LP640 Roadster is go!

  • Thread starter Thread starter McLaren
  • 24 comments
  • 1,340 views
McLaren

McLaren

Premium
Messages
46,551
United States
Texas
Fast Autos.net
Lamborghini presented the new version of the Murcielago Roadster at the 2006 Los Angeles Auto Show. The Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 Roadster benefits from the same extensive modifications to the bodywork and mechanics as the LP640 Coupe, as well as delivering its own distinct character.

In their re-interpretation of the Roadster, the designers of the Lamborghini Centro Stile have remained true to the original style principles of purism, sportiness and functionality. As with the Coupe it has now assumed a more aggressive appearance, a substantial influence being the new front and rear bumpers. On the latter there is a new rear diffuser, in which the exhaust system is integrated within a tailpipe. The rear lights are also new, increasing the distinguishing features and making the Murcielago Roadster as unmistakable at night as in daylight. The asymmetrical design of the sides is particularly striking. Whilst the area behind the air inlet on the right is almost closed, on the left there is a large opening for the ventilation of the oil cooler. This, in addition to the aerodynamic form of the front and rear, is an illustration of how functionality dictates the shape of Lamborghini.

Changes to the rear-view mirror make the Murcielago Roadster more aerodynamic, with other features including new windscreen wipers and the option of new Hermera alloy wheels.

From its forerunner, the Lamborghini Murcielago Roadster LP640 has inherited the characteristic asymmetrical interior arrangement. The whole interior is tailored to the driver and arranged in such a way that a true driver-focused experience is offered; a car which challenges yet at the same time is entirely geared to the driver. This is illustrated in the use of perforated leather for the chair cushions, the dashboard tunnel console and the door lining on the driver’s side.

The instrument panel has also been redesigned with different display graphics. This includes a new Kenwood car radio with a 6.5 in widescreen monitor and reader for DVD, MP3, and WMA. The navigation system is also available as an option. Like its predecessor, the Murcielago LP640 Roadster can be customized through special equipment packages. The ‘ad personam’ individualization program offers even more scope to create a personal, unmistakable individual sports car.

A More Powerful Engine

As with the coupe the new 6.5 liter V12 engine with 640 bhp and 486 lb-ft torque is now used. Naturally the Lamborghini meets all the current valid European and North American emissions standards.

The increased power naturally leads to increased road performance. The maximum speed now lies at 330 km/h compared to 320 km/h. The standard sprint from 0 to 100 km/h is now reached in an excellent 3.4 seconds making it .4 seconds faster than its forerunner.

The engineers also focused their attention on optimizing the torque band. The driveability of the engine thus benefits from the use of a continually variable timing system and engine management with Drive-by-Wire-System.

Click to expand...
The order list for this one is filling faster than the coupe, and right now, word is that 300 will be the limit until a few are built. Can't wait to see this baby in Dallas, and hopefully at the Auto Show in March.
 
Those wheels are available on the coupe too. I absolutely love the engine covers of Murcielago roadsters. I think it would look really good in white with black rims. Hope to see it somewhere sometime soon.
 
I actually like the wheel as they look somewhat a original design to me.
 
Now, if Lamborghini could figure out how to chop a 1/4 ton off the weight to make it a proper sports car. The 599 is less powerful and has the engine all wrong to be a "real" supercar, yet is faster and handles better. It's also much lighter and cheaper. Basically, The Mucielago fails. It does look cool though, which is what Lamborghinis are all about.
 
keef
Now, if Lamborghini could figure out how to chop a 1/4 ton off the weight to make it a proper sports car. The 599 is less powerful and has the engine all wrong to be a "real" supercar, yet is faster and handles better. It's also much lighter and cheaper. Basically, The Mucielago fails. It does look cool though, which is what Lamborghinis are all about.
Click to expand...

Because Lamborghini is equipped with AWD, a thing Ferrari claims makes a sports car unpure like Lamborghini and Porsche, DESPITE the fact that Ferrari was just seen testing out an AWD system on their test courses.
 
I have a feeling that the LP640 would be the quicker car on a track if put up against the 599, the power, weight and acceleration figures are pretty similar with the LP640 beig ever so slightly faster, but the 599 won't be set up for a track as much as the LP640 will. It'd probably be pretty close though, like the rest of the figures.

As for the weight, the Ferrari 599 is slightly heavier than the LP640, not a lot lighter, and the handling comment is probably speculation.

Ferrari 599 GTB
0-60mph - 3.5
0-100mph - 6.9
0- 124mph -
1/4 mile - 11.2
Top speed - 205mph
Weight - 1688kg

Lamborghini Murcielago LP640
0-60mph - 3.3
0 - 100mph -
0 - 124mph - 10.5
Top speed - 211mph
1/4 mile - 11.1
Weight - 1665kg

So to cap it off, the Lamborghini is faster, not slower, it's lighter not heavier and the handling is probably going to be better for road use in the Ferrari, and track use in the Lambo but unless someone has a track comparison or any lap times to compare them both, that's pure speculation.
 
live4speed
I have a feeling that the LP640 would be the quicker car on a track if put up against the 599, the power, weight and acceleration figures are pretty similar with the LP640 beig ever so slightly faster, but the 599 won't be set up for a track as much as the LP640 will. It'd probably be pretty close though, like the rest of the figures.

As for the weight, the Ferrari 599 is slightly heavier than the LP640, not a lot lighter, and the handling comment is probably speculation.

Ferrari 599 GTB
0-60mph - 3.5
0-100mph - 6.9
0- 124mph -
1/4 mile - 11.2
Top speed - 205mph
Weight - 1688kg

Lamborghini Murcielago LP640
0-60mph - 3.3
0 - 100mph -
0 - 124mph - 10.5
Top speed - 211mph
1/4 mile - 11.1
Weight - 1665kg

So to cap it off, the Lamborghini is faster, not slower, it's lighter not heavier and the handling is probably going to be better for road use in the Ferrari, and track use in the Lambo but unless someone has a track comparison or any lap times to compare them both, that's pure speculation.
Click to expand...

I hate to be a magazine fanboy, but Motor Trend happened to test both this month:

Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 (with E-Gear)
Power (SAE NET): 631 hp
Torque (SAE NET): 487 lb-ft
Curb Weight: 4046 lbs (1835 kg)
0-60mph: 3.7
0-100: 8.0
1/4 mile: 11.8 @ 124mph
braking, 60-0: 108 ft
100-0: 317 ft
lateral accel.: .96g

Ferrari 599GTB Fiorano (with F1 trans)
Power (SAE NET): 612 hp
Torque (SAE NET): 448 lb-ft
Curb Weight: 3750 lbs (1701 kg) (mfr rating) What's with those British scales?
0-60mph: 3.2
0-100: 7.1
1/4 mile: 11.3 @ 126.4mph
braking, 60-0: 105 ft
100-0: 288 ft
lateral accel.: 1.08g

Those acceleration times are very different, and I'm pretty sure 400 pounds and a bad-launching E-Gear would justify those poor times for the Lambo. It has some lower ratios than the Ferrari, also. I really wish MT could have done their figure-8 test with the 599 over there at Fiorano, but they didn't. They did with the LP640. They didn't do a slalom test with either, which would really show which one handles better. The Murc is most likely harder sprung, but is significantly heavier (It's body is all steel, which is where Lambo could save some weight) and a tad wider, which never helps one's slithering ability.
 
Well thoes times Motortrend got from the 599 are very impressive, faster than I've ever seen it record before. And that's quite the opposite with the LP640, I have seen the LP640 record a 3.2 seconds 0-60 time, but only the once, 90% of the tests are 3.3 or 3.4, the fastest I've seen of the 599 is 3.4 a lot are around the 3.7 mark which is also the official 0-60. The time Motortrend have recorded from the LP640 is the slowest I've ever seen one record in a performance test.

As for the Ferrari's kerb weight, the official weight on the ferrari.co.uk web site is 1690kg, not 1701kg, likewise the official weight of the Murcielago LP640 is 1665kg over at lamborghini.co.uk. The Lambo is lighter, and I've seen tests where it's gone faster than all that 1/4 mile time from MT and that 0-60 time. Somethings gone wrong with thoes figures at motor trend there I think. It happens.

http://www.ferrari.co.uk/index.php?page=productioncars
http://www.lamborghini.co.uk/?section=models&sub_section=4&model=murcielago_lp640
 
Yeah, it happens. Maybe someone found a good/bad patch of asphalt. I guess we just need a bunch of different tests and then average them all out, eh? :lol: I also think MT usually weighs test cars themselves (not the Ferrari, as that was done at Fiorano with the company), but I'm not sure if they have the driver in there or a full tank of gas.
 
If the driver wasn't as expernced with high powered 4wd cars then that might explain the bad launch the LP620 had, that 599 time was very good, I don't doubt the car could do that on a near perfect run which I'd presume is what the driver managed to get out of the 599. The weight figures are just wrong, theres no reason to dwell on thoes. The cars seem pretty close performance wise.
 
Despite sounding like a fanboy, I've never seen Motor Trend has the greatest source. Hell, I find Car and Driver a better source. Esp. since MT recorded a 3.7 0-60.

How would that be even logical from Lamborghini when that was what a 6.2 583Hp Murcielago was hitting?
 
In MT's defense, they have never found E-Gear to be anything more than torture to use.
live4speed
As for the Ferrari's kerb weight, the official weight on the ferrari.co.uk web site is 1690kg, not 1701kg, likewise the official weight of the Murcielago LP640 is 1665kg over at lamborghini.co.uk. The Lambo is lighter, and I've seen tests where it's gone faster than all that 1/4 mile time from MT and that 0-60 time. Somethings gone wrong with thoes figures at motor trend there I think. It happens.
Click to expand...
Regarding the weight issue, according to my sources the 599 GTB is 1690kg kerb weight, and only 1580kg dry. The LP640, however, is 1665kg dry; and with the normal Murcielago having a kerb weight of 1740kg with a 1650kg dry weight I'm guessing that the LP640 does weigh rather close to 1800kg with fluids. Especially with the Lambo in question having the heavier E-Gear system..
 
...I'd still buy one, but I'd be more apt to go hardtop, and I think that can be said for almost any car. Big power, big car, 4WD, etc all makes for impressive performance any way you look at it. But people are right when they say the car may be too big when it comes to hard-driving. That said, the Ferrari still comes off as the better option here, narrowly of course. I much prefer the FR layout as opposed to MR, and you really can't beat the soundtrack of the Ferrari.

...I'm really tied here. I love the looks of the car, but the performance is never consistent. Pricing isn't great, but there aren't many cars you can buy for "cheap" that can perform like that **cough*Z06*cough**.

Now if Lamborghini could figure out how to build a transmission that isn't prone to implode, I might be better convinced to make a down payment...
 
Since when has MT ever been a good source of timed runs? AFAIR, they modify their actual times with some numbers to get an "ideal"... kinda like a perfect run, but without it actually happening. They may have stopped, but has anybody ever wondered why they almost consistently have much lower times than any comparable magazine?

I've always looked at the Murc in a slightly different class from the 575/599. It's a big wide wedge, the 599 is a more classic GT (although sped up to hyper-speed). OTOH, it's not quite at Enzo/CGT levels of performance, so I don't know where I'd actually place it. But it's funny to see how close the two cars are weight-wise, because the Lambo is a much more dated chassis, not to mention the extra complications of 4WD.

Anywho, back on-topic; I'd actually prefer a Murc roadster over the coupe. Why? The car's basic point is posing and being seen around town. Why not make it that much more fun with a convertible? Plus, it's way easier to hear the engine that way. If I wanted a hard-edged coupe with a bull on the front, I'd just grab a Gallardo. A lot more practical and wieldly.

(Of course I'll probably never even drive either in my life, but that's not the point)
 
Toronado
In MT's defense, they have never found E-Gear to be anything more than torture to use.

Regarding the weight issue, according to my sources the 599 GTB is 1690kg kerb weight, and only 1580kg dry. The LP640, however, is 1665kg dry; and with the normal Murcielago having a kerb weight of 1740kg with a 1650kg dry weight I'm guessing that the LP640 does weigh rather close to 1800kg with fluids. Especially with the Lambo in question having the heavier E-Gear system..
Click to expand...
I've just checked the Lambo site again and your right, that explains the weight issue then. The official Lambo figure is dry while the official Ferrari figure is kerb, well spotted 👍. The performance of both cars still seems pretty similar though, with the Lambo edging out in front in most tests.
 
If I recall correctly, recently a german magazine tested both the 599 and LP640 head to head and got better accel runs from the 599. Something along the lines of...

599 GTB
0-100: 3,8 seconds
0-300: 29,9 seconds

LP640
0-100: 3,3 seconds
0-300: 31,4 seconds

I believe it was the same test where the Veyron did 0-300 in less than 20 seconds, as well some cars like the Porsche 911 Turbo and Corvette Z06 pulling times in the 40s.

I really wish someone would test these cars head to head on a track and compare lap times. Acceleration runs are all nice and dandy, but that not what the 599 is all about.

Anyway, on the topic of the roadster LP640, it's expected. Of course it is going to sell well. Though it is a Lamborghini and a Cabriolet so I dont think Ill ever be interested in getting one.
 
.That car is pretty good looking. I hope they did something about the diabolical-to-raise-top. Did I miss it in the article?
 
SlipZtrEm
Anywho, back on-topic; I'd actually prefer a Murc roadster over the coupe. Why? The car's basic point is posing and being seen around town. Why not make it that much more fun with a convertible?
Click to expand...

As Clarkson points out with convertibles: People can see you, and they can hear the music you are listening to. That isn't always a good thing...
 
...who needs music when you've got babes? If Batman Begins taught me anything... :lol:
 
Quite often you don't actually look cool driving these cars either, the tendency seems to lean more towards "prat" than "cool" in my experience. I'd buy the coupe all the time, your still driving a cool car but you've got the privacy of a coupe and you're less likely to be getting called a tosser by half the people you drive past.
 
I love those rims, because they have a part retro part modern feel.
 

Latest Posts

Back