Fastest production car in the world...

Jstas

bobman1235 wrote:

Still.... bike, 11k. Buggati - 1.5 mil.

It's a question of value

Value? Pfft!

If you wipe out in the Bugatti, it won't turn you into a pasty smear on the asphalt.

Besides, if I have the wampum to even consider a Veyron as my next ride, sport bikes are not even in the running. Hell, I don't have the money now and I still wouldn't consider a sport bike.

There's just something about massive amounts of power like that under your right foot...a sport bike just doesn't come anywhere close.



Oh and the Saleen S7's vents are functional. It's part of the reason it can run so fast and has such a drag coefficient. They may look dumb but just because it's ugly doesn't mean it don't run like stink.

Sami

RuSsMaN wrote:

Who made it a question of value? I say it isn't.

You are correct, it isn't. I have a bike I bought for $4400 (modified '03 CBR929), and it can keep up with a stock R1 (the bike on the video) up until 120-130mph until it starts to run out of gears. I rarely drive it though as it just isn't as much fun as something on four wheels. There's also a R6 in the garage that is a little more fun to drive but not nearly as comfortable to ride for longer distances.

Some people like bikes and some always insist comparting them to cars but it's not a fair comparison. For the bike.

bobman1235

I was just being a smartass, everyone relax

A car is far more comfortable and safe, no one can argue that. Although if you think you're getting into an accident in anything at 130+mph and not being turned into creamed corn, you're deluding yourself.

Jstas

bobman1235 wrote:

Although if you think you're getting into an accident in anything at 130+mph and not being turned into creamed corn, you're deluding yourself.

These cars that run this fast need very rigid and strong frames. The Veyron has a cockpit cage integrated into the unibody of the car. You will annihilate the car at 250+ MPH if you run into a wall or a deer and you will likely get hurt. Maybe seriously, maybe not. However, you have a damn good chance of surviving to drive your car another day.

Do the same on a crotch rocket and you're going to have a very bad day.

On top of that, race cars plow into walls at 150+ MPH on a regular basis. Champ cars will hit a wall at 230+ MPH and those guys will walk away from accidents like that. Sure, there are fatal ones and ones where people get injured to the point of being crippled but safety advancements in racing have grown in leaps and bounds and manufacturers have trickled the technology down to thier road cars. On top of that, federally mandated safety changes have forced alot of advancements to be made. Consequently, we have cars that are much, much safer now and your chances of surviving a serious accident are very good.

The Veyron is one example of a blisteringly fast car. There are many out there and they are built to go that fast. The includes brakes, steering and safety equipment to support those speeds. A sport bike can be lots of fun but it lacks the safety features of a car that usually mitigate the risks of travelling so fast.

Joelsbass

Jstas wrote:

They may look dumb but just because it's ugly doesn't mean it don't run like stink.

Take Forrest Gump for example....


I think my favorite part was where he said that at top speed the tires would only last 50 min and the fuel 12... :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

I'd sell my first born for that thing.... :cool:

audiobliss

bobman1235 wrote:

Although if you think you're getting into an accident in anything at 130+mph and not being turned into creamed corn, you're deluding yourself.

I'm not too sure about that. I read about a guy who was doing some top spend testing in a McLaren F1 somewhere in the deserts of Northern Africa, and he lost it and flipped the car several times. I don't remember the speed, but if he was doing a top speed run, he was going at least 180+.

When the car came to a stop, he opened the door and jumped out. All fine and dandy.

Obviously, though, more could go wrong. But not always.

Sami

Joelsbass wrote:

I'd sell my first born for that thing.... :cool:

I wouldn't. I'll get my first born a go-cart as his 3rd b-day present and we'll go from there. Maybe he'll be in F1 someday and then he can buy daddy any car he (I) wants...

If he doesn't, well, at least we'll have fun driving those carts.

shack

bobman1235 wrote:

I was just being a smartass, everyone relax

A car is far more comfortable and safe, no one can argue that. Although if you think you're getting into an accident in anything at 130+mph and not being turned into creamed corn, you're deluding yourself.

What about the idiot Swede that cut the Ferrari Enzo in half at an estimated at 185 mph(you hear anything between 125 and 200 but the police say 185)mph and walked (no RAN) away from the accident with just a couple of minor injuries? The carbon fiber driver's compartment and seat had a lot to do with his surviving. That is pretty common technology and most of todays "Super" cars are made that way.

The vents on the Saleen are fully functional and the reason it is as fast and as stable at high speeds as it is.

PolkThug

I'll take the Saleen S7, but I'm a little biased.

MikeC78

I think I say someone on MTV cribs who had one of those?

WilliamM2

Speaking of crashing Veyron's, here's a used one you may be able to get cheap. Claimed the driver was going around 100mph, I woder how it would fare at 250mph?

bobman1235

Hmph. Well... obviously all of you more knowledgable people have proven me wrong about my crashing into walls comment. I'll just go sulk in a corner now....

heiney9

RuSsMaN wrote:

Who made it a question of value? I say it isn't.

I say it's sitting in a quiet, air conditioned cockpit, in a posh leather seat, listening to Stravinsky - but moreso the engineering of it all. It's pure opulence at it's finest.

Cheers,
Russ

Both RuSs and Noel on right on the money. It's the engineering that does it for me. We are talking price no object opulence here not, "I can get a $75K Corvette and get 3/5th's of the way there." If any of you have read anything in detail on what it took from an engineering stand point to make this work it's a marvel of human ingenuity. Christ, the thing is faster than and F1 race car, yet it's civil enough to drive to your next golf outting.

They wanted to use a Formula one wind tunnel and they were told that the F1 cars don;t go that fast so it wouldn't work. Have you seen the super secret Volkwagen test track? :cool: :cool: .

Although, I will say the Saleen S7 has always been an impressive machine to me. But the Bugatti is off the charts..........and traditionally I'm a Ferrari man myself (as far as ultimate dream cars go) and the Bugatti has displaced both the F50 and Enzo for me (in my fantasy world).

H9

ND13

WilliamM2 wrote:

Speaking of crashing Veyron's, here's a used one you may be able to get cheap. Claimed the driver was going around 100mph, I woder how it would fare at 250mph?

Notice how the passenger compartment was not damaged???

Sami

heiney9 wrote:

Christ, the thing is faster than and F1 race car

Not quite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One

"A Honda Formula One car, running with minimum downforce on a runway in the Mojave desert achieved a top speed of 415 km/h (258 mph) in 2006."

The keyword is downforce of course as F1 cara are not designed to run on a straight line. Top speed isn't that important but can be achieved if you're not so concerned about cornering speed.

MillerLiteScott

Formula 1 starts this Thursday night at 11pm on The Speed Channel. Australia is the first race and it should be an intersting season due to new spec tires and the lack of Michael $chumacher. A few of the top drivers also jumped teams and we should be able to see(to some degree) how much the performance is from the car or the driver.

shack

Sami wrote:

"A Honda Formula One car, running with minimum downforce on a runway in the Mojave desert achieved a top speed of 415 km/h (258 mph) in 2006."

The keyword is downforce of course as F1 cars are not designed to run on a straight line. Top speed isn't that important but can be achieved if you're not so concerned about cornering speed.

You won't often see open wheel cars at the speeds we're talking about. As Sami said, the Formula 1 cars are not designed for flat out speed but a combination of speed and handling. Even the Indy cars are maxed out below 240. It's hard to say if they could get higher just because they generally don't run on tracks with long enough straights to get there. I'm not sure how fast the aerodynamics of open wheel cars will allow them to go (obviously 258 according to Sami's link).

The 250 mph barrier was reached by full bodied race cars all the way back to the early 70s where a Porsche 917LH hit the mark at Le Mans before the FISA got nervous and backed the speed down through technical regulations. The IMSA GTP and FIA Group C cars of the 80s and early 90s were able to hit the 250 mark at Le Mans as well. The fastest time on the Mulsanne Straight was mid 250s by a Peugeot in 1989. As the speeds increased, FISA again slowed the cars down, this time not by technology, but by adding 2 chicanes to the Mulsanne Straight. That was probably the only course with a enough straight road to test the limits. Today the VW Ehra-Lessien track may be the only paved facilty that has the length (9 kilometers - 5.6 miles) to "legally" test these top speeds. There are some roads in some of the Western states that would allow a car to reach true top end....but I wouldn't want to be on them at those speeds. :eek:

Sami

Australia is also a place for top speed runs, particularly popular with the Asian performance crowd.

I believe this is the 383.8 km/h (~240mph) run by one of the top tuner cars:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2821353342938959579

It's said to have more hp (1300?) than the Veyron but all that hp help when you consider the aerodynamic differences of the two cars at those speeds.

sucks2beme

bobman1235 wrote:

I was just being a smartass, everyone relax

A car is far more comfortable and safe, no one can argue that. Although if you think you're getting into an accident in anything at 130+mph and not being turned into creamed corn, you're deluding yourself.

A guy in high school t-boned a little old lady driving accross a main paved road. He was in a Cuda driving at some insane speed. Both cars splintered,
for lack of a better word. He was hurt pretty bad. The old lady was puzzle
pieces. We had a 40 acre field next to where it happened at. I found a lot of car pieces out there. North Iowa has some long, flat roadways with little or no traffic. And lots of guys willing to test this theory.
I'm sure this car is built much better than the crap we used to take out
and max out.

m00npie

Not really related since these are not production by any stretch of the imagination, but interesting anyway…

I have seen almost every brand of racing and I’m amazed at the stats of the cars within each. One form though really boggles my mind…

Top fuel cars have as much horsepower in one cylinder as the Bugatti has total. Of course, they only last a little over 4 seconds before imminent detonation.

Other cool figures…

-700 PSI comes out of each 3’’ Header pipe. This pressure in addition to the wing in the back = 12000 lbs of down force at the end of the run.
-Teams run anywhere from 500-600 PSi of fuel pressure. That’s about 10 Gallons of fuel in just over 4 seconds.
- Generates over 120 DB !! Not only that, depending upon how close you are, the shockwaves tend to blur your vision as they go by. SVS subs are impressive, but they won’t hit your chest like these will. Pretty neat!
- Oh yeah, ¼ mile in about 4.5 seconds around 325mph average.

If you are a car enthusiast, the price of admission is worth it at least once. The wait between rounds is almost enough to not want to go back and see them again.

Systems

MillerLiteScott wrote:

Formula 1 starts this Thursday night at 11pm on The Speed Channel. Australia is the first race and it should be an intersting season due to new spec tires and the lack of Michael $chumacher. A few of the top drivers also jumped teams and we should be able to see(to some degree) how much the performance is from the car or the driver.

Go Kimi GO:)

Jstas

shack wrote:

You won't often see open wheel cars at the speeds we're talking about. As Sami said, the Formula 1 cars are not designed for flat out speed but a combination of speed and handling. Even the Indy cars are maxed out below 240. It's hard to say if they could get higher just because they generally don't run on tracks with long enough straights to get there. I'm not sure how fast the aerodynamics of open wheel cars will allow them to go (obviously 258 according to Sami's link).

The 250 mph barrier was reached by full bodied race cars all the way back to the early 70s where a Porsche 917LH hit the mark at Le Mans before the FISA got nervous and backed the speed down through technical regulations. The IMSA GTP and FIA Group C cars of the 80s and early 90s were able to hit the 250 mark at Le Mans as well. The fastest time on the Mulsanne Straight was mid 250s by a Peugeot in 1989. As the speeds increased, FISA again slowed the cars down, this time not by technology, but by adding 2 chicanes to the Mulsanne Straight. That was probably the only course with a enough straight road to test the limits. Today the VW Ehra-Lessien track may be the only paved facilty that has the length (9 kilometers - 5.6 miles) to "legally" test these top speeds. There are some roads in some of the Western states that would allow a car to reach true top end....but I wouldn't want to be on them at those speeds. :eek:

The Ford GT40 team piloted the ford GT40 to over 230 MPH on the back stretch at LeMans in 1966. That team was made up of several drivers of noteworthy fame in A.J. Foyt, Dan Gurney and Bruce McLaren.

F1nut

Sami wrote:

Not quite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One

"A Honda Formula One car, running with minimum downforce on a runway in the Mojave desert achieved a top speed of 415 km/h (258 mph) in 2006."

The keyword is downforce of course as F1 cara are not designed to run on a straight line. Top speed isn't that important but can be achieved if you're not so concerned about cornering speed.

Yep! Not to mention they do it with 8 less cylinders and no turbos. Of course, the F1 guys don't have A/C or a stereo either.

The typical F1 car does 0-100-0 in 6.6 seconds (I wonder what the Bugatti does?) and can, with the proper downforce, run upside down!

Anyway, the Bugatti is one beautiful, badass car. My hat is off to them for creating such a wonderful machine.

Did anyone catch the one video explaining how the rear wing pops up under braking, acting as an air dam, to help stop it? Very cool stuff.

heiney9

F1nut wrote:

Yep! Not to mention they do it with 8 less cylinders and no turbos. Of course, the F1 guys don't have A/C or a stereo either.

The typical F1 car does 0-100-0 in 6.6 seconds (I wonder what the Bugatti does?) and can, with the proper downforce, run upside down!

Anyway, the Bugatti is one beautiful, badass car. My hat is off to them for creating such a wonderful machine.

Did anyone catch the one video explaining how the rear wing pops up under braking, acting as an air dam, to help stop it? Very cool stuff.

A few posts earlier I said F1 cars, I meant Indy cars. Too some that might be a small distinction, but in reality it's pretty large. Basically the difference between a Danica Patrick car and a Michael Schumaker (last year ) car. I read a lot about the car about 6-8 months ago and watched a special on the car but all the phenominal details escape me. I *think* they said the Bugatti can 0-100-0 faster than and Indy car. I *think* they also said it can go 0-200-0 faster than the Porsche Carrera GT.

But the bottom line; it is one badass road car. And the rear wing does act as a rear brake to slow the **** down. Reduces braking distance by some 15-20% if I remember correctly. Every scoop, intake, air dam, wing is absolutely functional and imperative for it to reach it top speed. That's what the biggest problem was; making it aerodynamic enough to reach the speed and stay completely planted and stable. The problem was then not getting a high enough volume of air to cool the damn engine compartment. Several of the original prototypes overheated something fierce......I believe one journalist talked about a MELTDOWN of epic proportions :eek:. The current Bugatti has 10 radiators. That's what's so awesome about the engineering of the whole car. They were very close to scrapping the whole project because Ferdinand Piech (VW head at the time, this was his project) refused to compomise one bit on his original vision of the car.

H9

MillerLiteScott

Even more impressive than acceleration in an F1 is it's braking abilities. Even with only 13" rims ( to limit rotor diameter ) the braking abilities are astounding.

The first time I saw an F1 car brake for turn 1 at Indy I thought there was no way he was going to make the turn. They also make quite a sound that is like nothing else I have ever heard and have never been able to accurately describe it in words.

shack

F1nut wrote:

The typical F1 car does 0-100-0 in 6.6 seconds (I wonder what the Bugatti does?) and can, with the proper downforce, run upside down!

Reported times:

Zero to 60 mph 2.5 s
Zero to 100 mph 5.4 s
Zero to 150 mph 9.3 s
Zero to 200 mph 20.2 s
Zero to 250 mph 55 s

F1nut wrote:

Did anyone catch the one video explaining how the rear wing pops up under braking, acting as an air dam, to help stop it? Very cool stuff.

Yep and I especially like the "Top Speed Key"...

When the car reaches 137 mph hydraulics lower the car until it has a ground clearance of about 3 1/2 inches. At the same time, the wing and spoiler deploy. This is the "handling" mode, in which the wing helps provide 770 pounds of downforce, holding the car to the road.

The driver must, using a special key (the "Top Speed Key"), toggle the lock to the left of his seat in order to use the maximum speed of 253.2 miles per hour. Theoretically it can go faster but it is electronically limited to 253.2 miles per hour to prevent tire damage. The key functions only when the vehicle is at a stop when a checklist then establishes whether the car—and its driver—are ready to enable 'top speed' mode. If all systems are go, the rear spoiler retracts, the front air diffusers close and the ground clearance, normally 4.9 inches drops to 2.6 inches.

heiney9

shack wrote:

Reported times:

Zero to 60 mph 2.5 s
Zero to 100 mph 5.4 s
Zero to 150 mph 9.3 s
Zero to 200 mph 20.2 s
Zero to 250 mph 55 s


Yep and I especially like the "Top Speed Key"...

I forgot about that special key........damn I remember now, thinking that was the coolest thing I ever saw. This car should be in the next Bond movie

F1nut

MillerLiteScott wrote:

They also make quite a sound that is like nothing else I have ever heard and have never been able to accurately describe it in words.

Kinda like a million buzzing bees.



Standing 20 feet off the track side at the end of the back straight, watching them go from 180 to 40 in a matter of a few feet impressed the hell out of me.


Shack, thanks for the reported times and yes, the "Top Speed Key" feature is very cool stuff too.

petrym

GV#27 wrote:

Go Kimi GO:)

Yeah Babeeeeeee!

Jstas

heiney9 wrote:

A few posts earlier I said F1 cars, I meant Indy cars. Too some that might be a small distinction, but in reality it's pretty large. Basically the difference between a Danica Patrick car and a Michael Schumaker (last year ) car.

H9

I'm not sure what you are getting at because I can't seem to find the post you are talking about. It's probably staring me right in the face and I'm just not seeing it.

Anyhow, Indy (IRL) cars are vastly different from F1 cars. Indy cars are more like NASCAR cars in the way they are regulated. If you want an American racing series comparison to an F1 car, the Champ cars (used to be CART cars) are a better comparison.

Champ cars were also the cars with the dubious distinction of being able to run upside down. The F1 cars can be tuned to run with that kind of downforce but they typically don't. The Champ cars run that level of downforce all the time. The Champ cars are turbocharged though and typically run somewhere around 35-42 pounds of boost. Then again, they are making well over 800 horses out of less than 3L of engine displacement. IIRC, they are 2.4-2.65 liters. They are typically DOHC V8's running on methanol but Buick ran a V6 for a while.

Nigel Mansell, arguably one of the greatest racing drivers of all time, won a championship in F1 in 1992 and the next year decided to run CART and drove for Newman/Haas Racing as a teammate to Mario Andretti. He replaced Michael Andretti who picked up an F1 ride with McLaren for 1993. Mansell proceeded to dominate the circuits and won the championship in 1993. Then he left because everybody essentially thought he was a ****. But hey, he won it all, the guy is just raw driving talent. However, both he and Jacques Villeneuve both remarked at how competative and how powerful the CART cars were compared to F1 and how they weren't expecting them to be so intense. That's typical European smugness though (even though Villeneuve is Canadian) because god forbid the Americans might be able to build a car equally as powerful and technologically advanced. While they were similar overall designs, they were vastly different cars. Mansell said he enjoyed CART more than F1.

Anyway, it's really a shame about CART because it was a very exciting racing series to watch. Many people compared it to the American F1 because it had the same technology driven competition and alot of new technology, especially in the engine management realm, came out of CART. The internal politics and poor management did it in and I honestly miss it. The IRL just isn't interesting. It's open wheel NASCAR. However, F1 is the big game. It's the big money and as big as NASCAR is, F1 still has a much larger world-wide following.


I can't help but think though, out of all the races I've had the priviledge to watch in person, the one that has the most impact to me is the open wheel Outlaw, Sprint and Super Sprint dirt track cars. There is just something visceral about 50 big-block engined cars rumbling around the race track flingin' dirt and blowin' methanol exhaust. It literally shakes the ground and they ain't kidding when they call it Rollin' Thunder! I'm all for F1 and it is an experience to behold but I think that there are more interesting experiences out there.

One day, I'm going to get to a round of the WRC!

For anyone who hasn't had the opportunity, just once in your life, go to a NHRA event and see the Top Fuel and Top Fuel Funny Cars. It is an experience to see, hear and feel. One Top Fuel dragster makes as much power as 1/4 of the starting grid of an F1 race.