Another way to describe the difference...

If I take a stock V8S and do nothing to it but swap tachometers with the Lambo, the F-Type would rate around 792 bhp. But changing a guage probably doesn't make the car that much faster.

Torque is the only thing that moves a car, spins the dyno, and wins races. Hp is smoke in mirrors to sell cars.

 

Careful with just reading paper specs to decide a race, most that have actually weighed V8 F types find they come in at a hefty 3850-4000 lbs. I think the Hurican is about 400-500 lbs lighter. I've removed about 150lbs from my car and it is starting to wake up the potential, would love to ditch another 250 lbs somehow...

 

Not sure I agree with your point that torque is all that matters. 2011 M3 Vs 2011 Mustang GT. Motor trend drag raced these cars a dozen times, effectively dead even.


Mustang GT weighs about 200 lbs less, has 95 ft. pounds more torque (390 vs. 295), but the cars were dead even. I point this out because I own a M3, and while it has very low torque, it revs to 8300 RPM and at highway speeds and above, you can really feel the horsepower - it's an absolute blast. And with proper gearing, low torque cars can do ok off the line as well.

 

Its a fair point, gearing makes a difference but is always a trade-off, better here, worse there. Porsche is masterful at gearing specifically to ace the known tests. Of course that is a trade, not an overall gain. Its smart though, because most don't consider consider that when comparing numbers. E.g. one car might win 0-60 but lose 0-70 because of the shift points or ratios.

AWD is another good way to ace 0-60 by sacrificing overall power soaked up by the second differential. In test of 5-60 the AWD version would likely lose. The games we play are determined by what we choose to measure.

The Mustangs higher redline is a good example of how manufacturers play with the numbers because very few people understand what hp means. Let's say you have two identical copies of a car, literally identical in every way. Erase the redline on one and redraw it higher. It now has more rated horsepower than its sister. Is it faster? It's still identical.

 

Yep the Porsche is significantly lighter than the R. I'd say 300 - 400 lbs.


Dave

 

Beating Huracan and 792 bhp out of V8S are very obvious trolls. Do not fall for it.

 

You didn't read anything I wrote, so you don't understand the point, which is that hp is nothing more than torque reframed. Obviously, a dyno can't measure hp directly, it only measures torque than calculates and plots hp based on an rpm assumption that the car could actually be moving (that is, work).

Hp is a kludge at best, it is just to sell cars, since power is a calculated outcome that only has physical meaning after the fact (distance). It is not an input, and as such, hp has no affect whatsoever on the only motive force that pushes a car faster: torque.

Since you can spin any engine faster on a workbench, rating at a higher hp is as simple as where your choose to draw the rpm redline and stop fueling. Either car can do that, but only the weaker engine needs to.

If the Jag designers wanted to shorten its engine life exactly similar to the Lambo, it would indeed rate at 792 hp at the same rpm. One manufacturer is choosing to destroy the customer's car faster, one is not.

Bottomline, the Jag has a 25% torque advantage at the same curb weight and rpm. This is not a race. It wasn't a race. That poor guy obviously doesn't undestand torque and power, either, or he wouldn't have spent $250K on a measly 398 ft-lbs requiring time to get to 9000 rpm before generating competitive power.

 

+1
LOL, I bet on Civic forums someone is also beating Huracan with 800 bhp Civic.

 

JIMLIGHTA do you know what's good at generating high torque? Electric motors and diesel engines.

 

No doubt. It doesn't matter how the motive force, torque, is generated, at the same curb weight, more force wins. Well, should win, gearing can shift the advantage to a different speed range, but that does not change that you have more force to work with overall.

​​​​​​Unfortunately, EVs are usually very heavy and, of course, don't lighten up as they drive, and they lose nearly 100% of their torque as they deplete toward 0% charge. Ever wonder why they don't race EVs at min charge against an ICE muscle car with min fuel? Cuz they'll lose the quarter mile by a half mile. Oh, the manufacturers of these ultra-high profit margin cars forgot to mention that? Oh.
​​​​​
Do you know what is good at generating hp?

Turbines spinning at 22,000 rpm. But is a 2,000 hp turboprop faster than a 2,000 hp multi-stage supercharged WWII-era piston engine fighter? Not a chance. Why? Not enough torque. Thats why Reno is still dominated by ancient, piston engine monsters.

Thats why the many high hp turbine-powered cars, over the years, were generally dogs. I think Chysler's version weighed in at something like 3800 pounds and produced almost 400hp. It ripped off 0-60 times in the 15 second range.

Low torque? High rpm to make competitive hp? Same weight? No thanks.

 

I didn't realize that speed was such a factor in owning the F Type or really any Jaguar in general. My recent acquisition of a 2016 F Type Manual has been fantastic. It wasn't purchased for speed. Heck a Ford Focus is faster! However, it is the most beautiful sports car in production. Manual in a Jaguar?!?! - yes please! And I love the prestigious Jaguar brand - mostly the design. For most of us, driving on road is not about specs but overall fun and enjoyment. Many cars now are a straight ticket to jail if used to their potential. The Jag can be played with and enjoyed within the legal limits which I love. And the sound - so good.

Porsche is an excellent performance car no doubt. But in the end... it is a squashed VW Bug with a big motor. Some love that. It doesn't do anything for me.

Jags are for the different people in life, not the majority. And that makes them special.

 

Couldn't agree more that Porsches have lost their exclusivity and design creativity to mass marketing. Boring, old, ugly, screams VW group, quiet, and overall, slow compared to Jags sensational V8. The worst thing is the lack of value, but they do have cult-like loyalty. I think that will be hard to maintain as the people who grew up with the well played Porsche mystique of the 1980s, die off. Kids today don't get them.

 

Electric vehicles are great.

 

Jimstalighta or whatever your name is, listen to yourself lol.
Im no racing engineer but i know F1 cars have loads of bhp but little torque but still manage silly 0-60, 0-100 etc
But your saying bhp has nothing to with speed, acceleration go figure son lol

 

Thats because are all artifically limited to 1.6L, so they have no choice but to run 15,000 RPM to make power. It's the rules. They also weigh less than half of the cars we are talking about. **** poor torque only hurts you in a race if everyone isn't mandated to use the same layout.

How long do those engines last?

 

I have the SVR and my friends that I drive with all the time have the 2018 911 GTS, 2018 911 Turbo S, 2018 Lambo Perf and 2017 Lambo 610-4...all stock, and all of us have AWD.

0-60 mph, from dead stop, my SVR feels extremely quick (clocks 3.3 to 3.5 consistently)...however, all the cars above walk me, the GTS barely, the 911 Turbo S and Lambos are down right gone. Their launch controls are simply superior.
40mph thru 100mph+ the SVR walks away from the GTS, gives the 911 Turbo a fair run but the Turbo walks. The Lambos as well.

We rented out the NHRA drag strip several times. The SVR ran 11.4 - 11.6 consistently. Turbo S and Lambos are sub 11's to mid 10's. (GTS didn't run)

If you have a V8S modded with RWD, I can't imagine how you're getting any traction...let alone 10 car lengths. IMHO...Fake News.

 

While I don't think the RWD traction issue is a big deal to overcome, you're results are exactly what I'd expect. .....and I agree.

Dave

 

More likely, the V8S is just a more powerful car than the SVR. Mine dynos at 498 whp stock (same as the R RWD, the 2014 was just more conservative marketing), and 540 with a slight tune. If you apply the 15% rule, even a stock V8S RWD or V8R RWD pushes 573 bhp.

Since you are AWD at 575 bhp, you'd have to apply the AWD -22% rule (some say -25%), yielding 51 less whp horsepower at 448 to the wheels, or 10% less stock whp than the V8S or V8R in RWD form. Max torque probably suffers a bit more.

Add my minor tune which has a +72 whp max difference and +42 peak, plus RWD instead of AWD, and this car is perhaps 120 whp max, and 110 whp peak up on the SVR. Thats whp, not bhp.

The Huracan is RWD, so it only loses 15% of bhp to the drivetrain but I still have a whopping 27% torque advantage, so I leave the Lambo almost like its standing still. Same weight.

The green line is the V8S stock whp, could you please post yours, it'll be interesting to see what the AWD drivetrain cost is in bhp.

It was a sauna in there.

 

My point...RWD vs AWD with Launch Control...no chance given roughly close HP/Tqe #'s. Perhaps close race with Lambo RWD. (weight difference is key though)

Easy to prove...Let's see your 0-60mph and Qtr mile Draggy results...as the SVR has been proven to run 3.3 sec. and 11.3 (even better I believe from Gibbo).

I think RWD against SVR 0-60mph wouldn't fair well. .

Meantime... 609HP / 557lbft

 

Forgive me if I don't believe a stock SVR puts down 609 whp (761 bhp) just from race gas, so obviously that dyno is silly wrong. Try an industry standard fully calibrated Dynojet, then we'll have something worth discussing.

And, are you really saying there is no bhp loss attributable to the second transmission/diff? I assure you, there is.

Nominally, there is no way in hades a 575 bhp AWD can put down more whp than 550 bhp RWD. Lets use Jags own numbers to eliminate the variables:

575 bhp minus 30% drivetrain loss: 402 whp
​​575 bhp minus 25% drivetrain loss:​ 431 whp
575 bhp minus 22.5% drivetrain loss: 445 whp
550 bhp minus 15% drivetrain loss: 468 whp

If it simply costs the same to drive each wheel, a V8 RWD has 16% more wheel horsepower than the SVR, according to JLR.

Then there's the extra tranny weight, so maybe 20% down, nominally.

So to answer your question, I don't think an SVR would stack up well against a V8 RWD. Not at all well.

Your race results sound about right to me. Add 15-20% more overall performance and you'd be seeing headlights instead of tailights.