RE: SSC To Hit Back At Bugatti's 268mph Veyron
Discussion
CraigyMc said:
The Veyron has a 100L fuel tank. How big would you need it to be? The touring range is of course dependant on how it is driven, but you're talking about 200+ miles if sticking anywhere near the speed limit in every condition except derestricted roads.
I take your point about the lack of luggage capacity - but really, the way this car is going to be driven, it doesn't really need any. The sort of people who have the moolah to drop on a Veyron very likely own more than one pair of socks, and can arrange for some at each end of the journey if required. I suppose I was wrong to call it a GT, but I think you'd basically use it the same sort of way.
According to Autocar, the servicing cost for a veyron is about £13K, not £20K+. I'd argue that the servicing cost just makes it an expensive car, not a crap GT. Given the bespoke nature of the engineering, I'm not surprised - it's not that dissimilar to a McLaren F1.
I thought the fuel tank was smaller than that, so I stand corrected. Serving though... the tyres apparently cost £23,500 and Bugatti recommend changing them every 2500 miles, so I suppose it depends if you include those in the service costs or not. I don't think they'll actually get used as a GT car. They'll get flown somewhere so the owner can do a few miles and pose in it, then it'll get flown back. I take your point about the lack of luggage capacity - but really, the way this car is going to be driven, it doesn't really need any. The sort of people who have the moolah to drop on a Veyron very likely own more than one pair of socks, and can arrange for some at each end of the journey if required. I suppose I was wrong to call it a GT, but I think you'd basically use it the same sort of way.
According to Autocar, the servicing cost for a veyron is about £13K, not £20K+. I'd argue that the servicing cost just makes it an expensive car, not a crap GT. Given the bespoke nature of the engineering, I'm not surprised - it's not that dissimilar to a McLaren F1.
Twincam16 said:
You see, I don't get all agitated about sales figures like some people on this site. I don't care how many they sell, I'm just glad it exists.
Unfortunately it does matter. Any fred-in-a-shed can knock out a kit car with a monster engine and claim its the next big thing, but getting them on the road and into customers hands is the big thing. Only then can the car actually move forward developmentally. At the moment its just a few engineers who 'think' they have the best way forward. Only when you get it into the hands of customers will they be able to hone it - due to the small volume of sales. I would love for everyone to succeed, but its not going to happen. They NEED to get it into customer hands and only then can they have any chance of getting it to work.Twincam16 said:
It's like Bristol. I have never, ever understood quite why people actually get angry because they exist.
I am far from angry I am afraid - its more like complete disinterest to be honest. I would never say that they CANT do this, nor do I suggest that they SHOULDNT build the car. I just do not understand WHY they are doing it. SSC are not the only manufacturer who are going down this route, and I believe it to be ultimately a cul-de-sac. The market for hypercars has exploded in the last decade and thats great for the high-end manufacturers. But the modern buyer is much more astute, focused and aware of what they can buy. They have a massive choice from all of the leading brands and can a mixture - various Euro and US manufacturers will provide the full bespoke build too, if you want it. I see that they have a monster engine, but take Zonda for example - they have a successful business model based around the bespoke nature of the vehicles, but also the fact that they offer that 'thing' to differentiate them. They also do the hypercar version too, and it ultimately may prove to be a stunning piece of engineering (at a price), but its also FUN to drive. I dont see the SSC being fun to drive, other than for the huge power. In fact, the Veyron is not that much FUN to drive, but offers massive availability for the power and speed, in a package that no-one is able to emulate currently.
So the SSC doesnt offer the fun factor that others do. They dont provide the package of driving like the Ferrari FFX programme and the lack of image, brand and awareness will see it largely ignored by 99.99% of the population. That leaves the bespoke nature and top speed of the car as the most important aspects. Yes, its pretty unique and thats great, but the top speed is a bit of a meh thing.... Yes, there will be buyers for it, but its a VERY limited market I am afraid, and that ultimately means that its not going to be around for long. A bit of a dead-end really. Shame.
Exactly how many times would you actually be able to use the key selling point of this car? Its not going to be great on a track, so its the public road you go. Exactly how many times would you get a chance to do this? It might handle, but its going to be far from fun, so its a highway blaster, and not a great one at that.... limited appeal again. Nice idea, but dont see the point.
zippyprorider said:
A dragster is less interesting than the bug! think your on the wrong website!
To be fair I get where the other poster is coming from, but agree with you as in as far as the dragster is as interesting as the bug - but for different reasons.'horses for courses' there are cars that are incredibly capable - in that sense you could argue the Range Rover is the best in the world because it can deliver across a ploughed field and on the Kings Road.
In this sense the SSC and Bugatti are really answers to different questions, I've been lucky enough to have a choice of cars to get into to go places, and something that is technologically adept can be uninvolving, I had this discussion during my RS2 ownership with a Suburu Impreza WRX driver, to get the buzz we had to push harder than say in an older and or more basic car without the aids - say TVR or even an mx5
Absolute numbers don't translate into driving appeal - and what I want to drive varies from day to day, on a good day for a short blast something fast without a roof, on a grey wet day when it's raining cats and dogs, something with four wheel drive abs and all the bells and whistles, and on a long M-way drive something big with an equally big engine and an auto box.
Edited by rudecherub on Tuesday 13th July 16:33
hairykrishna said:
I thought the fuel tank was smaller than that, so I stand corrected. ...
They'll get flown somewhere so the owner can do a few miles and pose in it, then it'll get flown back.
There's an oft-quoted thing about the car emptying the tank in 11 minutes, which I suspect might be the root of that bit of info. It's talking about top speed, thus top power. It's not possible to drive like that on the road - the normal consumption is well over 10mpg, or 4x as much.They'll get flown somewhere so the owner can do a few miles and pose in it, then it'll get flown back.
I recon that's how a lot of GT cars atually get used too...
C
zippyprorider said:
A dragster is less interesting than the bug! think your on the wrong website!
Lol. You might be right. Top fuel cars are a bit too simple for my tastes, which is probably why I watch F1 religiously and never watch 1/4 mile racing. On the other hand, I'm not exactly alone in that.I liked the "fun facts about top fuel cars" email I had years ago, but if you offered me a go in a digger versus a go in a veyron, I'd be in the veyron. Each to their own.
C
Everybody finished playing Top Trumps?
Chill and enjoy the car you love, mine's just blown the clutch-boo hoo! But i did have a good blat in the car lent to me a 106-FWD is weird when your used to RWD though.
Next for me is a Zonda-trouble is the model shop is sold out-so another test in the CRZ beckons this weekend.
Chill and enjoy the car you love, mine's just blown the clutch-boo hoo! But i did have a good blat in the car lent to me a 106-FWD is weird when your used to RWD though.
Next for me is a Zonda-trouble is the model shop is sold out-so another test in the CRZ beckons this weekend.
I think what it all really comes down to is what would you prefer a pet Lion or a pet Tiger?
Much like these type or cars they are rare, dangerous and amazing beasts and should be admired and appreciated for even existing in the modern world.
I love the Veyron its an amazing car but honestly I think I would prefer to own the SSC.... and a Tiger.
Much like these type or cars they are rare, dangerous and amazing beasts and should be admired and appreciated for even existing in the modern world.
I love the Veyron its an amazing car but honestly I think I would prefer to own the SSC.... and a Tiger.
hairykrishna said:
I'd much rather have a go in a top fueller - more of a unique experience. I think I'd be done with it after a few runs though so the Veyron might be entertaining for longer.
I dunno... I still shiver at Maggie Filbin's "near death" experience of drag racing... anyone else with me here?! ;-)CraigyMc said:
Twincam16 said:
It always makes me laugh whenever SSC turns up on this site.
So much bile, so much cobblers, so much hate and rage.
And yet have you ever so much as read a road test of one?
No, didn't think so.
I have. Here are some random thoughts for you to rip apart:So much bile, so much cobblers, so much hate and rage.
And yet have you ever so much as read a road test of one?
No, didn't think so.
We can sort out your last point fairly quickly. Clicky... or Clicky...
Oddly, I can't see a review of it on car and driver, the US's defacto standard magazine. Plenty of stuff on the Veyron, mind.
I suppose, oddly, the Ultimate Aero does come under some criticism. Most of the posters on here are UK based; as a country we typically tend to favour the underdog. WIth that in mind, I suppose the Aero should get plaudits rather than hate, but there are things about the Aero that are somewhat annoying.
- People compare the SSC with the Veyron because of the top speed aspect. It's not really fair: the Veyron is a GT, the SSC isn't. I wonder what the Aero's performance would be like if it had equivalent kit to the Bug.
- The level of pain/money VAG went through to engineer the bug is astonishing - bespoke engine, bespoke transmission, bespoke tyres. Bespoke everything, pretty much. The pain was in getting things right, while not compromising on the car's main mission of being a rich person's comfy GT. Comparing this with the Shelby model of producing an aero shell, chucking a nelson engine in and to hell with everything else, is not the same game.
- How do you suppose the two cars would compare if used daily? VAG put the bug through the same durability testing as everything else - it's a VAG product. How about the SSC?
- I'm not 12, so I don't see top speed as being everything.
I'm interested in many of the opinions on PH, because at least a few PHers have cars in this class (well - which purport to be anyway, arguments aside). There are a few McLaren-F1 owning folk on here, for example.
Mr Bridger, Flemke et al - would you buy this car?
By the way, something that's always bothered me is that Jarod Shelby has bugger all to do with Carroll Shelby. It's an unfortunate coincidence that these guys share a surname, and just like Equity would have forced them to if they were actors, I'd rather he used a different brand for his business.
C
I really don't understand the hate for the SSC. Yeah it's a bit sparse.
The F40 was the first car to 200mph, and it had no interior. Where the 959 had more luxuary and was only 199mph.
The only think the SSC and Bug have in common is the top speed, they are very different cars (like the 959 and F40).
We should celebrate these cars for pushing the "road car" boundries. Like the Nur laps, quicker is better. Keep it going !!
The F40 was the first car to 200mph, and it had no interior. Where the 959 had more luxuary and was only 199mph.
The only think the SSC and Bug have in common is the top speed, they are very different cars (like the 959 and F40).
We should celebrate these cars for pushing the "road car" boundries. Like the Nur laps, quicker is better. Keep it going !!
Bavarianbeauty said:
Thats interesting about the name - I was wondering if it was anything to do with the Cobra ledgend - glad its not really if these things are as poorly finished and dated looking as Ive heard.
Jerod Shelby has a background in medical imaging. I sort of see him as one of these Koenigsegg-type guys, a self-made man who decided to build a car afterward. Just be careful of your understanding when you read about him being a great engineer - he may well be one, in fact, but not necessarily in the field you'd assume...C
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff