|
Originally Posted by wez_sti
some people on here do make me laugh.
only an extra 10mph etc.... do you realise the forces involved at those speeds, the extra power needed to overcome the drag is imense! and if i passed a stationary car at 100mph in what was the fastest road car in the world for about a decade and he caught me up fairly rapidly, i'd be f*cking impressed! I did read in EVO that a lightweight version is something they are considering.... :norty:;):) |
after seeing the photos in Evo mag I dislike it even more.... I mean, have you seen the badge on the back and the steering wheel? Its awful!!! The interior looks horrible to me.... from the back, its an ugly car!
If I was super super rich, I'd never choose the veyron over a zonda/murcilago?/saleen/koenissegg/enzo/carrera gt........... The performance figures are very impressive though. I don't know why, but I just hate it!! |
Originally Posted by GrollySTI
On a technical point I don't think that's what was said. I believe the Veyron would reach 200mph before the F1 but wouldn't have caught it - in fact it would be quite a way behind. :norty:;):) hmmm, fair point ;) |
Has anyone read the latest Top Gear Mag where the designer of the Macf1, Murray, test drives the Veyron and gives his opinion? Interesting reading.
Although he is baised, he does point out a good few issues, the main asking whats the point of the Veyron in the first place? He said Top Speed and outright power is pointless if you can't use it properly on the road, and after his drive, he mentions the lag makes it very difficult. But, he also goes on to say how impressed he was with the Veyron on the track, far better than on the road. But surley that makes sence on such an impractical car. He designed the F1 with no holds barred but to make the ultimate driving machine, the aim wasn't top speed on the F1 apparantly, but bhp per ton without turbos, perfect weight distribution etc. On another note, IMO its fine Buggati saying the car does 0-62mph in 2.5secs, 0-125 in 7.3secs and so on in their tests, but no independant magazines has actually timed the car yet! I am still waiting! 2.5secs, which is the quickest you can acheive with road tyres using phyiscs, seems so fast, even too fast, for such a heavy car, even with that huge BHP and 4wd. I really do want to see a magazine get this 60 with their hard launch, but will be surprised if they do. I know 60 isn't that important, but they quoted it! |
EXCELLENT PROMOTIONAL VIDEO
|
Its not a true super car its brute. Big, heavy and overly powerful.
This car has lost touch with reality. Any firm can whack a big turbo'd lump in a car and make it go quick. Where is the elegance and skill of design gone a'la Enzo, Mac F1, Sintura see- (http://www.f1-sales.com/lolagt.htm) etc. This car is merely a willy extention for Bugatti. Kam. |
so nice to see so many agreeing with what i concluded years ago.
what the hell is the point? it is way over 2 tonnnes and is a lag monster. Mclaren F1 for me. The fact remains, it is all about weight. That is always going to make for a decent supercar. Massive PWR, rear (maybe 4) wheel drive, mid engine and NA. The way it should be. After the Mclaren, it must be a Zonda F or an Enzo. The Enzo was designed to beat the F1 round a track. Ferrari weren't looking for straightline numbers and they achieved what they wanted. Still Mclaren F1 for me though it isn't pretty. Far nicer than the veyron! Having said all that, I suspect you could drive a veyron everyday. |
Appharently someone driving the fabled clio cup handed a veyron drivers ass to him recently. Remarkable cars those clios. Totally standard too.
|
Can anyone confirm that the bugatti veyron is quicker than a WRX?Im sure the WRX would have it through the twisties!
|
The WRX will beat a Formula 1 car driven by M Schumacher, straights and twisites etc. After, all it has more torque than a F1 car :rolleyes:
|
I would certainly pu money on the WRX against an F1 car on any bumpy normal road.
would expect the F1 would spin so many times on anything but decent tarmac that a well driven road car could stay ahead. Either that or the F1 car would get beached. |
How sad :sleep:
|
Originally Posted by Karl 227
How sad :sleep:
|
The beauty about a car like this is that they will be most likely owned by people who will have one of each....veyron, enzo, zonda and similar.........so not like its gonna be their only car.
Its a engineering marvel....gorgeous engine....and bloody quick and amazingly loud. I think its brilliant. IMO obviously. You guys talk about lag, how do you know? Have you driven it? I have a twin turbo Supra and havent experienced ANY lag issues at all......cant figure out how FOUR turbos wouldnt actually help reduce ANY lag whatsoever... |
Originally Posted by GrollySTI
On a technical point I don't think that's what was said. I believe the Veyron would reach 200mph before the F1 but wouldn't have caught it - in fact it would be quite a way behind.
:norty:;):) The actual quote you are refering to is the along the lines of the following. The Veyron was run next to an F1. The F1 was given a 10 sec head start. After 10 secs the F1 was doing 130 mph. The Veyron then set off. The veyron reached 200mph just before the F1. So in fact the veyron will do 0 - 200 mph in a fraction less time than the F1 does 130 - 200 mph. I hope this clears it up. Interestingly when going full whack 251 mph the veyron will empty its tank (100 litres) in 12 minutes over a distance of 80 km. I thought my scoob was bad. |
Originally Posted by imi
Its a engineering marvel....gorgeous engine....and bloody quick and amazingly loud.
I think its brilliant. IMO obviously. You guys talk about lag, how do you know? Have you driven it? I have a twin turbo Supra and havent experienced ANY lag issues at all......cant figure out how FOUR turbos wouldnt actually help reduce ANY lag whatsoever... I don't think anyone on here as driven one. But Gordon Murray has, and he writes about in Evo. (and Top Gear magazine) and whilst he's slightly biased as he designed the F1. He makes a good case against it. He doesn't hate other Supercars either. He likes the Zonda and even considers the F430 to be a pretty good car. The Lag is apparently quite noticeable. Even James May talks about it, in his Top Gear magazine piece. Its a fast GT car certainly, but its no supercar. And its definetly not something you could live with every day, unlike certain other cars. |
Originally Posted by rr_ww
but its no supercar.
|
Originally Posted by davyboy
Shame it'll never be any lighter.
Quite fancy a quick lap in it though. As far as i know, they are making a lighter/more powerful version later on. ;) |
Originally Posted by scoobylav
The actual quote you are refering to is the along the lines of the following.
The Veyron was run next to an F1. The F1 was given a 10 sec head start. After 10 secs the F1 was doing 130 mph. The Veyron then set off. The veyron reached 200mph just before the F1. So in fact the veyron will do 0 - 200 mph in a fraction less time than the F1 does 130 - 200 mph. I hope this clears it up. The actual quote reads as follows: "If a fully wound-up McLaren F1 went past a poised, stationary Veyron at 100mph and the Veyron driver gave it the gun as the F1 passed, the Bugatti would still reach 200mph just before the McLaren did." I hope that clears it up. :p Some of the posts on this thread are laughable. Nice work. |
Originally Posted by slim_boy_fat
That must rank as one of the most idiotic statements ever typed on a forum.
Its more in line with the Mercedes SLR and the Bentley Conti GT. Only it cant carry very much luggage as its front end is full of 10 radiators! Sure its fast, but so is ContiGT and a Aston Vanquish. And they aren't supercars either. Hope you can understand why you're wrong. :) |
The Veyron is a very fast car as it should be with all that Power.
The only Production car that can out acclerate most of the Top modified cars around. 0-186 in 16.7 is mega. Mine managed 0-186 in 21.18 secs at Brunters so a bit slow. A Macca is a real slowcoach taking around 25secs. However Mr Cowie in his Skiline is around 14secs at the mo & exspecting to go much quicker next year, that car makes the Veyrons accleration seem slow. Topspeed it would be hard to beat by anything. Yep one hell of a car. I want two, one for the Mrs. |
Originally Posted by MADRod
The Veyron is a very fast car as it should be with all that Power.
The only Production car that can out acclerate most of the Top modified cars around. 0-186 in 16.7 is mega. Mine managed 0-186 in 21.18 secs at Brunters so a bit slow. A Macca is a real slowcoach taking around 25secs. However Mr Cowie in his Skiline is around 14secs at the mo & exspecting to go much quicker next year, that car makes the Veyrons accleration seem slow. Topspeed it would be hard to beat by anything. Yep one hell of a car. I want two, one for the Mrs. Unless your planning on taking your Sierra in its current spec to the Nurburgring, or ANY track, I shall not consider it anywhere near the aforementioned Supercars/GT's. Your's and Cowies are both straight line cars, and interesting as the engineering is, we're talking about an overall package which your car simply isn't. |
I dont think Bugatti ever intended the Veyron to be a track car so it shouldnt be compared to other track orientated supercars. It was an engineering excercise, which has gained them more publicity recently than virtually any other car ever has done for its respective manufacturer. I dont think any owner would care that many other cars could beat it round a track but its the bragging rights and snob value that goes with owning one. Plus ill bet it would be a finnancial investment to as it will probably appreciate in value. If you could only afford one supercar then you probably wont buy one but Ill bet every owner of a Veyron will have every other supercar around at the moment anyway so its just one more for the collection. Lucky b astards.
|
All these guys slating the veyron.....they wouldnt be able to fill it up with fuel let alone owning one
LOL It should be an entertaining TopGear on tonight |
Originally Posted by rr_ww
I don't think anyone on here as driven one. But Gordon Murray has, and he writes about in Evo. (and Top Gear magazine) and whilst he's slightly biased as he designed the F1. He makes a good case against it. He doesn't hate other Supercars either. He likes the Zonda and even considers the F430 to be a pretty good car. The Lag is apparently quite noticeable. Even James May talks about it, in his Top Gear magazine piece.
Its a fast GT car certainly, but its no supercar. And its definetly not something you could live with every day, unlike certain other cars. oh and yes it is supposed to be a bit laggy and going back to the comment on a twin turbo supra not feely laggy, well thats because that car uses two turbos in a sequential setup, a smaller turbo and larger turbo feeding all cylinders the bugattis setup is one turbo the same size per cylinder head, being a w16 thats four heads four turbos, another example of this is say the original audi s4 bi turbo, bi turbo being one turbo per bank of 3 cylinders on the v6, |
Originally Posted by rr_ww
This car doesnt (from what Ive read) compete with Zonda, Carrera Gt or F1. It's not as involving to drive, is a automatic gearbox (no clutch pedal) and isnt RWD. And thats pretty much what a Supercar is all about, going stupidly fast, but being involved in the process.
Supercars are about being stupidly fast, that's it (well, maybe outrageously priced as well :D). As for involvement, aren't we splitting hairs? Nowhere have I read that the Veyron is an uninvolving car. Maybe not AS involving as an F1 or whatever. It's drivetrain is split rearward also all 4 wheels are powered. Is the Lambo Murcialago not a supercar since it, too, has 4WD and many with flappy paddles? Anyway, where's the definition of a supercar that mentions RWD only, manual only, involving only? |
Originally Posted by rr_ww
Not at all, fat scottish bloke. This car doesnt (from what Ive read) compete with Zonda, Carrera Gt or F1. It's not as involving to drive, is a automatic gearbox (no clutch pedal) and isnt RWD. And thats pretty much what a Supercar is all about, going stupidly fast, but being involved in the process.
Its more in line with the Mercedes SLR and the Bentley Conti GT. Only it cant carry very much luggage as its front end is full of 10 radiators! Sure its fast, but so is ContiGT and a Aston Vanquish. And they aren't supercars either. Hope you can understand why you're wrong. :) |
To me, thats the supercar recipe. Anything that isnt mid engine, NA and RWD is probably a great car, but not a supercar. Supercars should be terrifying. Old Lambos were real liabilities and thats what gave them the Wow factor. Not many people go Wow over a Conti GT or a Vanquish. They just think they are nice cars.
My main gripe with the Bugatti is that everyone considers it to be a BETTER car than the F1. But to nick Gordon Murrays words. It doesnt better the F1 on everything, only on Acceleration and Top Speed. What VW should of done is sat down and said. We've seen what the F1 does well and we're going to move the technology on. We'll design a supercar that can hit 250mph. But is: Mid engined NA RWD Has Carbon brakes Can carry more luggage than the F1 (that carries more than a Fiesta in its panniers/3rd seat bag) Is easy to park Is really compact. (People forget just how small/short the F1 actually is) Has great throttle response etc etc No one cares about the Koenisegg now the Veyron is (allegedly) faster. As that's all the Koenisegg guys considered when designing and building there car. To make it faster than a F1. And when the next car comes along that can hit 255. No one will care about Veyron. A car like this needs to be something special to be remembered for decades afterwards. It needs to be not just faster, but BETTER than the car that was availiable before. Remember its about 12-13 years since the F1 was launched and its still king of the all round Supercar. :D |
Originally Posted by rr_ww
To me,
|
Originally Posted by rr_ww
To me, thats the supercar recipe. Anything that isnt mid engine, NA and RWD is probably a great car, but not a supercar. Supercars should be terrifying. Old Lambos were real liabilities and thats what gave them the Wow factor. Not many people go Wow over a Conti GT or a Vanquish. They just think they are nice cars.
My main gripe with the Bugatti is that everyone considers it to be a BETTER car than the F1. But to nick Gordon Murrays words. It doesnt better the F1 on everything, only on Acceleration and Top Speed. What VW should of done is sat down and said. We've seen what the F1 does well and we're going to move the technology on. We'll design a supercar that can hit 250mph. But is: Mid engined NA RWD Has Carbon brakes Can carry more luggage than the F1 (that carries more than a Fiesta in its panniers/3rd seat bag) Is easy to park Is really compact. (People forget just how small/short the F1 actually is) Has great throttle response etc etc No one cares about the Koenisegg now the Veyron is (allegedly) faster. As that's all the Koenisegg guys considered when designing and building there car. To make it faster than a F1. And when the next car comes along that can hit 255. No one will care about Veyron. A car like this needs to be something special to be remembered for decades afterwards. It needs to be not just faster, but BETTER than the car that was availiable before. Remember its about 12-13 years since the F1 was launched and its still king of the all round Supercar. :D |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:26 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands