Close

Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 24 Hours Last 24 Hours Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums Articles Articles
Filter by: Popular Last 7 Days Clear All
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    05-19-2015, 04:04 PM
    One of our valued customers in the land down under has posted a review on our facebook page showing off his RHD 135i picking up an astounding 30WHP with ONLY the installation of our VTT silicone inlets, no tuning changes. Add a little conservative tuning to the mix, and that power jumps up almost 60 WHP! This is what he had to say about his experience "VTT silicone inlets made Massive power gains for me taking my N54 135i to 397rwKw with RB's. It's a beast since I installed the inlets. 353 to 375 was inlets only, 397 was new backend and some tuning and a little more boost. The sound is just intoxicating." Awesome work Greg! Glad you are enjoying your new inlets! For us WHP guys that is 474WHP, up to 503WHP with inlets only, up to 532 with some tuning! $499 for 30WHP, requiring absolutely nothing to be touched in your engine, 100% plug and play! Works with EVERY brand of intake box, or DCI on the market. No need to buy what you already have again! No other inlet offers this versatility, plain and simple. This explains why we have sold 55 sets in such a short time...:) If anyone is wondering when we will have more. We ordered 30 more sets, they will arrive in the next 7 days or so. We have 5 pre-ordered leaving 25 sets ready for purchase! Feel free to email us with any questions! Find the review here: https://www.facebook.com/VargasTurbo?sk=reviews
    55 replies | 458 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-19-2015, 08:32 PM
    Why there is such a large disparity between US Porsche 991 Turbo performance and Middle Eastern times we have no clue. ESmotor claims this is their ES650 bolt on package on a Porsche 991 Turbo S. What are the details of this package? What they claim does not add up. Why you ask? Because to go 143 in the 1/4 mile on the 991 Turbo and Turbo S platform will require fuel system upgrades. What fuel system upgrades are they running? This is clearly necessary beyond the bolt on level which the factory fuel system does support. Also, a trap speed of 143 miles per hour is much more than 650 horsepower. Even at the wheels. Where is a dyno for this car? This network yet again can not explain Middle Eastern 1/4 mile anomalies or modifications. They say bolt on but do you really think this is the stock DME? Ekanooracing and ESMotor can claim to throw as much money as they want at a Porsche 911 Turbo S but you are not getting a 143 miles per hour pass out of it with bolt ons. Something just is not adding up unless you believe this: Emre@ESMotor: "Hello guys, Just to clarify the claims in the thread. The car has stock engine, never touched, and believe or not, it has completely stock fueling system. Its running our exhaust, headers, water/meth injection kit and our ecu module. It also has our "specific" alignment settings for better traction on the launch. Upgraded VTG's and upgraded intercoolers; i'm testing them on my personal car, i will release more information about them soon. " There is a video below but who knows if it is actually a 991 Turbo S that is running as you can not tell from the video. We have no explanation. <blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-version="4" style=" background:#FFF; border:0; border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width:658px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px); width:calc(100% - 2px);"><div style="padding:8px;"> <div style=" background:#F8F8F8; line-height:0; margin-top:40px; padding:50% 0; text-align:center; width:100%;"> <div style=" background:url(); display:block; height:44px; margin:0 auto -44px; position:relative; top:-22px; width:44px;"></div></div><p style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; margin-bottom:0; margin-top:8px; overflow:hidden; padding:8px 0 7px; text-align:center; text-overflow:ellipsis; white-space:nowrap;"><a href="https://instagram.com/p/2jUzYyQAXX/" style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none;" target="_top">A video posted by ESMOTOR (@esmotor)</a> on <time style=" font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px;" datetime="2015-05-11T18:37:30+00:00">May 11, 2015 at 11:37am PDT</time></p></div></blockquote> <script async defer src="//platform.instagram.com/en_US/embeds.js"></script>
    26 replies | 269 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-18-2015, 11:11 PM
    The battle we have been waiting for is officially underway. Owners are getting their hands on the new C63 and fortunately one such owner was willing to go up against an F80 M3 on the highway to settle which car is quicker in stock form. It is not as simple as looking at the stock output to determine this race. On paper, the C63 AMG S M177 V8 has the advantage with its 503 horsepower rating. That said, the car is heavy coming in at roughly 400 pounds more than the F80 M3. It also does not have the F80 M3 and F82 M4 dual clutch transmission but the Mercedes MCT is a top of the line automatic gearbox offering quick gearshifts. The M3 is lighter, has a DCT, and also is severely underrated in its output showing 427 horsepower at the wheels and 429 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. The C63 AMG S on the other hand shows 467 horsepower stock and 489 lb-ft of torque stock to the wheels. The C63 AMG S takes this race easily. It does have the inside track which plays a factor. The M3 does have a JB4 tune and downpipes but was run in Map 0 making this essentially a stock on stock race. The standard C63 AMG and the M3/M4 should be almost even. The S gives AMG the edge much like the P31 package did for the previous generation W204 C63 AMG. The first round goes to Mercedes.
    16 replies | 1314 view(s)
  • Tony@VargasTurboTech's Avatar
    05-21-2015, 02:38 PM
    Our awesome test car in Boston running our N55 Stage 2 JB turbo took his car to the track for the first time since it opened last night. He only got two passes before a spill shut the track down. His results? How about 12.18ET at 121.44, with a not great 2.08 60ft. Then on his very next pass he made a few adjustments, and managed an 11.73ET at 122.7, with a better 60 ft of 1.85. This incredibly was done on PUMP gas 93 octane, a single meth nozzle, and 18-20PSI! Shant is really showing off his driving skill here, with near perfect shifts, and NLS shifting on the runs. Video of the run: Keep in mind, our Stage 2 DBB currently holds the N55 1/4 record with a pass of 11.42 at 123.1 with an AT, E50, more timing, and nearly an identical 60ft. The AT alone will make up the 3/10ths of a second difference in the passes, let alone the higher timing. Here is log showing the car running 6-4 degrees of timing and a timing FLATLINE all the way through 4th. What this means is, as soon as he gets some more octane in the car, and can hold timing through 4th gear, this is an easy low 11 second car with at least 3-4MPH trap in it. Lets not even talk about turning up the boost a little bit...:naughty: http://www.datazap.me/u/vargasturbotech/shant-jb-n55-tester-logs-9-drag-strip?log=0&data=1-3-4-5-11&zoom=110-202 Bottom line the car has a TON left in it, and its already so close to taking the 1/4 record, well from us, but from an AT! If you want a dyno queen, you have other options, if you want N55 turbos that hold real drag racing records, your only option is VTT! Great work Shant! We appreciate all your hardwork, and nice driving!
    25 replies | 381 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-19-2015, 05:51 PM
    This is the second round of the matchup between these two cars. You may remember yesterday the video posted shows the stock C63 AMG S beating up on this M3. The M3 has a JB4 S55 tune from BMS (Burger Tuning) but was run on Map 0 to try to get as close to a stock to stock comparison as possible. The F80 M3 in this video is running Map 2 and also has downpipes. Running an actual tune makes a huge difference as the M3 opens up a lead. The C63 AMG S starts to come on strong though. Oddly, it stops pulling and the M3 pulls ahead as if the C63 let off. One thing is certain here. If F80 M3 or F82 M4 owners want to play with a C63 AMG S on the highway they better be tuned with bolt ons. The C63 AMG S sure looks strong in stock form.
    19 replies | 909 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-18-2015, 09:52 PM
    After teaser, after teaser, after teaser, GM officially revealed the new 2016 Camaro. You might be saying to yourself that it looks quite a bit like the car it replaced. You would not be wrong in that assessment but the main changes really come under the skin. The interior for one is a huge improvement. Americans traditionally struggle with interior design for some odd reason but they finally seem to be getting it. All of them, not just GM. The new chassis is said to be 200 pounds lighter. With how many manufacturers are missing their weight loss claims we will wait for independent weights before we proclaim that GM has done a great job leaning out the Camaro. The car should handle better due to its new rear end architecture based on the Cadillac ATS. Less weight and improved handling, good job. These were major areas of concern with the previous generation car. There will be three launch engine choices and four different transmission choices depending on the motor which are detailed below. Is the new Camaro enough of a change? It still looks very familiar and that may be the main downside. Adding LED lights with sharp angles to a design people already have grown accustomed to years ago is somewhat boring. On the other hand, they play it safe and improve the car where it matters. What do you think? Engines 2.0L Turbocharged I-4 VVT DI 3.6L V-6 VVT DI 6.2L V-8 VVT DI Displacement (cu in / cc): 122 / 1998 222 / 3640 376 / 6162 Bore & stroke (in / mm): 3.39 x 3.39 / 86 x 86 3.74 x 3.37 / 95 x 85.6 4.06 x 3.62 / 103.25 x 92 Block material: cast aluminum w/ cast-in-place iron bore liners cast aluminum w/ cast-in-place iron bore liners cast aluminum w/ cast-in-place iron bore liners Cylinder head material: cast aluminum cast aluminum cast aluminum Valvetrain: DOHC, four valves per cylinder, continuously variable valve timing DOHC, four valves per cylinder, continuously variable valve timing; Active Fuel Management overhead valve; two valves per cylinder; Active Fuel Management Fuel delivery: direct high-pressure fuel injection direct high-pressure fuel injection direct high-pressure fuel injection Compression ratio: 9.5:1 11.5:1 11.5:1 Horsepower (hp / kW @ rpm): 275 / 205 @ 5600* 335 / 250 @ 6800* 455 / 339 @ 6000* Torque (lb-ft / Nm @ rpm): 295 / 400 @ 3000-4500* 284 / 385 @ 5300* 455 / 617 @ 4400* *SAE certified. Transmissions Tremec TR3160 6-speed manual (2.0T and 3.6L) Tremec TR6060 6-speed manual with Active Rev Match (6.2L) Hydra-Matic 8L45 8-speed automatic (2.0L and 3.6L) Hydra-Matic 8L90 8-speed automatic (6.2L) Gear ratios (:1): First: 4.40 2.66 4.62 4.56 Second: 2.59 1.78 3.04 2.97 Third: 1.80 1.30 2.07 2.08 Fourth: 1.34 1.00 1.66 1.69 Fifth: 1.00 0.74 1.26 1.27 Sixth: 0.75 0.50 1.00 1.00 Seventh: -- -- 0.85 0.85 Eighth: -- -- 0.66 0.65 Reverse: 3.99 2.90 3.93 3.82 Final drive ratio: 3.27 3.73 3.27 (2.0L) 2.77 (3.6L) 2.77 Chassis/Suspension/Brakes Front: MacPherson-type strut with dual lower ball joints, twin-tube struts and direct-acting stabilizer bar; Magnetic Ride Control with monotube inverted struts (avail. on SS) Rear: independent five-link with twin-tube shocks and direct-acting stabilizer bar; Magnetic Ride Control with monotube shocks (avail. on SS) Steering type: ZF rack-mounted electric, power-assisted and variable ratio Brakes: four-wheel disc with four-channel ABS/TCS w/ DRP
    20 replies | 189 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-20-2015, 03:04 PM
    G-Power has quality hardware and solid tuning (from a BMW source that supplies many other tuners as well) but their kits are overpriced especially for the performance. How else would you characterize a $32,500 SKII S85 V10 twin supercharger kit that produces 660 horsepower? There are cheaper options on the market at a fraction of the G-Power cost that offer more power. G-Power seems to be getting more serious about performance though announcing their 1001 horsepower kit. It's nice to see them for once provide a graph although it is a crank horsepower readout. It looks like they are using a MAHA dyno and the raw readout is in the upper right hand corner which shows the wheel output and losses but it's too small to read and not shared. So while they are getting better about providing output graphs so people who do not care about the G-Power name brand can actually take them seriously as a real high performance option they still are not providing all the data they can (and should). As this is an SKIII system it does involve a built S85 V10 motor. That means this is not a cheap solution but it is a complete solution. They do not list the price but an SKIII system with a single supercharger and built motor on the S65 V8 E9X M3 platform runs $57k. You can use that as a barometer as for how much they charge for this. Let's just say $65k+ and that they want you to contact them to discuss pricing. Does spending more money on a supercharger kit than one can buy an actual E60 M5 or E63 M6 vehicle for make sense? Not really. One of the cheaper single supercharger Vortech based solutions for under $15k plus a custom built motor makes more sense if one really want to push the S85 V10. This same thing can be done for less than half the price. You won't have twin ASA superchargers though and you won't have the G-Power logo scrawled across the orange manifold. Then again, if you're seriously considering this setup you probably don't care about the money anyway. Hopefully G-Power provides some actual performance testing and numbers but you can pretty much forget about ever seeing a 1/4 mile run.
    15 replies | 623 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-19-2015, 05:44 PM
    This is the second round of the matchup between these two cars. You may remember yesterday the video posted shows the stock C63 AMG S beating up on this M3. The M3 has a JB4 S55 tune from BMS (Burger Tuning) but was run on Map 0 to try to get as close to a stock to stock comparison as possible. The F80 M3 in this video is running Map 2 and also has downpipes. Running an actual tune makes a huge difference as the M3 opens up a lead. The C63 AMG S starts to come on strong though. Oddly, it stops pulling and the M3 pulls ahead as if the C63 let off. One thing is certain here. If F80 M3 or F82 M4 owners want to play with a C63 AMG S on the highway they better be tuned with bolt ons. The C63 AMG S sure looks strong in stock form.
    19 replies | 131 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-21-2015, 08:44 PM
    This is a pretty ugly beatdown but what it does is show just how fast the AMS Alpha 9 Porsche 997 Turbo package is in a street setting on pump gas. The video claims the Alpha 9 is running 600 horsepower with a custom Undercover Performance tune but considering AMS shows 800+ horsepower on 93 octane for the package there is some serious sandbagging going on here. The Stingray looks and performs as if it is stock. It ends up looking as if it is standing still. What we really learn here is that the Alpha 9 package on pump gas is tough to beat on the street. From a stoplight a rear wheel drive does not have much of a chance even if it has big power simply due to how effectively the 911 Turbo puts the power down. Ok, so it easily beats up on a Stingray and looks very fast. Now how about this car picks on somebody its own size? The AMS Alpha 9 Porsche 997.1 Turbo package starts at $19,995.95 and includes: TiAL Bolt on, Ball bearing turbochargers with advanced geometry billet aluminum compressor wheels Plex PBC Boost Controller COBB AccessPort W/Custom Tune 5.5 thick high flow intercoolers with smooth cast endtanks 4 ply reinforced silicone turbo discharge pipes Steel wire reinforced silicone turbo inlet pipes Cast Y pipe with smooth merge Carbon fiber upper intercooler ducts Line hardware and fittings Heavy Duty Injectors
    17 replies | 271 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-21-2015, 04:41 PM
    The next gen battle between these popular M and AMG vehicles will soon be in full swing. Now we know the S55 engine in the BMW M3/M4 is underrated despite its claimed output of 425 horsepower. Thanks to Eurocharged Dynojet baseline testing of the new W205 C63 AMG S we know that car is also underrated despite its claimed 503 horse output. Eurocharged was kind enough to do a comparison between the two on their Dynojet dyno for us. You will notice the readout is not RPM but time and the reason for this is explained by Jerry@Eurocharged: "I did it in time view so you can see how long each car takes to accelerate under load. Ironically, both cars accelerate to redline in 13 seconds under load. Blue is C63S Red is M3 Both are my cars and 100% stock." The C63 AMG S obviously makes more power and torque. Considering its bigger 4.0 liter V8, this is no surprise. Its 467 wheel horsepower and 489 lb-ft of torque at the wheels comfortably exceed the M3 S55's ~425 wheel horsepower and ~430 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. This particular graph shows a bit of a spike in the M3's torque as the turbo comes on showing a value above 450 but this seems to be an anomaly from the norm. The reason the peak values are not listed on the graph is due to an accidental shift at redline while on the dyno causing a spike for the M3. Whoops, these things happen and so the comparison is not perfect. Considering how hard graphs like this are to come by we appreciate the effort from Eurocharged. What we can clearly see is the that C63 M177 has a big torque advantage namely down low. This is to be expected from the bigger V8. The BMW S55 motor has to rev more and has more lag. Interestingly the horsepower difference between the two toward redline is negligible. The M177 hits its power peak before the S55. The S55 uses its revs to keep power fairly level as its torque curve also drops toward redline. It is not a classic naturally aspirated M motor curve or a high rpm engine by any means but BMW still has to use revs to mitigate displacement differences to a degree. AMG also is tuning the M177 for more torque down low than the M178 in the AMG GT S which is tuned for more top end punch. The next overlay we will bring you is tuned versus tuned.
    16 replies | 571 view(s)
  • BlackJetE90OC's Avatar
    05-18-2015, 08:37 PM
    Well it begins... F80 M3 (JB4 map 0, downpipes, manual) vs W205 C63s (stock)
    16 replies | 172 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-21-2015, 08:38 PM
    This is a pretty ugly beatdown but what it does is show just how fast the AMS Alpha 9 Porsche 997 Turbo package is in a street setting on pump gas. The video claims the Alpha 9 is running 600 horsepower with a custom Undercover Performance tune but considering AMS shows 800+ horsepower on 93 octane for the package there is some serious sandbagging going on here. The Stingray looks and performs as if it is stock. It ends up looking as if it is standing still. What we really learn here is that the Alpha 9 package on pump gas is tough to beat on the street. From a stoplight a rear wheel drive does not have much of a chance even if it has big power simply due to how effectively the 911 Turbo puts the power down. Ok, so it easily beats up on a Stingray and looks very fast. Now how about this car picks on somebody its own size? The AMS Alpha 9 Porsche 997.1 Turbo package starts at $19,995.95 and includes: TiAL Bolt on, Ball bearing turbochargers with advanced geometry billet aluminum compressor wheels Plex PBC Boost Controller COBB AccessPort W/Custom Tune 5.5” thick high flow intercoolers with smooth cast endtanks 4 ply reinforced silicone turbo discharge pipes Steel wire reinforced silicone turbo inlet pipes Cast Y pipe with smooth merge Carbon fiber upper intercooler ducts Line hardware and fittings Heavy Duty Injectors
    17 replies | 119 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-21-2015, 04:36 PM
    The next gen battle between these popular M and AMG vehicles will soon be in full swing. Now we know the S55 engine in the BMW M3/M4 is underrated despite its claimed output of 425 horsepower. Thanks to Eurocharged Dynojet baseline testing of the new W205 C63 AMG S we know that car is also underrated despite its claimed 503 horse output. Eurocharged was kind enough to do a comparison between the two on their Dynojet dyno for us. You will notice the readout is not RPM but time and the reason for this is explained by Jerry@Eurocharged: "I did it in time view so you can see how long each car takes to accelerate under load. Ironically, both cars accelerate to redline in 13 seconds under load. Blue is C63S Red is M3 Both are my cars and 100% stock." The C63 AMG S obviously makes more power and torque. Considering its bigger 4.0 liter V8, this is no surprise. Its 467 wheel horsepower and 489 lb-ft of torque at the wheels comfortably exceed the M3 S55's ~425 wheel horsepower and ~430 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. This particular graph shows a bit of a spike in the M3's torque as the turbo comes on showing a value above 450 but this seems to be an anomaly from the norm. The reason the peak values are not listed on the graph is due to an accidental shift at redline while on the dyno causing a spike for the M3. Whoops, these things happen and so the comparison is not perfect. Considering how hard graphs like this are to come by we appreciate the effort from Eurocharged. What we can clearly see is the that C63 M177 has a big torque advantage namely down low. This is to be expected from the bigger V8. The BMW S55 motor has to rev more and has more lag. Interestingly the horsepower difference between the two toward redline is negligible. The M177 hits its power peak before the S55. The S55 uses its revs to keep power fairly level as its torque curve also drops toward redline. It is not a classic naturally aspirated M motor curve or a high rpm engine by any means but BMW still has to use revs to mitigate displacement differences to a degree. AMG also is tuning the M177 for more torque down low than the M178 in the AMG GT S which is tuned for more top end punch. The next overlay we will bring you is tuned versus tuned.
    16 replies | 64 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-18-2015, 08:10 PM
    Most readers here understand that we identify a BMW motor by its engine code. It is even how the forums are sorted here. It takes a bit more knowledge of BMW's than the casual BMW fan might be aware of so let's educate people on how and why BMW uses the engine codes that they use. A popular past engine family for example in the BMW world is the M50 line of inline-6 motors. The full codename explains the differences in the M50 line. Look at this M50B25TU example: M is the engine family or generation. 5 means it is an inline-6 engine. 0-9 are the variation. B means it is a gasoline engine. 25 is the engine size in liters in this example a 2.5 liter. TU stands for technical update. Using a more modern example the BMW N63 twin turbo 4.4 liter V8 was updated and so there is an N63TU motor. We rarely use the full engine codes here as typing the whole thing out is tedious. If we did instead of writing N63 or N63TU we would have to write N63B44TU. Make sense? Here is a graphical example that relates to the brand new B series engine generation: This is the new 1.5 liter three cylinder turbo motor and you can see how the code changes to reflect this. We will just refer to it a B38. BMW also does block codes and this complicates things and isn't necessary for general discussion but worth pointing out for those interested:
    5 replies | 1236 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-18-2015, 08:31 PM
    The old and new M philosophy clashing on the highway. These two cars may both have V8's but they go about their power delivery very differently. The 4.4 liter S63TU in the F10 M5 is of course twin turbocharged and features direct injection. The motor is all about low end torque. You can take a look at a graph here showing the output and the M5 makes roughly ~520 wheel horsepower stock. The torque curve drops off toward redline but with a tune there is a lot of area under the curve. We do not know what tune this F10 M5 is running but expect output of roughly 580 wheel horsepower, 594 lb-ft of torque at the wheels, and 130 mile per hour trap speeds from a Stage I tuned car. That amount of wheel horsepower and that same 130 trap speed range is about what is expected out of a supercharged E92 M3 (depending on how aggressively it is tuned and what pulley/kit it is running). You can see how a G-Power SKII kit compares to an Active Autowerke Level I E9X M3 S65 V8 supercharger here. Suffice it to say G-Power is not the strongest option especially for the money on the platform. What this basically boils down to is the supercharged M3 top end horsepower thanks to its flat curve that increases toward redline thanks to the centrifugal blower adding torque the harder it spins versus the F10 M5 raw grunt. It's a great run between the two and very even. The M5 with its roughly 700 pound weight penalty needs that torque advantage down low far more. Both are very capable on the highway.
    11 replies | 727 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-20-2015, 10:33 PM
    The MKVII Golf R continues to impress with its tunability and APR has raised the bar again on the platform. Just earlier this month APR went 11.9 @ 114 with their Stage I software and an intake. The elapsed time improves with the Stage II software, APR intake, and downpipe to 11.793 @ 114.41. This is on 93 octane pump gas and street tires. Keep in mind, there is more in this car whether it be on 93 octane or with race gas. Breaking into the 11's with bolt ons on the Golf R platform should basically be expected as the norm. Now we need to see how far into the 11's the car will go on the stock turbocharger. The Stage II software with bolt on is putting out 382 crank horsepower. We want to see the numbers at the wheels but that is a very solid gain: If the Golf R is doing this with basic tuning imagine what the Golf R420 will do out of the box and then with tuning. It's a good time to be a VW enthusiast.
    11 replies | 242 view(s)
  • Sticky's Avatar
    05-19-2015, 03:31 AM
    Absolutely incredible performance here from the Lamborghini Aventador LP750-4 Superveloce. We all knew the Superveloce version of the Aventador would offer higher performance but cracking the 7 minute barrier on the Nurburgring Nordschleife while testing Pirelli P Zero tires is mind blowing. The Porsche 918 Spyder manages a 6 minute and 57 second laptime and that is a hybrid supercar more than twice the price of the Aventador. If you are looking for other production cars with officially recorded laptimes under seven minutes you have that car and now the Lamborghini Aventador SV on the list. That's it. Who knew a Lamborghini could look like a performance value? The Aventador SV shaves 110 pounds off the standard Aventador and also bumps power into the 750 horse range. The aerodynamics, suspension, and brakes are all updated. The SV model offers 170% more downforce than the standard Aventador and it shows. The Aventador LP 750-4 Superveloce is the real deal ladies and gentlemen. Watch the video and see how incredibly well it hustles around the track (and how glorious it sounds while doing so).
    8 replies | 145 view(s)
More Activity