MP4-12C stands for:
MP4-12C shares its name with the MP4/12 Formula 1 car that raced in the 1997 season. This car featured a second brake pedal discovered by photographers to counter understeer on the exit of the corners by selecting the inside rear wheel, similar to the computer controlled "brake steer" system of the MP4-12C.
Variants
Convertible
In addition to the coupe, a convertible version of the MP4-12C is under development at McLaren. The convertible is planned to have a retractable hardtop that will be made from either aluminium or carbon fibre. McLaren is working to preserve the coupés 200 mph top speed. Meanwhile, the unique butterfly wing doors of the coupé will be retained.
Motorsports
GT3
In December 2010 McLaren announced that they would produce a small number of MP4-12C cars in order for them to compete in the FIA GT3 European Championship. McLaren stated that they will provide maintenance for the cars and will begin racing in 2012 with the CRS Racing team. The MP4-12C will be the first car to compete in sportscar racing for the company, since the F1 GTR. It received its début with a single car entry for the Spa Francorchamps round of theBritish GT championship. This was followed by a three car entry in the 2011 Spa 24 Hours.
Compared to the road car, the MP4-12C GT3 produces less power with only 493 bhp (368 kW; 500 PS) due to homologation. The car features a new bespoke 6-speed gearbox that is 80 kg (176 lb) lighter than the road cars 7-speed, developed with Ricardo. The steering wheel is lifted straight from the McLaren MP4-24 Formula 1 car.
Auto Express test of the stunning car
Evo mags test of the F1 successor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)