RE: Bugatti Chiron sets 0-400kph-0 world record
Discussion
hondansx said:
The numbers don't really mean much to me - I need video! Preferably against some other hyper car.
Would like to see against the Agera R. I'm not a fan of the 'egg, but it appears to walk away from the 918, LaF etc.
Well this is the video of the old Bug against the Agera R. Bear in mind this is the R not the more powerful 1 to One.Would like to see against the Agera R. I'm not a fan of the 'egg, but it appears to walk away from the 918, LaF etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DH5j4PYp-o
Also worth bearing in mind that technically the Regera is the new Chirons more direct competitor and from the sounds of it the Regera would destroy the Chiron in a drag race.
The Regera stats are pretty crazy. Rough estimates put it at 0-249mph in 20 seconds. Given the Agera 1 to One record was 17 seconds 0-200-0 broken down as 6.5 seconds braking from 200-0 at a guess the Regera will do 0-249-0 in about 30-35 seconds if we allow 10-15 seconds for braking.
That would make it around 7-12 seconds faster than the Chiron 0-249-0.
According to CVK the Regera will spin its wheels at 180mph.
Edited by frankenstein12 on Monday 11th September 23:25
Mike335i said:
CoolHands said:
Well I knew they made something in 1903 or something but you know what I mean; in modern times.
Surely you know of the EB110? The company was t founded until 1909
In the mean time though, it's f
king awesome and I want one.There is a guy round here who has one. Plate is Bug I. It's in that bright blue and black paint scheme. It's gorgeous. The same owner apparently owned two veyrons previously; one being a pur sang. Not a bad spot for a small village near Nottingham!
CoolHands said:
Have Bugatti come from nowhere? I don't remember hearing about them before the veyron. Now, if I was minted like Simon Cowel I'd be buying one.
Just google Type 35 if you want to know what a real Bugatti looks and sounds like. Unlike today's daftness, these won on the track, and are still being raced 90 years later. All the EB 110 was in the 90s was another exploitation of a pre war marque.big_rob_sydney said:
kambites said:
RB Will said:
Granted they won't be as reliable or fancy.
They also wont be capable of passing the crippling emissions standards that production cars have to. Getting 1500bhp out of out of a turbocharged engine isn't particularly clever; doing so whilst maintaining the ability to run reliably in all sorts of environments whilst meeting ever more stringent emissions regulations is a very different proposition. Because as impressively engineered as these devices may be, us human beings still need to interface with them at OUR level.
By all means build a better mousetrap. But the dead mouse wont be any deader.
There is a real sense of thrill in going fast, and also in just knowing that the power you have at the disposal of your right foot is quite intoxicating. Something that your mouse trap of dishwasher analogies don't really stand up to.
BMW made an E39 M5.....an E39 520i was more than adequate and thus the M5 is pointless, no?
Of course not.
Cheer up a bit you miserable sod
big_rob_sydney said:
I think the point is that yes, its impressive in isolation apparently, but in the real world, what relevance is there?, My dishwasher is impressive, but I don't get all gaga over the speed of its spin cycle. My computer has a cpu with some ridiculous amount of widgets, and apparently they're down to the atomic scale now, or some such trickery. Smartphone screens have increased the DPI beyond what the human eye can even register. And you know what? I couldn't care less.
Because as impressively engineered as these devices may be, us human beings still need to interface with them at OUR level.
By all means build a better mousetrap. But the dead mouse wont be any deader.
How long do your plates last?Because as impressively engineered as these devices may be, us human beings still need to interface with them at OUR level.
By all means build a better mousetrap. But the dead mouse wont be any deader.
E36GUY said:
MrGman said:
Just out of interest, why not?
Cars like these are utterly pointless but so is a lot of stuff in life.
I love all this kind of stuff, just to see what's achievable, it's exciting for me anyways.
I honestly don't know. I grew up with supercars - my old man had all sorts so maybe it's just as I get older and more cantankerous? I like driving very much, I like going fast on a track and trying to improve my laptime and am interested by the circuit performance of new sports cars but if I see one in the wild I don't really care anymore. I point them out to my kids but that's for their excitement rather than mine. I'm far more interested with what happens in the sportscar sector - Porsche, new TVR etc than the supercar world. Maybe I just see them as quite unattainable (currently, maybe one day) therefore irrelelvent. Cars like these are utterly pointless but so is a lot of stuff in life.
I love all this kind of stuff, just to see what's achievable, it's exciting for me anyways.
JustinF said:
still fails to elevate my heart rate even slightly, can't put my finger on it but modern bugs just leave me cold.
I'm sure that driving one would be thrilling, and they do make a great noise. And the headlights are pretty darned cool.But it looks boring. It doesn't excite in the way that Lamborghinis and Ferraris used to.
Fast and Spurious said:
big_rob_sydney said:
I think the point is that yes, its impressive in isolation apparently, but in the real world, what relevance is there?, My dishwasher is impressive, but I don't get all gaga over the speed of its spin cycle. My computer has a cpu with some ridiculous amount of widgets, and apparently they're down to the atomic scale now, or some such trickery. Smartphone screens have increased the DPI beyond what the human eye can even register. And you know what? I couldn't care less.
Because as impressively engineered as these devices may be, us human beings still need to interface with them at OUR level.
By all means build a better mousetrap. But the dead mouse wont be any deader.
How long do your plates last?Because as impressively engineered as these devices may be, us human beings still need to interface with them at OUR level.
By all means build a better mousetrap. But the dead mouse wont be any deader.
Somebody said stuff about somebody Cowell. If I was somebody Cowell, I'd hang myself from a tree over a cliff & shoot myself & hope like Howell that I didn't shoot the rope & plunge into the sea & live to pontificate further on someone with no talent.
Can't fathom that somebody claiming an interest in automotive history (pher) thinks Bugatti sprang from nowhere, just recently.
Can't fathom that somebody claiming an interest in automotive history (pher) thinks Bugatti sprang from nowhere, just recently.
coppice said:
CoolHands said:
Have Bugatti come from nowhere? I don't remember hearing about them before the veyron. Now, if I was minted like Simon Cowel I'd be buying one.
Just google Type 35 if you want to know what a real Bugatti looks and sounds like. Unlike today's daftness, these won on the track, and are still being raced 90 years later. All the EB 110 was in the 90s was another exploitation of a pre war marque.They won on the track, I am sure the Bugatti of today would be able to produce a racing car if that were their focus, Bugatti back in the day made massively expensive, excessive and opulent road cars like the Royale as well. They made kids pedal cars as well.
If its got a Bugatti badge on it then its real enough for me, whoever owns the company matters not one jot, its not a Golf "By Bugatti", its a ground up, state of the art Hypercar with sixteen cylinders and four turbochargers, one of the fastest cars in the world that isnt some lash up with a massive engine, its a proper cohesive product that can be used all the time, that does whatever is asked of it without histrionics.
Its people, making stuff to the best of their abilities with the technology available, which is what happened back in the 1920s, I am sure there were people then that thought they were pointless, noisy and expensive, because it was new then like the Chiron is now. the past seems all lovely and romantic, its all nice and safe, the current is a bit familiar and the future tends to be scary, its human nature.
Now dont get me wrong, I like the history but this constant moaning about anything new "Oh why cant it be like the old days, they were awesome" gets boring, celebrate what is going on now, in thirty years you will be getting nostalgic about it or someone who wasn't there will be.
See this in every thread "Proper Bentley", "Proper Rolls", "Proper Bugatti", anything made after 1985 ? is considered rubbish and its really not the case, maybe humanity should pack up and rest on its laurels, never develop anything ever again, all been done mate. Exploitation, Jesus listen to yourself, its an old car brand, not the holy grail.
I have heard one run, my father in law had one, he sold it about ten years ago and thats what paid my kids school fees.
I am glad they make the Chiron, brightens my dad reading about stuff like that, its interesting, the tech filters down eventually and the Daily Mail comments section gets some awesome new comments.
Not at all - my point isn't that old is better because it's old but the fact that( yes , you are right just like the Royale ) the Chiron is an enromous irrelevance . Performance which doesn't translate to a race track , unlike a T35 , and which is even more unattainable than similar daft oligarch specials like the La Ferrari.
I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
coppice said:
Not at all - my point isn't that old is better because it's old but the fact that( yes , you are right just like the Royale ) the Chiron is an enromous irrelevance . Performance which doesn't translate to a race track , unlike a T35 , and which is even more unattainable than similar daft oligarch specials like the La Ferrari.
I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
Again, Kim Kardashian is current, I am not sure what she does but go back fifty years, there were also people famous for being famous, not quite as many but the names wont seem so loaded in terms of being a pointless waste of space, I am sure Marilyn Monroe had her detractors, Betty Paige was probably considered a harlot or similar, but 50 years on these are evocative names, especailly if we didnt live through the time.I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
I am sure whoever had a Royale looked like an Oligarch back then now all we see is a magnificent, massive and very different creation, people then probably thought look at that rich t
t Rocerkfeller in his rich mobile.We get nostalgic about stuff we didnt much like at the time, I like hearing songs I hatred back in the late eighties as its a link to the past, at the time it annoyed the crap out of me, if we wrent there we romantiicise things, maybe things were better ? dont know but I think a lot is this is perhaps over done.
In terms of history, Bugatti has only been around just over 100 years as a name in the car industry, a blip in time terms, i get what the name represents, Italian, well made, special, fast, beautiful but the Chiron doesn't change that and it carries the name on, a name that would otherwise fade into obscurity apart from car folk, as it is, its in the Daily Mail, can think of worse legacies.
coppice said:
CoolHands said:
Have Bugatti come from nowhere? I don't remember hearing about them before the veyron. Now, if I was minted like Simon Cowel I'd be buying one.
Just google Type 35 if you want to know what a real Bugatti looks and sounds like. Unlike today's daftness, these won on the track, and are still being raced 90 years later. All the EB 110 was in the 90s was another exploitation of a pre war marque.coppice said:
Not at all - my point isn't that old is better because it's old but the fact that( yes , you are right just like the Royale ) the Chiron is an enromous irrelevance . Performance which doesn't translate to a race track , unlike a T35 , and which is even more unattainable than similar daft oligarch specials like the La Ferrari.
I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
Why does the performance of a road car need to have any relevance to race cars? I saw a Chiron at Silverstone recently; my first thought was Kim Kardashian in the metal.
Can't believe the attitude of some people on here. It's very impressive, of course it is. Comparing this to an F1 car is apples and oranges - 0-400-0kph may or may not be achievable in an F1 car, the impressive part is that it can be done in such luxury and in a vehicle you can 'pop' to the shops/Harrods in. And something that you can just order, like you'd order a Aygo per se (albeit a very different process. Obviously.)
If the Wright brothers thought "Fk it, we've got boats. What's the point?" We may still be where we were in 1900 or whenever it was!
Lighten up, Jesus. /rant
If the Wright brothers thought "F
k it, we've got boats. What's the point?" We may still be where we were in 1900 or whenever it was! Lighten up, Jesus. /rant
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff