Estimated Acceleration Stats For Pininfarina Battista:
0-30 MPH: 0.9 sec
0-40 MPH: 1.3 sec
0-50 MPH: 1.6 sec
0-60 MPH: 1.9 sec (100 km/h: 2,0)
0-70 MPH: 2.3 sec
0-80 MPH: 2.7 sec
0-90 MPH: 3.2 sec
0-100 MPH: 3.6 sec
0-120 MPH: 4.5 sec (200 km/h: 4,7)
0-150 MPH: 6.2 sec (250 km/h: 6,6)
0-180 MPH: 8.4 sec (300 km/h: 9,0)
0-200 MPH: 10.5 sec (400 km/h: 23,9)
Top Speed: 256.6422 mph (413.0256 km/h)
Pininfarina claims a top speed of 217mph, but the Rimac sibling with almost the same power and the exact same torque is claimed to reach 258mph. Maybe the Pininfarina is either electronically limited or tire-limited to 217mph.
1.9+3.6/(1.9+3.6)x11 = 9.1sec standing quartermile time; normally I'd multiply by 12, but using that factor would show up as 9.75sec, which is far from accurate.
10.86121 m/s2, new world record for MY simulations for acceleration off the line!!! It's the equivalent to a 0.2sec 1-foot rollout. So, 9.1-0.2=8.9.
Engine speed @ maximum torque [rpm]
Engine speed @ maximum power [rpm]
Gear ratios [-] Gearbox
5.625 (= 5.50 front, 5.75 rear)
Wheel static radius [m]
Driveline efficiency [-]
Wheel (tire) friction coefficient [-]
Rear axle load coefficient [-]
Vehicle mass (curb) [kg]
Driver mass [kg]
Aerodynamic drag coefficient [-]
Ambient air density [kg/m3]
Vehicle frontal area [m2]
Road slope [%]
Road load coefficient [-]
0.011 (pre-100km/h); 0.339 (post-100km/h)
Engine speed points (full load) [rpm]
Engine static torque points (full load) [Nm]
Simulation time [s]
This is the first time that I set the wheel friction coefficient and the rear axle coefficient both to 2 in a car simulation test; in previous cars I've mostly used the number 1.
Note: Tires used in this simulation were 295-35-21 made by Pirelli P-Zero
for sale on the America's Tire website https://www.americastire.com/buy-tires/pirelli-p-zero/p/41164?forceSetStore=true&storeName=1047&gclid=CjwKCAiA1aiMBhAUEiwACw25MYDIHy-oJqeTYu9cYBvmmy6CG-jdEbUHkw3Glrka3d0BisBvzVocDhoCB8wQAvD_BwE
Drag coefficient rating should fall between 0.23 Cd (highest typical scale of "experimental") and 0.27 Cd (lowest typical scale of "sports"), so 0.25 Cd it is.
For this testing, I benchmarked the Maserati MC20 (1965mm wide + 1224mm high) and McLaren 720S (1930mm wide + 1194mm high) in terms of frontal area since both of them are physically and stylistically (in terms of size and shape) similar to the Pininfarina Battista. Averaging all of these numbers gives me a frontal area rating of 1.93 square meters. http://hpwizard.com/aerodynamics.html
Also, the vehicle's curb weight is 4400 lb. (1) https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a37419682/2022-pininfarina-battista-drive (2) https://www.roadandtrack.com/reviews/a37443982/the-pininfarina-battista-is-a-blast-from-the-future/
Using 110% VE boost rating, 17000 max rpm, and a target bhp rating of 1874.008, its electric powertrain is the equivalent to 469.75 cubic inches. That's 7.7 liters in the postmodern world.
Unlike with the (mostly turbocharged) gas cars I've used, I didn't use peak power in the rpm section; instead I used the redline rpm for the electric hypercar/megacar. It is a huge torque monster as well! You may as well call it a spiritual successor to the Dodge Viper.
Change rpm setting from 17000 to 5800, and this is the horsepower rating the Pf.-B would make as a gas car: 640 horsepower. Adding 1,234 horsepower to it requires 28.4 psi (1.96 bar) of boost.
Tested "curb weight" includes downforce (2440kg). Pininfarina targets a "sub-2000kg" curb weight, but we don't know exact curb weight, but HPWizard estimates 1885kg. Unlike the Rimac Nevera, the Pininfarina Battista will be a downright track car; it will likely generate 555 kg of overall downforce.