Monday 5th September 2005

Bugatti unveils Veyron

Fastest road car in the world is cooked

---

Bugatti Veyron: now cooked

Testing of the Bugatti Veyron is now officially finished and the car is ready, according to Autocar.

The car has been unveiled, and the company has released official photos. The car has also, said the report, "silenced the critics by smashing the top speed record for road cars with a spectacular two-way average speed of 252.95mph at parent company Volkswagen’s Ehra Lessien test track in Germany." That's 12mph faster than the McLaren F1's 240.1mph record, which was set in 1998.

The four-wheel drive Veyron features 922lb-ft of torque channelled through a seven-speed, dual-clutch gearbox and propels the 1,888Kg Bugatti from to 62mph from Zero in a gobsmacking 2.5seconds.

PHers Gerald Styles spotted the car in high-altitude testing last week -- his pictures and story are above and here.

• www.autocarmagazine.co.uk

[r988]

Thats a stonking amount of power to get that lard arse to accelerate at that rate and reach that top speed. But then you'd bloody well hope so after all that time it took them to get it reach expectation. Is this now the highest torque of any factory petrol car? SL 65 AMG has 'only' 1000Nm, wonder if they'll bump it up now. After all even the Falcon F6 Typhoon can bump 1000Nm with a bit of a tickle and thats only an ancient 4.0L Ford engine.

Bring on the power war :driving:

[joust]

A stunning machine and considering the challenges, an incredibly short development time.

People seem to forget that there was a long time in waiting for the F1, XJ220 and others. Supercars aren't born in a day...

J

[slikk]

I was under the impression that the Koenigseggggggg had alresady beaten the F1's top speed by a substantial margin.. .. ..

kim

[nisman]

So it's taken 18 years (since the F1 was introduced) and another 370BHP to beat that record. That makes the F1 look even more impressive than ever to me - and I think it's by far the better looking of the two.

[CRBox]

Where do I apply to get an Official Bugatti Veryon, Body Repair Franchise?

[dinkel]

It say's: "how big is your penis . . ."

Nuff said . . .

[alexkp]

Here's more:

Is this for real? 2.5secs to sixty?

http://cars.msn.co.uk/carnews/carnews5sep05/

[r988]

nisman said:

So it's taken 18 years (since the F1 was introduced) and another 370BHP to beat that record. That makes the F1 look even more impressive than ever to me - and I think it's by far the better looking of the two.

The F1 is a pure racing car, lightweight, NA engine for maximum responsiveness, manual gear box everything carefully thought out nothing unnecessary.

The Bugatti is a big fat monster designed solely to be the most powerful, fastest, most outrageous statement that VW can make. The usual suspects will all buy one, especaially in the middle east where speed is king, but the purist will always go for something like the F1.

[joust]

nisman said:

So it's taken 18 years (since the F1 was introduced) and another 370BHP to beat that record. That makes the F1 look even more impressive than ever to me - and I think it's by far the better looking of the two.

Remember that top speed is a cubed law against BHP given everything the same, so in simple terms

F1 : 240mph
Increase: 12mph = 5%
Power increase = 5%^3 = 16% increase
F1 power : 680bhp
Increase in power = 788

i.e. to make the F1 go at the same speed it would have needed nearly 800bhp.

Now, clearly this isn't as slippery as the F1, and so needs more, but to get 800bhp out of the F1 would have been arguably an even more significant challenge.

From an engineering basis I therefore think this is a wonderful example - thank god that VW had the balls to go through with it!

J

[joust]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Yep - means Ultima cars have to take down their 2.7s 0-60 as being 'world beating' from their website...

J

[fosse]

joust said:

F1 : 240mph Increase: 12mph = 5% Power increase = 5%^3 = 16% increase F1 power : 680bhp Increase in power = 788

?
5^3=16 ?
by my maths this should be 125, or if you consider 5% as .05 then cubed it would be 0.00125 or 1/8 of a percent.
sorry mate, but you've lost me here?

[stig]

joust said:

anonymous said: [redacted] Yep - means Ultima cars have to take down their 2.7s 0-60 as being 'world beating' from their website... J

Indeed, they could replace it with "It may be .2 seconds slower, but it's about 950 grand cheaper than a Veyron"

[jonathant]

fosse said:

joust said: Increase: 12mph = 5% Power increase = 5%^3 = 16% increase ? 5^3=16 ? by my maths this should be 125, or if you consider 5% as .05 then cubed it would be 0.00125 or 1/8 of a percent. sorry mate, but you've lost me here?

Joust is correct:

increase by 12mph = 5% increase = top speed*1.05
power increase = 5%^3 = 1.05^3 = 1.158 = 16% increase

[CRBox]

fosse said:

joust said: F1 : 240mph Increase: 12mph = 5% Power increase = 5%^3 = 16% increase F1 power : 680bhp Increase in power = 788 ? 5^3=16 ? by my maths this should be 125, or if you consider 5% as .05 then cubed it would be 0.00125 or 1/8 of a percent. sorry mate, but you've lost me here?

Er, look it's 100% + 5% cubed! AKA 105% cubed = 1.157625 x 680bhp = bhp

[joust]

fosse said:

? 5^3=16 ? by my maths this should be 125, or if you consider 5% as .05 then cubed it would be 0.00125 or 1/8 of a percent. sorry mate, but you've lost me here?

You cube the power increase - i.e. for 5% you cube 1.05.

Full maths (where I cribbed that from) is here

www.pumaracing.co.uk/topspeed.htm

J

[fwdracer]

Leaves me ice cold. As either a car or statement of business intent on behalf of VAG.

Colin Chapman is sat on his cloud gently chortling to himself.

Finally - It'll be like any other VeeDub. If you are daft enough to buy one the depreciation shouldn't bother you!

[joust]

jonathant said:

Joust is correct: increase by 12mph = 5% increase = top speed*1.05 power increase = 5%^3 = 1.05^3 = 1.158 = 16% increase

CRBox said:

Er, look it's 100% + 5% cubed! AKA 105% cubed = 1.157625 x 680bhp = bhp

[joust]

slikk said:

I was under the impression that the Koenigseggggggg had alresady beaten the F1's top speed by a substantial margin.. .. .. kim

I've never seen that independantly verified, and after the top-gear TV and mag fiasco I think they kept their heads down...

[Andrew Noakes]

nisman said:

So it's taken 18 years (since the F1 was introduced)

The F1 wasn't introduced 18 years ago. It was launched in 1993.

joust said:

Remember that top speed is a cubed law against BHP given everything the same, so in simple terms F1 : 240mph Increase: 12mph = 5% Power increase = 5%^3 = 16% increase F1 power : 680bhp Increase in power = 788

Even allowing for the fact that 5% cubed isn't 16%...

and that an F1 is 627bhp not 680...

you are saying that an extra 5% speed always costs you 16% more power, which is nonsense. You have to take the whole speed cubed, not just the increase in speed.

Very roughly:

max speed cubed x a constant = max power

therefore power/(speed cubed)=constant

therefore 627/(240^3) = power required/(252^3)

power required = 726bhp

But the F1 was over-revving anyway at 240mph, and with longer gearing it might have gone faster. So it might do 252mph with less than 726bhp, if geared properly.

[joust]

Andrew Noakes said:

Even allowing for the fact that 5% cubed isn't 16%... and that an F1 is 627bhp not 680...

I thought there was a matter of "debate" if the car that made the 240mph was running what was to become the LM engine spec. That was quoted at 668bhp so I was using round figures as it was only an example.

Andrew Noakes said:

you are saying that an extra 5% speed always costs you 16% more power, which is nonsense. You have to take the whole speed cubed, not just the increase in speed.

All things being equal, absolutly.

Andrew Noakes said:

Very roughly: max speed cubed x a constant = max power therefore power/(speed cubed)=constant therefore 627/(240^3) = power required/(252^3) power required = 726bhp

Do the same maths with 680bhp as the start and you get the same answer as me.

Why? Because if you write that as two simultaneous equations you'll find that "a constant" cancels out, and hence you just get

bhp_new = bhp_old * (speed_new/speed_old)^3

Look at the Puma Racing link I posted - you'll find the table that bears that out (and who am I to argue with them!)

Andrew Noakes said:

But the F1 was over-revving anyway at 240mph, and with longer gearing it might have gone faster. So it might do 252mph with less than 726bhp, if geared properly.

You sound like you were there (which of course you may have been given your job)? If that's true then I'm amazed that McLaren didn't change the gearing and set it even higher. My impression from reading the book and may other articles was they were just a tinsy little bit pleased that they had got away with 240mph and that they weren't quite sure about the aeros if they went any higher. Happy to be put straight though as clearly my knowledge/speculation is only from the written word.

J

>> Edited by joust on Monday 5th September 15:41