Ferrari F40 specs

Added!

504 PS in 1987.... And that's from a restricted capacity engine and tuned for road use (semi-reasonable emissions, consumption, noise, idle speed etc).

504 PS from a car that ran a 100-200 kph in an improvable 7 seconds.

The ONLY non account even worth bothering or interacting with and learning from, in the years I've been here, bravo long may it continue.

This Ferrari F40 thread will be like the last. Legendary!

Thank you very much!

An interesting aspect of the F40 was the cooling of the turbocharged system.
Air temperature is one of the main points of the combustion so air boosted into engine need to the well cooled before to be breate. The revolutionary aspect which it was not fixed in the 288 GTO was that.
Infact during road test 288 GTO lost power when the car was launched during hot days. It wan't like that with the F40. Quattroruote Italian magazine tested a powerful F40 on a hot day in summer that doesnt lose power in comparison to F40s tested in way better conditions as the Cargraphic magazine did. If the cooling system hadn't work as it should we would have seen a drop in acceleration for overheating of the turbocharged system.
On the other side, I still have to understand on the right way if this brings a power improvement with speed crescendo, once in cool conditions. Some cooler condition tests made give the assumptions.

The 288 GTO lost power, on hot days? Well as you said this in part explains why the F40 was so quick and fast! Interesting as your maximising what's already available!

It's evident that during 288 GTO and Evoluzione development the aspect of the surface of radiant mass or fluid dynamic to the intercoolers was not treated at best. Having a system that keeps the inlet air temperature as low as possible on different ambient temperatures means engine power reserve.

Because it is normal to say that an intercooler works better at speed, on that case need to take attention on cold air throught faster on the intercoolers means even more power. That's my question.

"It wasn't like that with the F40."
Edmond Mondi disagrees

That car doesn't run as fast as correctly. Mainly it run underboosted at 12 psi on full throttle runs and the boost needle of the gaude is tired to rise high. we can see on the video. at around min 13:00.

https://ibb.co/y5w4nNg
Screenshot of the boost gauge running at 6000 rpm of the purple car.

https://ibb.co/JRjS2n4
Correct overboost running at 6000 rpm.

Doesn't that mean it makes less power and therefore the same thing that happened to 288 GTO has also happened to it?

Ah get it what you are meaning! NO these are two different things, the GTO I mean it make less power because the cooling of the turbocharged air was evidently undersized. But no other issue.
The problem that affect the F40 owned by this guy is an issues of engine cooling, that evidently it desn't able to can't make the fans work enough or meantime. Gauge wather temperature seems to high so it seems that something in the engine cooling system is struggling. That car was a Tipo USA specs made with catalyst system adjusted for those countries so compensating for temperatures can be an adventure for the cooling system explecially if It seems that something is not running correctly or in order. I often see underboosted Tipo USA F40s, I don't understand if it was a choice of the dealer assistant technicians or something. At fact that car was under powered and overheated on that circumstance.

I add, if that guy was not enought qualified to get that a 80's car made for racing used asbestos-free brake pads and that noise comes from there, or unqualified to get that something was not right on cooling electrosystem of his car I think the car is not in the right hands!

"I often see underboosted Tipo USA F40s, I don't understand if it was a choice of the dealer assistant technicians or something. "

As for example, the Tipo USA F40 tested in CARWOW video versus the Bugatti EB110 GT was also underboosted looking at the boost gauge.

I think that videos running underboosted turbocars make no sense expecially if driven by hamburger eaters that doesn't even know how launch and how gaershift a car.
Looking at the revs counter and the noise of the engine it's easy to get as under revs those gearshifts.

I'm the first to respect a 3M$ car, but please youtuber make videos how they need to been made, othervise is just misleading info or untrue.

Americans are too fat and turbo cars with high boost pressure is known to affect their IQ level, so the EPA decided to lower the boost pressure, in order to have a healthier life and not suffer a sudden heart attack.

In other words, their cars are slower and heavier + pig sized driver adds another big fat penalty and turns the whole formulae into a junk food cabin with cup holder and a tray with speakers and subwoofer.

Life in America is all about straight line acceleration, 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile run.

Oh dear... cosimo vibes

Youre too fat for this site, zero braincells, your life is all about skunking anything?

Greetings, dear friend!
Nice to see you here again, glad you are continuing your research.

On the other side, I still have to understand on the right way if this brings a power improvement with speed crescendo, once in cool conditions. Some cooler condition tests made give the assumptions.

I think if you had the time and opportunity, you could pick, say, a dry hot day and a dry cold day, and take several consecutive acceleration measurements in 2nd and 3rd gear starting at low rpm. While fixing the cooling system temp before and after each run.
I think that would provide a ton of information to analyze. Still, there's no better way to confirm a theory than experiment)

By the way, I think I'll do a similar thing on my car.
However, I have a turbodiesel and a more modern construction)
But, still interesting for comparison...

Hello 196ss,
that kind of experiments should been interesting to do. Firstly, I will try to find examples around the web. Anyway yes every different turbo car could be affected by these kind of temperature of cooling variable depend of their size of the system or how is efficent.

Yes I completely forgot about the Ferrari 288GTO Evo. I'll have to read up on it!

Mimicry too. Smh.

"Life in America?". You've never been LMFAO.

I think if you had the time and opportunity, you could pick, say, a dry hot day and a dry cold day, and take several consecutive acceleration measurements in 2nd and 3rd gear starting at low rpm. While fixing the cooling system temp before and after each run.
I think that would provide a ton of information to analyze. Still, there's no better way to confirm a theory than experiment)<<

Mainly we can say that the difference between air/air and air/water intercoolers is precisely in the fact that the latter has the best heat exchange at low speeds to remain constant at higher speeds. The former, on the contrary, is not efficient at low speeds but it works at speed. So here, as the more air flow is, as the better heat exchange is.

What I was saying is that till we are running on hot conditions it works limiting heat exchange damages, but at contrary, running on cold we can have heat exchange advantages.

https://ibb.co/PWwNqJv
https://ibb.co/bRgppHN
https://ibb.co/hyZ9rsg
https://ibb.co/X2BsVb2

Here a very interesting article F40 vs Hamann published by Motor 1994

Concerning Hamann car there are lots of details to treat. First of all is that article claims 1,5 bar of max boost but published pictures of the interior shows a boost gauge positioned close to the gearbox lever that reveal a boost addressed to 1,9 or just below 2 bar. I don't know if there was a peak of overboost or boost was setted only by the double wastagetes.
The magazine Tuning Special Cars from Japan explains that the peak was boosting up to more like 1,8. I wouldn't want that final power would be much grater than 620 PS claimed.

https://ibb.co/pjkn0nQ

Than, with boost setted to 0,9 bar producing about 545 PS the car seems faster but not much faster than the standard catalysed version tested at the side. Sound as interesting detail because that almost justifies that the standard car seems again underestimated

Imagine thinking straight-line performance was EXCLUSIVELY an American priority or vice versa. Are the Lotus Carlton and Mercedes C/E-Class V8 models a joke to you? What about the new Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing which is better on most tracks than the M5 CS, GT63S AMG, and Panamera Turbo S?

The magazine Tuning Special Cars from Japan explains that the peak was boosting up to more like 1,8. I wouldn't want that final power would be much grater than 620 PS claimed.<<

Indicatively power will jump from 660 to 670 PS looking at that boost level.

Indicatively power will jump from 660 to 670 PS looking at that boost level.

I'm correcting myself, I'm more inclined to think the car deliver 620 PS but provided of transitory overboost.

https://ibb.co/S08Wcw7

That picture comes from Max Power magazine, the article said the car was tested at 0,9 bar but pictures seems overboosting close to 1,3 on the gauge.

This car is an underboosted Tipo USA F40, so it is not indicative in terms of performance for that car.

The Mclaren F1 road car is the fastest supercar of the period on top speed but for me isn't the best as argued for long in past here and on other forums. Too many details were chosed to be indicated to be a road car, for road use, and not be be inclined for absolute performace on track.