Results 1 to 10 of 73
Thread: RRC vs S2000 NA
-
13th April 2012, 12:24 #1
- Join Date
- Jan 2004
- Location
- Norway
- Posts
- 6,385
- Like
- 2,008
- Liked 1,369 Times in 712 Posts
RRC vs S2000 NA
Ye ye, naming convention on the 1,6T 30mm we have been thru this before, and my opinion is clear, call that type RRC, that up till now is the best name
Anyway, Corsica will be the first real test btw S2000 and RRCars with top drivers handeling them in a top series I think. Will be very interesting to see the result. If the RRC shows that it is way faster, more of them will maybe come. And since the S2000 is a beast easier to mess up in, due to the NA and narrow powerband, the RRC might be easier for the 2nd tier drivers to do a good result in.
Lets see !!
What are your predictions: what is the faster car?
-
13th April 2012, 12:38 #2
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Location
- Zlin
- Posts
- 8,360
- Like
- 497
- Liked 3,794 Times in 1,687 Posts
Last year, with top driver (on comparation test) atmospheric S2000 was in average 0,4 sec faster than S2000 1,6T (on tarmac).
-
13th April 2012, 13:30 #3
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- Prague / Eastern Bohemia
- Posts
- 22,505
- Like
- 7,833
- Liked 11,152 Times in 4,427 Posts
Originally Posted by SullandStupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump
-
13th April 2012, 15:48 #4
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Athens
- Posts
- 25,092
- Like
- 9,921
- Liked 16,095 Times in 6,984 Posts
Originally Posted by Mirek
top speed for Mini 1,6t s2000 is 206km/h.
-
13th April 2012, 15:54 #5
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- Prague / Eastern Bohemia
- Posts
- 22,505
- Like
- 7,833
- Liked 11,152 Times in 4,427 Posts
Originally Posted by dimviiiStupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump
-
13th April 2012, 16:17 #6
- Join Date
- Oct 2000
- Posts
- 8,821
- Like
- 2,088
- Liked 2,242 Times in 1,200 Posts
I find it a bit strange that a car with twice the torque and the same chassis rules can't at least be on the same speed, even with 30bhp less? On a race circuit ok, but in rally I thought torque was king? Especially as the Mini's torque should be available across the whole rev range compared to a peaky S2000. Explain more Mirek!
-
13th April 2012, 16:19 #7
Your milestone for the car's performance is Pech????????????
Go find another sport kiddo!
-
13th April 2012, 16:51 #8
- Join Date
- Jun 2007
- Location
- Prague / Eastern Bohemia
- Posts
- 22,505
- Like
- 7,833
- Liked 11,152 Times in 4,427 Posts
Basically You don't need to know torque chart if You know power chart. It's all in with the benefit that power unlike torque doesn't change through gear ratios (not counting mechanical looses for simplification). What You need is that the area below power curve is as large as possible in rpm range You use. Than You don't need to think about torque chart.
I made a very quick estimation how the situation could look here. Blue area is power available in S2000 2.0NA in usually used rpm range. Orange area is power available in S2000 1.6T in usually used rpm range. You can see that the higher torque of 1.6T virtually brings You benefit over the high-rewing 2.0NA only in so low rpm which are used in the 2.0NA S2000 for only a fraction of time. Mostly in first gear corners.
Stupid is as stupid does. Forrest Gump
-
13th April 2012, 17:08 #9
- Join Date
- Aug 2007
- Location
- Athens
- Posts
- 25,092
- Like
- 9,921
- Liked 16,095 Times in 6,984 Posts
Originally Posted by Mirek
-
13th April 2012, 17:10 #10
- Join Date
- Oct 2000
- Posts
- 8,821
- Like
- 2,088
- Liked 2,242 Times in 1,200 Posts
Thanks Mirek, I understand better now
Yes I fear so too, you just need to look at the new cost for tourists to get into Venice and when everyone sees the amount of money being made others will soon follow, and prices will go up. As...
[ERC] Rally Islas Canarias 2024