My take on the Bugatti Veyron

...is Dr. Vahe Ohanessian going to buy a Veyron? let's hope so

 

thats a foolish statement.
Its not about the fact that it can go 12MPH faster than a Mclaren F1.
Aside from being able to do this with current immissions and crash test standards is incredible.
Its more about the fact that you can let an F1 hit 120MPH before starting in the Veyron, and you will still hit 200MPH faster then the F1.
Its more about the fact that 6 years ago (give or take), Ferdinand Piech told the world that Bugatti will build a supercar that will have "1000HP, hit 252MPH, and look like (this)."
Supercars aren't designed like that normally. They will take a goal, lets say top speed of 220MPH and 0 - 60 in less than 3.5 seconds. Thats a good goal. What they are still able to figure out is how much horsepower they will need and what's it going to look like. With the Veyron, those figures were decided already. They had to make it work.
The fact that this thing can do 0 - 60 in 2.5 seconds is incredible!

To put it simply, Bugatti did raise the bar that high, and it will be a LONG time to see anything better, if we ever do.

Think about it. It took the industry 10 years to bring out a car faster than a Mclaren F1. With all the new laws with emissions and the regulations that we see in North America, I'd be surprised if this is ever attempted again.

 

I like the cut of your jib, doc!

 

I agree they overproduced the SLR and CGT. What are your thoughts about 300 Bugattis? Do you think that is too many, at $1.3m?

If you thought they would go up in value like Enzos or McLarens, it might be reasonable to buy one and hold it for a while.

 

Just curious Bull_Attack. Did you put the petal to the floor much? If so how did it feel? Im still amazed that the car does 2.5 seconds to sixty. Thanks for sharing your experience with us!

 

Murray is probably right; however his car is less stable and would take a LOT more time to get there!!!

 

I am truely surprised noone has said it yet.....CANT WE ALL JUST GET ALONG......!!!!!!!


PS....I am still jealous you got to drive the Bugotti.......and the XJ for that matter!!!!

 

Lots of low in torque? Like an S2000?

 

As the 9ff article in Excellence said, in order for the 911 turbo (narrow body config.) to beat the Maclaren's 242 mph topspeed by 1 mph it needed 800+ hp. To get another 12 mph higher will need more than 1000HP rather than his estimate of getting to 282 mph.

The acceleration numbers are all due to gearing and traction. Being all wheel drive and have big tires will help. Top fuel dragsters have been able to reach 0-350 mph in 5 sec. range. So who's to say the Veyron's capabilities are so unachievable. It's really more of a matter of which manufacturer is willing to lose another 1.8+ billion dollars producing a low number of cars with higher capabilities. That said I'm personally not interested in such a car (even if I had the means to afford one) whose only purpose is to provide bragging rights to being the fastest car out the factory that is street legal (soon to be displaced by the Saleen S7 TT according to magazine numbers racers).

Aside from being a low volume specialty car I doubt it would have much investment potential like the SJ220S. JMPO.

 

Is that its sole purpose?

 

Does not the increased power to attain an extra ten miles per hour start becoming exponential at around 210 or so. In other words, it could perhaps take 2000 horse power to for the Buggati to attain an extra 10 mph on top of its current speed. At 240 mph the McClaren may very well need a doubling in the horsepower to attain the Buggati speed. I doubt very seriously that an extra 120 hp would do much to the top speed of the McClaren. I am not an engineer or mathmetician, but I have seen the formulas when discussing the power necessary to get 911s up in to the 200 + territory. Perhaps someone on here with that expertise could chime in.

 

damn, you mods are ruthless, I just wanted to tell you guys how much I loved the car!!! i just want to be loved!

 

Gordon said due to the high CoD of the Veryon it needs 1001 Hp to get 12 MPH faster then the F1. the Veryon’s CoD is 38 if I remember, what is the CoD of the F1?

 

Thanks for the write up. I received a few notes from Bugatti, but will not be able to drive one until Pebble probably. That car was the only one around for the next two months. Looking forward to it.

 

No doubt. Hang 4 turbos on an Enzo and I am sure it would perform just as well. I don't understand why everyone keeps comparing a car specifically built to be the fastest production car in the world to other cars that were not designed to be so. The Enzo was NOT designed to be the fastest production car in the world.

It would be the same as comparing the first TR to just about any of the other exotics out there in '84. Apples to Oranges.

Like I said in another thread. An "old" McLaren F1 can come pretty damn close to the top speed of the Veyron and that is without turbos OR ricer wings.

 

Personally I'll go with Gordon's thoughts on drag and weight. Being the designer of the F1 I think he knows what hes talking about.

 

Pretty close at 250 mph is a fairly large difference. And I don't know how you could possibly justify calling the Veyrons wing, 'ricer'.

 

242 MPH for the McLaren. Not that big a difference.

Although the wing on the Veyron is necessary, it sticks up too high for my taste.

As I understand it, the wing was not part of the original design but was added later out of necessity.

I would much prefer an active lip like the Enzo or even the CGT

 

Obviously an active lip would not cut it, and 10 mph at those speeds is, a big difference.

 

If we're going to play the top speed game, shouldnt we be mentioning the CCR? Last time I checked it was quicker than a mclaren, and decently priced(relative to the competition). Or are the nay sayers still in denial that CCR made claimed time?