Koenigsegg. The unloved super car?
Discussion
Nice article in this month's EVO.
Hope the Koenigsegg 'Free Valve' technology (computer-controlled pneumatic valves, so no camshafts; and you can have infinitely variable cam timing ---> always the optimum power/torque for every circumstance) will be a cracker.
Also using the engine as an airpump under braking and then later on using the compressed air on the engine (as a reversed airpump then) sounds very good. No need for very heavy batteries all the time.
The airpump idea is developped together with a buscompany, which will use it first. Wait another 2 or 3 years!
Future looking good!
Hope the Koenigsegg 'Free Valve' technology (computer-controlled pneumatic valves, so no camshafts; and you can have infinitely variable cam timing ---> always the optimum power/torque for every circumstance) will be a cracker.
Also using the engine as an airpump under braking and then later on using the compressed air on the engine (as a reversed airpump then) sounds very good. No need for very heavy batteries all the time.
The airpump idea is developped together with a buscompany, which will use it first. Wait another 2 or 3 years!
Future looking good!
Streetrod: I personally doubt that the Huayra's flaps do much, other than slow the car down a bit better under braking. They don't look particularly sophisticated from my untrained eye and I wonder how much expertise they have in such aero? Is there a way of them objectively showing the benefits?
I am uncomfortable with anyone referencing TG laptimes because they are IMHO pony. You really do not know anything about the car supplied, how it's been used, what track conditions are really like or even if they've had the same driver. We all know manufacturers like to have cars on 'top form', which is a nice euphemistic way of saying they often cheat!
TG is an entertainment programme first and foremost and isn't about objective performance. For that you'd need a good US magazine because they run the most fair comparisons and aim solely for consistency, specifically trying customer cars for tje purpose to remove foul play.
When Koenigsegg's CCX had a spoiler added it certainly didn't shave such a big margin from the previous time. What actually happened is that the car went away and then came back set up for that particular track. Such a small spoiler could not make such a dramatic change and Koenigsegg themselves said so. However, it makes a good soundbite to call it the 'Top Gear spoiler' and the average TG viewer will now happily tell you that Clarkson single-handedly solved the CCX's on-limit handling!... (See also every journalist claiming that the MP4-12C's changes are because of them, not the hundreds of customers who bought the bloody car!)
In reality, given the level of status afforded to Pagani's by the show it would be naive to think the Huayra sent over was not optimised for that track. Yes I know that on a lot of cars now they can be setup for certain circuits but it's beyond at-home spannering and thus for me I would say that invalidates a time as much as not being able to get over a speedhump does, which is just as arbitrary a control measure. After all, if you didn't use your Caparo on roads with speed humps it wouldn't be much of an issue?!
(For the record I prefer both companies' earlier efforts for myriad reasons.)
I am uncomfortable with anyone referencing TG laptimes because they are IMHO pony. You really do not know anything about the car supplied, how it's been used, what track conditions are really like or even if they've had the same driver. We all know manufacturers like to have cars on 'top form', which is a nice euphemistic way of saying they often cheat!
TG is an entertainment programme first and foremost and isn't about objective performance. For that you'd need a good US magazine because they run the most fair comparisons and aim solely for consistency, specifically trying customer cars for tje purpose to remove foul play.
When Koenigsegg's CCX had a spoiler added it certainly didn't shave such a big margin from the previous time. What actually happened is that the car went away and then came back set up for that particular track. Such a small spoiler could not make such a dramatic change and Koenigsegg themselves said so. However, it makes a good soundbite to call it the 'Top Gear spoiler' and the average TG viewer will now happily tell you that Clarkson single-handedly solved the CCX's on-limit handling!... (See also every journalist claiming that the MP4-12C's changes are because of them, not the hundreds of customers who bought the bloody car!)
In reality, given the level of status afforded to Pagani's by the show it would be naive to think the Huayra sent over was not optimised for that track. Yes I know that on a lot of cars now they can be setup for certain circuits but it's beyond at-home spannering and thus for me I would say that invalidates a time as much as not being able to get over a speedhump does, which is just as arbitrary a control measure. After all, if you didn't use your Caparo on roads with speed humps it wouldn't be much of an issue?!
(For the record I prefer both companies' earlier efforts for myriad reasons.)
LongLiveTazio said:
Streetrod:
In reality, given the level of status afforded to Pagani's by the show it would be naive to think the Huayra sent over was not optimised for that track.
And yet it was 2.4 seconds faster than the McLaren, which was developed on the same track!!!In reality, given the level of status afforded to Pagani's by the show it would be naive to think the Huayra sent over was not optimised for that track.
I find it bloody amazing that such a tiny company as Pagani can make a car go that bloody fast, against the might of Volkswagen (Bugatti Veyron SS and Lambo Aventador) and one of the leading Formula 1 teams.
'Cheating' or no 'cheating', my deepest respect!
vincegail said:
And yet it was 2.4 seconds faster than the McLaren, which was developed on the same track!!!
I find it bloody amazing that such a tiny company as Pagani can make a car go that bloody fast, against the might of Volkswagen (Bugatti Veyron SS and Lambo Aventador) and one of the leading Formula 1 teams.
'Cheating' or no 'cheating', my deepest respect!
I'm not suggesting it is not an impressive time, just that it shouldn't be used as an objective benchmark when comparing it to other cars when talking about relative merits.I find it bloody amazing that such a tiny company as Pagani can make a car go that bloody fast, against the might of Volkswagen (Bugatti Veyron SS and Lambo Aventador) and one of the leading Formula 1 teams.
'Cheating' or no 'cheating', my deepest respect!
LongLiveTazio said:
I'm not suggesting it is not an impressive time, just that it shouldn't be used as an objective benchmark when comparing it to other cars when talking about relative merits.
Yes. Agree with that. The emphasis put on that laptime is a little too big. Better not use it as THE benchmark, but as one of the aspects one which to judge/review a car.
GALLARDOGUY said:
The flaps will work. And work well.
Do you think they would release a 230 MPH car without superb aero?
Especially in light of Pagani's incredible obsessive attention to detail?
Has it done 230 mph though or is it a theoretical top speed like so many others? It is rare that the published top speed is conservative and just because it can do it doesn't mean it is stable at such high speeds, which is something else entirely. And the flaps wouldn't be in play for a top speed run anyway? Do you think they would release a 230 MPH car without superb aero?
Especially in light of Pagani's incredible obsessive attention to detail?
Like I say, I am not for or against the manufacturer, I just like to wait for proof before I believe a claim!
GALLARDOGUY said:
This car has been years in the making.
Ally that with their famed attention to detail, I think your concerns are completely without basis.
The flaps work, you've no reason or proof to say otherwise.
What a strange thing to post. How could I possibly prove that the flaps do or not do anything meaningful? (Even though I've said they probably help under braking as they'll be airbrakes, of course.) That's for the manufacturer to do, in the same way that if they claim a top speed they can prove it, or engine power can be measured on a dyno, or weight can be measured on a weighbridge. Ally that with their famed attention to detail, I think your concerns are completely without basis.
The flaps work, you've no reason or proof to say otherwise.
For the record, more than one source reported it as being the first production car with active aerodynamics, which is completely false. Along with only quoting dry weight in usual Italian fashion, which again is odd. For these reasons I do not consider it unreasonable to not assume that everything that comes from Pagani is gospel. In fact, I would have thought that with such a purported level of development one would positively encourage independent testing?
GALLARDOGUY said:
This car has been years in the making.
Ally that with their famed attention to detail, I think your concerns are completely without basis.
The flaps work, you've no reason or proof to say otherwise.
You on the other hand have no reason or proof to say they do work.Ally that with their famed attention to detail, I think your concerns are completely without basis.
The flaps work, you've no reason or proof to say otherwise.
I, in my humble opinion, think they react very slowly with changing input factors: speed, brake force, steering angle, acceleration, deceleration, throttle, etc...
You hardly see them moving at all during the TG lap, where you would expect them to be moving about all the time with every changing input.
Weight? All manufacturers are deceitful there I would imagine.
Pagani have come from nowhere to now be a firm fixture at the top table of hypercars.
They would not throw it all away by economical with the truth with something as vital as aerodynamics on their new flagship.
The company's future rests on this car.
It has to be spot on.
They will have tested every parameter to the extreme and therefore what is on the final production car, will be there because it works.
Simple as that.
Pagani have come from nowhere to now be a firm fixture at the top table of hypercars.
They would not throw it all away by economical with the truth with something as vital as aerodynamics on their new flagship.
The company's future rests on this car.
It has to be spot on.
They will have tested every parameter to the extreme and therefore what is on the final production car, will be there because it works.
Simple as that.
LongLiveTazio said:
In fact, I would have thought that with such a purported level of development one would positively encourage independent testing?
Last sentences in the aforementioned EVO article about the Agera R:"I do wonder how the Agera R would fare up against the Pagani Huyra or a Bugatti Veyron. [...] There's only one way to find out which is the best for sure, though. To be continued...."
Love the "to be continued...". Some multiple car test coming up in the near future!
Edited to say: don't know how independent Harry Metcalfe is though. He seemed to be a little biased towards Pagani. Although that might be little bit less, because Harry M. doesn't seem to be very pleased with Horacio presenting him with a much higher than expected repair bill with unwanted, unasked and untold (upfront) parts and upgrades. Little while later: Zonda sold.
Seems that Horacio doesn't play ball very fairly.
Edited by vincegail on Wednesday 6th February 18:57
vincegail said:
You on the other hand have no reason or proof to say they do work.
I have no proof, but I have a reason. Good reason.That reason being, that I will put my faith in the expertise of Mr Pagani and his amazing staff as opposed to people posting on the Internet who by their own admission have no idea of aerodynamics.
Pagani do not make badly resolved cars.
They are famed for going the extra mile.
Do you honestly think they would scrimp on aero testing?
No.
vincegail said:
Please don't confuse 'in my humble opinion' with 'I confess I have no knowledge about aerodynamics'....
I may not be working for Pagani, but I have done some windtunnel research
That was more in response to LLT's comment about his untrained eye, rather than anything you said.I may not be working for Pagani, but I have done some windtunnel research
LongLiveTazio said:
Blind faith has no place in science.
Pagani Automobili will have done the science.Pagani of all people would not release a car that didn't do everything at the top of its game.
You know both know that as well as I do.
For the record I actually prefer Koenigsegg's but marvel at Pagani's anal attention to every single detail.
As fun/tedious (delete as applicable) as this has been, the football's about to start, so I will leave you to it.
GALLARDOGUY said:
That was more in response to LLT's comment about his untrained eye, rather than anything you said.
I have an untrained eye to lots of things but it isn't just me who's seen plenty of videos about the Huayra to think that the flaps looked slow to respond and notice that it is very different to what other manufacturers with vastly more race and engineering experience have preferred. So until I see evidence of the contrary (beyond airbrake) I will treat it with healthy cynicism, which doesn't seem to me to be unreasonable. Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff