Talk:Production car speed record

Cleaning up this article

I put this article up on AFD, but it appears that it's going to be kept, so I'd like to start up some discussion on what needs to be done to fix it. I see the following issues:

1. Article name - needs to be more descriptive and more encyclopedic.
2. Neutral point of view - this is not neutral: "Ferrari F40 was a legend since inception. Launched to celebrate Ferrari's 40th Anniversary, it was rough, spartan, basic, carrying an almost unbelievably bad finish, but man, was it fast! Pure adrenaline, pure pleasure, with a 201 mph (323 km/h) maximum speed."
3. Sources - this article cites no sources for its figures.
4. Standards for inclusion - I suggest we use the standards found on List of automotive superlatives to decide what counts as a production car and therefore what should be discussed in this article.

I think that this article is best suited to being converted into a list of fastest production cars through the years. TomTheHand 19:52, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

The list on this article of the fastest cars is different to that of the "Fastest street-legal production car" box thingy at the bottom of the respective cars' articles. When you click through those you arrive at the Lambo Countach, which isn't in this list at all, and according to the Countach article there is no previous fastest car. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.66.8.120 (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I believe it to make sense that this article be merged into, or simply entirely redirected to, List_of_automotive_superlatives#Performance as that article contains a much broader spectrum of information about other automobile records and this article is somewhat lacking in content and references as well as overall consistency and organization. The other article also already includes several notable past record-holders. Please leave any comments on this below with your belief as to the course of action that should be taken. Thank you. --Ctrlfreak13 01:57, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Dont merge.92.5.78.73 (talk) 19:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Huh

Both these statements are contradicting:

"The first production Ferrari was launched in 1948, using a shared engine from their V12 Grand Prix cars. The 410 Superamerica reached over 257 km/h (160 mph) in late 1948."

"1954 Mercedes-Benz 300SL 250 km/h (155 mph)"

Someone should fix them. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 02:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

References

Is really Shelby Super Cars the best reference to prove that Guiness have verified it's record? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.227.31.180 (talk) 08:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Objection

Maybe if this article was titled Fastest Streel Legal car the Uhlenhaut coupe would have a place here but taking in to consideration that mercedes only made 2(two) of them, that they were never sold to anyone they hardly seem to be production cars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.85.0.66 (talk • contribs) 12:00, February 9, 2008 (UTC)

Barabus TKR

When this record-breaking supercar car is coming up? 88.114.216.26 (talk) 16:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Now known as the Keating TKR - the car crashed in 2010 while attempting to set the record. Their web-site suggests a new model is being made for 2013, but unless they make more they seem to one-off's.

Lamborghini Diablo

Where is this car? In 1990 this babe broke the record. --190.25.6.109 (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

on the diablo page, it says it is. preceded by Ferrari F40, and succeeded by Bugatti EB110 24.222.93.190 (talk) 22:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree. Popular car magazines of the time touted the Lamborghini Diablo as the fastest production car in the world when it was introduced in 1990. I read it in Road and Track, if I remember correctly. Fungicord (talk) 08:29, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Fungicord - check the discussion under the heading F40 vs Diablo below. Essentially independent test results for the F40 yeilded a higher top speed than the Diablo thus the Diablo misses out.NealeFamily (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

What is mass produced production car?

Mercedes-Benz SSK Murphy Roadster between 31 and 35 examples were built with around half being factory-designated Rennwagens, or race cars. So only around 15 is made for street use. This table should have clear rules... --— Typ932^{T | C}  07:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The single issue that arrised from this article is the ill defined nature of "production car." Road legal is simple enough depending on legal jurestiction but the requirments in terms of production volume are rather more moot: - Manufacturers who procure components & assemble cars only after orders are recieved, contrary to many common definitions of "mass production." - Very limited production runs - Factory "legalised" race cars (e.g. many Alfa Romeo pre-war offerings, some of which would count here)

Further to this defining a factory car seems equally tricky; comments above note companies such as (for example) RUF, who essentially produce cars which have a parent car from a major manufacturer as their development start point & repressent a collection of modified components (albeit with a few exceptions) thereof. While these can be purchased factory fresh they are still repressent a modification of a base product (intellectually & physically) from a major another manufacturer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.48.5 (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Reorganize

I propose that this article be cleaned up by being changed to 'Production Car Speed Records'. There is only one fastest car. This entry is about multiple records not a single car. Also, there should be a determination as to what counts as a production car so that a second list of 'Street Legal Car Speed Records' could be produced. For example, the Ruf CTR is not generally considered to have set a record for fastest production car- (Which at the time would I believe have been the Lamborghini Diablo) but it certainly would have qualified as fastest street legal car. The Ruf CTR, should not be on this list because it is a modified Porsche 911. OckRaz (talk) 18:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you are wrong. A Ruf is not a Porsche. Do a little research - it is based on a porsche chassis - this is where it ends. Ruf is its own make, and has its own badge - which is the identifying and technical characteristic of a unique auto manufacturer (versus aftermarket modifier). jeeperjake 23:00, 23, November 2008 (PST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.237.48.105 (talk)

I would argue with this. According to this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruf_CTR , production began in 1987 and 29 were built from scratch, rest converted from customer cars. Converted cars can not be considered mass produced as they are not produced by definition. So it is left with 29 actually built. If this number is enough to classify into this table, then why not include 25 built Porshe 917? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.238.96.5 (talk) 07:59, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Can someone explain this?

I see something missing in this table. For example, according to this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_917 In 1969 Porsche 917 was displayed at the Geneva Motor Show. 25 were built and they were sold to general public for the price of DM 140,000. Also there is stated that at least two 917s were road-registered. So, this car was mass produced (comparing to some other models from this table like Monteverdi Hai 450). It is definitely road legal as it was actually registerd for road use. Why then it is not included? It had a top speed of over 254 mph (407 km/h), thus it has to be the fastest car starting from 1970 up until SSC Ultimate Aero TT. So why isn't it?

There is more to it than that. The 917 was built as a racer. They built 25 cars, brought one to Geneva and gave it a sticker price to nominally meet the CSI competition standards. The car was never speed-tested in a non-racing configuration. The only numbers come from race versions of the car. And while two cars were road-registered, the registrations were rather unusual. One was bought as a race car, raced once, sent back to the factory for one-off street modifications, registered in the US and driven in europe (Rossi's car). The other one was Joachim Grossmann who bought a wrecked 917 frame and other components for 20,000 D-marks rebuilt it into a street-legal car (examples: installing of turn signals, hand brake, Safety glass windows and some modifications to the exhaust system). A stock 917 isn't street legal and Porsche has never sold one as a production (non-race) car. Rossi's was sold as a race car originally. Grossmann bought pieces of a wreck which he rebuilt.

Similar question - Koenigsegg CC, I thought, beat the F1 before the Veyron came along. It says so in the article on it?? 86.151.207.213 (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Countach an Diablo.

First - Countach was faster than Miura so it has to be placed betwin Miura and Ferrari 288 GTO. Second - since the RUF CTR is removed, Diablo is a one that has to be placed betwin F40 and EB110. Is it correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.238.96.5 (talk) 07:52, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

5000QV was the first Coutach to reach speeds higher than 171 mph (the Miura record). But it was introduced in 1985, later than 288 GTO. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Source missing

My problem with this list is that it lacks reliable source and I feel some of these are manufacturer claims, partically anything around the 1980s.

Well, heres one that isn't listed; some time ago, I seen a copy of Guinness Book of Records (presumably a '88 edition) which stated that the Lamborghini Countach 5000QV was the fastest production car. Donnie Park (talk) 19:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

McLaren vs. Koenigsegg

I think it looks rather strange that the Koenigsegg broke the record of 391 km/h with a speed of 388 km/h. The McLaren may have reached a higher speed after the Koenigsegg broke the record, but the actual record that was broken, according to the article cited in the report of the Koenigsegg record, was 386.7 km/h.

standards

The article is contradictory as far as what the standards are for "fastest production car".

1) Recent winners are not "mass-produced". The current holder (Ultimate Aero TT) at best produced under ten cars and maybe even less than that of the model that was given the record.

2) The record-setting cars in the configuration where they won the record are absolutely not street-legal.

3) The record-setting cars are by every definition of the term "modified cars". They are not even close to whats being sold as the production car. They are typically at best a "limited edition" of one.

174.46.28.58 (talk) 15:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I would have to disagree with some of your points:

1) The Ultimate Aero is being produced to 50 cars, and Mclaren produced 66. I can see where you got the idea for the SSC, it was originally started as a limited edition but has since become the standard car.

2) The previous four cars (McLaren F1, Koenigsegg, Buggatti and SSC) were all stock.

3) See number 2.

~Sandypineman~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandypineman (talk • contribs) 21:49, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Another problem is that this page is simply a supercar fan page. Nowhere is it considered that the Model T could have been the fastest car in the world at the time. In 1908 it could do 40mph. Was there another car that could go that fast? The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeantaud could do 39mph in the 1880s. Listing fast modern cars is fine, but in reality, if a car sets a land speed record of 125mph in the 1930s, it had to be faster than something that came before it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.120.20 (talk) 19:03, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Jaguar XJ220

This car does not belong on the list. It only beat the record in a modified non-street legal configuration (no emissions). 174.46.28.58 (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

With catalytic converters it reached 212.3 mph (341.7 km/h), which was a record anyway. With them removed, it reached 217.1 mph (349.4 km/h). It was done to achieve the ultimate goal of 220 mph, which stood for it's name XJ220. 217.1 mp/h on the oval Nardo Ring is roughly equivalent to 223 mph (359 km/h) on a straight road.93.183.236.73 (talk) 09:16, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Edits from this account

Hi! It seems my pesky 10-year-old brother has been abusing my account... please note that none of the nonconstructive edits from this account where actually done by me!--Vox Humana 8' 16:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion

This is just poorly sourced random list of fast cars, this is not list of any organization-approved topspeeds, thats why its missing fast cars as this is just random list from random years... see also discussion in WP:CARS Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Automobiles#Fastest_production_car --Typ932 ^T·C 21:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

In general, I agree with the assessment that this article is rather poorly defined, poorly executed and poorly-sourced. What is your proposal to do about it? N2e (talk) 22:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Scope of this article

Is it meant to document the progression of the land speed record, or is it meant to list the fastest production cars ever? We need to define that criterion first before this article can be cleaned up. If the former, about 80% of this list will be deleted since it is not properly referenced. If the latter then more recent cars will need to be added and we need to set a minimum speed (perhaps 200mph or 300km/h or similar) and we'll also have a big headache with different versions of the same basic car (e.g. the Lamborghini Gallardo which was released in MANY different variations). Zunaid 08:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I thought this was suppost to be a timeline of the fastest production car. Please don't remove useful information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.247.178 (talk) 09:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed that's what I thought it was supposed to be as well, and the current article does in fact reflect that. That's exactly why the current list is so short, these entries are the only few that explicitly reference a claim to be "the fastest car in the world" at the time they were produced. All the old entries on the list are simply fast cars (the references provide absolutely no further detail or evidence), hence have been removed. Zunaid 12:25, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

For a long time when I was a small Mr Larrington the fastest car listed in Autocar's road test data was the Ferrari 365 GTB/4 (Daytona), which was clocked at a genuine 174 mph. In the seventies there were numerous claims from manufacturers that their product was the fastest but few held up to close scrutiny.

The article could be as ambiguous as the parameters of records, unless you define the terms precisely.

"Production" is not the same as "mass produced". There will be a sanctioning body specifying a minimum number of examples produced. "Fastest" to me means top speed, but that should be specified as many people mistake "quick" for "fast". "street legal" is often mentioned, but on whose streets? The Ariel Atom for instance is legal in the UK, not America. I know the scope of wiki is not to define all these or decide which to include or discard, but they all need to be taken into consideration. Batvette (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. As much as this list has been cut down only to the clearly referenced entries (i.e. only 4 items or so), it STILL suffers the problems you mention. Give it a couple of months and I'm sure it will be up for AfD again. Zunaid 19:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Cool. Here's a factor that may explain why this is such a dodgey subject- can you imagine what legal liabilities await these manufacturers for even claiming their car is the fastest in the world?

Doesn't seem to worry Bugatti/VW much does it? Greglocock (talk) 00:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

People will buy one and by golly go out and validate their purchasing decision. Something I additionally found puzzling is I cannot for the life of me find what the speed record, at Bonneville or anywhere else, of a modified car in otherwise road legal equipment state. You know, a one off, anything but a "production" vehicle. For instance there's the guy in Europe with the Trans Am doing 252 mph. I saw a site with some banter claiming a class at Bonneville equates to street legal and has vehicles over 300, but no firm data. If I find it I will bring some links. If nothing else we'll probably just end up with the lede having to explain all that I wrote above (which you surely already knew) to head off unnecessary arguments. Batvette (talk) 11:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Random speed changes

There have been a couple of random alterations to the speeds of some of the cars listed here, without any reason why. I would recommend that any changes to speeds should refer to the references already included in the article, or supply good quality new references to support a change. Warren Whyte (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Ariel atom 500 v8

I guess Ariel Atom 500 v8 is the fastest car cos no one knows what is it top speed :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.95.130.41 (talk) 13:38, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

1957-1984 gap

This gap must be filled. There was a plenty of cars having top speed higher than 269 km/h stated for Ferrari 250 TR in this period of time. Miura P400S from 1968 has stated measured 276 km/h for example. Ferrari Dytona from 1968 was capable of 280 km/h. Ferrari 365 GT4 BB from 1973 as stated was capable of 303 km/h. And there was a Countach. All these were road legal, undoubtedly production cars. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 08:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok. I have filled it in a bit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:00, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Ferrari 250 TR

Can anyone confirm that the stated speed of 167 mph (269 km/h) was ever actually reached in any road legal version of the 250? In fact, I have a sort of proof that this was probably not possible. The most powerful version 250 GTO was tested by The Motor magazine in 1982 and only reached 147 mph with estimated top speed of 160 mph. So, unless there is a reference to any test that supports 167 mph version, this entry should be either corrected or removed, since even the estimated top speed of the GTO is lower than the previous entry in the table (and I'm not sure if that one is realistic as well). Any thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:09, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Mercedes-Benz 300SL

The stated top speed is an estimated one. There's no records of this car ever reaching such speed. The highest recorded speed for Mercedes Benz 300SL is 150 mph set by John Fitch in 2005. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:22, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Claimed/Estimated vs Recorded top speed.

I think we have a problem here. As you know, in many cases manufacturers claimed much higher top speeds that actually could be reached by the vehicle. For instance 300 km/h for Miura or 200 mph for Countach. Obviously, we must only rely on the recorded results of testing. But the problem is that most of the older sports cars were never properly tested for the top speed and there's no records of the actual top speed ever reached. I think we should not use the calimed top speed for these older cars even if it seems realistic because this would make the table inconsistent. For example, the claimed top speed of the 1964 Ferrari 500 Superfast is 174 mph which is more than recorded top speed for 1966 Miura P400. Any suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.183.236.73 (talk) 08:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree, this should be based on actual recorded top speeds of UNMODIFIED (so far as we can tell) cars by reliable sources. Most press cars before 1980 were probably tuned to some extent to make them unrepresentative but there isn't much we can do about that. Greglocock (talk) 12:21, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Indeed - if a guinness world record is not available, then an independent road test is the best option. Manufacturer's claims are not sufficient. Warren (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

What makes you so confident that cars tested after 1980 aren't tuned as well? What we must do, is only rely on verifiable sources to provide the figures. The web page currently linked to from the Miura speed is not a reliable published source, it just gives you the name of magazines that have recorded that speed. It doesn't even give the date of the test of the car in the magazine. A magazine will usually state whether the speed is claimed or 'as tested' and if a manufacturer claimed historically that their car could do 174 mph, I see no reason why that shouldn't be included in the list providing you state that it is the manufacturers claimed speed. I seem to recollect that even the XK120 'offically tested' to 120mph by The Motor wasn't the standard production version. Mighty Antar (talk) 17:16, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding Miura. I have no better source for P400. However, there is an indirect support to this statement. Slightly improved Miura P400S is known to reach "mean maximum speed of 172mph" as tested by Autocar. First hand source: http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsHistory/Lamborghini-Muira-P400-S/202085/. So the test results stated for P400 at 171 mph are highly realistic. However, if I'll find better source for the mentioned P400 test, I'll certainly update the reference.

Regarding manufacturers claimed speed. This can not be compared to the results of tests obviously. So, basically, we may need a separate table for proven records and for claimed records. These would contain quite different entries. For example, Ferrari 365 GT4 BB would set a record of 188 mph, as claimed by manufacturer, already in 1973.93.183.236.73 (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

What makes you so confident that cars tested after 1980 aren't tuned as well? Because I've worked for 4 different car companies since 1980. The cars supplied to the press are checked to make sure that they are representative of design intent but are not souped up. I'm sure the occasional ringer gets supplied to the press, even now, but it is no longer the standard case, as it used to be.Greglocock (talk) 00:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Addendum Ferrari in particular are famous for supplying two test cars, one for straight line work and the other to be driven around corners and photographed. This happened fairly recently. Perhaps they might be no difference between the two cars. Greglocock (talk) 08:23, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Production totals

May I ask before I remove these pointless facts, what is the point of production totals on this list as like listing MSRP, this does nothing to contribute the reason why that car is the fastest. Donnie Park (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

This is a list of the production cars. Since the definition of the production car is rather blurry, it may be treated differently. To make more or less full picture of how much "production" cars are they, it is best to show the actual production numbers. Once again, if this was a list of absolute speed records, this would be unnecessary. This would also be unnecessary if we had a strict requirement on production numbers to these cars. But we don't. So let readers see and decide for themselves.93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree, the number of units manufactured is worth having. MSRP is not relevant. Greglocock (talk) 09:58, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

F40 vs Diablo

We have a problem here. Ferrari F40 had claimed top speed of 201 mph. It was tested not once. Quattroruote magazine managed to reach over 202 mph. AFAIK, this is the highest speed test result reported for F40. Now the problem is that Lamborghini Diablo had claimed top speed of 202 mph, just 1 more than F40 and was supposed to beat it. But this is less than Quattroruote actually managed to get from F40. So the question is, should we remove Diablo from the list, or use claimed speed instead of actual for the F40? What do you think? 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:54, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that the independent test of the Ferrari F40 should top the Diablo, unless there is something in the test report that indicates it was inaccurate or the car was in some way modified. I don't have access to the cited magazine to check. NealeFamily (talk) 20:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree, except that the Diablo was measured at 206 by Road and Track in their Sept 1991 issue (the same one in which they famously declared the Ruf "Yellowbird" the fastest car in the world. Top Gear allegedly corroborated 206 as the top speed of the Diablo. This is also credible given that Sandro Munari achieved 211 on the Nardo ring in a Diablo, although this was only in one direction and not supported by test gear... Jvshenderson (talk) 17:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the Road & Track September 1991 issue, the "World's Fastests Cars" article, and the top speed for Diablo is explicitly stated at 202.2 MPH. Do I miss something? 93.183.236.66 (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

No you are probably right. I got the citation from the Lamborghini Diablo page here on wikipedia, where it states 207. I couldn't find an e copy of the article, so I took their word for it. I guess the Diablo page needs to be edited too... I know I've seen a test that said 206 - maybe it was top gear. I will try to track it down. Thanks for catching that... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvshenderson (talk • contribs) 22:07, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

incorrect converted speed

something is wrong with converter, speed of Mercedes-Benz 300SL is 140 mph that is 225 km/h and not 230 as we see in this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.43.117.209 (talk) 17:11, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed now -->Typ932 ^T·C 17:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Autocar source

There is 3 cars with autocar citation, the autocar has no mention these are world fastests cars, they only say these are fastest they have tested, so these need sources they are fastest production cars in the world -->Typ932 ^T·C 06:29, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

The sources provide a speed that is used in the table. The citation by the speed must prove the speed, not the fact that the car is actually fastest. Unless you have a source that provides both facts, you should not remove the one that provide at least one of them, explicitly stated in the table. If you think that this table looks more credible with no support for the numbers used, then I shall disagree.

Another problem is that for some of the cars you may never find a credible source explicitly stating that the car is the fastest in the world. Up until 80's this was very rarely claimed by reviewers. So, if, for example Grifo was in fact the production road car that reached the highest speed on testing, but the magazine that tested it had not stated that it is the fasted car in the world (simply because they had not tested all the cars in the world obviously), it must remain without a citation? Again, I disagree.

93.183.236.73 (talk) 06:51, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

the problem is that where do you put the citation needed tag, but there was comment, which should be easy to read even for you. Unless there is no sources these should be removed. This is not list of fast cars, you can read more of this problem in this talk page, that why this page has been nominated for deletion already twice. At this state this isnt very encylopedic article, random fast cars put in table mode nothing more -->Typ932 ^T·C 07:02, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

"the problem is that where do you put the citation needed tag, but there was comment, which should be easy to read even for you. Unless there is no sources these should be removed." - please translate this to English. I can not understand what are you trying to say here. Thank you.

I'm well aware of the conceptual problems associated with this particular subject. But unless this thread is entirely removed, it can only be as good as this. After all, we can not synthesize the kind of sources we would prefer (preferably a readily made complete table, right?), so we must provide the best we can get. We can't hang in between - with cars mentioned but no source provided whatsoever. Can we?

So I propose to leave the citations we have until someone provides a better ones. Agree?

93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

No remove inaccurate citations, and add citation needed tag, those curretn ones are not citations for needed this, we dont need citation for top speed we need citation that says : this was the fastest production car on that particular year . And after couple of weeks when no citation is offered, these can be removed altogether, did you understand now or should I spell it for you??-->Typ932 ^T·C 08:22, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

"did you understand now or should I spell it for you" - no, your spelling is mostly acceptable. But you have to learn to build your sentences correctly.

You can not remove any of these entries without removing all the entries before them. This would break the consistency of the table. Let me explain. If you remove DB4, E-type and Grifo, the table will suggest that 300SL, with the top speed of 140 mph was the fastest production road car up until the Miura introduction. But this is known to be incorrect as we have a proof that there were a faster cars in the 1955-1966 period. And the currently present citations do prove this unambiguously.

So to avoid any confusion we'd have to start this table with 288GTO.93.183.236.73 (talk) 08:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

the Grifo needs better source, the current one doesn have proof that it was fastest car at that time "Autocar recorded 161 mph in its 1966 road test, which was the magazine’s fastest record until the arrival of Lamborghini Miura." "Although that was obviously overoptimistic, it should had no problem to reach 170-plus mph and able to challenge Ferrari Daytona as the world’s fastest car." -->Typ932 ^T·C 08:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

How about this: "The Grifo was considered the fastest production car one could buy in 1966." http://www.girlracer.co.uk/motorsport/michael-gulett/10868-iso-grifo-.html 93.183.236.73 (talk) 09:02, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Myabe this can be used, altough its not that exact either, cant find better one -->Typ932 ^T·C 10:19, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree with the user 93.183.236.73. The source does not need to explicitly state that the car in question was the fastest in the world. All it needs to do is establish the speed (and perhaps the launch date of the car or the date of the first delivery to a customer) and the car in question will implicitly surpass the previous car on the list, thereby becoming the fastest car in the world until another car has an higher top speed established at a later date.

This is especially true because, as other users have pointed out, there is no universal definition of a "production car" that we on wikipedia, or the various sources that DO happen to call a car "the fastest" agree upon. A source stating that "The Grifo was considered the fastest production car one could buy in 1966" is not meaningful because there could have been faster cars that preceeded it but were no longer for sale in 1966, and because it depends on the specific source's definition of "production car."

This is a very small issue to be arguing when there are more important issues at hand: for instance, what to do about cars that were probably the fastest but were never measured as such: for instance, the Ferrari 410 Superamerica (estimated to go 165 mph in 1959 by Road and Track, but never measured). Jvshenderson (talk) 16:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

this is just the problem , when you add random cars to the list, its missing more faster cars anyway, so keeping it as mentioned it has some more creditabily than adding some cars on the list, if you dont have source that says it was the most fastests car on the world at that year, it has no creditability. So why to add anything without proper source -->Typ932 ^T·C 17:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

And there is measured cars with faster top speed than in this list, thats why this list is VERY unencyclopedic, and by adding more those it comes even more so. How you determine which is fastest car for example in 1959? if you dont have proper source claiming that? you would need to investigate all cars on that year, what month the speed was tested and so on. Finally this would be just a huge list of fast cars. -->Typ932 ^T·C 17:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, actually it's an opposite for Diablo. The sources claiming that it was a worlds fastest car do exist. But they all state the top speed which is lower than the actually reached by F-40 earlier. Those sources make such conclusion based on the manufacturer claimed top speed of 201 mph for F-40. So, obviously, they are wrong. In other words, the fact that there's a source saying that some car is worlds fastest may be not enough. 93.183.236.66 (talk) 21:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I looked through some books I own and found sources for the Countach and the EB110. Peter Dron's book "Lamborghini Countach: The Complete Story" says on page 159: "The LP400...was very clean aerodynamically, and it was capable of almost 186 mph. That was back in 1974, and in that period there was nothing on the road that could get near it." Craig Cheetham's book "Ultimate Performance Cars" says on page 49: "1992 the EB110 becomes the world's fastest production car, rivaling the XJ220 with a speed of 212 mph." While he quotes Bugatti's claimed speed rather than the one measured by Auto Motor und Sport, 209 would have still made it the fastest in the world because it debuted in September 1991, a month ahead of the XJ220. A corroborating source can be found at http://www.fastestcarintheworld.org/bugatti-eb110.html With these sources, I feel that I have established both the tested top speed of the Countach LP400 and the EB110 GT, as well as the fact that they were the fastest in the world at their debut. I will add these sources to the official list. Jvshenderson (talk) 23:42, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh no! You mean Countach LP400 was faster than QV?! :D That IS rediculous. None of the cited sources provide results of test runs, only manufacturer claimed speed. First Countach to actually reach this speed was QV.

Regarding EB110. It is generally not regarded as the fastest car probably because record beating test runs of Jag were made about a year earlier than for EB110. But it does have a 1 month edge of introduction date. So it may fit here well I think. 93.183.236.66 (talk) 06:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

On the other hand, XJ220 was first presented in 1988 with orders taken since 1989. Sure it was not a production version. But the fact is that XJ220 actual sales started much earlier than EB110. So what was first? I don't know... 93.183.236.66 (talk) 08:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong when you say that these sources only quote Lamborghini's claimed top speed. If you look at the Ruoteclassiche article, you will find the top speed listed at 299.2 km/h, whereas Lamborghini claimed 300 km/h for the LP400. If they were simply quoting the manufacturer, it would be very unusual to give the added precision of an extra decimal rather than simply quoting 300. Also, the top speed figure is in the context of exhaustive acceleration testing, and there is no mention of the data being manufacturer claims. Finally, the speeds given for the Bora and 365 GT4 BB tested alongside the Countach differ from the manufacturer claims as well. According to http://www.autozine.org/Archive/Maserati/classic/Bora.html Maserati claimed 174 mph (280 km/h) which is different from Ruoteclassiche's measured 271.2 km/h. According to http://www.autozine.org/Archive/Ferrari/classic/BB.html, the 365 BB had a claimed top speed of 188 mph (303 km/h) which is very different from the 290.3 km/h that Ruoteclassiche measured. All of these reasons point to the fact that Ruoteclassiche actually did carry out a careful top speed test, and the LP400 happened to top out close to, but not exactly at, the claimed top speed. Now, this test was conducted in 2000 on three cars that were said to be (and looked) stock. It is possible that there was some tuning done on the Countach, resulting in the 299 km/h top speed - we will never know. And yes, it is quite plausible that the LP400 was as fast or faster than the QV because, while it was considerably down on power, it didn't have the splitter, wheel arches, or extra-wide tires of the QV and therefore had far less drag. Jvshenderson (talk) 20:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

No I am not wrong. Lamborghini claimed 186 mph. And 186 mph is 299.2 km/h. So yes, they probably quoted manufacturer. The conversion from mph to km/h explains the extra precision. There is no mention about it being a manufacturer claimed top speed, but there's no mention about how did they test it either. Or if they even tested it at all. I'm not going to discus cited Bora and BB statements, they could take them from anywhere. Check the tables in that article. The LP400 table has a top speed of 315 km/h and power of 385hp stated. Even Lamborghini had never claimed this high figures. Where did they take it from? We may guess, but that doesn't matter. What matters, is that this article is not a reliable source in any way. Especially if they tuned that Lambo.

Now if you want to analyze the credibility of such an achievement, I'll give you some clues. First of all, the actual power of the LP400 engine was about 350 hp. Yes, Lamborghini claimed 375 initially, but a bit later, as they put exactly same engine in LP400S, they got more realistic and officially stated 353hp. Now, QV had about 100hp more. But let's put it into perspective. I don't want to guess how much of the QV's Cx of 0.42 was added by the bodykit and wider tires, and was this all equal to 100hp. No. Let's rather look at all the other supercars out there. The first one that actually ever topped 300km/h was Ferrari 288GTO. It had much lower drag coefficient of about 0.36, arguably lower that LP400 with all it's sharp edges and huge airboxes. It also had similarly wide tires as LP400. It was also significantly lighter that LP400. Yet it needed as much as 400 hp to achieve it. If that's not enough, check any other supercar that is known to reach such speeds for sure. None of them was as bad aerodynamically as Countach, none of them was able to do this with much less than 400 hp (Testarossa needed 390hp to merely reach 181mph for example). So, not even getting into scentific or technical analysis it is pretty much clear that Countach LP400 was not able to reach 186 mph in normal conditions. Actually it's top speed was estimated at about 170 mph. This is more than any following Countach up until QV, because LP400 had better aerodynamics. But only 450 hp of QV were enough to get it going this fast. Also, the narrower tires and lifting force at high speeds made LP400 very unstable when going really fast. So that even reaching speeds at about 170mph, which it arguably could actually do, was way too dangerous. This may be a reason why no one ever tested it to it's actual top speed.

Anyway, unless there is an explicit source that describes test runs of production LP400, there's nothing to talk about. Besides, there are sources that, for example, state that Ferrari Daytona was clearly faster than Countach. So no way for it to get into this list. 93.183.236.66 (talk) 08:21, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, this article does not state that LP400 was a fastest car in the world. It only states that it was faster than Bora and BB. Neither of which where ever claimed to be the fastest car in the world either. Since the actual fastest car at the moment of LP400 introduction was still Ferrari Daytona, this particular article is not enough to make any conclusions. Formally. 93.183.236.66 (talk) 08:45, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The criteria to be on the list is: it is an unmodified production model (not a one off), it was tested at the claimed speed by an independent source (not the manufacturer), and its tested speed made it the faster than the previous car on the list. You would also need to cite the published test.

There has been discussion about cars being provided for such tests having been tuned for optimum performance and that was accepted as something that could not be reasonably avoided. Tests also need to be carefully checked to determine how the speed was determined, so a mention that a car was driven at a particular speed would be insufficient in my view. You would want to see some form of acceptable measurement being undertaken. I accept that over time the method and quality of measurement has changed, so what was acceptable for some of the earlier models may no longer be acceptable now. NealeFamily (talk) 00:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, some more about that article. Check the acceleration figures for LP400. It claims 5.0s to 100km/h and 11.5s to 160km/h. While actually, Motor magazine tested 5.6 and 13.1 in 1975 and then Road & Track got 6.8 and 13.3 in 1976. These magazines did actually tested acceleration and, as you see, it was much worse than claimed here. I don't know if those figures are fake or if they had actually tweaked their LP400, but that is most definitely not a performance of the production LP400. 93.183.236.66 (talk) 09:59, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

According to http://www.autozine.org/Archive/Lamborghini/classic/Countach.html which is a cited source for a couple of cars on this page, Lamborghini claimed 300 km/h (converted into 186 mph). This would make more sense than an Italian company making a performance claim in mph, because Italy uses the metric system... Also, there is some disagreement about what they actually claimed, as http://www.insideline.com/lamborghini/1975-lamborghini-countach-lp400-vs-1982-ferrari-512i-berlinetta-boxer.html (a division of Edmunds and very reputable source) says Lamborghini claimed 195 for the 1975 Countach LP400... Also, you're right that Ruoteclassiche never says it was the fastest in the world, but Peter Dron's book (which I quoted above) clearly shows the Authors opinion that the Countach was the fastest in the world in 1975. Regarding the 288 GTO, it rode on 225mm wide front tires and 265mm rears, while the LP400 had 205mm in front and back (much narrower). Finally, you mentioned the Countach and 288 GTO's weight when discussing top speed, which I think displays a lack of understanding of the related physics. Weight has a profound effect on acceleration and cornering performance, but none on top speed. The only two factors that affect top speed are power and coefficient of drag.

I'll grant you that Ruoteclassiche achieved much better acceleration than others, and the top speed is much faster than what most others estimate, meaning it is likely that the car was tuned in the intervening 25 years. However, I still think that the LP400 was at least as fast, if not faster than, the Daytona and Miura SV (even if it couldn't do 186, many people think it could at least do 175 - see http://www.evo.co.uk/features/features/238363/supercar_years_70s.html), however proving it is difficult. Therefore it will be on my own personal list, even if its not here on Wikipedia... Jvshenderson (talk) 17:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, according to Autozine, estimated top speed of LP400 is 170mph. I most certainly agree with this. Yes. Now about metric systems. Original claims were made in both systems as car was supposed to be sold in many countries. They could quote anyone as well as several sources could use anyone as well. Besides, originally, when Countach was just a prototype, the target top speed stated by Ferruccio was imperial 200mph.

Now about your understanding of physics. First of all, learn about rolling friction and it's dependence on the car weight. Then add the frontal area to your formula of top speed as you obviously missed it. Then we may proceed to stability and sub top speed acceleration questions. But actually no. I don't want to diss you in any way. That's why I was hinting on other supercars. It's really simple to understand that all supercars that actually reached this speed, had about 400hp or more. Countach had much less and had no other reason to compensate for the lack of those 50 horses. If you still believe that it was able to reach 186 mph with 350hp, that's fine, but it's way too fantastic to be published without very serious proof.

Peter Dron could believe whatever he wanted too. He never did any testing though. In fact, lots of people did believe that Countach was the fastest car. After all, spaceship can't be slow, can it? ;)

93.183.236.66 (talk) 18:11, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Upcoming contenders

Do we need "Upcoming contenders" section? It's all based on unsupported claims and the cars that, in most cases, do not even exist. What is the point in it? Is Wikipedia a good place for spreading rumors, propaganda and most importantly - free advertising and PR for commercial companies? 93.183.236.73 (talk) 07:59, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Check out the cars before you claim they don't exist! There are articles on all three of them in Wiki. My reason for also including them on this page is to give future editors of the list a sense of the direction development in this category is heading and vehicles that could achieve contention in the very near future. NealeFamily (talk) 08:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Of those three, only Koenigsegg exists. Neither record claiming Venom (with 1,200 bhp), nor top-spec Tuatara (1,350 hp) have been built yet. Moreover, neither of these cars is production, and we don't even know if they will ever be (in the record claiming specs). And this is the list of production cars. The point is, that it is very easy to claim anything, and many manufacturers do so. For example, Lamborghini was claiming 300 km/h for original Miura, which no Miura ever reached. For Countach they originally claimed 200 mph. And again - no Countach ever made it. Original claims for Ferrari 365 GT4 BB were also never met. And so on. Basically, those are pure rumors with not background whatsoever. It's like posting claims of one football team about their future successes. Now since this article is about production cars and their real world confirmed speed, such claims do not fit here well. Probably separate article could be created regarding the future models and concepts. But I think this section has to be removed from here. 93.183.236.73 (talk) 12:45, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

I removed it because of what said above and this is a list not an article. -->Typ932 ^T·C 18:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for expanding on your reasoning 93.186.236.73. I agree that manufacturers tend to make many unsubstantiated claims and that only verifiable ones should be in the main list. A seperate article as you suggest with possibly a "see also" from this page seems the best way forward because I think it could be useful and with regard to false claims, educative. NealeFamily (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Fastest cars 2011

I see someone is attempting to add a new list, the fastest 10 production cars of 2011. Quite why this had to be added in december is a bit beyond me. Anyway, the original list was quite interesting, this one strikes me as a desperate fanbois list of also-rans. But I would conceed that so long as they are genuine production cars then it could stay. Cars performance must be measured by qualified third party techs and reported in an RS. I think we should add a rider that the cars must be in standard trim, and currently for sale in that condition (ie once all 5 special unlimited cars are sold that model gets booted off the list). Greglocock (talk) 06:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Does Guinness Record trump Magazine test?

The Ford GT40 received the Guinness World Record in 1967 with a top speed of 167mph but Motor tested another car faster in this period. (See Forbes article for Ford reference)

Not necessarily so - for the case in point Motor magazine is a reputable source. Unless there is some inherent bias in its car test it would stand, regardless of Guinness. NealeFamily (talk) 07:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Production numbers in a column

I think it would be relevant to include the number of production cars of each mentioned that were produced in the spec that could have achieved the claimed speed. This might supply some context for the more ludicrous entries here. Greglocock (talk) 08:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree as it will give context. The current encumbant looks like they need to prove they have made 5 for instance - a one off is hardly a production car and five stretches the imagination. NealeFamily (talk) 20:49, 15 March 2012 (UTC)