New Nurburgring record?

[JV911]

Huracán Performante (allegedly) sets Nurburgring record at 6:52:01

Lots of controversy over whether it was legit, including whether the video was doctored. It does seem incredible that it was ~6 sec faster than the 918, so you at least have to wonder what tyres it was on.

You be the judge.

 

[Macca]

He drove the shit out of that car - video made me sick just watching it. (wish it was the driver view not the fender) 

[StevepGT3]

Unless Guinness is involved, i wouldn`t believe anyone.

[Raven]

Records are made to be broken if no one brakes the 918,s lap time how will we ever progress onto bigger and better things ,,,,,Imagine what comes next 

[Airhead]

Unless Guinness is involved, i wouldn`t believe anyone.

I like drop of that meself.

[LeeM]

  Watch the video of the Zonda R that did 6.47, though that was on special Pirelli's....and its a bonkers car. Driver has some big cojones!

[tazzieman]

It's not scientific unless you account for weather , tyres , driver , what he had for breakfast etc.
So for mine , pretty quick yeah  but a random event with bragging rights only. 

Of course it sends the interwebs into an orgiastic pillow fight 

[Carrera28]

Apparently it was on Trofeo R tyres

[MFX]

There was a heap of controversy about the Aventador SV time being dodgy, and this is no different. Lamborghini do not have a lot of credibility in this area. Porsche on the other hand are renowned to underquote performance figures. 

[Raven]

I wouldn,t think an Italian Auto maker would Lie .....................

[DJM]

Some of the accusations here:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/531069/lamborghini-has-nothing-to-hide-with-huracan-performante-nurburgring-lap-time/

to me it didn't look sub 7 minutes fast but.....does it really matter?  They've got more publicity for the car thanks to all the conspiracy theories.  They probably started them!

[Raven]

I think they are running the car on Lance Armstrong Urine ............that,s got to be what giving them the edge  

[tazzieman]

I have played with my Snipit Tool ; 4:28.02 137 km/hr ; 4:28.39  191 km/hr
Even if you didn't study maths and physics very well , that is ballistic missile acceleration. Even then it's a bit Marvel comics...
Suss...

 

[Skidmarks]

I wouldn,t think an Italian Auto maker would Lie .....................

Reminds me of a story I heard back in the day. 

A couple of guys racing Ghibli GT cars.  Were absolutely blowing everything into the weeds. 

Cars dynod and very large raised eyebrows on the readings, let's say 550 against what was thought should have been low 400's on a good day. So the series organizers put a call into Maserati in Italy to verify.  

They ask if Maserati can verify their dyno figure. Maserati Man asks, "waddah she put out?"  Answer 550.  Long pause.  'Soundsa bout right" ...

I have played with my Snipit Tool ; 4:28.02 137 km/hr ; 4:28.39  191 km/hr
Even if you didn't study maths and physics very well , that is ballistic missile acceleration. Even then it's a bit Marvel comics...
Suss...

 

 

 

and there is only a 200 rpm change in the revs.  It's bullshit. 

[BlitzKonig]

I have played with my Snipit Tool ; 4:28.02 137 km/hr ; 4:28.39  191 km/hr
Even if you didn't study maths and physics very well , that is ballistic missile acceleration. Even then it's a bit Marvel comics...
Suss...

 

This is explained because they used GPS for speed which was fed back into the digital dash. They put it down to a packet update missing...

918's lap record was back in Late 2013... Thats a lot of time to develop and improve cars based off something that has been released onto the market for others to inspect in greater detail. 

For marketing though, its all attention is good attention. Its getting people talking. 

[Redracn]

^ GPS speed is rubbish. It can and does fluctuate wildly in the short term. I have heaps of logging that shows this. It gets worse around trees and buildings and hi G corners.

The fact the GPS speed is doing what it is adds to the credability as no one would think to make it as bad as GPS speed actually is.

 

 

[Skidmarks]

It's still bullshit.  Don't care that's it's not a Porsche but unless it's properly logged then take it with a bag of salt. 

[tazzieman]

Seriously , I'd be inclined to believe it if they started at point A , used a $5 Kmart watch duct taped to the dashboard , and finished at point A. Even K mart watches don't gain or lose 5 seconds in 7 minutes.

[Redracn]

Seriously , I'd be inclined to believe it if they started at point A , used a $5 Kmart watch duct taped to the dashboard , and finished at point A. Even K mart watches don't gain or lose 5 seconds in 7 minutes.

Yep way more accurate than GPS. Just make sure it has good vibration isolation mounting so it will last the distance. Better still tape a couple of different brands/design timers to the dash  for a cross check. 

The logging is irrelevant. The only thing that matters and what is being quoted is the time taken to drive between two points while staying on the road surface.

[SimonN]

GPS is an accurate way of measuring speed and because the data can be examined and compared it is now the preferred method for verifying water speed record data. BUT....... the gear used needs to be good, for record purposes you normally need 2 units so their data is compared and, even more important, the way the speed is calculated is vital because of the speed peaks that you have seen and identified above. The usual method is to use a continuous moving average speed calculation that ignores data glitches of a certain duration and extrapolates across data points up to a certain interval. Then you compare the data around unusual peaks between the 2 GPS units because you never get the same glitch happening at the same time with 2 units. From all of this it is possible to get some very accurate data.

When using only a single, cost effective unit, most of us who use GPS for sailing accept that you can only really rely on 10 second averages and not peak speeds. Recently I had data that showed I had gone from 27 knots to 33.5 knots in less than 0.15 of a second, so as much as I would have liked to claim a 33 knot plus top speed, I knew it was BS.

So the question about the Lambo lap is not whether the GPS data is correct, but is the timer they use OK

Edited for clarity after reading. For sailing speed records, it is actually a straight time over distance calculation by 2 separate GPS units with the distance being 500 metres. It is only for some of the windurfer and kiteboarding speed tables that average speed calcs are used.

[Redracn]

GPS is an accurate way of measuring speed and because the data can be examined and compared it is now the preferred method for verifying water speed record data. BUT....... the gear used needs to be good, for record purposes you normally need 2 units so their data is compared and, even more important, the way the speed is calculated is vital because of the speed peaks that you have seen and identified above. The usual method is to use a continuous moving average speed calculation that ignores data glitches of a certain duration and extrapolates across data points up to a certain interval. Then you compare the data around unusual peaks between the 2 GPS units because you never get the same glitch happening at the same time with 2 units. From all of this it is possible to get some very accurate data.

When using only a single, cost effective unit, most of us who use GPS for sailing accept that you can only really rely on 10 second averages and not peak speeds. Recently I had data that showed I had gone from 27 knots to 33.5 knots in less than 0.15 of a second, so as much as I would have liked to claim a 33 knot plus top speed, I knew it was BS.

So the question about the Lambo lap is not whether the GPS data is correct, but is the timer they use OK

Edited for clarity after reading. For sailing speed records, it is actually a straight time over distance calculation by 2 separate GPS units with the distance being 500 metres. It is only for some of the windurfer and kiteboarding speed tables that average speed calcs are used.

So does this mean that GPS has many problems but if you torture the data for long enough you can potentially tease out some accurate data? For GPS can you specify an absolute error for any reading. I.e an error band that the actual reading is guaranteed to lie within. This is easily done for timing beams or 5th wheels or radar guns etc. Or is this just to hard for GPS given all the variables such as atmospheric conditions, satellites in use and their locations in the sky etc. 

Also on a boat or windsurfer how do you account for movement in the vertical direction as these speeds can be quite high and add to the speed over the surface and can still be significant even when averaged over a longer period depending on the starting and ending points. 

GPS is about statistics and you will never be able to say that you are 100.000% confidant that it meets an acceptably high absolute accuracy.

Here is how one of the better GPS units performed on my last Tarmac Rally and I have tesed many units. GPS is green trace the others are the 4wheel speeds and the ABS units determination of vehicle speed. It is better at a constant speed with a better view of the sky but without knowing the absolute error of the reading GPS is at best just a sometimes useful indicator. A precision measuring instrument it is not.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/kgmvsrghx7dc0cb/GPS Speed.pdf?dl=0

 

[SimonN]

If you are measuring over a set distance, nothing will ever be as accurate as a timing beam at the start and finish, but that is rather impractical for water speed records particularly if it is a sailing record.. Radar guns have too many known problems and are a momentary view of speed, when all record speeds have always been an average over distance because peak speed is simply too unreliable.

In sailing, we actually don't have issues with height changes. In almost all cases, it doesn't even come into the consideration set because speed attempts are almost exclusively on as flat water as can be found. With all but one of the recent record breakers, anything other than dead flat water is simply too dangerous. For the rest of us, GPS speeds over an average of 10 second takes out wave action. I use it more as a training device, although bragging rights are a bit of fun. At a speed of, say 27 knots (50kph), I am more interested in how long I can sustain that speed rather than whether I achieve an extra .1 or .2 of a knot. The devices we use are considered accurate enough for everything but records that need ratifying. Officially, they calculate speed to + or - 0.2 knots but over the distances and at the speeds we are working, the accuracy or maybe that should be inaccuracy is very consistent. So when you take a 10 second average as, say 50kph you travel about 143 metres and that distance is actually so small that the errors don't actually creep in. This is why some yachts use GPS for calculating distance to start lines having taken a reading at each end of the line. Because they are so relatively close, the errors are a lot smaller. The final thing that contributes to accuracy is where in the world you are. Worst case is usually considered to be accurate 10 feet, but in most parts of the USA, the accuracy is about 3 feet.

Bottom line still comes don to teh fact that the video we are discussing is using raw GPS data and that is creating the jumps. I am surprised that they aren't running algorithms to tackle that, but it doesn't mean anything is being faked.

[Redracn]

If you are measuring over a set distance, nothing will ever be as accurate as a timing beam at the start and finish, but that is rather impractical for water speed records particularly if it is a sailing record.. Radar guns have too many known problems and are a momentary view of speed, when all record speeds have always been an average over distance because peak speed is simply too unreliable.

In sailing, we actually don't have issues with height changes. In almost all cases, it doesn't even come into the consideration set because speed attempts are almost exclusively on as flat water as can be found. With all but one of the recent record breakers, anything other than dead flat water is simply too dangerous. For the rest of us, GPS speeds over an average of 10 second takes out wave action. I use it more as a training device, although bragging rights are a bit of fun. At a speed of, say 27 knots (50kph), I am more interested in how long I can sustain that speed rather than whether I achieve an extra .1 or .2 of a knot. The devices we use are considered accurate enough for everything but records that need ratifying. Officially, they calculate speed to + or - 0.2 knots but over the distances and at the speeds we are working, the accuracy or maybe that should be inaccuracy is very consistent. So when you take a 10 second average as, say 50kph you travel about 143 metres and that distance is actually so small that the errors don't actually creep in. This is why some yachts use GPS for calculating distance to start lines having taken a reading at each end of the line. Because they are so relatively close, the errors are a lot smaller. The final thing that contributes to accuracy is where in the world you are. Worst case is usually considered to be accurate 10 feet, but in most parts of the USA, the accuracy is about 3 feet.

Bottom line still comes don to teh fact that the video we are discussing is using raw GPS data and that is creating the jumps. I am surprised that they aren't running algorithms to tackle that, but it doesn't mean anything is being faked.

Hi Simon

How do you reconcile that a typical location specification for a GPS (without augmentation) reads like less than +-10meters for 50% of the time. What about the other 50%? And how far out can it possibly go? The position can be relatively stable for longish (many minutes) or short periods and when it moves it moves relitavly quickly to a new position. So if you are timing between two points using a GPS with a < 10m 50% spec then the points may be precise to a few cm or there could be a 20m error which is significant when calculating speed by time over distance. Local correction can do wonders but you still have the issue of <y for x% of time and cost of these systems.

I have no doubt that GPS is better than anything but dedicated local triangulation systems when it comes to marine use as you really do not have the luxury of more accurate methods to even compare against and if used sensibly as you are then GPS can be a benefit.? 

But there is way to much belief placed in readings from just about anything without understanding the instruments errors and the additional errors that are more often than not  introduced by the user. GPS just happens to be the worst offender even worse than just about anybody's dyno numbers or speedo readings from 1960's cars.

A few years ago now I made a jig that I used to spin GPS units at various speeds on a 7m arm. The data was logged for many hours along with the exact rotational speed of the arm. One thing to note is g force matters and some read speed faster and some slower some could handle more Gs than others. Any movement of the GPS antenna in any direction other than the smooth motion you are trying to measure could creat an error even when averaged over a long period of time. 

 

[SimonN]

TBH, I only know so much about GPS but what I do know is that the basic units I use are accurate to +-0.2 knots which is more than good enough for what I am doing and would be good enough for the GPS tracking they do in the video. The super accurate ones used for speed attempts are accepted by the World Sailing Speed Record Council who are pretty strict. They only approve a few systems, one of which is made by a company called Trimble. I checked the details and it claims accuracy to 10mm  (yes, millimetres!) in real time and 5mm post-processed. The WSSRC lay down very specific rules about how the equipment is used, including time stamped positions ever 0.1 of  second and in an answer to an earlier question, if there is a horizontal positioning error (HPE) of more than 0.1m, the record is not accepted. Once a claim is made, they sift through all the data and ratify or otherwise.

The most interesting thing in the WSSRC rules is the margin by which a record needs to be broken in order to count. There are 2 ways of 'recording' the record attempt, one being teh approved GPS and the other being between 2 fixed points on "land" (sea bed counts but not buoys) and video recording equipment accurate to 1/100th of a second. On water, it is impossible to use a timing beam. For the fixed point video system, the record needs to be broken by 1/25th of a second but with the approved GPS method, the margin only has to be 1/100th of a second, which tells us the degree of accuracy and confidence they have in GPS.

If only the Ring record was monitored to that degree of accuracy!

[Redracn]

TBH, I only know so much about GPS but what I do know is that the basic units I use are accurate to +-0.2 knots which is more than good enough for what I am doing and would be good enough for the GPS tracking they do in the video. The super accurate ones used for speed attempts are accepted by the World Sailing Speed Record Council who are pretty strict. They only approve a few systems, one of which is made by a company called Trimble. I checked the details and it claims accuracy to 10mm  (yes, millimetres!) in real time and 5mm post-processed. The WSSRC lay down very specific rules about how the equipment is used, including time stamped positions ever 0.1 of  second and in an answer to an earlier question, if there is a horizontal positioning error (HPE) of more than 0.1m, the record is not accepted. Once a claim is made, they sift through all the data and ratify or otherwise.

The most interesting thing in the WSSRC rules is the margin by which a record needs to be broken in order to count. There are 2 ways of 'recording' the record attempt, one being teh approved GPS and the other being between 2 fixed points on "land" (sea bed counts but not buoys) and video recording equipment accurate to 1/100th of a second. On water, it is impossible to use a timing beam. For the fixed point video system, the record needs to be broken by 1/25th of a second but with the approved GPS method, the margin only has to be 1/100th of a second, which tells us the degree of accuracy and confidence they have in GPS.

If only the Ring record was monitored to that degree of accuracy!

Hi Simon

The specs you quote are incomplete so not really meaningful. Such as the effect of dynamic conditions and the limits that must be met for the specifications to be valid like satellites in use but most off all with a GPS you must have the % number. Yes there is an indication of position error but that is just an estimate and not an absolute limit.

Now how many of the GPS have been extensively tested in real world everyday conditions, on land where it is easy to do, against instruments with absolute specifications. I would suggest none as no one wants to know the answer. Have the boating people independently verified the GPS systems?

And the biggest issue never confuse resolution with accuracy. Of course this along with many other measurement issues needs its own thread in a technical forum.

GPS are convenient and while people are inclined to accept headline numbers without question rather than understand all the information GPS will carry far more weight than is justified by its actual performance. 

Many many yeas ago now I installed a timing system at Indianapolis Motor Speedway capable of tracking multiple cars across a timing line. Part of commissioning was comparing to an existing IR light beam. The two points at the start finish were about a meter apart. This was enough to make a significant differance to the measured lap times based solely on the speed the car crossed the line at. We also had 8 other timing lines around the track and even if the car is running consistent laps the lap time as measured by each point will vary.

We also tested the 33 push button (stopwatch) people (each one allocated a car) and the results were very interesting. Just like GPS a person could on the rare occasion be very accurate then they could also be way out. I certainly hope no world records are determined using a stopwatch but up until not that long ago stopwatch was kingn a lot of sports and while now replaced by GPS in a lot of cases I am not sure anything has improved.

 

edit

Also if your GPS is accurate to -+0.2kn then why do you need to reject readings that you know are wrong with much greater error as per previous post. Ill answer the GPS is NOT actually accurate to +-0.2kn