which surface can cars travel on the fastest?
80948
When people attempt to break records they head to an area that is very smooth, low altitude, and very little wind.
71917
the fastest I know of would be the Bugatti Veyron 16.4.  they are handbuilt with a 1001 Euro (987 SAE) horsepower, 8.0 liter quad-turbo DOHC 64-valve W-16 engine with 7-speed auto-clutch manual transmission, and tops out at 250+ mph.  in the 7th gear, the car gets less than 3 mpg.  a second key is required to program the engine into "top-speed" mode, where you can go 0-250 in less than 60 seconds.  an air-brake is required to take the car down from 250+ to 160 mph, and the audio system alone costs US$30,000.  a deposit of 350,000 is required to place an order, for a final cost of about $1.25 million.  it will be available in the US about summer 2006, and was recently featured in the January 2006 issue of Motor Trend magazine.
977523
Correct, Hyabusa at the moment although the Kwak ZZR 1400 is likely to take the crown....... for a very short time. The Ducati Desmoseidici MotoGP replica is likely to be the most arm wrenchingly fast publicly available bike around ($45K £30K will get you one!!)\nAs for the Dodge Viper engined thing. Definitely not the fastest. Powerful yes, but the test rider was afraid to go above 50mph and was scared of going round corners (and motor BIcycles have only 2 wheels). You could put a 747 Jet engine on a AMC Pacer but it would not be the fastest car.......... well for about 1/2 a second maybe before it launched itself into the neighbours kitchen!! Good engineering exercise tho and must sound awesome!! Is it true the test rider wore brown leathers so no-one would notice when he s**t himself ;)
191652
Very efficient cars as far as I know. German engineering is quite superb.\n\n(PS I do get your question - and I love 'em! :-) )
671488
A Formula One car is much lighter and faster than anything used in NASCAR. However, I believe the fastest sustained speed in road racing is at Le Mans, specifically along the Mulsanne Straight where, Le Mans-type sportscars, at one time reached speeds of 405 km/h (251.7 mph).\nMonza, the venue for the Italian Grand Prix is, I believe the fastest track on the F1 circuit; last year Kimi Raikkonen's pole-winning speed was 257.855 Km/h (160.223 mph) and Juan Pablo Montoya won the race at an average speed of 247.097 Km/h (153.538 mph).\nFernando Alonso's speed of 231.620 km/h (143.921 mph) secured the pole for last year's British GP and Juan Pablo Montoya won the race at an average speed of 218.968 km/h (136.060 mph).
516599
This question is too vague.  But I can tell you that tires will make the biggest difference both cheaply and quickly.
13740
The fastest car is the Thrust SSC, with the top speed 763.035 – Mach 1.02.\n\n"The fastest of those listed comes in at 766 mph (over the speed of sound!) by the Thrust SSC car at Black Rock Desert in Nevada, in 1997.\n\n"The fastest street legal car is listed at 240 mph. This one was the McLaren F1 in 1999."\n- van.hep.uiuc.edu\n\n"The Thrust SSC, driven by Andy Green and owned by Richard Noble, was the first land based vehicle to break the sound barrier on October 15th 1997, with a two way average of 763.035 mph"\n- cybersteering.com
957026
its ethier Fast Cars by Hellbent or Le Tigre
464972
I'd rather be driving a 1960s chevy than my 92 Sentra. You're comparing 2 different things...cars/buildings and health. It's like asking, Isn't it weird that computers are soooo fast nowadays...but tortoises are so slow? Would going back to Black screened, green lettered computers make tortoises faster?
433701
It depends on your frame of reference.  Relative to the Earth, the fastest speed man is capable of is probably 10km/s, that's 1/30000 the speed of light.
161239
These are the fastest cars based on acceleration (in seconds) from 0 to 60 MPH. \nThe fast and furious :-) \n2.6 - 1994 Dauer 962 LeMans \n2.7 - 2000 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 Concept \n2.7 - 2000 Dodge Hennessey Viper Venom 800TT \n2.7 - 1999 Leblanc Caroline \n2.7 - 1993 Dauer 962 Le Mans \n2.8 - 1996 Renault Espace F1 \n2.9 - 1991 Audi Avus Quattro \n2.9 - 1997 Callaway C7 Corvette \n2.9 - 1997 Dodge Viper GTS-R \n3.0 - 2003 Bugatti 16/4 Veyron \n3.1 - 2006 Mosler \n3.1 - 1995 Ford GT-90 \n3.1 - 1993 Jaguar XJR-15 \n3.1 - 1998 Koenigsegg CC \n3.1 - 1991 Lotec C1000 \n3.1 - 1991 McLaren F1 \n3.1 - 1995 Yamaha OX99-11 \n3.2 - 2002 Koenigsegg CC 8S \n3.2 - 1992 Bugatti EB110 SS \n3.2 - 1996 Quadraduce \n3.3 - 1997 McLaren F1 \n3.3 - 2001 Saleen S7 \n3.3 - 1987 Vector Avtech WX3 \n3.4 - 1992 Bugatti EB110 GT \n3.4 - 1985 Koenig Competition Evolution \n3.4 - 1994 Schuppan 962CR \n3.4 - 1987 Westfield SEI \n3.4 - 1997 Dodge Viper Venom 600 GTS \n3.5 - 2002 Pagani Zonda C12-S 7.3 \n3.5 - 2002 FERRARI ENZO \n3.6 - 2002 Lamborghini Murciélago \n3.6 - 2003 Ferrari Enzo \n3.6 - 2001 Lamborghini Diablo \n3.6 - 1997 Porsche 911 GT1 \n3.6 - 1987 Porsche 959 \n3.6 - 1997 RUF Porsche CTR-2 \n3.7 - 1991 BMW Nazca C2 \n3.7 - 1996 Ferrari F 50 \n3.7 - 1994 Lamborghini Diablo SE30 Jota \n3.7 - 1996 Porsche 911 GT2 \n3.8 - 2003 Dodge Viper SRT-10 \n3.8 - 2000 Porsche 911 Turbo \n3.8 - 1997 Campagna T-Rex \n3.8 - 1992 Jaguar XJ220 \n3.8 - 1996 Lamborghini Diablo SV \n3.8 - 1998 Lotus GT1 \n3.8 - 1994 Ultima Spyder \n3.9 - 2006 Dodge Viper \n3.9 - 2001 B. Engineering Edonis \n3.9 - 2003 Viper SRT/10 \n3.9 - 1987 Ferrari F 40 \n4.0 - 2002 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 \n4.0 - 2000 Dodge Viper ACR Coupe \n4.0 - 2001 Porsche Carrera GT \n4.0 - 2003 Porsche 911 GT2 \n4.0 - 1993 Lamborghini Diablo SE30 \n4.1 - 2001 Ferrari 550 Barchetta \n4.1 - 1990 BMW Nazca M12 \n4.1 - 1993 Lamborghini Diablo VT \n4.1 - 1996 Lamborghini Diablo Roadster \n4.2 - 2000 BMW Z8 \n4.2 - 2000 Ferrari 360 Modena \n4.2 - 2002 Ferrari 575 M Maranello \n4.2 - 1994 TVR Cerbera \n4.2 - 1985 Vector W8 Twin Turbo \n4.3 - 2003 Porsche 911 GT3 \n4.3 - 1996 Bugatti EB112 \n4.4 - 2002 Aston Martin Vanquish \n4.4 - 2002 Lotus Esprit V8 \n4.4 - 1988 Cizeta Moroder V16T \n4.4 - 1997 Dodge Viper GTS \n4.4 - 1997 Gillet Vertigo \n4.4 - 1996 Mega Monté Carlo \n4.4 - 1996 Porsche 911 Turbo \n4.4 - 1996 Spectre R42 \n4.4 - 1990 TVR Griffith \n4.4 - 1996 Vector Aeromotive M12 \n4.5 - 2003 z06 Corvette \n4.6 - 1996 Dodge Viper RT/10 \n4.6 - 1994 Ferrari F 512 M \n4.6 - 1996 Ferrari F 355 GTS \n4.6 - 1996 Ferrari F 355 Spider \n4.6 - 1982 Lamborghini Countach \n4.7 - 2003 Mercedes-Benz SL600 \n4.7 - 1992 Aston Martin Vantage \n4.7 - 1996 Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 \n4.7 - 1997 Ferrari F 550 Maranello \n4.7 - 1985 Isdera Commendatore \n4.7 - 1996 Lotus Esprit S4S \n4.7 - 1997 Rinspeed Mono Ego \n4.8 - 1997 Chevrolet Corvette C5 \n4.8 - 1996 Lotus Esprit V8 \n4.8 - 1997 Panoz Roadster \n4.9 - 2002 Acura NSX \n4.9 - 1994 Chaterham Seven HPC \n4.9 - 1989 De Tomaso Guara \n4.9 - 1996 Ferrari F 355 Berlinetta \n4.9 - 1996 Ford Mustang Saleen S351 \n4.9 - 1997 Italdesign Scighera\n\nFastest Land Car Speed\nThe one-mile (1.609-km) land speed record is 1,227.985 km/h (763.055 mph), set by Andy Green in Thrust SSC in the Black Rock Desert, Nevada, USA, on October 15, 1997. Thrust SSC (Super Sonic Car) completed its record-breaking run in a matter of seconds, but was the culmination of six years of work and a six-week on-site campaign. Two and a half years of research went into the shape of the Thrust SSC, and building the most powerful car ever took a further two years and 100,000 man-hours.
760675
Making something go fast is not all that difficult much of the time, it is about making it *controllable*. Speed (power) is nothing without control.\n\nIn the air, not only do you have the option of full 360 degree movement options (esp with rotating wing aircraft), you do not have "blind corners", slippery road surfaces and sodding speed cameras.\n\nIn many ways we DO embrace much of the other technology though, from lighter materials, more aerodynamic design and advanced navigational facilties (FRED / GPS) etc\n\nOne thing that has never seemed to make it to the road is an engine with twin spark plugs - a requirement on all conventional engined aircraft. Not only does it give backup (less critical on the road) but ALSO makes a fair difference in economy. When switching magnetos (ignition) from BOTH to Left or Right, a drop of 50-100 RPM is not uncommon - suggesting strongly that the additional spark does indeed improve effieicney and power output.\n\nAeroplane engines are also happy to be leaned out considerably more than automobile engines. Again allowing for greater economy AND power.\n\nAre there any other technologies you are thinking of specifically that you think should be incorporated into cars?
67865
direction\naverage speed\nconstant
516568
when you travel faster than the speed of sound.
157633
If I cant get the batmobile I stick with the E39 BMW M5. The fastest, most powerful car BMW has ever built. It can accelerate to 60 MPH in 4.9 seconds and is restricted to a top speed of 150 MPH. Without speed restrictors the top speed is about 180 MPH...
122442
sports car... so it must be fast and good overall performance.  A ford gt, I believe, is bad at handling bc it's so heavy, although it does have an established reputation.  \n\nFor me, I'd go with a fast and light car with good handling.  I'd go with Toyota Supra for a decently priced car.  it's fast and has good handling.  So you can turn corners fast!  Because you know that no street race is a straight away. I also like the Porsche GT for the same reason as the supra.\n\nFor supercars, I like the Ferriari Enzo and the Bugattii.  The Bugatti has 1001 horsepower!  That's crazy.
561115
Question -   Please explain how molecules in the air cause air\nresistance. Why air resistance is larger when a car a travelling faster?\n---------------------\nSharazaad,\n\nEven though you cannot see them, air molecules (a mixture of gases, mainly nitrogen and oxygen) are \njust like all other molecules inasmuch as they have mass and occupy space. Anything moving through \nair must push the molecules out of the way.\n\nThe faster the object moves, the faster the air molecules are encountered and the greater are the \nnumber to be pushed aside. This requires a larger force that necessary when the object is moving \nslowly. Consider swimming: The faster you swim, the harder it is to push the water molecules out \nof the way.\n\nStreamlining a car is a way of making it slip through the air more easily. Cars with narrow or \nwedge-shaped front ends and smooth, gentle curves allow it to slip through the air more easily \nthan bulky things like large trucks with large, boxy, flat front ends. Even something so simple \nas keeping a car clean and polished will help it slip through the air more easily.\n\nRegards,\nProfHoff 869\n=====================================================\nSharazaad,\n\n\nMolecules in the air have mass.  Even though they are invisible, they are\nstill there, and they still have to be pushed out of the way for a car to\noccupy the space that the air is in.  This now should make sense WHY air\nresistance even exists.\n\nNOW.  Why do greater speeds cause there to be an even greater air\nresistance.  It is true that there is barely any appreciable air resistance\nto a car going 10 MPH versus 60 MPH.  But at 60 MPH, even though there is\nthe same amount of air, the resistance is much greater because the car needs\nto move the air out of the way MUCH MUCH QUICKER.  I do not know if you can\nreally speak about viscosity of air (non - liquid).  But air really does\nbehave like a liquid when it comes to resistance.  HOW?  The air that is\nexisting on or above the sidewalk WILL ALSO RESIST the air molecule that is\nbeing struck by your car and pushed to the side.  SO, this is why at higher\nspeeds you will have a much greater resistance because you are FORCING THE\nAIR to move not at 10 MPH but NEEDING IT to move out of the way at 60 MPH.\n\nYou could say that the relationship between air resistance (r) and velocity\n(v) is proportional.  However, I think I read somewhere that resistance (r)\nis ~ velocity (v)^1.5\n\nPlease do not quote me on that ... but I am pretty certain I read it in an\nMath book for Engineers.  So there may be some credence to it.\n\nHope this helps.\nDarin Wagner\n=====================================================\nAir resistance is caused by the car banging into air molecules and\nincreasing their momentum in the direction the car is going.  Since the car\nexerts a forward directed force on the molecule, by Newton's 2nd law (for\nevery action there is an equal and opposite reaction) the molecule exerts a\nforce on the car in the backward direction, tending to slow the car.\n\n\nOf course, a molecule has so little mass, it exerts an extremely tiny force\non the car.  However, there are so many molecules that the cumulative effect\ncan be large.  You might also imagine what would happen if molecules were as\nlarge as bowling balls!  I think you can picture how the forces could be\nvery large.\n\n\nIncidentally, the molecules are moving at speeds much faster than the car is\ngoing and in random directions.  So some hit the car from the rear and speed\nit up a little (very little).  However, one coming from the front slows the\ncar down by a larger amount because the car's speed is added to the\nmolecule's speed for a molecule coming from the front and subtracted from\nthe molecule's speed for one coming from the rear.\n\n\nBest, Dick Plano, Professor of Physics emeritus, Rutgers University\n=====================================================\nHi Sharazaad,\n\nGood question,