countach - Jalopnik

posts about #countach more →
1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Carbotanium or Titbon: What You Get When You Mix Carbon Fiber With Titanium
Basement Lamborghini Hits The Road, Builder Gets The Pink Slip
An Elegy for Six Missing Cylinders
Separated at Birth: Lamborghini Countach Vs. Ikarus 280 Bus
How The Stile Bertone Mantide Got Angular Rear Wheelarches
The $2 Million Showdown: Bertone Mantide vs. Corvette ZR1
Delivery Driver Wrecks Mario Andretti's Rare Lamborghini Countach
The Ferrari 599’s Archways of Aerodynamics
Lamborghini Coloring Book: Color Me Urraco

Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.

Dsmvwl Admin Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×

Six Flags Over Tomsk
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
There are many, many things I would buy for $400k (not that I have that kind of dough) before I would spend it all on this thing.

Pipe.
Reply

Edited by Six Flags Over Tomsk at 07/30/09 1:50 PM

MushyHeirloom
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Maybe if you're a museum, but if you ever plan to drive that thing any distance, this - and for that matter, any - Cuntstache is a real Crack Pipe.

Actually, it's just some coke off the dashboard, I suppose.
Reply

MushyHeirloom was starred MushyHeirloom was unstarred

Nurburgringer
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
paint it lime green and I'd say nice price.kudos to FJ for including the best photos yet of the mystical 'periscope', but of course they didn't break the 32 years and counting "no photos through the LP400 Periscope from the driver's eye view" embargo. Probably because it's absolutely useless unless the driver has a third eye mounted on a stalk growing out of his right temple, but still.
Reply

FlakJack promoted this comment Edited by Nurburgringer at 07/30/09 11:55 AM Nurburgringer was starred Nurburgringer was unstarred

Joshuman
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
At that price, hire Ken Imhoff to build you one.
Reply

Tomsk 1.1 promoted this comment Joshuman was starred Joshuman was unstarred

MikoSquiz
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Crack pipe at any price. The Countach is a legendarily terrible, terrible car. The poster is actually better than the vehicle itself.
Reply

MikoSquiz was starred MikoSquiz was unstarred

Feds
07/30/09

@MikoSquiz:

Thank you James May. Please take this opportunity to regaile us with your personal driving tales of the Countach, both on the street, in TSD rallies, and on the track.

Thanking you in advance,

The Commentariat.
Reply

Mike the Dog promoted this comment Feds was starred Feds was unstarred

Mike the Dog is sitting by the door with a pair of cow slippers, and a very sad face.
07/30/09

@Feds: Drat. I didn't realize that approving your comment would automatically approve the one above it. Live and learn, I guess...
Reply

beercheck
07/30/09

@Feds: Wow. Touchy.
Reply

beercheck was starred beercheck was unstarred

Feds
07/30/09

@beercheck - Commentin' Dirty:

Meh, as far as I am concerned, you might as well post "FIRST!!!111!!!one1!!!"

We've all seen the review, we all know that according to Top Gear, these cars suck. What does regurgitating someone else's opinion add to the discussion?
Reply

Feds was starred Feds was unstarred

Mobius
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Crack pipe, this is the less desirable road-going model. However, this much would be chump change for the secret Italia Programma Spaziale Evoluzione Edizione with the scarmjets, popout wings and also the optional flux capacitor.
Reply

Edited by Mobius at 07/30/09 11:01 AM Mobius was starred Mobius was unstarred

Feds
07/30/09

@Mobius_1000_Club:

Best part about the edit function is when mistakes carry through...

P.S. Scramjets.
Reply

Mobius_1000_Club promoted this comment Feds was starred Feds was unstarred

Mobius
07/30/09

@Feds: Damn you grammar police!

Go police Youtube!

:)
Reply

Edited by Mobius at 07/30/09 9:19 PM Mobius was starred Mobius was unstarred

Mobius
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
2 days ago, certainly, a Countach is something special.

But then the 458 Italia came along, and if I had that much money, all other spending plans are on indefinite hold.
Reply

Mobius was starred Mobius was unstarred

BadIdea
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
$395K??? Lambos may have looked cool in that era, but so did skinny leather ties and mullets. Plus, the dash on that car looks like blocks of wood covered in felt.
Reply

layabout returns promoted this comment BadIdea was starred BadIdea was unstarred

layabout
07/30/09

@BadIdea: Mullets were never cool,ever!
Reply

layabout was starred layabout was unstarred

SmartAspen
07/30/09

@BadIdea: Agreed - that dash is positively hideous! Crack!!
Reply

FlakJack promoted this comment SmartAspen was starred SmartAspen was unstarred

Novaload
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
It's crack. It was even, to some extent, crack back in its day, i.e. something for people who just can't get high fast enough snorting coke and need something MORE. FASTER.
Reply

Novaload was starred Novaload was unstarred

Flagrant German Fanboy
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
While this is clearly one of the more rare models of the Countach era, if you really need a Countach fix, you can easily acquire a later one in equally good shape for about $300,000 fewer bucks. Unless this was the only one of it's kind, I can't possibly condone this sort of price-tag.

Smoke those rocks, baby.
Reply

FlakJack promoted this comment

Number_Six
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Nice price. In this condition it transcends the word "car".
Reply

Number_Six was starred Number_Six was unstarred

nataku8_e30
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
"Weight distribution of the car's 3,296 lbs was an ideal 41/59"

Wait, what?
Reply

Maymar is breaking in the commenting system like a new pair of socks promoted this comment nataku8_e30 was starred nataku8_e30 was unstarred

Maymar
07/30/09

@nataku8_e30: There are different ideas of what represents ideal weight distribution. There's the commonly accepted 50/50, but then there's also the school of thought that a little rear bias is preferred. I know one of the reasons is because of weight transfer under braking, and someone else might be able to clarify this more.
Reply

Maymar was starred Maymar was unstarred

nataku8_e30
07/30/09

@Maymar - Save the CSRs!: Weight transfer under braking is generally fairly irrelevant with properly adjusted brake bias. I can see additional rear weight being a positive for traction during acceleration on a RWD vehicle (although, you have weight transfer to the rear wheels anyway during acceleration). 50 / 50 allows for (although does not guarantee) a minimal rotational inertia about the yaw axis, as well, if i'm not mistaken, as more neutral steering characteristics. There may be some justification for more weight over the rear wheels, but I think it's lost out in the end, since even Porsche targets 50/50 these days, if I'm not mistaken.
Reply

nataku8_e30 was starred nataku8_e30 was unstarred

Feds
07/30/09

@nataku8_e30:

I can't let that go...

Regardless of brake bias, the percentage of weight on the front wheels will increase under braking. As such, the front wheels will move further toward the edges of their friction circle for a given amount of lateral acceleration. As such, a rearward bias is preferred. It does also benefit traction and weight transfer.

A 50/50 weight distribution in and of itself has no bearing on rotational inertial. Take a dumbbell and support it on 1 finger. 50/50 distribution, but very difficult to rotate. Now stand it on its end. 50/50 distribution, but much easier to spin.

As you allude to, there are limits to everything. Porsches of old were 60% or more rearward biased, making for scary handling at the limit. attempting to make a rear engined car 50/50 will do nothing but kill the rotational inertia.
Reply

FlakJack promoted this comment Feds was starred Feds was unstarred

Maymar
07/30/09

@nataku8_e30: Ehh, I'll admit my understanding of physics is nowhere as good as I'd like it to be (I slept a lot in grade 12). I'm left with the possibility that there are many cars with a 41/59 distribution, but it's distributed most ideally in the Countach.
Reply

Maymar was starred Maymar was unstarred

nataku8_e30
07/30/09

@Feds: As I said, 50/50 weight distribution doesn't guarantee minimal rotational inertia, however, you can theoretically have a lower rotational inertia with 50/50 weight distribution than you can with 41 / 59 weight distribution. In addition, I think you're misunderstanding how friction works. The weight transfer to the front wheels INCREASES the limits of friction (maximum friction force = coefficient of static friction * normal force, the normal force is the weight on the front wheels). If you have the bias calibrated correctly, both the front and rear wheels will hit the limit of the braking force at the same time, completely independent of what your "static" weight distribution is.
Reply

nataku8_e30 was starred nataku8_e30 was unstarred

beercheck
07/30/09

@nataku8_e30: Your science is powerless here. The Countach-love force is strong in this one.
Reply

beercheck was starred beercheck was unstarred

Feds
07/30/09

@nataku8_e30:

You are actuall more likely to have a lower rotational inertia with a 99/1 weight distribution that you can with a 50/50 distribution. Rotational inertia is a measure of distribution of mass relative to the centre of mass. In a 99/1 scenario, your centre of mass will be very close to most of your mass, whereas in a 50/50 scenario, you could have your mass concentrated at the extreme ends (like a barbell).

Secondarily, friction in tires is non-linear. Without getting into the details, take a set of tires and put them on a 59 Caddy. Measure the maximum lateral acceleration. Now take those same tires and put them on a Miata. According to your theory, the miata will have lower limits, as less mass is pushing down on them.
Reply

Feds was starred Feds was unstarred

nataku8_e30
07/31/09

@Feds: No, rotational inertia can be calculated about any point. In this case, the relevant point is the center of rotation, not the center of mass, which will be located geometrically close to the center of the vehicle. A 50/50 weight distribution can theoretically have all of the mass located on the geometric center of the vehicle while a 41 / 59 cannot. True, this is an unrealistic situation, but as you move mass out to have a more realistic distribution, you can still maintain a lower moment of inertia about the center of rotation with a 50/50 weight distribution

You can also drop the barbell and other analogies to try to help me "understand" what you're talking about as my mechanical engineering degree is more than enough to allow me to discuss this without some sort of stupid physical example....

Again, you're not seeming to understand friction - a Miata WILL have lower limits on the force between the tire and road because it weighs less. HOWEVER, this will result in the same braking acceleration because the Miata has much less mass, so it requires less force. Basically, since both relationships are linear (braking friction = mu_static * normal_force and braking friction = vehicle_mass * braking deceleration, and vehicle mass and normal force are directly related by the gravitational acceleration 'constant'), you have the same deceleration from a set of tires and a properly biased brake system, no matter what the car weighs - it has nothing to do with the friction coefficient being non-linear.

Finally, why are you even talking about lateral acceleration under hard braking? Turning and braking is poor driving technique, and in any car, will cause you to spin out.
Reply

nataku8_e30 was starred nataku8_e30 was unstarred

cchannel BLT
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
Crackpipe - it doesn't have a genuine Fiero chassis!

The Countach before the body kitted and winged LP400S version is like the pre-boob-jobbed Pamela Anderson to me.
Reply

Maymar is breaking in the commenting system like a new pair of socks promoted this comment cchannel BLT was starred cchannel BLT was unstarred

Maymar
07/30/09

@cchannel BLT: I agree - the earlier cars were cleaner, prettier. But that's not why you want a Countach - you want one because it is the ideal supercar in an adolescent mind. It is outrageous, it has a spoiler tacked on the front end, it's more xtreme than a truckload of Doritos.
Reply

Maymar was starred Maymar was unstarred

r0ver
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
I hate to say crackpipe as this is one of my dream cars,and,yes,Graverobber,you're right.These early cars are the purest expression of the design(esp. in that colour).But,Jeez,for that much money I'm pretty sure I can get a Ferrari Daytona for that-and you can at least drive those around quite quickly. Crackpipe.(Or perhaps in this case,some finest Columbian energy powder.)
Reply

FlakJack promoted this comment Edited by r0ver at 07/30/09 9:02 AM r0ver was starred r0ver was unstarred

reddingofish
07/30/09

In reply to 1977 Lamborghini Countach for $395,000!
I remember seeing one of these things on a city street 25 years ago. It sounded like a frigin' lion.
Reply

reddingofish was starred reddingofish was unstarred

acarr260
07/30/09

@reddingofish: An odd experience, really. It sounds like it wants to rip you limb-from-limb, and yet I cannot stop walking toward it. Someone help me!
Reply

acarr260 was starred acarr260 was unstarred

Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

SUBSCRIBE TO Jalopnik

Login

Reset Password

Register

Submit Your Comment