RE: Speed Matters? PH Blog
Discussion
rogerhudson said:
When a man in a Veyron beats my Brighton (St.Peters) to London (London Bridge) time of 46 minutes i will concede he has a quick car. You just can't drive fast in England any more, time for slow luxury, the Veyron looks like a giant squashed frog, horrible.
Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Well done on totally missing the point of a fast car like this. For example, when your train can give you anything like the acceleration thrill as a veyron or the luxury and refinement, then I'll concede the train is better. Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Plus, the UK isn't the only country in the world.
suffolk009 said:
gigglebug said:
It annoys me that there are always far more negative comments than positive on any given subject, maybe it's just easier to put down then praise. If you have no interest in a particular car or find it pointless why spend the time reading the article then posting a comment merely stating that you have no interest or find it pointless?
Are you annoyed at the posters on this forum or with Chris Harris for the original article? I'm not surprised by the arguments against impossibly fast cars (I largely fall into that camp), but I was very surprised at the tone of the article.
humblesabot
"The Caparo rather than was closer to what i think of as good engineering; that is: any idiot can make something more complex it takes real skill to make something simple."
So your saying that there was no skill shown by Bugatti in making a 1000hp car usable and more importantly reliable and that idiot could do it? Are you saying that an idiot could produce a winning F1 car but it would harder to produce a winning Gokart?? I just don't get it
Edited by gigglebug on Saturday 9th August 13:37
gigglebug said:
suffolk009 said:
gigglebug said:
It annoys me that there are always far more negative comments than positive on any given subject, maybe it's just easier to put down then praise. If you have no interest in a particular car or find it pointless why spend the time reading the article then posting a comment merely stating that you have no interest or find it pointless?
Are you annoyed at the posters on this forum or with Chris Harris for the original article? I'm not surprised by the arguments against impossibly fast cars (I largely fall into that camp), but I was very surprised at the tone of the article.
The Caparo rather than was closer to what i think of as good engineering; that is: any idiot can make something more complex it takes real skill to make something simple.
So your saying that there was no skill shown by Bugatti in making a 1000hp car usable and more importantly reliable and that idiot could do it? Are you saying that an idiot could produce a winning F1 car but it would harder to produce a winning Gokart?? I just don't get it
foliedouce said:
The Caparo T1 was purely a vanity project by Angad Paul spending his Dad's money. Given that Caparo Group turnover is down 60% since 2008 and it's lost over £30 million in the last 2 years, I'm surprised Daddy Lord Paul as the Chairman of the group is letting this happen at all.
It really should go the same way as their Film24 project, left to go into insolvency.
Anyway, I really don't get the T1 at all and the T1 Evolution is just about ego as far as I can see.
I think the big issue for the Caparo is the Radical SR8, EVO went faster in that than the Caparo and it costs a fraction of the price and if you buy one you can compete with plenty of other people in race series around the world or go the fastest at any track day. Very few are ever driven on the road. It really should go the same way as their Film24 project, left to go into insolvency.
Anyway, I really don't get the T1 at all and the T1 Evolution is just about ego as far as I can see.
The key element is that Radical didn't start trying to build a super car they started with relatively cheap track day/race cars. Hence they sorted out most of the technical issues over the development of multiple models, attempting to start at the top is much more difficult.
Note even Pagani started off at Lamborghini where he developed a carbon fibre Countach. Plus the first Zonda was relatively unextreme compared to the current cars.
rogerhudson said:
When a man in a Veyron beats my Brighton (St.Peters) to London (London Bridge) time of 46 minutes i will concede he has a quick car. You just can't drive fast in England any more, time for slow luxury, the Veyron looks like a giant squashed frog, horrible.
Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
The inconvenient fact is that the Veyron,or any other really fast supercar,isn't designed to be driven within the UK speed limits.That doesn't mean that it is always going to be impossible to find somewhere to use most of the available performance.Wether that might be an unlimited section of autobahn or other foreign road type scenario,at the right time or one of the supercar airfield runway type events etc etc.My question is just wether there is a point where it is better to use lower gearing to trade ulitimate,probably mostly unusable speed like 250-300 mph,for massive acceleration in the lower 100-180 mph speed range.Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
As for 'slower speed fun' v outright supercar type road car speed.I'd choose the latter every time together with the challenge of finding somewhere to use as much of the performance as possible.
suffolk009 said:
gigglebug said:
suffolk009 said:
gigglebug said:
It annoys me that there are always far more negative comments than positive on any given subject, maybe it's just easier to put down then praise. If you have no interest in a particular car or find it pointless why spend the time reading the article then posting a comment merely stating that you have no interest or find it pointless?
Are you annoyed at the posters on this forum or with Chris Harris for the original article? I'm not surprised by the arguments against impossibly fast cars (I largely fall into that camp), but I was very surprised at the tone of the article.
The Caparo rather than was closer to what i think of as good engineering; that is: any idiot can make something more complex it takes real skill to make something simple.
So your saying that there was no skill shown by Bugatti in making a 1000hp car usable and more importantly reliable and that idiot could do it? Are you saying that an idiot could produce a winning F1 car but it would harder to produce a winning Gokart?? I just don't get it
A few laps of Silverstone (short circuit) in the Caparo with Phil Bennett is the most memorable motoring moment of my life and one of the most memorable of my life in general. A huge thank-you to Phillip to succumbinbg to my blagging and to Caparo for building it. You'll get no criticism for me even if it did burn Jason Plato a week later :-)
rogerhudson said:
When a man in a Veyron beats my Brighton (St.Peters) to London (London Bridge) time of 46 minutes i will concede he has a quick car. You just can't drive fast in England any more, time for slow luxury, the Veyron looks like a giant squashed frog, horrible.
Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Wow. Great time!Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Car, or bike?
;-)
rogerhudson said:
When a man in a Veyron beats my Brighton (St.Peters) to London (London Bridge) time of 46 minutes i will concede he has a quick car. You just can't drive fast in England any more, time for slow luxury, the Veyron looks like a giant squashed frog, horrible.
Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Wow. Great time!Bugatti were mad not to produce that replacement saloon. A high tech Napoleon replacement please.
Car, or bike?
;-)
Performance figures quoted by many manufacturers don`t mean much on the roads of Britain. Nurburgring times that impress usually mean you will loosen any fillings if you hit the pot holed excuses for what we call roads.
Track times only matter on track. It reminds me of how many young Saxo drivers used to lower the cars so that they had little suspension movement left, every roundabout they would go around like it was a fifty pence piece as camber changes pitched the car about.
Track times only matter on track. It reminds me of how many young Saxo drivers used to lower the cars so that they had little suspension movement left, every roundabout they would go around like it was a fifty pence piece as camber changes pitched the car about.
I am not remotely excited by anything that does 200mph. If I want fast I can just rent an aeroplane that does fast in 4 dimensions.
For a car I want something that:
a) I can afford to own
b) I can afford to thrash
c) I can afford to insure
d) I can afford to exploit to its limits on the open road with my average ability without recourse to a track
e) doesn't need a lot of ruinous garage work to keep operational
My daily drive is a 300bhp 535d.
Whilst not rich I earn in the top 2%.
I could have lots and lots of different fast cars. Amongst the very last consideration in vMax. It is pointless and cringeworthy. A man boasting about his vMax is one who is truly lost in the world of blokeness.
Top Speed is for twunts.
For a car I want something that:
a) I can afford to own
b) I can afford to thrash
c) I can afford to insure
d) I can afford to exploit to its limits on the open road with my average ability without recourse to a track
e) doesn't need a lot of ruinous garage work to keep operational
My daily drive is a 300bhp 535d.
Whilst not rich I earn in the top 2%.
I could have lots and lots of different fast cars. Amongst the very last consideration in vMax. It is pointless and cringeworthy. A man boasting about his vMax is one who is truly lost in the world of blokeness.
Top Speed is for twunts.
Well at least Hennasassy are the first American company to realise that going faster is about horses and weight. Pointless as it is.
I heard (from Bristol) that the Bristol Fighter S was capable of 275mph but they were not interested in marketing it in that way, so they restricted it to 225mph. Shame it might have kept them in business.
I heard (from Bristol) that the Bristol Fighter S was capable of 275mph but they were not interested in marketing it in that way, so they restricted it to 225mph. Shame it might have kept them in business.
converted lurker said:
I am not remotely excited by anything that does 200mph. If I want fast I can just rent an aeroplane that does fast in 4 dimensions.
For a car I want something that:
a) I can afford to own
b) I can afford to thrash
c) I can afford to insure
d) I can afford to exploit to its limits on the open road with my average ability without recourse to a track
e) doesn't need a lot of ruinous garage work to keep operational
My daily drive is a 300bhp 535d.
Whilst not rich I earn in the top 2%.
I could have lots and lots of different fast cars. Amongst the very last consideration in vMax. It is pointless and cringeworthy. A man boasting about his vMax is one who is truly lost in the world of blokeness.
Top Speed is for twunts.
Has it not crossed your mind that someone can afford one insure it, afford it bin it etc and may like top speed. Just because it doesn't appeal to you, to say it's for twunts full stop is idiotic. For a car I want something that:
a) I can afford to own
b) I can afford to thrash
c) I can afford to insure
d) I can afford to exploit to its limits on the open road with my average ability without recourse to a track
e) doesn't need a lot of ruinous garage work to keep operational
My daily drive is a 300bhp 535d.
Whilst not rich I earn in the top 2%.
I could have lots and lots of different fast cars. Amongst the very last consideration in vMax. It is pointless and cringeworthy. A man boasting about his vMax is one who is truly lost in the world of blokeness.
Top Speed is for twunts.
lukefreeman said:
FrankUnderwood said:
Speaking as an engineer and a car enthusiast I find designs like the original Elan and Elise more impressive in their intentions 
That doesn't make sense, veryon is far more of an engineers wet dream. Edited by FrankUnderwood on Friday 8th August 20:09
I'm with Frank. Throwing money as a project until you achieve the numbers you want doesn't excite me. As the sainted Sidney Camm once said "sophistication = complication = ruination.
Is top speed irrelevant? Pretty much these days, my Fisher Fury is only a little faster than my 102,000 mile 1800 Zafira & probably slower than my wife's 2.0d Focas, but it's much much QUICKER. What would you rather pilot, a Spitfire (around 400mph) or a jumbo (around 600)
We are the irrelevant ones not the the car. This car is the ultimate for the super wealthy. That's the point. No one cares if you're not impressed. This car will crush everything else at any speed not just the top speed, I'd say that's more relevant for highway show downs than track times or any "handling" qualities you care to invent. More Hyper cars get pitted in drag races and rolling races than around tracks.
Have to say a 290mph super car awakens the inner child and makes me remember being 10 and drawing my own ridiculous cars with 8 gears, 16 cylinders, 4 turbos and a 300mph top speed.... Little did I know!
As for the advent of the mechatronic super car, I find it hard to resent them as they're all as exciting and pioneering as they always were, there's always something out there upping the game again and again. If there's anything to despair for it's looking to the future and seeing the some of the possibilities of what might be next
As for the advent of the mechatronic super car, I find it hard to resent them as they're all as exciting and pioneering as they always were, there's always something out there upping the game again and again. If there's anything to despair for it's looking to the future and seeing the some of the possibilities of what might be next
Fury1630 said:
lukefreeman said:
FrankUnderwood said:
Speaking as an engineer and a car enthusiast I find designs like the original Elan and Elise more impressive in their intentions
That doesn't make sense, veryon is far more of an engineers wet dream. Edited by FrankUnderwood on Friday 8th August 20:09
I'm with Frank. Throwing money as a project until you achieve the numbers you want doesn't excite me. As the sainted Sidney Camm once said "sophistication = complication = ruination.
Is top speed irrelevant? Pretty much these days, my Fisher Fury is only a little faster than my 102,000 mile 1800 Zafira & probably slower than my wife's 2.0d Focas, but it's much much QUICKER. What would you rather pilot, a Spitfire (around 400mph) or a jumbo (around 600)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W_JFuohZxI
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff