RE: Bugatti reveals 1577hp Centodieci

[WonkeyDonkey]

Ugly car built for only the most deplorable people to grace society.

Wouldn't mind a drive though.

[Gandahar]

WCZ said:

horrible but at least it is up on power and down on weight (if only slightly)

wish they'd just hurry up and make the ss for a more reasonable price, 9m for this is nuts

Edited by Gandahar on Saturday 17th August 14:10

[Pericoloso]

Dynamic Space Wizard said:

If you think that's bad, you should see the title of this thread:

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=14...

Lol,good one.
How the other bloke got diesel from the word for 10 just irked me.
Foreign language in spelling shocker!

[unpc]

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s... I'd walk past any modern Ferrari to drool over an F40 or a Testarossa, and in the same way I'd walk past that silver thing to the blue EB110, there's just something the older ones have that the new ones lack, like they come from a time when society wasn't run by kowtowing wimps and people could actually enjoy stuff without having to justify it to some sandal-wearing dreadlocked stink-machine, and you can just feel that when you look at one, whereas looking at most modern stuff you get the feeling it's been designed by someone eating Alpen with lentils at a H&S-approved standing desk with a biodegradeable ethnic pencil.

For all those of you bemoaning modern supercars maybe this is the salvation gordonmurraydesign.com

Won't be cheap mind...

[another 3 points]

Centodieci? Why? What for? What a waste of resources. FFS

[Leon R]

bigdog3 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s...

Supercars from the 60s/70s are even better IMHO - wonder if that has anything to do with being an impressionable youth back then ?

In what way were they better? Just looks?

Because objectively if you compare a Testarossa to an 812 the 812 will come out on top in terms of performance, handling, build quality, reliability and will also be easier to drive and easier to live with.

[bigdog3]

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s...

Supercars from the 60s/70s are even better IMHO - wonder if that has anything to do with being an impressionable youth back then ?

In what way were they better? Just looks?

Because objectively if you compare a Testarossa to an 812 the 812 will come out on top in terms of performance, handling, build quality, reliability and will also be easier to drive and easier to live with.

Supercars aren't about the practical aspects. They're about appeal, charisma, desirability, passion - the visceral stuff

I find modern supercars boring and almost pointless except for posing

[Leon R]

bigdog3 said:

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s...

Supercars from the 60s/70s are even better IMHO - wonder if that has anything to do with being an impressionable youth back then ?

In what way were they better? Just looks?

Because objectively if you compare a Testarossa to an 812 the 812 will come out on top in terms of performance, handling, build quality, reliability and will also be easier to drive and easier to live with.

Supercars aren't about the practical aspects. They're about appeal, charisma, desirability, passion - the visceral stuff

I find modern supercars boring and almost pointless except for posing

What do you drive that affords you the perspective that a 458 or a GT3 are boring posers cars?

[CustardOnChips]

bigdog3 said:

Supercars aren't about the practical aspects. They're about appeal, charisma, desirability, passion - the visceral stuff

I find modern supercars boring and almost pointless except for posing

Looking past the nostalgia. Supercars of old are a bit st. The build quality and switchgear on many of them is terrible, and often from the parts bins of mainstream manufacturers.

Even Porsches from the late 90s and early 2000s feel cheap compared to a modern mid range hatch.

I know that's not whole point of these cars, but when looking at old 911s I just couldn't get past it. Even the performance of many is lacking.

And the character and charm people talk about is mostly just faults with the cars.

[bigdog3]

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s...

Supercars from the 60s/70s are even better IMHO - wonder if that has anything to do with being an impressionable youth back then ?

In what way were they better? Just looks?

Because objectively if you compare a Testarossa to an 812 the 812 will come out on top in terms of performance, handling, build quality, reliability and will also be easier to drive and easier to live with.

Supercars aren't about the practical aspects. They're about appeal, charisma, desirability, passion - the visceral stuff

I find modern supercars boring and almost pointless except for posing

What do you drive that affords you the perspective that a 458 or a GT3 are boring posers cars?

GT3 is a very capable race car which lends itself to the track, but I don't see GT3 and Bugatti Centodieci as direct competitors. I own some quick cars with one having over 500hp but they are not supercars. Does that exclude me from holding an opinion?

[bigdog3]

CustardOnChips said:

And the character and charm people talk about is mostly just faults with the cars.

Character and quirks are closely related

[Leon R]

bigdog3 said:

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

Leon R said:

bigdog3 said:

JimSuperSix said:

Supercars were just better in the 80s / 90s...

Supercars from the 60s/70s are even better IMHO - wonder if that has anything to do with being an impressionable youth back then ?

In what way were they better? Just looks?

Because objectively if you compare a Testarossa to an 812 the 812 will come out on top in terms of performance, handling, build quality, reliability and will also be easier to drive and easier to live with.

Supercars aren't about the practical aspects. They're about appeal, charisma, desirability, passion - the visceral stuff

I find modern supercars boring and almost pointless except for posing

What do you drive that affords you the perspective that a 458 or a GT3 are boring posers cars?

GT3 is a very capable race car which lends itself to the track, but I don't see GT3 and Bugatti Centodieci as direct competitors. I own some quick cars with one having over 500hp but they are not supercars. Does that exclude me from holding an opinion?

You said you find modern supercars boring and pointless except for posing so I simply listed two that I have a little experience with that I would definitely not describe as boring.

Not really sure why a GT3 would need to be a competitor to the Bug in order to be a supercar.

My question around what you drive was not to deny you an opinion but more to understand what that opinion was based upon. The fact that you gave a peak horsepower figure instead of a make or model of vehicle kind of answers that question for me though.

[bigdog3]

Leon R said:

You said you find modern supercars boring and pointless except for posing so I simply listed two that I have a little experience with that I would definitely not describe as boring.

Not really sure why a GT3 would need to be a competitor to the Bug in order to be a supercar.

My question around what you drive was not to deny you an opinion but more to understand what that opinion was based upon. The fact that you gave a peak horsepower figure instead of a make or model of vehicle kind of answers that question for me though.

Good - you can retire content in your own bliss

ps One of them is a TVR Tuscan V8 but the really powerful one is a Ford.

[foxbody-87]

I’m not into supercars, not least because they’re totally out of my reach. Even if I did win a significant amount of money I can think of so many cars I’d buy before a modern Ferrari or Lamborghini. The exception being something from the 80s, they were unreliable pieces of crap but so outlandish / flamboyant and unlike anything else on the road. I think this would also fit the bill because it’s so daft and excessive. It would enrage the morally superior aholes who want a say in what everyone does and drives.

[MikeGalos]

Well, the EB 110 GT was beautiful and tiny and sophisticated and a superb car and relatively affordable for a supercar. So the new owners of Bugatti revised history to intentionally pretend it didn't exist so nobody would notice their new cars were only good at bragging rights for top speed and money spent.

It's no surprise they did a "tribute" to the EB 110 SS track version which sacrificed looks and drivability for strangeness and top speed with the portholes and ugly wing. And then they did a cartoonish job on that, emphasized the "SS" distinctions and painted it German Racing White rather than the French Racing Blue most of the Artioli-era Bugattis came in as a tribute to the company's French roots.

Between the German Racing White and the tribute to the "SS" version you'd think the new German owners still held a grudge over Bugatti's original home in Molsheim being in France and not Germany.

[belleair302]

For the money I would buy an EB110 and a McLaren F1.

[hyphen]

+1 to like it.

But not at that price!

[MikeGalos]

It's also worth remembering that the original EB 110 GT was the big sister to the Lotus Elise.

The Elise was developed when Romano Artioli owned both Bugatti and Lotus and the Elise was named after his granddaughter. Both the EB 110 GT and the Elise reflected Artioli's agreement with both Ettore Bugatti's and Colin Chapman's philosophies of using technology and clever engineering to reduce weight and improve handling.

That's hardly an philosophical tradition that a company known for straight-line speed and massive pricing wants people to remember.

[Vee12V]

What a disgrace to the Bugatti brand and the EB110(SS) in particular.

[bigdog3]

Zenith of desirable supercars in the right environment where all that performance can be used ? T70 is 54 years old this year.