bugatti veyron.. why is it so hyped?

[fpsasm]

Could anyone tell me a good reason why the bugatti veyron was so hyped? It wasn't that much better then a standard Mclaren F1, infact the bug is:
-Less practical (less seats, bag space, etc)
-Slower (on a track)
-uses more fuel for the same run
-worse aerodynamics
...then a mclaren f1

the only real upsides i see is that its got nearly 2x more power, and is faster in a striaght line.. but its only 6km/h fastester in then a mclaren f1? lets face it.. thats not alot.. no one rly blinked a eye about the aero tt beating it

what makes it so good? that is has 1001bhp? a bloke in a shed got 2200hp out of a v8 5.7ltr engine (road legal).. and its over 2.5x faster to 100km/h...

rly wtf? can someone enlighten me why people say it is good??

[fpsasm]

heebeegeetee said:

fpsasm said:

Could anyone tell me a good reason why the bugatti veyron was so hyped? It wasn't that much better then a standard Mclaren F1, infact the bug is:
-Less practical (less seats, bag space, etc)
-Slower (on a track)
-uses more fuel for the same run
-worse aerodynamics
...then a mclaren f1

the only real upsides i see is that its got nearly 2x more power, and is faster in a striaght line.. but its only 6km/h fastester in then a mclaren f1? lets face it.. thats not alot.. no one rly blinked a eye about the aero tt beating it

what makes it so good? that is has 1001bhp? a bloke in a shed got 2200hp out of a v8 5.7ltr engine (road legal).. and its over 2.5x faster to 100km/h...

rly wtf? can someone enlighten me why people say it is good??

Possibly because the F1 (and the 2200 shed special) wouldn't pass any current legislation and so wouldn't be able to be produced today?

well i read that the mclaren F1, is avery safe car... and btw.. it produces less emissions then the Bug...

p.s the mclaren F1 is worth nearly 2x more dosh then a veyron,..

[fpsasm]

Motorrad said:

A Veyron is better to drive down to the shops.

you get there slower.. tho

[fpsasm]

otolith said:

You'll be cancelling your order then? What will you be buying instead?

By the way, I wouldn't be surprised if the F1 is faster on track, but what track times are you basing that assertion on?

source: http://www.sps-automotive.com/en_sps/track/07Nt_zo...
nurburgring laptimes..
mclaren f1; 7:11, bug 7:40

[fpsasm]

sperminator said:

fpsasm said:

p.s the mclaren F1 is worth nearly 2x more dosh then a veyron,..

There's an F1 for sale on Autotrader for 1.4 million and a brand new unregistered veyron for 1 million. That says it all really.

a veyron (new) is about £900,000

a Mclaren F1 GTR (number 29 (me thinks))is up for £3,000,000 and thats a rare car!

[fpsasm]

Flanders. said:

fpsasm said:

Motorrad said:

A Veyron is better to drive down to the shops.

you get there slower.. tho

No you wouldn't, the Macca is a hard car to drive, search for when Brundell tested it in the damp, he almost lost it. It's a race car made for the road, if the FXX was road legal it would be faster than the Macca around a track. The Bug is a fast safe comfy car to whoosh across Europe in. My gran could drive it. Which isn't bad for a 1001 bhp Monster.

Don't get me wrong though, the Macca is a fantastic car which I love.

Edited by Flanders. on Wednesday 12th August 22:53

if u take that approach.. then the aero TT is better.. when the test driver (a old guy(over50)) took it for a 100mph speed run it climbed to 190mph, he said it felt so stable he didnt notice he was going so fast.. so why not get a aero tt, it has more bhp/kg and has more bhp, and is faster...

[fpsasm]

ctallchris said:

I've allways been a bit puzzled about this too.

Jeremy clarkson called it an engineering marvel but if you look at the numbers

it has a 16.4l 16 cyl engine. 100bhp per cyl is a good benchmark for a n/a engine. Add to that it's turbocharged....

so it gets 59 hp per litre now thats just godawful for a modern engine. my 1998 chimera gets 56hp per litre and it's normally asperated and has two valves per cyl instead of four. not only that it produces less torque. this is comparing what should be the best engineering money can buy with a landrover engine from the 50's.

In comparison the F1 produces 690hp from a 6l engine 115hp per litre and was built almost a decade earlier.

as an engineering feat the fact it has 1000hp is a bit of a joke.

I think it is seen as being wonderful due to peoples obsession with round numbers thats why it was allways the 1000bhp supercar rather that the 981bhp of the 1015bhp they don't sound as good. Plus there is no way to accurately verify the power output so it can only be a parketing ploy. The F1 could have touted it'sself as the worlds first 700 bhp supercar but the bugatti added an extra 10 litres and squeesed 300bhp out of it and got an even rounder number. well done lads...

blah blah... 120hp/ltr is nothing

[fpsasm]

funkyol said:

I wish Jaguar would re-do the XJ220 but with the proper engine, a nice interior and adding all the technological wonders that today's automotive technology brings. I think that'd then be a car which would trounce the Veyron

Jaguars are b-e-a-utiful... brilliant V6 that pumps out over 500hp, fantastic car did the nurburgring as fast as the stron (a.k.a Veyron), and its nearly 16 years older

.

[fpsasm]

the veyron uses force induction.. and its beaten by a car made in '92 thats n.a (i.e the mclaren)

[fpsasm]

Flanders. said:

fpsasm said:

the veyron uses force induction.. and its beaten by a car made in '92 thats n.a (i.e the mclaren)

And?

shows how st it is...

..the s h i t r o n is liek a stty boat, looking at its performance

[fpsasm]

AUDIHenry said:

Vixpy1 said:

From an enginnering point of view, one cannot but impressed by the Veyron. However as a car it has always left me cold, it lacks any of the charm of an F1 or an XJ220. It is, like any Audi, simply a tool for getting from A to B as quickly as possible, in as much comfort as possible. I have no doubt it does this Brilliantly, but for me it will never be a classic in the way others have been.

Charm? Most people would not call the XJ charming. And the F1? It's a bloody sports car! It's like comparing a Bentley Conti GT to a Zonda. The Veyron is a faster Bentley, if you will, and it is ALONE in that class. It can be used daily, while the F1 can't, nor the XJ. It is a practical supercar. You cannot have it be practical/comfortable/easy to drive and light/good around corners/etc.

I think most of you hating on the Veyron are either too purist or lost in British nationalism like the above poster seems to be.

you can use a Mclaren F1 each day, thats what it was made for.... when it came out a german bought one, and he drove to work in it each day topping 200mph eachday.. McLaren and his friends didnt beleive that he did 200+mph each day, so they checked using the GPs thing that the Mclaren has..

...amnyway.. the McLaren can be used each day... and u couldnt use a S-h-i-t-ron (veyron) daily cause it doesnt have any bag-space...

[fpsasm]

mr bridger said:

Rich_W said:

yeah yeah. We all know you just posed for Tiff in that 5th Gear spot*, and it's really your Mrs that owns all the cars

• Curious that you let him drive the cars, but not (Like Flemke) Clarkson and his motley band. I guess you must like 5th Gear more than Top Gear?

Edited by Rich_W on Sunday 16th August 12:44

Rich, she does indeed, but i get to pay for them occasinally ,
& if its comedy im after i prefer Monty Python over the Pot Gear crew, anyway the Norwegian Blue is deceased apparently so no chance of it doing a lap in a reasonably priced car!

modern Top Gear is a entertainment show, not a car show... Fifth gear is a car show..