No, say its not so. All that technology being thrown away, they must hire software engineers to disable their torque managment and traction control systems for them because of how complicated these systems are.

 

So first you say..
Then you try to cover what you previously stated by adding the word ring

So basically what your doing is meticulously attempting to pick a part every little word that i say, all the while ignoring my final conclusions.

So yes i disagree that ditching "all that technology" would make it slower around the nurburgring. yeah it would be lighter and RWD but thats not the point your forgetting that the ATTESSA system can simultaneously split torque between the front and rear wheels, in essence making it a RWD car when needed. So now what do you have left to argue? the car is lighter? and a lighter car will outperform its heavier brethren?

First question is do you have any idea how much lighter it would be? NO this is all talk and you have no unit of measurement to be able to tell if it would in fact be light enough to outweigh the benefits of its all wheel drive sytem

second question or better yet a statement followed by a question. In the late 80's Audi entered the British touring car championship with there new quattro(torque sensing) all wheel drive system similar to the ATTESSA. Audi despite having less power and more weight demolished its competition and later it was banned with the excuse of them having an "unfair advantage"

Question: do you think that since their AWD platform was banned they decided to come back with a RWD (therefore lighter) "and supposedly faster" version and defeat the competition even easier or did they go a different route? Search function will be your friend, and will also disprove your fact that the same car in RWD lighter form is faster, and also your irrelevant comparison of BMW's Torque Transfer system (not a true all wheel drive system) to other AWD systems.

 

Also before you decide to list more AWD systems that are irrelevant please research what the difference between Permanent AWD and Full-time AWD. and there manufacturers this will help you decide why certain companies AWD systems are competitive for racing purposes and others are made for daily comfort.


LOL Cant wait for your response

 

This is new to me didn't realize that the measurements were at the wheels, i guess this would mean that its making more like 550hp to the crank (15% drivetrain loss)

 

No need to, the story is about the car going around the track known as the ring, unfortunately you took what I said out of context. I could care less its performance around a parking lot made course similar to an auto-x. No cover was made it was pretty straight forward the discussion is about this car and it 3900lbs of weight going around the ring at 7:38. If you eliminated the AWD system and associated components making it lighter it would go around the track faster. For your consumption again:

By ditching the AWD and associated components would reduce weight and therefore decrease its time around the track. Especially considering that this thing weighs in at a portly 3900lbs, it could use the reduction. Of course I am not supporting an engine swap, just dismissing your theory.

In response to "a muscle car capable of some good times down the 1320 but not a 7:38 at Nurburgring", Notice the reference to its time around the track, notice my reply includes reducing that time.

I cannot help the fact that you cannot communicate at a level that is clear and concise to ensure that your very thought is being conveyed. It is apparent in your listening/reading skills that you cannot read and interpret properly.

Well yes it is the point being made, it is a 3900lb car, it could use weight reduction.

By eliminating the transfer case, the drive shaft, and the front differential, utilizing existing drive train components from an existing model will outperform the AWD version.

Not much difference in car parts, the drive shaft averages the same per length like any other vehicle, carbon fiber or not it will still come in at 20lbs. A transfer case made to accelerate a 3900 pig with that kind of horsepower, that is a given 80lbs on average, a front differential with internal components and all 140lb difference to a simple tubular member and suspension set up. At a minimum it would eliminate a good 250lbs. That is just major components, I am sure there are coolers, sensors, wiring, and mounting hardware that would probably take it over 300lbs easily. I have built my cars, have you?

Was it running around the ring? Nope, so it is irrelevant to what is being discussed. See at least I can pull a Porsche 997 GT2 AWD time off and compare it with a modified RWD platform of the same car and show proof that yes in fact the lighter RWD variant is faster, you on the other hand have nothing.

Who cares? The ring times are posted, I can pull them all up and look at how a manufacturer went back with a RWD version to beat their own AWD version all day long. It is a fact that cannot be argued with. What next? Rally racing used for showing the importance of AWD and how it superior to RWD?

 

Your theory.
My theory
One is a statement the other is an attempt to dismiss that statement. Have you done this? No you have only listed guestimates on what you think would happen and how a BMW's inferior Full-Time AWD system was outperformed by its RWD counterpart.

also I guess you didnt read my post about you doing research on the different types of AWD systems and their purposes before you post, So once again please refrain from inserting your foot in mouth by comparing a Porsche's Full-time AWD system to a more advanced Permanent system such as Haldex, or ATTESSA. Its completely off subject because because they're closer to 4wd than a true AWD system

It does nothing but back up my theory and "dismiss you theory" on the lighter RWD car always being faster around the track. It may not be the perfect theory i.e on the ring but its does include lighter and more powerful rear wheel drive cars versus a heavier less powerful all wheel drive system that is very much similar to the ATTESSA system. Do you really think that if one of the circuits for BTCC was nurburgring the outcome would be any different? are you saying that even though the heavier, underpowered, awd Audi was able to beat out its lighter more powerful rear wheel drive competition on ten different circuits through engineering, that this would be any different if The Ring was added?

Please answer this because im very curious to know how your gonna explain that away. Maybe you'll just ignore them all together and go back into constant bickering and talk about how im not swaying the masses with my facts. Or probably just make childish remarks wondering if i've built cars before. Or maybe you'll just bow out gracefully and let me post this

 

All that technology and still no clutch pedal..... I wouldn't be able to stand it, putting it in drive. I'll say again,

It's still an automatic!

 

Lighter is better, resulting in better times around the ring.

You stating that if it is lighter it will not be quicker around Nurburgring.

Good for you to catch up on the original subject.

No one is based upon fact (lighter car will be quicker around the ring) the other is an idiotic statement.


Yes, I have helped remove the AWD aspects of Porsche and BMW for track cars. Have you?

Oooops I guess you were wrong..... again...... This is why you are failing, you make assumptions with no credible support for your assumptions. Further I have supported the fact with other manufacturers on the same course, you on the otherhand...... well nothing as usual.

Inferior? Well I guess that is debatable, but either why I surely did not hinge all upon BMW. I just used them as an example, along with Porsche, either way it has no bearing on the fact that removing the weight made them faster around the track. If it was a racing series and I was worried about tire management then maybe I would be concerned about the type of AWD system I was using. But none the less I am not interested in tire management currently, because story is about a GTR going around the ring for its quickest lap time.

No research necessary, I am well aware of the different types of AWD systems out there. Yet it still has no bearing on a lighter car being faster around the track.


Well that is good, but it still does not dismiss the FACT that eliminating the 300lbs on this pig of a 3900lb car would make it faster around the ring. I mean it was your own words that stated clearly "a muscle car capable of some good times down the 1320 but not a 7:38 at Nurburgring." I did not make you write that, you did with no basis behind.

I find it humerous that now you want to use a "race car" from the 1980's to compare to a production car from now. I find it idiotic that you think you have a clue about what that race team did to that car in both trims. Considering the time line and other factors for those teams they did not come up with the best solution to make the best of it. Once again, point to one car that has ran both trims at the ring with the AWD variant being faster. You set the standard by stating "not a 7:38 at Nurburgring", it is your own constraints that are making you look dumb. I mean you would think at some point you would concede that you should have not stated that, because you have nothing to back it up. While there is plenty of data supporting my factual statement down to the specific track that you picked.

 

that 3900 lb car just made 3.3 seconds in 0-60 in an independent review.

 

LOL i think thats pretty hilarious that you used my question, about dismissing my theory for a quick way to insert your mechanical background. and also did exactly what i said you would do
But since your so curious to know then ill tell you. I've done many rear wheel drive conversions, ranging from installing a PPG rear wheel drive conversion on a subaru(used for drag) Back-halving Unibodies, building custom chassis, to converting a car to Mid-engine RWD. So please once again dont humor me by posting silly comments like I "helped" convert a Porsche to RWD. Which i imagine would be pretty easy considering its awd setup (removing the driveshaft and front differential and leaving the CV joints in the hub? Is that about right? No fabrication Neccesary)


HAHAHAHA!!! Really did you do any research at all like i asked before posting now your just babbling at the mouth. Do you even know that Audi didn't even return with a RWD "trim" It was a trick question!!! LOL Your really making yourself look dumb now.

Many times i warned you to search before you post. To help you from making yourself look like an idiot by posting 4wd systems in a comparison against AWD's. Its like comparing FWD-RWD just because they're both drivin with two wheels, apples and oranges.

I also find it hilarious that you never answered my question. Pretending to be oblivious to the facts only makes you look dumber