Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 lap time at El Toro TopGear US

Other manufacturers claim Nordschleife lap times which are the best their test drivers achieved after basically unlimited attempts, with free choice of electronic set-up, tire pressure, ambient conditions etc, in some cases even using pre-production prototypes. These times are compared with independent magazine tests where the time has typically to be set weithin two laps.

The acceleration of the 458 tested by Automobile Magazine and Quattroruote corresponds to the calculated acceleration curve, so no indication for ringers.
Ride height is OEM adjustable on Ferrari for over 20 years, so no indication for a ringer.
Two stock customer 599 GTO tested ran 340 and 342 km/h, so topped 335+ claim.
The stock customer Ferrari of which I've verified power tops the claim.

@monkeypop
The story of the 1964 GT sportscar World Championship is more complicated.
The FIA allowed Ford to bend the stock block engine regulations and to use 7 litre engines in the limited production Cobra prototypes.
Ferrari's application for the homologation of the mid-engined 250 LM on the other hand was rejected by the FIA since Ferrari (as opposed to Ford) was considered to be too small a company to afford the production of the required 100 cars.
And Ferrari didn't have any possibility to get a bigger engine homologated, since it didn't produce enough cars to fall under the stock block regulations.
Therefore Ferrari was forced to participate with the 3 litre 250 GTO.
Ferrari understandably felt discriminated but with three races to go led the championship. Two of the remaining circuits (among them the next one, the Italian at Monza) would favour the more powerful Cobra-Ford, one the more agile Ferrari, meaning that Cobra-Ford was probably going to win the championship.
The organiser of the race at Monza, under the pressure of Ferrari, then announced to cancel the race if the 250 LM was not homologated at least for this race.
The FIA did not homologate it and the race was not held.
The last two races ending as expected with one win for either competitor, Ferrari won the championship.

Ferrari probably didnt have one of its tuned cars and or crew avaliable to go to the show. If they already had thier tuned cars and crew working some place else three weeks isnt much notice to move a car(s) and staff or cancel some other obligation.

If ferrari wasnt using ramped up cars then why would they refuse to let them use a car from a dealer?

In no way do their actions show anything other than them trying to hide something. GM was willing to let them use a ACTUAL production car randomly plucked from a dealer lot.. ferrari refusing to do the same only says one thing about them.

You made it sound as if its hard for Ferrari to cheat because of the N/A engine.. thats pretty ignorant or just plain bias.. not sure which. Obviously Ferrari engineers wouldnt have a hard time giving a press car a substantial bump in power and suggesting that they would holds no water.

I dont see why you are trying so hard to defend them that you would come up with such useless arguments. If anything as a ferrari owner I would think their pompus attitude and obviously dubious activities would piss you off. As a previous vette owner I would be furious if GM treated the press in the way ferrari does and would feel ripped off knowing that my car wasnt up to par with the ones being reviewed.

Not what I've said. The potential for cheating with n/a engines is more limited, that's all. I agree, there are no indications that ZR1 test cars were over boosted. But the potential is huge and other manufacturers clearly tweak their turbo engined test cars.
I drive a Ferrari stock customer road turbo car which reliably produces a verified >160 hp/l for over 20 years.

If you were right, Ferrari would very simply have prepared and sent a car, no?

"while no road going n/a car engine gets beyond 130"-F355

But you are talking about production cars. Read what I wrote below.. such N/A power levels would be easily possible if the car maker didnt care if the engine lasts long term.

To say ferrari couldnt cheat or it would be more difficult for them to cheat just shows how bias you truely are. You are honestly trying to convince people that FERRARI couldnt easily juice up its N/A cars for a weekend with the press. Pffffttt.. thats just ignorant.

@F355

None of the points you make hold any water. Pure speculation and assumption.

There are any number of reasons ferrari would say they couldnt get a car to top gear U.S and refuse to let them borrow a car from a dealership.. none of which fall in line with what you are trying to say.

If Ferrari were so keen on achieving good test results by cheating as you try to suggest, a works 458 would easily have been prepared and sent to the US in three weeks, don't you think?
You get 160 hp/litre out of a turbo / charged engine by simply increasing boost, while no road going n/a car engine gets beyond 130. Now do the calc's...
Ferrari's EBIT profitability amounts to 14% and its car production is sold out for over one year, so there's no manufacturer which has to care less about unhappy customers.

I wouldnt say the potential for cheating is less with N/A cars than with forced induction.

If the manufacturer is supplying the press cars any number of things can be done to a N/A car that would shorten long term life span but add a significant boost in power. Most engines are detuned by quite a bit in order to preserve longevity and it would be very simple to add significant power if you dont care about the engine lasting 100k miles.

It might be easier with forced induction but I wouldnt say its any less likely with a N/A engine.

If that 458 had been riding on stock rubber and the time was the same then I'm sure there would be some really pissed off owners. But like I said.. I dont think the time would have been far off had it been completely stock.

The way ferrari handles the press indicates they have something to hide.

Nothing against their cars, they are fantastic. I just dont like the way Ferrari does things and never have. Their B.S goes back for decades... still cant get over what they did when Ford was going to win the championship so they got the rest of the season canceled.

I read a story about Enzo being such a prick to Ferruccio Lamborghini that it inspired him to make his own cars. All Ferruccio wanted to do was help Enzo with a clutch problem. The negative stories about the nasty things Ferrari has done over the decades cant all be false.

Imagine the reactions if a 458 would have been tested with say Michelin Pilot Sport Cup of the correct dimensions (which would be much closer to the OEM tires than these ill-sized Pirelli PZero Nero)!

I agree that cars randomly picked from dealers - and compared on track simultanously by several independent pro drivers - would be ideal.
But it has nothing to do with cheating if cars with adjustable suspension like the 458 are reasonably set up for track use.
And the potential for cheating by increasing power is far more limited with a naturally aspirated than with a turbo / charged engine.
The 458 tested by TopGear US was clearly not stock featuring wrong tire type and dimension.

@F355

I dont know what kind of wheels those are but there is a pretty fair chance of that time being closer to reality than many other lap times set with press cars. I doubt a Ferrari owner is going to buy a cheap $1000 generic set of wheels.

Who knows what effect those wheels/tires had. But I doubt it was that big of a effect. I do think its very interesting that it was a actual buyers car and was slower than it should have been. I have a feeling the lap time with non factory wheels/tires is closer to reality than when Ferrari sends their own car complete with a race mechanic crew.

Do you not think its a very unfair advantage when one car comes off a dealer lot and the other comes with a pit crew to tune it? You say the lap times ferrari has set this way are good.. but complain about wheels/tires? Really?

If top gear had tested the ZR1 pulled from a dealer lot and ferrari themselves brought a car that had already been tested on and set up for that track and had god knows what else done to it.. you would say its a good lap time?

I know if I made cars and could do that.. I would cheat my ass off to make my car look better than it is.

McLaren learnt a lot from Ferrari already in 2007...
But on this 458 neither type nor dimension of the tires are OEM! Are you seriously trying to ignore this fact?

hey,why not ,they have learnt alot from ferrari these last few weeks!
Look what happens when the factory dosent get involved,looking forward to topgear usa getting a 12c

Will McLaren send further evolutions of the prototype cars and its own drivers plus the engineers and hydraulics repair staff again..?

To answer my own question from earlier in this dicussion it looks like the 458 was running Pirelli PZero Nero tires. Which according to TireRack testing performed slightly better than the Michelin Pilot Sports. Yes they would add a little weight over the stock 20s by 1-2 lbs per tire. .

@Racerns,
it's quite useless you try to validate this comparison. Pzero nero is an aftersales tires assembled to fit into the 22' rims and not homologated to 458.
The nero version is, by far, inferior to the Pzero and PS2. I never consider to buy it for my Alfa 3.2 GTA.
The 458 cames with Michelin PS2 K1 (Ferrari Tires spec) now replaced from MY2011 with the Michelin PSS K1. Other OE tyres are Pzero (K1)(inferior to the PS2 K1 and not very durable )
http://www.ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=331890
and Bridgestone S001 which I have no information about behavior on a 458.
I bet if that customer car performed 1 second better than ZR1 on track, it would be automatically declared NOT STOCK.
It's slower so it's STOCK.
Drag race, of course, was a joke ...

To answer my own question from earlier in this dicussion it looks like the 458 was running Pirelli PZero Nero tires. Which according to TireRack testing performed slightly better than the Michelin Pilot Sports. Yes they would add a little weight over the stock 20s by 1-2 lbs per tire.

458 ran a 1:23.3 somebody mad lol

What pissed off fanboy put the 1:16 time for the Ferrari up there?