Top73, from the top can we please try and keep this civil, I am not interested in winding you up and see no reason why you appear to be trying to make this personal. Harry's name is Harry, not Arry and Mr Pagani should warrant the same respect from you that Christian does from me, especially as neither are here to defend themselves
There's nothing wrong with geeking out, streetrod. We're all grown men here and neatly padded in a layer of text and word play, so if it bothers you or anyone else then the option is there to exercise the index finger and use the scroll button.
I can’t cover all of your points at this time as I just don’t have the time, but here are a few.
You respond quickly enough and cover plenty of points. Don't seem that busy to me. Just selective.
First the exhaust you see are not nessasaraly the ones that end up on the finished car. Pagani uses a number of parts that are just used for mock up and testing purposes, with the final parts being added just prior to delivery. This practise can be seen on a number of videos. Also as you well know ceramic and plasma coatings come in a number of colours so you may not being seeing what you think you are seeing.
I'm not seeing titanium and welds? Is this your attempt at a twisted joke?
About it being a prototype I very much doubt it. The same finish can be seen in the Pagani story video and like I explained to you earlier this is not a process you do after the fact. If it came ceramic coated it'd gone straight from the supplier to the coating firm.
That said it may very well be an option for the customer (hopefully with the right annotations so someone doesn't get lured into buying something that will reduce underbonnet thermal stability). I just found it odd that 'Arry and Pagani themselves would make a big deal out of a subpar finish. For me personally the beauty of a car is the sum of it's function, so the whole idea of them being special in any way, shape or form is just too much for my sense of fairness to handle.
Under floor aero, The Huayra is not a race, you might argue its less of a race car than the Zonda, I would say it’s a very fast GT. But it is longer than a Zonda therefore has a longer floor and wheel base and larger area so increasing down force as you say. Also please note like the early Zonda's this car does not have an aggressive splitter or diffuser, these were added when the CS and Cinque appeared. Expect similar upgrades in the Huayra's future
I can't argue with "very fast GT". It's a very fast, luxurious GT. Not a hypercar. Why attempt to market it as anything else? If you were to say to me "listen Tom, you helpless git, the Huayra isn't trying to compete with Koenigsegg at all. The context of this new car is rather a more exclusive and competent option to your Aston Martins, Rolls Royces and Bentleys" I wouldn't have as much problem with it as I do now. It's the context of Pagani's and 'Arry's PR that really turns me off.
Now why should the Huayra be built to F1 standards, I know of no other car that is, also it’s not a practical proposition.
Koenigsegg's come in F1 spec with a honeycomb monocoque. So did the Macca F1. And the Ferrari Enzo. And the Carrera GT. It's a huge part of what makes these particular cars so expensive.
With the Paganis I'm not so sure what makes them expensive. CNCing aluminium is comparatively cheap. Leatherwork is comparatively cheap. Buying an engine is cheap. Anodozing is cheap. Etching is cheap. Brand name stickers are cheap. Even carbon fiber can be made cheap if you use hot injection instead of pre-preg and cut corners on labour intensive layering.
Obviously you don't seem to mind them cutting a few corners here and there (unless they're Koenigsegg of course in which case they should be under total scrutiny and judged by their earlier cars), but as far as I'm concerned as 2012 there should be a certain amount of engineering integrity in order for a hypercar to be considered "hyper". You can't just pick and chose between the extremes, the goal should be excellence on all fronts. Not just eye candy to keep costs down and cover up the flaws.
As for being able to stand up to a 230 MPH crash, what do you mean by that? Because if you mean the concreat block head on test even F1 cars are not tested at that speed, even if the car did survive the driver certainly would not.
He certainly wouldn't in a monocoque with no compression material and with what I'm assuming an above 30000 Nm/deg stiffness, that's for sure. He may as well be riding a steel block into a concrete block...
Your crash pictures are also very misleading. You cannot draw any conclusions from those pics unless you know all of the factors that lead up to those pics.
And what factors would those be? Anyone can look at the pictures and tell that the subframe is crumbled and stuck to the car like a bad case of herpes. As 'Arry mentioned in the video Pagani even takes pride in using a "unique metal crash structure in the front" for "insurance costs".
I'm assuming he must be speaking of life insurances.
The second picture you mention you say happened at 62 MPH, I think you may find that that accident actually happened at between 160mph and 190mph depending on which report you believe. Oh and both passengers walked away.
62 mph was a driver quote.
Other crashes have shown the cars coming apart in the way you describe they should,
No they haven't. There's been a few where the wheels came off etc but no clean breaks and like 'Arry said this is a design criteria. Some even taken an impact to the point where they've spilled all their fluids but still no clean breaks. This is a poor engineering decision by Pagani in order to keep cost down. If you look to the left on the first Koenigsegg picture you can even see the honeycomb peeking out on the subframe. Consider what a complex construction that is compared to Pagani's bolt on metal subframe and then consider the cost that goes into molding it into a one piece monocoque. It's so intricate that Koenigsegg rather than doing it themselves (and despite them doing it themselves when creating the molds) outsource it and only stick to doing cosmetic carbon fiber work. It would even be irresponsible for them to do it themselves since the process requires more than just an autoclave – you actually need a whole infrastructure of trained experts with the appropriate experience in building racing monocoques since it's really aeronautics tech and has a very limited use in cars.
Pagani lacks this expertise. Their composite workshops has not done the work required on cars at the speeds they're aiming at. They're mostly focused on design and body work. It's like comparing a company that builds tractors with one that builds supercars. Ironically Horacio used to work for a company that did both during a time when the tractor heritage still was evident on the road.
what I find interesting is that some of those have actually been rebuilt using the original tubs, probably the most famous being the Blue Zonda Uno
In this particular car you mentioned it wasn't a bad crash so it was supposed to stay together, but you're using a very bad example to describe the positive aspects of the crash structure. It's kind of like saying "look at this great parachute, it never opened so it's virtually new".
To my knowledge no one has ever died or suffered a serious injury in a Pagani crash.
To my knowledge I'm still alive but in hindsight I should've died a couple of times if not for pure luck.
As for Pagani's profit margins you may want to add another zero to that number to get closer to the truth.
£200.000 per car??? No wonder he's making strides then. I doubt Koenigsegg could find another £20.000 per car without dropping back to CCR quality levels or upping their sales four, five times their current levels.
How do you suppose Koenigsegg's cars are so much more expensive to produce? Any ideas?
In conclusion mate I don’t want to clog up this thread with us going back and forth. If you want to discuss this anymore PM me and we can have a chat on the phone
You want to continue a public debate in private? No I'm good. Thanks for letting me have the last word though, appreciate it.
I'll leave you with some good reading. It's a document on Koenigsegg engineering in the low quality CCR's. They've come a bit since then but it's still a interesting snapshot in time and reveals some of the suppliers and technology they had back then. I think you'll find some of it rather surprising. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:mhC...
If you ever do find that technical documentation on Pagani's aerodynamics you promised me I would love to read it. As much as I enjoy a good video now and then the documentation I'm able to find on Pagani's engineering is sparse. Geeking out on the technical details is a great deal of the fun and I'm sure I'd enjoy the Huayra more if there only was some way to get unfiltered information from them.