# Phaeton Top Speed



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

"With the speed limiter removed, the 6.0 W12 Phaeton can reach a top speed of 201mph as attested by Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...edded
On 1 August 2007, Bentley released details of a more powerful GT. Power is increased to 449 kilowatts (610 PS; 602 bhp), with a top speed of 325 kilometres per hour *(201.9 mph)* and a 0-60 mph time of 4.3 seconds. The Continental GT Speed is the first production Bentley officially capable of reaching 325 km/h (201.9 mph), and the world's fastest four-seater, despite the fact the car weighs over 2,268 kilograms (5,000 lb).
???







... Who's giving the wrong numbers Clarkson or VW?











_Modified by valmes at 3:33 PM 11-22-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Allright...
BMW M6 (RWD)
Engine: 5.0L V10 507Hp/520Nm
Weight: 1710 kg 
Top speed (de-restricted): 205mph
Phaeton (AWD)
Engine: 6.0L W12 450Hp/550Nm
Weight: 2300 kg 
Top speed (de-restricted): 201mph
Either 201 mph is way too optimistic or... that engine is underrated...


_Modified by valmes at 9:01 AM 11-23-2009_


----------



## Auzivision (Apr 19, 2007)

*Re: (valmes)*

Keep in mind mass is not as relavant to top speed as drag.


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

I know that the original Bentley Continental GT was capable for doing more than 200mph and that VW's estimates for the engines' outputs was on the very conservative side. That said, I would suspect that the speedo error present on the Phaeton means that Clarkson was probably doing something in the low 190s. 
However, I remember reading other journalists who achieved similar indicated speeds at the Dubai launch aften being egged on by VW engineers...
Harry


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (Auzivision)*

Both cars are at 0.31 Cx... RWD has less loses then AWD. Bimmer has 507 hp out of smaller (in comparison) engine and VW is much heavier (although it has not as much effect on top speed as aerodynamics... it still matters). 
I ran a simulation... and its supposed top speed is only 164mph (when weight is changed from 2300 to 1750kg its 168mph...).


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (valmes)*

I go easily up to 250km/h (155mph) in my V8, and I have the feeling that I could still go faster. I am quite sure the W12 is capable of doing much more than this, i.e. certainly more than 168mph.
The problem when you get to these speeds is that you need a clear motorway, otherwise, traffic comes towards you much too quickly to explore speeds above, 150mph I would say.
Has anyone tested a W12 flat out for long enough ?
P.
Ps: Oh, and btw, Cx is not all. You need to multiply this by the apparent frontal surface that depends on quite many things (the Phaeton gets into lower suspension mode above 87mph. Is the bimmer capable of doing this too ?)


_Modified by Zaphh at 1:03 AM 11-24-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

2005 Volkswagen Phaeton W12 4Motion 
Drag coefficient 0.310 
Frontal area 2.36 m2 
2004 BMW M6 
Drag coefficient 0.320 
Frontal area 2.15 m2


----------



## Auzivision (Apr 19, 2007)

*Re: (valmes)*

Measuring and reporting Horsepower is not an exact science. Quote from an internal an older Wall Street Article:
Measuring horsepower in an automobile isn't like measuring the length of a football field. In the latter case, 100 yards is a 100 yards. But when it comes to horsepower, there's been latitude for a certain amount of what General Motors technical fellow David Lancaster calls "creative interpretation." Under the Society of Automotive Engineers' former engine-power-testing protocols, established in 1990 and reaffirmed in 1995, Mr. Lancaster says auto makers didn't necessarily have to account for such things as the power loss caused by a power-steering pump, or the effect of electronic controls.
Newer standards set, but not sure they are universally applied:
http://auto.ihs.com/news/newsl...d.htm
To your original point, perhaps the power ratings aren’t consistent. 
Also, different W12 engine codes produce varying numbers:

BAN 309 kW (420 PS; 414 bhp)
BRN / BTT 331 kW (450 PS; 444 bhp) @ 6,050 rpm	
560 N•m (413 ft•lbf) @ 2,750 rpm


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

The different W12 outputs are probably due to the fact that MY06 engines had their output raised from 420PS to 450PS.
Harry


----------



## Chris Milnes (Nov 4, 2008)

*Re: (Prince Ludwig)*

To stick my oar in, Piech gave his engineers a list of ten parameters the Phaeton needed to fulfill.
Although most of these remain unknown (at least to me), one widely reported parameter was that the Phaeton should be capable of being driven all day at 300Km/h (186mph) all day with an exterior temperature of 50 degrees centigrade whilst maintaining the interior temperature at 22 degrees centigrade.
I guess therefore that the 420PS W12 will do 186mph, albeit I have never seen a video of a Phaeton doing more than an indicated 280km/h (174mph). Maybe the 450PS W12 is faster?
Discuss !
Chris


----------



## Kuwaity (Apr 2, 2004)

I did 270 km/h in my V8. But I'm not sure if I can trust the speedometer. 
I haven't driven the W12, but the extra +100bhp It can go much faster than 270 km/h.


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (Kuwaity)*

In my car, 270km/h would be 263,5km (164mph) true speed.
Was it flat out, or do you think you could you go faster ?


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

There are quite a few videos on youtube with W12 traveling at 270-280-290 kph.... 
- Remember, that widely known parameter on Piech wish list (300kmh 50C 22 C) was requested out of 420PS Phaeton...








- Jeremy's Volkswagen Phaeton W12, he says it is immensely comfortable, nice to drive and its windows do not steam up when you try to make a cup of tea in it. With the electronic limiter off, it can crack 200 mph (320 km/h). He is not verbose in praising it, but reveals that he prefers it to the Jaguar XJ, the BMW 7-Series, and the Mercedes S-Class. Date aired - 20 July 2003 ( THAT ----> 201mph - 323.5kph - was said about a 420PS version!!!







)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_(series_2) 
- Both models (420PS and 450PS) run the same numbers for 0-100kph...








My guess is - 420PS and 450PS engines differ only on paper! VW just corrected their numbers toward the "real figure"... whatever it is. 

Auto manufacturers often provide PS/BHP numbers that could be way off mark for unknown reasons... maybe to fall into some "niche" or get under certain laws... Look at GT-R or Evos for example. In case of VW it could also be "positioning"... there is Audi with the same engine... and of course Bentley!








Maybe Clarkson just made a mistake? 








... and Piech leaked that secret parameter on purpose (who would care if its restricted to 155mph anyway







... but what a sales pitch!)?

PS: btw ... here is what I found using scan tool on my W12... and I know for sure its neither twin turbo Bentley nor V10 twin turbo diesel!
















Any ideas?










_Modified by valmes at 2:08 PM 11-26-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_My guess is - 420PS and 450PS engines differ only on paper! VW just corrected their numbers toward the "real figure"... whatever it is.

No, not so. The first version of the W12, which produced 420 HP, was a wet sump engine. The second version, which produces 450 HP, is a dry sump engine. I have seen both in person, they are obviously physically different.
Horsepower affects top speed, torque is what affects acceleration times. So, it is understandable that the acceleration times are identical, because the torque output of the W12 engine is flat-rated to the maximum that the transmission can cope with. Have a look at the torque / HP map below (for the original 420 HP engine - you will see a flat spot on the red torque curve. This flat spot is imposed by programming in the two engine controllers, and avoids the need to put a heavier transmission into the vehicle. If you were to project the curve on a predictable path (a catenary) across the flat spot, you would see that the engine itself is probably capable of about 580 N·m torque output.
Michael


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Michael, any ideas on recorded maximum torque of 740Nm?
Also do you really think 420PS engine can move 2300kg sedan to 323.5 kph?
Val


_Modified by valmes at 4:25 PM 11-26-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*

Hi Val:
I can't see (from the photo) exactly what MVB (measured value block) you are looking at. If you let me know the MVB number, I will investigate it further.
As for the top speed - that kind of stuff is really hard to talk about with any credibility. I know that the W12 will do 290 km/h on the autobahn between Dresden and Görlitz - because I have sat in one when someone was driving at that speed, and verified the speed with a GPS.
As for going faster - I suppose it is possible, most especially in the Middle East, where the air is less dense than ISA (International Standard Atmosphere). 35°C air is easier to 'poke through' than 15°C air.
As for me - I have a North American specification W12 Phaeton, which is electronically limited to 210 km/h. I think that the fastest I have ever travelled in this car has been about 160 km/h, and that was only momentary while passing other vehicles. Here in North America, highway speed limits are typically 110 to 120 km/h, and the police spend a great deal of their time enforcing the speed limits. So, it is just pointless to go fast over here - that is why I keep my motorcycle in Europe, not in Canada.








Michael


----------



## Kuwaity (Apr 2, 2004)

*Re: (Zaphh)*

I really can’t tell. Because I need a very long road. But it was in fifth gear and there was some room to the red line, about 1k rpm, un like my passat, which topped at 260km/h in fifth while it was just on the red line. So it might go faster, while the w12 can easily go faster.


----------



## adamkodish (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_
I can't see (from the photo) exactly what MVB (measured value block) you are looking at. If you let me know the MVB number, I will investigate it further.


Engine controller MVB 8 has some torque numbers - registers 3 and 4 seem to be the most reliable, but I strongly suspect they read over the true torque. I understand the ECU has a mathematical model for estimating torque from other observable inputs.
If we all club together we can pay for someone to take a trip to a dynamometer








Adam


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

_I can't see (from the photo) exactly what MVB (measured value block) you are looking at. If you let me know the MVB number, I will investigate it further._
Look at the right lower corner on the photo - Info 1 - Torque; Info 2 - Maximum; Actual - 740Nm. Hmm, Can't even remember where I found this... let alone recall the numbers







Will pay attention next time!








Val
PS: _Here in North America, highway speed limits are typically 110 to 120 km/h, and the police spend a great deal of their time enforcing the speed limits. So, it is just pointless to go fast over here - that is why I keep my motorcycle in Europe, not in Canada._
I lived(studied) in NJ for 5 years...







and my mother lives near Zurich, Switzerland... so I know the difference between Europe and US... and Russia for that matter










_Modified by valmes at 6:16 PM 11-26-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_...and my mother lives near Zurich, Switzerland... 

Ah - so we have something in common - I lived in Balsberg (next to Kloten) for many years, still get over there 3 or 4 times a year.
We'll have to co-ordinate your next trip to CH and my next trip to CH so we can have a coffee together! 
Michael


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*

Sure thing!
Btw... I'm going to get my car on the dyno... just out of curiousity.








Val


----------



## adamkodish (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: (valmes)*

Val
Take a look at this:
http://www.rri.se/popup/perfor...D=132
Adam


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Very pessimestic numbers you found there, Adam.
Although I would say they only proove one point... some of them are incorrect!


----------



## Reflect (Apr 4, 2007)

*Re: (valmes)*

I can do 125 mph easily In my v8 after that the revs get around 5-6k but if I keep pushing I'm able to do 140 even though limiter should be 135 or so I heard. At this point revs are still between 5-6 so I'm guessin it can do more if removed so w12 would be more.


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (Reflect)*

FWIW, I regularly drive up to 155mph with my V8 (and will do so next thursday) on my regular 300miles commuting trip to work for which I bought this car.
In fact, I find difficulty in going above 135 not because of lack of power, but because at this speed, things (like trucks going at 55mph) jump at you quite fast, and since I don't like to overtake with an excessive speed differential, it really needs a totally clear motorway to go past 135.
Going up to 130-135 is a breeze though, and depending on traffic, my speed fluctuates between 110 and 135 on this portion of the A5 German motorway that I use, and occasionally past 135 if the road is clear.
I have no doubt the W12 can go beyond 155 easily because when I get there with my V8, there is still some margin powerwise.
So to me, the V8 is ideally powered, because having the W12 would not allow me to drive faster. I find no limitation whatsoever with the V8 on German motorways.
P.


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

The question is, can W12 get up to 201mph??? 
In theory it needs more power to do that...


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*

I don't know, but I think the discussion is academic.
I have been in a Phaeton whilst the car was being driven at 280 km/h (equal to 180 MPH), and that was *WAY *more than fast enough. At that speed, by the time you have seen something ahead of you, it is too late to avoid hitting it.
201 MPH is equal to over 320 km/h - that is an insane speed.
For comparative purposes, the top speed of my motorcycle is well over 220 km/h (135 MPH), but it's just not comfortable to ride it at more than about 180 km/h (110 MPH). I don't mean 'comfortable' in the sense of the seat or the wind - what I mean is that at speeds greater than 180 km/h, too much concentration on what is up ahead is required. Hell, if you are doing more than 180 km/h, you can't even sneeze without entering the 'danger zone' where your braking distance exceeds your combined visual range and reaction time.
To give you some context here, the rotation (liftoff) speed of an Airbus passenger jet is about 260 km/h, however, the go-no go decision is made much earlier than that - typically about 200 km/h. The guys driving the Airbus don't have to worry about other vehicles, curves in the runway, animals, crap on the runway (except at CDG after Continental has used the runway), etc.
Michael


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (valmes)*

Only people with a W12 can answer this... The problem is that with my experience, going at 200mph on an open motorway is unfeasible. You need a clear road to approach these speeds. There does not seem to be a large difference between 135mph and 155mph, but when you're there, you realise that these 20mph are indeed a lot, but this may be me only.
Is anyone on this forum driving faster than 155mph on a regular basis ?
If no-one is, this means (to me) that the ability to reach 200mph is only some kind of intellectual satisfaction that your car *can* go at this speed, but with no real application. This is not the case for the 4.1s that the Bentley needs to go from 0-60mph, where it is always big fun to be able to leave a sports car behind with a big family sedan... My V8 has limited capability on this (around 7s if I remember well), but this acceleration is good enough to keep up with 99% of the cars around you.
I have many stories related to this with my V8. 1 month ago, I was on the left lane at a toll, and when cleared, I started lazily (I was not in a hurry) when the guy after me in a big bimmer SUV caught up with me, blinded me with his high beams in the mirror and came within about 3 feet of the back of my car.
I politely slided to the lane on the right after placidly overtaking someone else, and when the guy overtook me, I waved genltly saying hello, and stomped on the accelerator. The guy visibly tried to keep up with me, but simply couldn't...
I don't see this "ego" problem of people with big flashy cars when I drive in Germany, probably because of the unlimited speed highways where people can go at the speed they like. The fast lane is generally clear, and people do look in their mirrors before going there.
P.


----------



## eveposk (Jun 9, 2009)

Surely Phaeton couldn't drive at 200 mph. My W12 engine (only 60.000 km) failed at ~230-250 km/h
7000 EUR for repair


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (eveposk)*

Oh. Do I understand it is finally repairable ?
I think this is "relatively" good news, looking at the price of the repair.
Now as far as "Surely Phaeton couldn't drive at 200 mph. My W12 engine (only 60.000 km) failed at ~230-250 km/h", I'm afraid there was a problem with the car you bought (since I think it happened just after you bought it, if I remember well), as I don't recall of hearing of many mechanical problems on the W12 engine...
Anyone else with a failed engine on the forum ?
P.


----------



## eveposk (Jun 9, 2009)

It WAS repaired already. I have driven this car for a few months before failure. However, I was driving at the speed of 200 km/h only (I did it for months), and it failed at higher speed.
Tech guy (who has repaired engine) told me that Phaeton W12 engines look like made from paper when compared to MB or Jaguar engines


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_I don't know, but I think the discussion is academic.

Sure it is. If 201 mph is achievable in Phaeton, then there might be a chance, that Phaeton was de-tuned from the factory... Its engine might be able to produce more HP/Nm... maybe to keep its gearbox in one piece or to keep Bentley and Audi sales high, while protecting Phaeton passengers from unnecessary stress.
On the other hand... J Clarkson might be just a dreamer


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (Zaphh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Zaphh* »_0-60mph, where it is always big fun to be able to leave a sports car behind with a big family sedan... 

My other car 0-60 times were less then 4 sec...







thats sure was fun!



_Modified by valmes at 10:27 AM 12-1-2009_


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

_Quote »_Tech guy (who has repaired engine) told me that Phaeton W12 engines look like made from paper when compared to MB or Jaguar engines 

Hardly surprising given that Jaguar's AJ-V8 and Mercedes M113 V8 are both so old that I believe they were first used by the Israelites. The M113 was SOHC for goodness sake! 
Harry


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Anybody knows what redline (Max Revs) is on Phaeton W12, Audi A8 W12 and Bentleys?


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

Not sure about Phaeton (surely you can tell us







) but the redline on the instrument cluster is about 6,250 for the Bentley and about 6,750 for the Audi A8.
Harry


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Its winter over here... but from my (short) experience it changes gears at around 6100-6300 rpm... tacho is marked until 8000 rpm


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated
Bentley Continental GT doing 345 kph (214mph)


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_Anybody knows what redline (Max Revs) is on Phaeton W12?

I believe the Phaeton W12 engine is redlined at 6,000 RPM. I'll check the instrument cluster later today to confirm.
Michael


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*

Yes, it is 6,000 RPM redline on the Phaeton W12, as seen in the photo below. Disregard the check engine light, this is an old photo that I had in the archive, I used it earlier for another discussion about check engine lights.
Michael


----------



## adamkodish (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated
Bentley Continental GT doing 345 kph (214mph)

Has anyone ever posted one of those autobahn camcorder videos where they crash and burn at the end?
Try searching in YouTube for 'Bentley Nardo' to see how the 'pros' do the top speed testing.
Adam


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_
I believe the Phaeton W12 engine is redlined at 6,000 RPM. I'll check the instrument cluster later today to confirm.
Michael

I wasn’t clear in my question. I know where redline starts cause I have the same car... Although in S mode it changes gears over 6000 rpm mark... cant tell for sure at what exact rpm. Will try to use the scan tool to find that out, when road conditions permit (lots of snow now) ... maybe in tiptronic mode it can go a bit higher in revs.
The reason I ask is this... In theory weight alone couldn't give A8 almost 1 sec advantage over Phaeton (1990 kg A8 W12 - 5.1 sec 0-100kph, 2290 kg Phaeton W12 - 6.1 sec 0-100 kph). It should also have higher maximum revs (not the redline painted on the tacho, but revs at which it upshifts). I asked on Russian Audis forums... they haven't got a clue... Some say its 7250 others say its 6750... no one is certain, but it seems higher anyway.
Here is an engine calculator made for a different car, twin turbo 4wd... but its overly general and if you play with values you can get close to what VW Phaeton, Audi A8 or Bentley W12 are capable of in terms of HP or straight line performance. Here:
http://tpizza.110mb.com/ecv1_2.htm


_Modified by valmes at 9:59 AM 12-1-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (adamkodish)*


_Quote, originally posted by *adamkodish* »_
Has anyone ever posted one of those autobahn camcorder videos where they crash and burn at the end?
Try searching in YouTube for 'Bentley Nardo' to see how the 'pros' do the top speed testing.
Adam

Even if I am not a pro (although I even managed to conceive and built the first circuit race track/dragstrip in Siberia... so people can test their cars and bikes in a proper environment, but that’s another story) I still want to know what my car is capable of. Sorry if it offends you to even discuss a top speed on the forum, but that’s a good indication of real horsepower figures...
As Michael said this discussion serves purely academic purpose...











_Modified by valmes at 10:36 AM 12-1-2009_


----------



## Reflect (Apr 4, 2007)

*Re: (valmes)*

zapph here in USA the max for me its 140mph but i would love to do 155 or more but its not possible unless i pay a lot of money and its not worth it cuz its somethinf that I would like to do just once and not often.


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: (Reflect)*

Then I think you should do it at least once, even if it costs you a bit to go on a track. Go for a circular track to enjoy the speed (I don't see the point of driving round corners in a Phaeton: that's the job of a mini cooper or a Caterham). Driving at a steady 140mph for a while in a Phaeton is a truly wonderful experience (compared to doing the same speed in my old Jag that needed the whole width of the motorway







)
P.


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_The reason I ask is this... In theory weight alone couldn't give A8 almost 1 sec advantage over Phaeton (1990 kg A8 W12 - 5.1 sec 0-100kph, 2290 kg Phaeton W12 - 6.1 sec 0-100 kph). It should also have higher maximum revs (not the redline painted on the tacho, but revs at which it upshifts). I asked on Russian Audis forums... 

Hi Val:
We have to be careful to not unintentionally mix up apples and oranges in this discussion.
*Torque *and *vehicle weight* are the only two things that matter for the acceleration time (zero to 100, 200, etc.). Horsepower is a non-issue for ∆V.
*Horsepower* and *coefficient of drag* are the only two things that matter for ultimate top speed, once you get into the top speed range that we have been discussing.
The torque/weight relationship is evident if you compare the zero to 60 times of a Volkswagen Golf and a Boeing 747. The Golf will always win.
The horsepower/Cd relationship is evident if you then compare the top speeds of the same Golf and 747.
Michael


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

_Quote »_Driving at a steady 140mph for a while in a Phaeton is a truly wonderful experience

Perhaps it's because it's so remarkably serene, but I always think the Phaeton feels more at home when you allow it to stretch its legs and cruise above 100mph for long distances...
Harry


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Then by all means try taking Boeing 747 up to 300kph with only Phaeton engine in it...
... weight doesn’t have as much influence on top speed, as on how fast you achieve it, but living in a real world that can be as important as top speed. Top speed is a constant acceleration to overcome rolling resistance and air resistance etc... kind of...
I think, to put it into perspective - Boeing 747 with Phaeton engine in it, will virtually stop accelerating at... I don't know 10 mph?... cause its acceleration rate will be so slow you will perceive it as a constant speed... someone would call it a day and say - it was a top speed! Although in theory, given a long stretch of road and enough time, it could reach 300kph in few years...
Now imagine 155 tons pushing car down through 4 wheels. I am not a rocket scientist, but I imagine rolling resistance through tires and other frictional loses will somewhat differ in 2 ton and 155 ton cars?
Well, CarTest2000 also thinks that weight matters:
testing with 2297 kg: 274 kph
testing with 1997 kg: 280 kph


_Modified by valmes at 7:01 PM 12-1-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_Then by all means try taking Boeing 747 up to 300kph with only Phaeton engine in it...

No, getting the aircraft up to 300 km/h work because you don't have enough horsepower to overcome the Cd and - most especially - the rolling resistance of the 747. The Cd of the aircraft won't be significant in this particular example because the rolling resistance will be limiting.
You will certainly have sufficient horsepower to move the aircraft at a reasonable (for ground handling) speed - a typical airport tug (tractor) used for wide-body aircraft has far less than the 420 horsepower that a W12 engine has. You would also have sufficient torque to get the aircraft moving at a reasonable rate of acceleration. Airport tractors generally have peak torque in the 400 to 700 kN range.
In other words - the torque and horsepower of a W12 engine is at least equal to that of an airport tug used for pushback and ground handling. Thus, the performance expectations should be the same as well, assuming you put the W12 into an airport tug. I suppose if you geared the tug such that it could take advantage of the additional horsepower at higher speeds, you might even be able to pull the aircraft faster than the tug engine could. But eventually, rolling resistance would equal horsepower, and speed would reach an equilibrium.
Attached is a brochure for a very large capacity airport tug, suitable for moving a 747. Note that the horsepower and torque values for the tug are almost identical to those for a V10 diesel Phaeton engine. The W12 has more horsepower - which means that the top speed would be higher, presuming that the gearing allowed for it.
Michael


----------



## Prince Ludwig (Mar 24, 2007)

Valmes, 
I don't understand what you're trying to achieve here. 
For whatever reason you seem to be wondering whether the W12 Phaeton is capable of the *indicated* 200mph that anecdotes claim it is.
However, your response to most of the comments on this thread are that the official numbers don't support such a conclusion. 
On that basis you're not going to get anywhere unless you:
a) Find a sufficiently long piece of road and test the W12's top speed yourself
b) Determine whether the projections of that software package are accurate
Harry


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (Prince Ludwig)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Prince Ludwig* »_Valmes, 
I don't understand what you're trying to achieve here. 
For whatever reason you seem to be wondering whether the W12 Phaeton is capable of the *indicated* 200mph that anecdotes claim it is.
However, your response to most of the comments on this thread are that the official numbers don't support such a conclusion. 
On that basis you're not going to get anywhere unless you:
a) Find a sufficiently long piece of road and test the W12's top speed yourself
b) Determine whether the projections of that software package are accurate
Harry

In short - I thought you, as in people who own that car for more then a month... should've already wondered about it and have some answers already... or at least would be interested to find out.
a) I will, as I said when road conditions permit or do you want me to do it on winter tires rated at only 190kph through roads covered in snow and ice?







Hmmm I am not that crazy yet















b) It proved to be quite accurate over time... you can try it yourself though.


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_No, getting the aircraft up to 300 km/h work because you don't have enough horsepower to overcome the Cd and - most especially - the rolling resistance of the 747. The Cd of the aircraft won't be significant in this particular example because the rolling resistance will be limiting.

All right, just change B747 to 155ton Phaeton in my earlier example... that should put things into perspective.


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (valmes)*

The same limitation will apply - rolling resistance, not Cd, will limit top speed. It's just physics, it doesn't matter what the object is.
*Torque *determines ∆V. *Horsepower *determines Vmax. That's all there is to it.
Michael


----------



## 1320-20V (Sep 20, 2007)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_The same limitation will apply - rolling resistance, not Cd, will limit top speed. It's just physics, it doesn't matter what the object is.
*Torque *determines ∆V. *Horsepower *determines Vmax. That's all there is to it.
Michael

I respectfully disagree. 
Horsepower has nothing to do with any achievement of a velocity. At a drag limited top speed the Drag is exactly equal to the amount of force the tires are exerting on the road. 
For example 1000lb of drag force and 1000 lb of tractive effort will result in a constant velocity. 
Increasing the torque will cause more tractive effort and therefore increase the speed. 
Torque is a measurement of force. 
Horsepower is a measurement of power, which is a force per unit time.


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_The same limitation will apply - rolling resistance, not Cd, will limit top speed. It's just physics, it doesn't matter what the object is.
*Torque *determines ∆V. *Horsepower *determines Vmax. That's all there is to it.
Michael

Seems like we are talking of the same thing, but fail to understand each other... so *you think there's no effect of weight on top speed*? Is that what you've been saying all along?
Ok I'll just copy couple of posts from native speakers...







maybe its my English that gets in the way:
"Weight does affect top speed slightly, but it is less of a factor than aerodynamics (at high speeds). Increased weight increases rolling resistance. The higher your rolling resistance the lower your top speed." 
"If you took two identical cars, and loaded one up with bricks, the heavier car would have a lower top speed."
"At top speed the force the engine "produces" is exactly the same as the friction forces of the tires and air resistance (together). The friction forces of the tires depends on the weight. So top speed depends on weight."
I especially like that example:
"Weight affects none of these drag sources except tire friction, and even then, its effect is almost COMPLETELY overwhelmed by aerodynamic losses. If you loaded up an NSX with a couple tons of lead, it'd only drop the top speed by maybe 10 MPH or so."
In last example, author contradicts himself, saying it doesn't have any effect, but *it will drop by 10mph or so*...
Here are the screenshots from simulated runs,
1) General parameters
2) With 1997 kg (as in A8)
3) With 2997 kg (as in Phaeton)
4) With 3000 kg (as in Phaeton loaded with bricks)
5) 155t Phaeton example...










































_Modified by valmes at 3:25 PM 12-2-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (1320-20V)*


_Quote, originally posted by *1320-20V* »_I respectfully disagree...

OK, in that case, why then does the V10 powered Phaeton (230 kW, 750 N·m) have a substantially lower top speed than the W12 powered Phaeton (309 kW, 550N·m)? The vehicle weights and transmission/final drive ratios are virtually identical. The Cd and rolling resistance can be presumed to be absolutely identical.
The V10 has a huge torque advantage over the W12, but a substantial horsepower disadvantage.
Michael


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_Here screenshots from simulated runs...

Ah. I see what you mean.
The reason that the last example (the 155 tonne Phaeton) doesn't work is because you have not adjusted the gearing to suit the nature of the work to be done.
If the gearing was adjusted appropriately, then you would find that the 155 tonne Phaeton would reach a top speed of just slightly higher than what the airport tug (with a bit less horsepower) could reach.








Michael


----------



## Kuwaity (Apr 2, 2004)

Guys you are not noting something very important which is not easy to talk about in simple physics.
First of all (in simple physics) as some mentioned earlier, Power is a repetition of torque. Just an example, if a motor M1 can produce x Nm of torque at w rad/sec, and motor M2 produce the same torque at 2w rad/sec, then M2 has twice the power of M1. This means both can do the same work and M2 would require just half the time to do it. If both motors are used in the same vehicle with a theoretically perfect CVT transmission and taking that everything else is equal and assuming that the torque is enough to move the vehicle, then M2 will accelerate twice as fast. So, it’s all about power, if you have more torque it means you have more power…
All engines has its own torque and power characteristics, plus all the power is going throw a transmission.
What I’m trying to say is that when a car accelerate, the power and torque are not constant but varies across the rev range and throw the gears and speed. That means, we can’t say that max engine torque or power affects so and so…..
Adding drag and rolling resistance plus some stray losses to the equation would be something difficult to explain in plain words. Only driving the car to its limit answers the question. This software is only a simulation based on some data, which would give us an idea about what is happing but the results won’t match the real world results.
So comparing cars to bikes, airplanes, tractors, etc. is not accurate in my piont of view.



_Modified by Kuwaity at 12:15 PM 12-2-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_
No, not so. The first version of the W12, which produced 420 HP, was a wet sump engine. The second version, which produces 450 HP, is a dry sump engine. I have seen both in person, they are obviously physically different.


Audis 420hp engine (on D2 cars) had a dry sump...
... here is 2005 car with added 30PS and 10Nm of torque:








Note that (there is more then .2 sec difference between 420 and 450 hp cars in 0-100kph tests)... 
and out of curiosity...








According to that program, Phaeton W12 needs 489bhp and 617Nm to get to 6.1 sec 0-100kph.


----------



## Kuwaity (Apr 2, 2004)

Talking about the airport tug and the phaeton. Assuming that both have the same max power, both can pull the airplane with a transmission that makes max power appears at the tug usable speed and both can push the phaeton to, say 200mph, at the correct gear ratio that makes the max power appears at 200mph. but we can’t explain further, it just a theoretical explanation.


----------



## Zaphh (Jul 5, 2008)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (Kuwaity)*

Hi everyone,
There are general the laws of Physics, and there's reality.
It is absolutely impossible to create a mathematical rectangle out of a piece of plywood.
So the general laws of physics are known and do apply, but with a pinch of salt when it comes to applied physics.
On a mathematically horizontal plane with no friction forces, a moving solid will never stop, whatever its weight, because weight only come in when you want to change the potential energy of the solid.
In real life, there is the aerodynamical friction, the friction of the wheels on the road, + all sorts of frictions everywhere, including friction of pistons in the cylinders, bearing everywhere and who knows what in a piece of equipment where hundreds of parts are moving around so as to get a car to run...
In some elements, friction will increase with rpm, in others, it will be something else (think of fluids that need to move here and there)...
So you can only get physics laws to apply in an approximate way, since it is impossible to get everything into account. Then, conditions change. Aerodynamical friction will be negligible at an airport tug speed (hence the not really aerodynamical shape of the tugs)...
Mass *will* affect wheels friction on the road, but at high speeds, aerodynamical friction is what will count most, so both Michael and Valmes are right...
With friction-less tyres, Michael is right: mass will not count, and there is an application of this: trains, that use iron wheels on an iron track to minimize rolling friction. If you look at the power/mass ratio of a goods train loaded with gravel, you will be surprised.
However, 255/18 tyres are no train wheels. Friction is not negligible although not as important as aerodynamic friction.
This is why at top speed (where the engine needs to fight against air for 98%, tyre friction for 1% and a sum of other things for 1% (the values I'm giving are for example only)), top speed will be slightly less with a heavier car because of tyre friction that will increase with mass.
But this may account for a handful of mph at top speed, and who really cares (but Valmes







).
Btw, Valmes, you should be using full disk wheels since wheel design can create a lot of drag.
Another thing: if you want to get the max speed you can out of a Phaeton, don't forget to put tape on all body junctions so as to get as smooth a surface as possible.
And of course use the thinner tyres you can find (you'r not really concerned with grip when speed in straight line is what you want)...
And don't use the air conditioning, don't drive at night (headlamps draw some energy), choose your day (air density and humidity), choose the road (French roads are smoother than German roads and MUCH smoother than English roads) and ... don't forget to use a car with an engine that was well run-in and ...
Oh btw, if you could find some train wheels and put the phaeton on a, iron track, you could probably grasp a couple of mph, Valmes








Top speed to the mph depends on *so many* conditions and variables that there may be no real answer to Valmes' question at +/- 3 mph. Then, if you try to compare between two cars, things will add up, meaning that the +/- 3 mph become +/- 6 mph... so 2 cars with a 6mph top speed difference may in fact go at the same speed a week later, with different environmental conditions...
So for me the quest for the "true" top speed of a car is pointless.
P.


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (Zaphh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Zaphh* »_Oh btw, if you could find some train wheels and put the phaeton on a, iron track, you could probably grasp a couple of mph, Valmes

















Ummm... I think I can live with +/- 3-6 mph difference...


----------



## adamkodish (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Phaeton Top Speed (valmes)*

For those of you that don't remember the VW Nardo, here's a link:
http://www.italdesign.it/dinam...id=25
So a VW with a W12 can do 320 km/h after all.
Adam


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

With 12:1 CR it gives out 440Kw/600bhp in NA form?

















_Modified by valmes at 7:56 PM 12-2-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

Another Russian owner told me his stock Phaeton W12 can get up to 289 kph and chipped one (mtm)... well he did get it up to 295 kph at 4800rpm, but traffic wouldn't allow to go any higher..


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_Another Russian owner told me... he did get it up to 295 kph at 4800rpm, but traffic wouldn't allow to go any higher..

Well, heck, he should have just left the downtown area and gone out onto the highway.








Michael


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (PanEuropean)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PanEuropean* »_
Well, heck, he should have just left the downtown area and gone out onto the highway.








Michael

Well, when you get cameras in Canada... you will get the same amusement out of your fellow citizens who died or got injured in road accidents...


_Modified by valmes at 5:03 PM 12-4-2009_


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*

Hi Val:
I apologize if any offense was taken. I meant that to be a humorous comment, and certainly did not mean any offense to those who are injured or killed in road accidents.
Michael


----------



## culverwood (May 20, 2005)

*Re: (valmes)*


_Quote, originally posted by *valmes* »_In short - I thought you, as in people who own that car for more then a month... should've already wondered about it and have some answers already... or at least would be interested to find out.


Why?


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

*Re: (culverwood)*


_Quote, originally posted by *culverwood* »_
Why?

Why what? Why would you be interested in knowing what your car is capable of? I don't know - its seems normal to me... otherwise I would just buy V6 and don't bother with questions...










_Modified by valmes at 7:45 AM 12-5-2009_


----------



## valmes (Oct 27, 2009)

I think moderators can close this thread up, since I got all the answers I was looking for... Thanks to everyone who participated in this discussion.


----------



## PanEuropean (Nov 3, 2001)

*Re: (valmes)*

Discussion closed up at Val's request.
Michael


----------

