Even faster than a Veyron...

[Slick Rick]

doesn't look that fast.

 

[Tornado]

doesn't look that fast.

If the 80's taught us anything, looking fast (512BB, Countach, etc.) isn't the same as being fast (Aston Martin Zagato).

 

[Scaff]

I promised to post these up a while ago but work and the real world got in the way so here they are.

Autocar's recent highspeed runs in a range of cars, including some more independent figures for the Veyron.

Regards

Scaff

 

[Tornado]

Whats up with some of those torque figures?
And is that Veyron 0-100KM/H figure actually tested, cause the Autocar 0-100-0 page says 2.8 seconds to 60 MPH?

 

[McLaren]

just wait and see.. though, now that BAP raped the Veyron, I know that nothing is sacred to rich people, so I believe that we'll see one bristol Fighter T in pink or chrome and with 15" wide, 22" rims with gold spinners.

Mind showing me an article of that, and not some story saying it CAN go 270Mph?

 

[Scaff]

Whats up with some of those torque figures?
And is that Veyron 0-100KM/H figure actually tested, cause the Autocar 0-100-0 page says 2.8 seconds to 60 MPH?

Different tracks and different conditions could account for such a difference, the test above was carried out a VW's Ehra-Lessian test track while the 0-100-0 were carried out at an airfield.

Test tracks often run very high grade surfaces with good grip, which I'm sure an airfield would not match.

The article on the piece above says...

0-62 mph (100km/h)
As expected, the 987bhp, four-wheel-drive Buggati launched off the line and rocketed into the distance with an intensity and efficiency not matched by any other car here. It recorded a phenomenal time of just 2.5 seconds

...so the article certainly says they recorded it.

Regards

Scaff

 

[SagarisGTB]

Bristol taking on the Veyron.

Regarding the Autocar test Scaff posted, just a comment.

While the new Murcielago has more power, costs more and matches the 599s PWR, it is still 2 full seconds slower from 100-300 km/h. Considering the 599 has more downforce and would pummel the Lambo in the corners, it really shows the performance gap between Ferrari and Lamborghini.

 

[McLaren]

Bristol taking on the Veyron.

Regarding the Autocar test Scaff posted, just a comment.

While the new Murcielago has more power, costs more and matches the 599s PWR, it is still 2 full seconds slower from 100-300 km/h. Considering the 599 has more downforce and would pummel the Lambo in the corners, it really shows the performance gap between Ferrari and Lamborghini.

Yet the fact that 599 also weighs less shows that as well?

 

[Jedi2016]

Mind showing me an article of that, and not some story saying it CAN go 270Mph?

Agreed. And since we're talking about how fast the cars CAN go... What's the theoretical top end of the Bugatti? It's limited to 254, remember. To my knowledge, they never actually did a full-bore non-limited top speed test on the thing.

Bugatti - Limited to 254mph. 0-60: 2.5s.
Bristol - Limited to 225mph. 0-60: 3.5s.

Which is faster again? I'm confused.

 

[Scaff]

Yet the fact that 599 also weighs less shows that as well?

And the Lambo is going to suffer much higher drivetrain losses being 4wd against a the mid-engined Ferrari.

Average 4wd system power losses would be around 25%, while mid-engined cars will typically suffer around 18% power losses (flywheel to driven wheels).

Source - Race and RallyCar source book - Allan Staniforth

Agreed. And since we're talking about how fast the cars CAN go... What's the theoretical top end of the Bugatti? It's limited to 254, remember. To my knowledge, they never actually did a full-bore non-limited top speed test on the thing.

Bugatti - Limited to 254mph. 0-60: 2.5s.
Bristol - Limited to 225mph. 0-60: 3.5s.

Which is faster again? I'm confused.

If we assume approx. 25% drivetrain losses and use the 0.36 Cd the Veyron has in 'high-speed' mode, and making a guesstimate about its frontal area it works out at around 270mph. Which would tie in with a few figures I read at the time of launch.

Regards

Scaff

 

[McLaren]

Agreed. And since we're talking about how fast the cars CAN go... What's the theoretical top end of the Bugatti? It's limited to 254, remember. To my knowledge, they never actually did a full-bore non-limited top speed test on the thing.

Bugatti - Limited to 254mph. 0-60: 2.5s.
Bristol - Limited to 225mph. 0-60: 3.5s.

Which is faster again? I'm confused.

I guarantee you as well Jedi, the moment Bugatti even find out what kind of tires will be used to reach 270Mph (if it does), they will use them and develop them for themselves. ANY idiot can see it coming.

 

[SagarisGTB]

Yet the fact that 599 also weighs less shows that as well?

Which is why I mentioned they share the same PWR (Power to weight ratio). And yes, Scaff is correct in mentioning that the drivetrain power loss in a 4wd should be higher that of the FR 599 GTB. All that being said, power is still more important than weight when it comes to high speed acceleration and the Lambo should still have a bit more of it. Not to mention the drag caused by downforce in the 599 should be greater (though I may be mistaken). Im not saying the Lambo is bad, its still an impressive machine, but it shows how really impressive the 599 really is.

How many automakers can make a NA 6L engine with 450 lb/ft and has a power peak over 125Hz? Progressive, Ferrari sure is.

 

[Danny]

Very ugly and yet again another misleading claim by article writers saying its faster than a veyron. So this is like the 8th car now to claim this feat yet the veyron is still recognised as number one.

Now hold on a minute.
Ugliness and such is a matter of opinion, and there's no way of discrediting it's potential top speed limit.

Depending on if the price is estimated rougly accurately, then this could be one of the first rivals to actually and dynamically crush the Veyron.

 

[Dave A]

But who cares when no one will ever find out. They've electronically limied it to 225mph, theyve made a bold statemnt about it's top speed and they're never going to let anyone challenge if that claim is true or not. On that basis I'm making the claim that my Pug 306 diesel has a potential top speed of 300mph but is imited to just over 100mph, there's no way your going to factually discredit that claim but you can use common sense amd make an educated guess as to the likelyhood that that claim is realistically possible. Claims like Bristols in this case are just stupid and groundless, they are made for no reason other than to make a headline, as I said no one will ever be given the chance to disprove it and Bristol will never attempt to prove it themselves.

 

[Danny]

But who cares when no one will ever find out. They've electronically limied it to 225mph, theyve made a bold statemnt about it's top speed and they're never going to let anyone challenge if that claim is true or not. On that basis I'm making the claim that my Pug 306 diesel has a potential top speed of 300mph but is imited to just over 100mph, there's no way your going to factually discredit that claim but you can use common sense amd make an educated guess as to the likelyhood that that claim is realistically possible. Claims like Bristols in this case are just stupid and groundless, they are made for no reason other than to make a headline, as I said no one will ever be given the chance to disprove it and Bristol will never attempt to prove it themselves.

225mph is an outstanding achievement for anyone, let alone Bristol, whose workforce could be counted on one hand.

As I am aware, the Veyron is limited to stop the tyres exploding. Really, I think "max speed" should encompass the highest speed the car can go without breaking, and so until Bugatti can find the exact speed at which it's rubber-split kingdom, the limited top speed is the only safe one to judge.

Give it time, and I'm sure we'll have more from Bristol. They wouldn't really make such a potentially rapid car and just leave it there.

 

[Dave A]

Yes they would. because it can probably only possibly attempy to reach it's potential top speed in circumstances that would not allow the car to be driven on the road. On top of that Bristol do not allow any public testing of their cars, they don't hand them to magazines to test, they don't allow tv shows to have them or anything like that. If you ever do see any test of this car, the only kind of test it will be is a private owners test. There will never be any attepted run of this car to take it beyond 225mph, and I'd bet my money on it.

 

[Tornado]

Yes they would. because it can probably only possibly attempy to reach it's potential top speed in circumstances that would not allow the car to be driven on the road.

Hold on there. I can think of 5 tuned Vipers that say you are wrong. If they took the limiter off, I have no doubt that it would go over 253 at the least. 270 is perhaps a stretch, but 253 is not.

 

[McLaren]

I'm starting to think this is Bristol's attempt as a stunt to get people to buy their cars by stating, "We got a car that can reach 270Mph". Why? Because I'm noticing all the public overviews of the car aren't saying that the car is limited and how Bristol doesn't let anyone test their vehicles.

It's exactly like me saying, "My product is the best ever" without telling the public that I never let the press test it, or how I do it, or how I limit it's capabilities so it's not as good as my competitors.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Actually all the items I've read on the car, including a bit in a national news paper mentioned that it was limited. However, it was very discretely mentioned half way through the article.

 

[Poverty]

Yeah it shows that alot of these articles and so called authors arent actually writting it themselves they just each utting the press release into their own words.

 

[Dave A]

Hold on there. I can think of 5 tuned Vipers that say you are wrong. If they took the limiter off, I have no doubt that it would go over 253 at the least. 270 is perhaps a stretch, but 253 is not.

What you say I'm wrong than then you agree that it is a bit of a strech. These Vipers that say I'm wrong, have they ever travelled 270mph? I'll repeat wat has been said many a time before, Bugatti on the back of VAG's budget couldn't invest in developing road legal tyre's that were capable of holding out at thoes speeds, that's why the Veyron is limited. It's not because some guy said "oh I know what would be fun, let's limit the car for no reason at all", the tyre's arn't certified to handle speed above 253mph safely. To think Bristol with such a smaller budget has come up with tyre's that miraculousely can do is imo a joke. Now yes you can get these road legal "cheater slicks" or whaever they're called which I know have been used on some tuned Vipers and Vettes in top speed and acceelration runs but they are nigh on unusable on most road surfaces beyond the smooth and bone dry and I'm also not saying it is impossible for any car to go 254mph or 255mph because I'm preetty suret that if someone was to put cheater slicks on a Veyron and remove the limiter it would go a few mph faster than the 253mph limiter has it set to. Now you have any actual fact to prove me wrong, by all means fire away but to claim that my point has been shot down and to shoot it down with speculation isn't going to win any arguments. If you prove me wrong with fact I'll happily concede, otherwise the show goes on.

 

[Tornado]

What you say I'm wrong than then you agree that it is a bit of a strech. These Vipers that say I'm wrong, have they ever travelled 270mph? I'll repeat wat has been said many a time before, Bugatti on the back of VAG's budget couldn't invest in developing road legal tyre's that were capable of holding out at thoes speeds, that's why the Veyron is limited. It's not because some guy said "oh I know what would be fun, let's limit the car for no reason at all", the tyre's arn't certified to handle speed above 253mph safely. To think Bristol with such a smaller budget has come up with tyre's that miraculousely can do is imo a joke.

2 things:

1. I know for a fact that the Veyrons speed is limited mostly because of the weight, just like the Mercedes SL, not because there are no tires that can operate above 253; so don't try to tell me that Bristol couldn't get a tire to go over 253 because Bugatti spent so much money developing one and came up with nothing. The Veyron could most likely go a damned sight faster if it didn't weigh over 4000lbs because the tires probably wouldn't explode at 260MPH or whatever.
   
2. I never said that the Bristol could easily go to 270. But you said that Bristol wouldn't try to take their car over 225 because there wasn't a tire to do so and Bristol didn't have the budget to do so. Well, I have news for you: if Bristol only took the speed limiter off of the car it would run well past the Veyron at the least.

Now yes you can get these road legal "cheater slicks" or whaever they're called which I know have been used on some tuned Vipers and Vettes in top speed and acceelration runs but they are nigh on unusable on most road surfaces beyond the smooth and bone dry

Michelin Pilot Sport 2's are cheater slicks?

Now you have any actual fact to prove me wrong, by all means fire away but to claim that my point has been shot down and to shoot it down with speculation isn't going to win any arguments. If you prove me wrong with fact I'll happily concede, otherwise the show goes on.

That car goes over 250 using very-much-so street tires and with a .cd well into the .4's. The Bristol's is in the upper .2's with the same BHP.

 

[Scaff]

I know for a fact that the Veyrons speed is limited mostly because of the weight, just like the Mercedes SL, not because there are no tires that can operate above 253; so don't try to tell me that Bristol couldn't get a tire to go over 253 because Bugatti spent so much money developing one and came up with nothing. The Veyron could most likely go a damned sight faster if it didn't weigh over 4000lbs because the tires probably wouldn't explode at 260MPH or whatever.

Care to expand on why.

Weight has nothing at all to do with how quickly a car can go, a cars V-max is determined by gearing, bhp (at the wheels), frontal area and its drag co-efficient.

Scaff

 

[McLaren]

Your Viper response Toronado is on the right idea, however, there's 1 little problem.

The 1000TT Viper hasn't yet been recorded going to 250Mph.

 

[Tornado]

Weight has nothing at all to do with how quickly a car can go, a cars V-max is determined by gearing, bhp (at the wheels), frontal area and its drag co-efficient.

I know. I meant the weight mixed with the speed having such a large increase in the heat of the tires. Weight alone doesn't make top speed lower, but it makes the tires hotter at higher speeds which could then indirectly lower top speed for fear of tire disintegration.

The 1000TT Viper hasn't yet been recorded going to 250Mph.

True. But the old Venom 800 did, if I recall correctly.

 

[Scaff]

I know. I meant the weight mixed with the speed having such a large increase in the heat of the tires. Weight alone doesn't make top speed lower, but it makes the tires hotter at higher speeds which could then indirectly lower top speed for fear of tire disintegration.

Ahh I see what you are getting at, trouble is I'm not 100% convinced that the weight of the Veyron alone is the problem, as a high downforce car at lower speeds could cause as much loading to the tyres.

You say you know this for a fact, so out of interest do you have any links?


Regards

Scaff

 

[YSSMAN]

True. But the old Venom 800 did, if I recall correctly.

I'm not sure on that one. I thought the Lingenfelter 650 held the record in that, officially rated at 225 MPH by Motor Trend. I thought the Viper 800 had a predicted top-speed of 240, but from what I had herd, it was never officially tested.

 

[Dave A]

2 things:

1. I know for a fact that the Veyrons speed is limited mostly because of the weight, just like the Mercedes SL, not because there are no tires that can operate above 253; so don't try to tell me that Bristol couldn't get a tire to go over 253 because Bugatti spent so much money developing one and came up with nothing. The Veyron could most likely go a damned sight faster if it didn't weigh over 4000lbs because the tires probably wouldn't explode at 260MPH or whatever.

1. I dissagree that the weight is a big issue here, at thoes speeds the downforce being produced is greater than the weight of the car and the downforce each car produces will probably have a much bigger effect on tyre stress than half a tonn of kerb weight.

1. I never said that the Bristol could easily go to 270. But you said that Bristol wouldn't try to take their car over 225 because there wasn't a tire to do so and Bristol didn't have the budget to do so. Well, I have news for you: if Bristol only took the speed limiter off of the car it would run well past the Veyron at the least.

You dissagreed with me, I was saying it couldn't do 270mph by your action of dissagreeing with me you were saying that it could go 270mph then in the same post saying it was a bit of a stretch. I never mentioned it not being capable of anything other than top speed. I didn't mention the tyre's preventing the Bristol going over 225mph, I mentioned the limiter preventing it going over 225mph. I said Bristol do not allow independent tests of their cars and I said Bristol will never test the car beyond 225mph, I did not say it was because at 226mph the tyre's would explode or even at 253mph, 254mph or 255mph. I was saying that 270mph is a stupid claim because if the Veyrons tyre's arn't certified beyond 253mph, to claim you can go 20mph more is ridiculous imo

Michelin Pilot Sport 2's are cheater slicks?

Have you seen a test with a car running thoes tyre's and going faster than the Veyron or have you just seen claims? Like I said, show me facts and I'll happily concede, show me specualtion and your barking up the wrong tree to start claiming anyone else is less right than you.

 

[Tornado]

You dissagreed with me, I was saying it couldn't do 270mph by your action of dissagreeing with me you were saying that it could go 270mph then in the same post saying it was a bit of a stretch. I never mentioned it not being capable of anything other than top speed. I didn't mention the tyre's preventing the Bristol going over 225mph, I mentioned the limiter preventing it going over 225mph. I said Bristol do not allow independent tests of their cars and I said Bristol will never test the car beyond 225mph

That was the only part you came out and said. And again, I never said anything about the Bristol being able to go near 270. In part, some of this misunderstanding is because I selected the wrong part of your post when I quoted you and didn't think it would matter.

Have you seen a test with a car running thoes tyre's and going faster than the Veyron or have you just seen claims? Like I said, show me facts and I'll happily concede, show me specualtion and your barking up the wrong tree to start claiming anyone else is less right than you.

The only thing I haven't seen done is a test that took the car to its top speed. I have seen a plethora of acceleration and handling tests from that car running Michelin PS/2 tires, and if need be I could post a link to it.

@Scaff: I'm still looking for the magazine that talked about the weight issue. I'm positive that I read it somewhere.

 

[ExigeEvan]

The only thing I haven't seen done is a test that took the car to its top speed. I have seen a plethora of acceleration and handling tests from that car running Michelin PS/2 tires, and if need be I could post a link to it.
[/FONT]

But the stresses a car undergoes under acceleration and cornering are totally different to those in top speed tests. So thinking that those tyres could withstand a high speed test just as well is...well, bollocks.