Acceleration data vs 430


SLF360

GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
Incredible performance figures

In January 2005, Road & Track magazine tested a F430 at Fiorano, Ferrari's home test track. It recorded some astonishing figures: 0-60 mph took 3.5 seconds, 0-100 mph took 8.1 seconds. That's 0.45 sec and 1.1 sec respectively quicker than the official claim. That arouse my su****ion immediately. I remember Autocar once recorded a 360 Modena taking only 8.8 seconds to 100 mph, while other magazines found more than 10 seconds. The British magazine therefore suspected Ferrari provided a specially prepared test car.

In the same month, Car And Driver also tested the F430 at Fiorano. The figures are even slightly faster - 3.5 seconds and 7.9 seconds respectively. Car And Driver said their test car was not the same one as that tested by a "rival magazine" but the result was similar. It also revealed that both magazines tested the car at Fiorano's slightly downhill straight runway and not allowed to go in reverse direction. This may account for a few tenths for 0-100 mph, but cannot explain the big difference from the official figures.

Later, Italian magazine Quattroroute recorded similar figures again (3.55 sec for 0-60 and 8.1 sec for 0-100). Even the usually slow Motor Trend measured 3.7 sec and 8.3 sec respectively. It seems the F430 is really that fast !

In fact, the data reveals why it is so quick out of the blocks: its launch control (I think not available for US though!!) gives it a lot of advantage in standstill acceleration, eliminating initial wheelspin and optimize the rev at which gearchange is made. Take the Motor Trend's data for example:


Ford GT F430

0-30 mph 1.7 sec 1.3 sec

0-40 mph 2.4 sec 1.9 sec

0-50 mph 3.0 sec 2.9 sec

0-60 mph 3.6 sec 3.7 sec

0-70 mph 4.5 sec 4.5 sec

0-80 mph 5.4 sec 5.7 sec :thumbsup

0-90 mph 6.3 sec 6.8 sec :thumbsup

0-100 mph 7.8 sec 8.3 sec :banana


You can see F430 launched to 30 mph in an eye-popping 1.3 sec, quicker than Ford GT by 0.4 second. Once overcame the wheelspin, Ford GT used its power and torque advantage to strike back, levelling the Ferrari at 50 mph and pulling away from 80 mph. To the Ferrari, rolling acceleration from 50-100 mph is every bit reasonable for its power-to-weight ratio (which is lower than Ford GT's).
The main contributor to its astonishing acceleration is the super-responsive initial launch, which you don't have available in US territory destined cars... :frown

I thought this would be interesting. Any other comparisons available, e.g vs Corvette Z06 yet ?
 

barondw

GT Owner
Sep 8, 2005
1,109
Stefan

Supposedly the launch control is accessable if you know the sequence in which to push certain buttons in USA delievered cars. MT had a driver do for them in a previous test against the GT.

Motor Trend tested the:
Z06, Viper, GT
0-30 1.6, 1.6, 1.6
0-40 2.3, 2.5, 2.2
0-60 3.8, 4.0, 3.4
0-100 7.6, 8.4, 7.5
1/4 11.6, 12.0, 11.5
1/4 126.6, 121.9, 128.7
Lap
Time 75.4, 76.7, 79.6 seconds


More interesting is braking
100-0 283 ft, 280 ft, 321 ft.
Thus the acceleration comes down to a difference between drivers.

As you are aware different days, tracks, temps, drivers, etc. can make big idfferences. The above numbers where the same day, same driver, all at Daimler Chrysler proving grounds near Chelsea, Michigan on concrete.

Dave
 
Last edited:

FordGTGuy

Well-known member
Aug 1, 2005
636
Norfolk, VA
Enzo / Ford GT / Carrera GT
0-30: 1.4/1.6/1.5
0-40: 2.0/2.3/2.0
0-50: 2.8/2.8/3.0
0-60: 3.4/3.7/3.6
0-70: 4.0/4.4/4.3
0-80: 5.2/5.3/5.1
0-90: 6.1/6.3/6.3
0-100: 7.0/7.4/7.3
0-100-0: 11.0/11.7/11.3
1/4 mile: 11.0 @ 133.9/11.2@131.2/11.1/133.4
Top Speed(on the track): 211.0/200.1/201.5
Gas Mileage city/hwy(shits and giggles): 8/12 / 13/21 / 10/16
 

Jason Watt

Had both, sold both
Mark II Lifetime
Oct 14, 2005
1,227
Copenhagen, Denmark
And then add this to the GT: The Whipple 3.3, headers, and delete cats... :eek

And better brakes
 

barondw

GT Owner
Sep 8, 2005
1,109
one of 101 said:
And then add this to the GT: The Whipple 3.3, headers, and delete cats... :eek

And better brakes

I don't believe that's the point. This is stock versus stock.

Yes John Coletti's tricked out GT did a 10.85 1/4 mile at 127 mph but you can modify the Viper and Z06. Except for the re-flashed compouter my car is the same as Coletti's.

To me the GT has an appeal and it may not be quicker than the news Z06 but so what. They appeal to different markets as it was beautifully said in the Motor Trend article.

Dave
 
Last edited:

FGT4me

GT Owner
Oct 19, 2005
95
The GT's brakes do not compare favorably with its competitors.

I cannot blame this all on weight since it is similar to the Carrera GT and the Viper at least.

I'm sure there is plenty of clamping force and similarly sized rotors so I am led to conclude that it's the ABS program.

I don't seem to read much about the electronic programming of the ABS systems and how they compare from car to car but I'll bet there's a lot to it... perhaps manufacturers should devote more time to it.
 

SLF360

GT Owner
Mark IV Lifetime
abs

don't they all come from Bosch anyhow ?
 

barondw

GT Owner
Sep 8, 2005
1,109
Maybe its the rear weight bias more than the abs programming?
 

dbk

The Favor Factory™
Staff member
Le Mans 2010 Supporter
Jul 30, 2005
15,187
Metro Detroit
The braking issue has more to do with a car swap than anything else in my opinion. The new car they used to do the acceleration runs in the Z06/Viper/GT comparo made it through that portion of the test, but broke before they could lap it.

Therefore, they brought in a well-worn 40,000 mile tester on short notice. You can't tell me a prepped-for-the-mags SRT and Z06 won't pummel an abused 40,000 mile tester with fatigued rotors and pads.

*note* I'm not saying the SRT and Z06 don't have superior braking anyhow, but certainly not by those ridiculous margins.
 

satx

Well-known member
Aug 25, 2005
197
Dana Point
barondw said:
Maybe its the rear weight bias more than the abs programming?

that is an advantage......I think that the GTs narrower tires are the main cause.
 

FGT4me

GT Owner
Oct 19, 2005
95
It could be tires. Could also be suspension related, weight transfer, etc.
In any case, the GT's stopping distances are not good and ultimately affect lap times.
 

NU FORTY

GT Owner
Nov 14, 2005
4
Braking

Tires are the most important factor, the manufacturer usually dictates how aggressive a program the ABS supplier uses. There are also wet weather and ice/snow trade offs when you get too aggressive. The new Z06 tires would probably do wonders for stopping distance but the smaller diameter would cause problems with indicated speed, etc. and might take an ABS reprogram to take full advantage of the added grip.
 

Jason Watt

Had both, sold both
Mark II Lifetime
Oct 14, 2005
1,227
Copenhagen, Denmark
barondw said:
Maybe its the rear weight bias more than the abs programming?

The ABS progamming will alter the bias if the fronts are about to lock... thats the hole point of ABS!!
 
Last edited:

Jason Watt

Had both, sold both
Mark II Lifetime
Oct 14, 2005
1,227
Copenhagen, Denmark
NU FORTY said:
Tires are the most important factor, the manufacturer usually dictates how aggressive a program the ABS supplier uses. There are also wet weather and ice/snow trade offs when you get too aggressive. The new Z06 tires would probably do wonders for stopping distance but the smaller diameter would cause problems with indicated speed, etc. and might take an ABS reprogram to take full advantage of the added grip.
Also the Z06 has the advantage of more weight on the front axle...