Veyron - Super Fast?

[Famine]

You know the engineers of the Veyron said it takes 7 hp for every mph gained, at 253mph, for the veyron?

Anyone who says that is an idiot. As speed increases so power required to reach that speed increase, by a cube of the increase in speed.

It might require 7hp more to go from 253mph to 254mph, but it would need more than that to go from 254mph to 255mph, more still to go from 255mph to 256mph - and so on.

do we know the veyrons aerodynamic ratings?

It's variable. In normal configuration the wings vary to provide most downforce at about 180mph and marginally less at 230mph. In top speed mode it trims off slightly throughout - though as soon as you back off from the accelerator it reverts to the normal configuration.


I'm actually quite surprised Motortrend found a completed, intact Hennessey Viper Venom to test...

[/stir]

 

[Deathclown66]

This should clear up ignorant speculation. I say ignorant because It's pretty clear when you actually READ the website.

Similar: Koenigsegg CCX, Pagani Zonda, Enzo Ferrari, Saleen S7

Guess this is where L4S got the Idea MT compared them, rather than me.

According to Volkswagen, the final production Veyron engine produces between 1020 and 1040 metric hp (1006 to 1026 SAE net hp), so the car will be advertised as producing "1001 horsepower" in both the US and European markets.

1006 and 1026hp? far from a 200hp fluctuation, I'm dissapointed in all the rumors spread as fact around here. And yes, VW's official statement is what counts.

Top speed was initially promised to be 252 mph (406 km/h), but test versions were unstable at that speed, forcing a redesign of the aerodynamics. In May 2005, a prototype Veyron tested at a Volkswagen track near Wolfsburg, Germany, and recorded an electronically limited top speed of 400 km/h (249 mph). In October, 2005, Car and Driver magazine's editor Csaba Csere test drove the final production version of the Veyron for the November 2005 issue. This test, at Volkswagen's Ehra-Lessien test track, reached a top speed of 253 mph (407 km/h).

Settled, 253.

The Veyron is the quickest production car to reach 100 km/h (62 mph) with an estimated time of 2.5 seconds. It also reaches 200 and 300 km/h (124 and 186 mph) in 7.3 and 16.7 seconds respectively. This makes the Veyron the quickest-accelerating production car in history. It also consumes more fuel than any other production car, using 40.4 L/100 km (4.82 mpg) in city driving and 24.1 L/100 km (10 mpg) in combined cycle. At full-throttle, it uses more than 125 L/100 km (2.1 mpg)—at full throttle, the Veyron would empty its 100 L fuel tank in just 12.5 minutes. The car's everyday top speed is listed at 234 mph (377 km/h). When the car reaches 137 mph (220 km/h), hydraulics lower the car until it has a ground clearance of about 3 1/2 inches (8.9 cm). At the same time, the wing and spoiler deploy. This is the "handling" mode, in which the wing helps provide 770 pounds (3425 newtons) of downforce, holding the car to the road. The driver must, using the key, toggle the lock to the left of his seat in order to use the maximum speed of 253 miles per hour (407 km/h). Theoretically it can go faster but it is electronically limited to 253 miles per hour (407 km/h) 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 (12.4 cm), drops to 2.6 inches (6.6 cm).

Okay, L4S was to busy getting bug-eyes to notice the "estimated" part, which would be harmless, except he ignored my actual Motor Trend road test results in the process.

So, when you test it, do you use "handling" mode, or not? You cannot change between modes while driving, so, it's 234 or no turns, or braking.

And last, but not least, it is theoretically possible it could go faster, but I have a hunch there's a reason the speed-limiter is where it is. also in Handling mode, why not let it wring out? why on earth would you limit it with downforce, (all measly 770lbs), to such a lower speed?
Well, I can see through the cover front, can anybody else?

Anyone who says that is an idiot. As speed increases so power required to reach that speed increase, by a cube of the increase in speed.

It might require 7hp more to go from 253mph to 254mph, but it would need more than that to go from 254mph to 255mph, more still to go from 255mph to 256mph - and so on.

That, my friend, is implied via common sense.
Though I did phrase it wrong, it is: "it takes 7hp to pick up a single mph at this speed in the Veyron"
I apologize if this confused you.

It's variable. In normal configuration the wings vary to provide most downforce at about 180mph and marginally less at 230mph. In top speed mode it trims off slightly throughout - though as soon as you back off from the accelerator it reverts to the normal configuration.

I'm actually quite surprised Motortrend found a completed, intact Hennessey Viper Venom to test...

Do you have any basic numbers at all, like, anything? or just, "variable". yay. another way people can look away from anything the Veyron might not be able to do.

 

[dubbed]

As for this, well, the Saleen has a gear change between 140-150, so obviously the GT will gain there, but what happens when the GT changes gears next? And I'm 100% positive the GT got better grip off the line, meaning the Saleen is probabley pulling harder than the GT at 150mph, not to mention the GT's ugly 0.39 cd rating, which will certainly start factoring in soon at that speed.

Actually look at the article again the GTTT about the intial traction through first:

Unless you live in a deserted area free of cops, it’s almost impossible to experience what this transformed GT can do. In the typical stoplight drag race, you’re likely to get smoked by a well-running Camaro Z28. When the boost hits in first gear, the Ford is all wheelspin and smoke. This monster needs room to strut.

Doing our best not to grind the tires into rubber dust, we ripped to 60 mph in 3.4 seconds, 0.1 second slower than we’ve gone in a stock GT. It’s tricky to get a good launch.

There’s anxiousness in this car until it has cleared 60 mph. Once you’ve shifted into second gear and passed that speed, the tedium of feathering the throttle is behind you. There’s suddenly enough traction to floor it, and if the car could talk, we imagine it’d be saying, “Okay, let’s gooooo!” The ride was on.

I've got a question for ya: What do you think 1000hp is, exactly?
here are some numbers from other 1000HP cars.
2006 Dodge Viper Hennesey Coupe
1100HP
3468lb
.39cd
1/4: 11.0 @ 145.5mph
1 MI: 26.2@217.85mph

2005 Dodge Viper Hennesey Venom 1000
1000HP
3430LB
.39cd
1 MI: 25.6@210.2mph
0-200mph: 21.3

So, what would make a Veyron reach 200mph 6 seconds faster, than an 1100lb lighter car, that only took 0.4 longer to reach 140mph?

The Veyrons AWD system gives it the advantage, in the article MT did the Hennessy was poor at best to try to launch. The Veyron's AWD system gets the car moving easily and then is complex enough to give all the power to the rear so it goes from AWD to RWD elminating the "drag" caused in AWD vehicles.

 

[Scaff]

Yes, open-wheeled cars are bad aerodynamically. do we know the veyrons aerodynamic ratings?

This top speed mode reduces the car's drag coefficient from 0.41 to 0.36 and reduces the peak downforce of 770 pounds to 120

Source - http://www.engr.wisc.edu/wiscengr/didyouknow/Bugatti Veyron 2/Bugatti Veyron 2.shtml

I do have to ask if you knew that open wheel cars were bad aerodynamically then why have you used them to compare the Veyron against, particularly as drag coefficient is so important it the areas being discussed and most open wheel cars with run a drag coeff of .70 to 1.1 depending on set-up. A factor that goes a long way to explain how the Veyron can compete with open wheel race cars in terms of acceleration at higher speed.

Regards

Scaff

 

[Deathclown66]

Okay, so they're about a dead heat, and neither can run with the Viper, and probabley not the Veyron.

The Veyrons AWD system gives it the advantage, in the article MT did the Hennessy was poor at best to try to launch. The Veyron's AWD system gets the car moving easily and then is complex enough to give all the power to the rear so it goes from AWD to RWD elminating the "drag" caused in AWD vehicles.

Okay, so they're about a dead heat, and neither can run with the Viper, and probabley not the Veyron.[/quote]You realize your quote here, is in retort to my asking what would make a car that is going slower at the 1/4mile mark, suddenly blaze past the car with a worse launch, right?
Ok. So, what you are implying, is that, after 145mph, the veyron suddenly goes 2wd, gains massive power, (3%), and with that 30hp, bolts to 200 like a bat out of hell, making the car with 75-100hp more look slow?

common sense. use it.

 

[Dave A]

It's reported by a posted dyno? or by heresay?
You know what I've noticed? All the arguments in favor of the fan-boy car, (veyron), are based on speculation thus far.

Only if you discout all the facts used thus far.

Grip, in a 0-200 run.... by a car that runs a quoted .6 faster in the 1/4, at over 5mph slower speed.... suddenly gains 3 seconds before 200, even though it's top speed is lower than the more powerful cars?

Okay what are you comparing it to now, your the one who keeps seeming randomly jumping from comparing the Veyron to theS7 TT to whatever else yo ucan think of that might be convinient for your argument. I have no idea what car your talking about right now.

Power delivery, umm, we are basing this on acceleration numbers, so power delivery is a mute issue, unless you meant grip, which would be repeating yourself.

Power deliver, as in how well that power hits the road. If you watch the video on motortrends website on the Veyron you will see their driver commenting on the Veyron's smoothness off the line, there's no sudden surge of power that spins the wheels on the line, just a consistent build up of power and that power delivery is constant upto and over 150mph according to motortrend.

Powerband An 8.5L Twin Turbo Viper doesn't have a fantastic powerband now? or is the Veyron's somehow magically that much better? Considering the Viper has very, very close, if not the Best powerband of all the supercars in the world, before it gets twin turbocharging.

I'm guessing you've been talking about a Hennesy Viper, well despite the fact that Hennesey is a man who can't be trusted and has possibly the worst customer satisfaction out of all the aftermarket tuners in the US I have no idea what's hearsay and what's been independently tested regarding his cars.

Aeorodynamics The Veyrons chance here, as the Viper does not shine in this catagory, (Saleen does) nevertheless, the Viper hits 218mph in just one mile, from a standstill, and is realistically claimed to hit 258mph, math does not permit the Veyron reach 145mph slower, have a slower top speed, but weirdly go faster, (TONS) in between. Nope, it's common sense.

Apparently the S7 has more downforce than the GT racer, what's it going to be, it can't cut through the air sublimely and have that much downforce.

GearingAgain, the Veyron has what should be far better, being essentially a 7-speed auto, however, the Viper doesn't reach 5th until over 200mph, and the gears don't hold it back between 0-150, nor keep it from reaching 250+, so common sense to the rescue again!

The number of gears has no bearing on how fast a car can go top speed, it's the ratio's of the gears it has. They can however speed up the lenth of time it takes to get there. I still have no idea what the figures are for the car your talking about which kind of makes your current points meaningless to me.

3 full seconds over the car I posted with a 23 second 0-200mph time.

You posted the S7 TT earlier, am I to assume that since that's the only car who's stats you've posted that you are now jumping back to that one or what?

The car that is not claimed to reach 258, matter of fact, we know that it can't.

None of the cars we're discussin can go that fast, the Veyron is the only one that possibly could if the limiter was removed.

You know the engineers of the Veyron said it takes 7 hp for every mph gained, at 253mph, for the veyron? so claiming it could go 270mph would be a mistake right now.

270 doesn't sound realistic to me, and I never claimed that. However, regarding the engineers comment he was talking about the power needed to increase the top speed but he never said what base power he was starting within his example, the fact is that the Veyron is electronically limited to 253mph so theoretically it can go faster still, however VAG didn't want any accidents happening with the tyre's since they become significantly less safe for every mph faster you go at thoes speeds.

Did I seem confused on the issue? Did I not post with full knowledge of the numbers?

No, nor did I say you were. However you did say that kph means nothing to you, so thoes figures were there for yours or anyone elses benefit should they not know.

do we know the veyrons aerodynamic ratings?

As famine said, it's variable, the car changes shape as your driving, winglets and flaps in the ducts open and close and channel air to different parts of the car altering the cD on the fly as well as the rear wing.

So, what you are implying, is that, after 145mph, the veyron suddenly goes 2wd, gains massive power, (3%), and with that 30hp, bolts to 200 like a bat out of hell, making the car with 75-100hp more look slow?

If you posted figures for the other cars you've brought into this comparison then you might make more sense. As for the acceleration, the Veyron shou;d accelerate over 150mph faster than a asimilarly powered car since it has the extra gear to make use of the ratio's can be tuned to allow for that. The gears can be shorter yet the same top speeds can be reached. Ontop of that the ratio's in the Veyron have likely been tuned to keep the car well in the powerband all the time. I'm not saying the Viper's haven't, but the Viper still has to make do with longer gears, it still has only rwd which even at 100mph+ with 1000bhp on tap can cause traction issues. There's a hundered and one factors that can cause two similarly powered cars to have different acceleration times.

 

[Deathclown66]

Only if you discout all the facts used thus far.

And those are, exactly?

Okay what are you comparing it to now, your the one who keeps seeming randomly jumping from comparing the Veyron to theS7 TT to whatever else yo ucan think of that might be convinient for your argument. I have no idea what car your talking about right now.

Thats a great speculative remark, but if your head was in the game, I've been using the Hennesey Viper as a tool, a tool to prove how rediculous the Veyron claims flying around here are. I havent used the Saleen as a benchmark for, oh, I don't know... 3 pages??

Power deliver, as in how well that power hits the road. If you watch the video on motortrends website on the Veyron you will see their driver commenting on the Veyron's smoothness off the line, there's no sudden surge of power that spins the wheels on the line, just a consistent build up of power and that power delivery is constant upto and over 150mph according to motortrend.

So you're telling me it keeps delivering more power to the wheels? it's awd, it should need to hold back after 1st gear, and it doesn't. Tell me that's not speculation.

I'm guessing you've been talking about a Hennesy Viper, well despite the fact that Hennesey is a man who can't be trusted and has possibly the worst customer satisfaction out of all the aftermarket tuners in the US I have no idea what's hearsay and what's been independently tested regarding his cars.

For not having a clue, you must've gotten lucky. Thankfully, customer satisfaction has nothing to do with what the car Motor Trend drove performed like, so hopefully, you'll stop diverting from the actual points.

Apparently the S7 has more downforce than the GT racer, what's it going to be, it can't cut through the air sublimely and have that much downforce.

depends on the aerodynamic the car is, smarty-pants. if it's got a cd of .25, multiplied by a small front fascia, you can add loads of downforce, and still run fast. OR are you saying that Saleen doesn't know what kind of downforce it's car has???
If anything, since you are in such favor of the Veyron, I would assume you wouldn't be demanding that a car can do "one or the other".

The number of gears has no bearing on how fast a car can go top speed, it's the ratio's of the gears it has. They can however speed up the lenth of time it takes to get there. I still have no idea what the figures are for the car your talking about which kind of makes your current points meaningless to me.

Actually, it can, and does. And you just said you knew which car I was talking about, so stop lying. how about that?
Again The statements I make about the Viper are based on how fast it accelerates from 0-60. 0-100. 1/4mi. 0-200. 0-218. So it doesn't matter what gears it has, does it? if it takes 1 mile to reach 218, and 1/4mile to reach 145.5, and so on, it does not matter if it's a one-speed or 10. Unless you say otherwise, of course.

You posted the S7 TT earlier, am I to assume that since that's the only car who's stats you've posted that you are now jumping back to that one or what?

I never posted the Hennesey's stats? excuse me?? read before you post.

None of the cars we're discussin can go that fast, the Veyron is the only one that possibly could if the limiter was removed.

So The Hennesey Viper can't go 258mph? how do you know this, Mr. Speculation? The Saleen is quoted for 248mph, as well. So, How do you know that they can't?

270 doesn't sound realistic to me, and I never claimed that. However, regarding the engineers comment he was talking about the power needed to increase the top speed but he never said what base power he was starting within his example, the fact is that the Veyron is electronically limited to 253mph so theoretically it can go faster still, however VAG didn't want any accidents happening with the tyre's since they become significantly less safe for every mph faster you go at thoes speeds.

Again, speculation. why not 252? why not 251? why not 254? why not 255? there is a reason they chose 253, and it's not because everybody would wreck at 254.
I notice you neglect it's being "electronically limited" to 234 in handling mode. Why's that? would to many people wreck with all that capability?
They electronically limited it for reasons of this very thread. They want owners, fans, kids, people, to speculate, on what their imagination says it might do, in some alternate universe. They know what kind of imagination cars like this spark, and they figured the best way to capitolize on that. And you are biting, hard, I might add.

As famine said, it's variable, the car changes shape as your driving, winglets and flaps in the ducts open and close and channel air to different parts of the car altering the cD on the fly as well as the rear wing.

Been. Done. Over. .36, until you need to brake. a million times out of a million, .02 worse than the Vipers. ( t...h...e...v..i..p..e..r..s...i..s....39)

 

[Famine]

That, my friend, is implied via common sense.
Though I did phrase it wrong, it is: "it takes 7hp to pick up a single mph at this speed in the Veyron"
I apologize if this confused you.

Do you have any basic numbers at all, like, anything? or just, "variable". yay. another way people can look away from anything the Veyron might not be able to do.

You're a very angry person, aren't you? Can you react constructively to people just passing out information, or just roll your eyes at them and claim they are confused?

Cast your eyes back to Post #30 - and then remember that, in debate, discussing the facts is preferable to discussing the person stating them.

 

[Deathclown66]

You're a very angry person, aren't you? Can you react constructively to people just passing out information, or just roll your eyes at them and claim they are confused?

Cast your eyes back to Post #30 - and then remember that, in debate, discussing the facts is preferable to discussing the person stating them.

What is significant about that post?
I see that you are doing the un-preferable, and discussing the person now, and I also see that you are claiming to have been "just passing out information"
Rather than saying, "I'm sorry I assumed that you and VAG engineers were stupid, and the fact that this seems to have upset you, makes me think you are angry, even though I seem angry now, after you have retorted in a similar manner as I"
And. actually, no, I'm not an angry person. However, when an entire forum gets filled with googly-eyed, I wish I could say kids, but that's probabley not the case, yes, that angers me. When people blatantly post fiction as fact, yes, that angers me.

Here's some quoted fact for those questioning a car with downforce reaching high speeds:

For the 2005 S7 Twin Turbo, the redesigned front and rear diffusers, along with the new rear spoiler, result in a 40 percent reduction in aero drag and a 60 percent increase in down force. Those of you who know anything about aero forces recognize the significance of that last statement. Typically, you would have to trade down force to reduce aero drag.

From this site. Just to give a little insight on the aero/drag issue of the Saleen.
http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-2005-Saleen-S7-Twin-Turbo.htm

More nifty fact for those who are interested in where it comes from:

Unlike most exotic supercars, the racing version, the S7R, has already proven itself on the international motorsports stage. During the past three years, the racing version has won more than 50 poles, set fastest race lap over 50 times and has been victorious well over 40 times, winning seven GT Championships. This incredible record includes winning the prestigious 12 Hours of Sebring and setting a new track record at the famed 24 Hours of Le Mans.

 

[Famine]

Actually, no, I'm not an angry person. However, when an entire forum gets filled with googly-eyed, I wish I could say kids, but that's probabley not the case, yes, that angers me. When people blatantly post fiction as fact, yes, that angers me.

So why did I deserve the condescension and smiley?

 

[Scaff]

Here's some quoted fact for those questioning a car with downforce reaching high speeds:

Its very interesting but a "a 40 percent reduction in aero drag and a 60 percent increase in down force" from what? I don't see any base figures to use here, I'm more than aware of how aerodynamics work, but this gives me little to work with.

I would also personally never state something as 'fact' that comes from a piece starting "from Saleen Press Release", that to me would be 'Manufacturers Claims' rather than 'Fact'. Fact would imply independent verification, something you have quite rightly been insistent on with regard to Veyron figures, so I would assume the same standard would be required for Saleen claims.

Regards

Scaff

 

[dubbed]

Again, speculation. why not 252? why not 251? why not 254? why not 255? there is a reason they chose 253, and it's not because everybody would wreck at 254.
I notice you neglect it's being "electronically limited" to 234 in handling mode. Why's that? would to many people wreck with all that capability?

This is the various cd's for the Veyron:

cd-value
Standard........0.393
Handling........0.417
Top speed......0.355
Airbrake.........0.682

http://www.bugatti-configurator.com/content/pdf/Veyron_en.pdf

The 233 is limited by the amount drag in handling mode, when you set the car to top speed mode the car more aerodynamically clean and then reaches the governed top speed. (Which to prevent the tires from blistering and exploding)

 

[Deathclown66]

Its very interesting but a "a 40 percent reduction in aero drag and a 60 percent increase in down force" from what? I don't see any base figures to use here, I'm more than aware of how aerodynamics work, but this gives me little to work with.

I would also personally never state something as 'fact' that comes from a piece starting "from Saleen Press Release", that to me would be 'Manufacturers Claims' rather than 'Fact'. Fact would imply independent verification, something you have quite rightly been insistent on with regard to Veyron figures, so I would assume the same standard would be required for Saleen claims.

Regards

Scaff

You are right, Scaff. So far, I have not been able to find a cd for the Saleen, although, I think we should point out that for all these cars, be it the Viper, Saleen, & Veyron, a cd alone means nothing, as that is a measuring tool for how well air flows over the car, but does not factor in the size of the fascia.
Smaller fascia = less times the cd gets multiplied, and therefore, the less actual drag the car has.
And I'd also like to mention that, even though that is a Saleen claim, there isn't to great of a reason to doubt it, at least not that I can think of.
They did change the portions mentioned, and one can only assume for two reasons, but, finding independant testing of a Saleen S7's aerodynamics, is not in high chance, but hopefully we'll find it.

Stuff

I apologize if it seemed as though I was being unruly, but you gave the speculation food, and that's just something I really don't want to see.

 

[Tornado]

Because your not posting true things about the Veyron.

Such as?

As has already been said, you get the second key when you buy the car, all you do is insert it into a slot by the seat, turn it and away you go in top speed mode. This was demonstrated on TopGear in France when Jeremy Clarkson drove it down a French motorway in top speed mode. You don't need to go to Germany to do thie, you just take the second key and put it in and turn it, and you can do this wherever you are, by yourself.

Which is probably why I didn't continue to argue the point after the Interceptor clarified.

likely not with the same drag levels, but if you can find me some statisics to prove that wrong be my guest.

Are you insinuating that a a Saleen S7 has more drag than an IRL car?

True, I can build a car that can out handle a Veryron or S7 TT for under a grand. Talking about value for money kind of becomes a moot point when discussing hypercars, if you have to ask how much you arn't a potential customer. The people that will be buying the Veyron arn't going to be concerned that they can get an S7 TT for less.

I've heard that argument before. But I have to wonder whether that really qualifies in this case because the Veyron costs 3 times as much as the S7TT.

In terms of what the interior is worth, it's worth a lot more than the Bentley's interior.

That's great. But irrelavent. dubbed said, to quote "The Veyron is not "like" a luxury car, luxury cars try be "like" a Veyron's." I posted a car that is a far better luxury car. Better materials? Most definately not. But a better luxury car? Definately so.

No they arn't, they Veyron is officially the fastest production car to 60mph ever, it has done it. As for the other calims, well Autocars 0-100-0 test had the Veyron as the clear winner, they didn't quite get the 0-60 as good as it could but unlike motortrend (2.5 seconds) the 30-100mph was very impressive. And theres a few other tests that are pertty consistent with claims. the motorstend figures are the only ones I've seen where an independent test has timed the car over 200mph, they hit 200mph in 22 seconds. 2 seconds can be lost or gained quite easilly in a 0-200mph run.

Let me see these tests than. The highest numbers I've found for either 0-60 or 0-100-0 were not the fastest in the world. And VW's claimed numbers I trust about as much as I trust any claimed numbers. Lest you forget, quite a few companies have made what could be called a sport of claiming outrageous figures before (Lambo Countach can go 200MPH, Vector V8 has 750BHP, etc.); so unless you have tests to back up the Veyron pulling 0-60 in the claimed 2.5 seconds and 0-100-0 in 9.3 seconds, I refuse to acknowledge that the Veyron is the fastest anything because it isn't true, barring perhaps 0-200.

Why? If I wanted a track car I'd but a Radical, if I wanted a road car I wouldn't buy an S7 TT. If we were talking about two cars that cost under 100 grand I could see your point regarding cost. But were no. Obviousely with the price difference the S7 TT is technically better value for money, but the people that buy these cars arn't going to be as concerned about that as you or I.

Which is where the problem starts, because if I was going to have a daily driver I wouldn't buy either of them, making that irrelavent. I never said that that the S7 was a better daily car either, but both would most likely be rubbish as daily drivers.

By your reckoning then, the F1's top speed is 180mph. That's how fast it can go in 5th.

Are you sure? Hm. I guess my source was wrong.

 

[Deathclown66]

so unless you have tests to back up the Veyron pulling 0-60 in the claimed 2.5 seconds and 0-100-0 in 9.3 seconds, I refuse to acknowledge that the Veyron is the fastest anything because it isn't true, barring perhaps 0-200.

L4S's "fact" of the Veyron running 0-60 in 2.5 was rubbish, as he skipped over the part where the motortrend.com article said, "estimated". The car ran a 2.7 second 0-60, in Motor Trend's actual road test, in the November 2006 issue, which can be picked up at newstands now.

Which is where the problem starts, because if I was going to have a daily driver I wouldn't buy either of them, making that irrelavent. I never said that that the S7 was a better daily car either, but both would most likely be rubbish as daily drivers.

I would drive the Saleen everyday

 

[Scaff]

Let me see these tests than. The highest numbers I've found for either 0-60 or 0-100-0 were not the fastest in the world. And VW's claimed numbers I trust about as much as I trust any claimed numbers. Lest you forget, quite a few companies have made what could be called a sport of claiming outrageous figures before (Lambo Countach can go 200MPH, Vector V8 has 750BHP, etc.); so unless you have tests to back up the Veyron pulling 0-60 in the claimed 2.5 seconds and 0-100-0 in 9.3 seconds, I refuse to acknowledge that the Veyron is the fastest anything because it isn't true, barring perhaps 0-200.

L4S's "fact" of the Veyron running 0-60 in 2.5 was rubbish, as he skipped over the part where the motortrend.com article said, "estimated". The car ran a 2.7 second 0-60, in Motor Trend's actual road test, in the November 2006 issue, which can be picked up at newstands now.

The figures I quoted earlier from the Autocar 0-100-0 2006 Shootout are easily verified, and I would be more than happy to (when I can) scan the results in and post them up.

Just as a reminder the figures were

Bugatti Veyron
0-30mph - 1.4 secs
0-60mph - 2.8 secs
0-100mph - 5.50 secs
Reaction time - 0.2 secs
100-0mph - 3.40 secs
Overall 0-100-0 - 9.90 secs

The Autocar press release covering it was as follows

Press Release:

Triumph for Bugatti Veyron

The Bugatti Veyron has wiped the floor with the opposition in Autocar's annual 0-100-0mph contest, featured in the current issue of the world's oldest car magazine, even managing to beat a Suzuki GSX-R1000 superbike.

Featuring 25 of the world's fastest cars, from the 14th placed £79,995 Aston Martin V8 Vantage to the second-placed £34,995 Ariel Atom, the shoot-out pitches the cars against each other in a straight fight to see which is the fastest to 100mph. There's more to it than just outright speed though – slowing from 100mph to a dead halt is just as important.

The Veyron, with its 987bhp 16-cylinder engine, wasn't necessarily the favourite to win. "A low weight tends to be the key to a good 0-100-0mph car," said Autocar's road test editor Adam Towler. "Cars like the Ariel Atom and Caterham Superlight historically dominate this contest."

But the 1890kg £880,000 Bugatti ripped through the gears to hit 60mph in 2.8sec and 100mph in an astonishing 5.5sec. It then stopped in just 3.4sec, giving a 0-100-0mph time of 9.9sec.

Not only is the Bugatti faster than the Suzuki, it creates more g-force at maximum acceleration than you'd experience in an F-16 jet fighter at take off or when skydiving.

But the lightweights still turned in an impressive performance, from the relatively unknown £32k Brooke Double R in fourth place to the £35k Ariel Atom 300 in second.

"Although the Veyron is undoubtedly the quickest road car ever, you can still have nearly as much fun for much less money," said Adam Towler. "It's good to see British sports cars doing so well against such an impressive machine as the Bugatti."

Autocar also brought along an A1 GP car, driven by Brit Robbie Kerr, to see how a purpose-built race car would compare with road-going machinery. The 550bhp single seater weighs just 695kg, and proved to be the fastest vehicle on the day with a 0-100-0mph time of 8.4sec.

By your reckoning then, the F1's top speed is 180mph. That's how fast it can go in 5th.

Are you sure? Hm. I guess my source was wrong.

Toronado, you have that quote attributed to me, however its not mine, I did not say it.

I would drive the Saleen everyday

And I think that's part of the issue here, very few people are going to be unbiased in this, and partisan statements are abound in this thread. While you and others would (or may) be quite happy to drive the S7 TT every day, I strongly suspect that just as many would prefer to drive the Veyron, and a good number would not pick either to run on a daily basis.

You are right, Scaff. So far, I have not been able to find a cd for the Saleen, although, I think we should point out that for all these cars, be it the Viper, Saleen, & Veyron, a cd alone means nothing, as that is a measuring tool for how well air flows over the car, but does not factor in the size of the fascia.
Smaller fascia = less times the cd gets multiplied, and therefore, the less actual drag the car has.
And I'd also like to mention that, even though that is a Saleen claim, there isn't to great of a reason to doubt it, at least not that I can think of.
They did change the portions mentioned, and one can only assume for two reasons, but, finding independent testing of a Saleen S7's aerodynamics, is not in high chance, but hopefully we'll find it.

I'm not specifically doubting Saleens claimed statements (just clarifying that they are claims rather than facts) as very few full scale wind-tunnels exist and as such independent figures would be almost impossible to gather.

However without a baseline set of figures the claimed reduction of 40% in drag and 60% increase in downforce are meaningless, and that my main issue with 'marketing' claims such as these. If the previous downforce was 10lbs (just a figure for illustration purposes) a 60% increase would give a new figure of 16lbs, yes it is a 60% increase, but all its done is go from very, very bad to just very bad. Now I don't know what the starting figures for the Saleen were, so we can't know the final figures; and while we know the claimed downforce and drag coeff figures for the Veyron a comparison is pointless without the actual Saleen figures.

Regards

Scaff

 

[the Interceptor]

I offered a video with a Veyron going from 0 to 130 mph in 8 seconds. Yesterday I went to bed, and right now I'm at work, so I will only upload that video when I'm home tonight, which will be in about 9 hrs. I will post the link here then, unless I find it on the net.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Famine]

I apologize if it seemed as though I was being unruly, but you gave the speculation food, and that's just something I really don't want to see.

That's pleasing - and you'll see some +rep heading your way.

I just want you to bear in mind that an awful lot of us stating figures are just stating figures. We're quite an even-minded bunch here and, since I can speculate to within an acceptable degree of accuracy that not one of us has driven either car, let alone both, very few people would offer a solid opinion that one is quicker/faster/better than the other.

As Joe Friday says, "Just the facts, ma'am."

Toronado, you have that quote attributed to me, however its not mine, I did not say it.

No - it was daan.

 

[Pink_the_Floyd]

I want the veyron 100 times more than I do a clio

And the only way anyone is stealing a veyron is if they steal the keys, or they are extremely proffesional and intelligent when it comes to stealing and electronics and computers. Do you know how hard it is to steal like a audi A4 or merc c-class let alone a veyron, hence why most stolen premium vehicles are done by car jacking, or by breaking and entering a property for the keys.

Ha!

Thing is: If you get caught with the Veyron or the Clio by the cops, think about that one, still want the Veyron?

 

[Dave A]

To get caught by them you have to have done something to get caught for, in which case it's your fault for getting caught.

 

[Danny]

I can't honestly believe that if faced with the choice between a Veyron and a Clio, the theif would take the Clio.

 

[Famine]

Will a Clio have a Tracker?

Would a Clio be harder to spot?

Can a Veyron on not-straight roads outrun a police helicopter in very-straight sky?

 

[Danny]

Will a Clio have a Tracker?

Would a Clio be harder to spot?

Can a Veyron on not-straight roads outrun a police helicopter in very-straight sky?

Many will.

True.

Also true, until you discover the theif isn't all that great a driver, there's traffic or a bend of some sort.
Drag-strip getaways just don't work in cities.

 

[Dave A]

What can a theif do with a Veyron once he's stolen it? He can't sell it, at the very least he'd have to transport it to some African country or somewhere third world to sell it, and he's more likel to get killed for it there. You stealing something you can't do anytihng with, except have a bit of temporary fun before getting arrested for stealing something worth nine hundered thousand pounds.

 

[Danny]

I'd wager plenty of theives won't be bothered by that. Joyriders too, don't forget.

 

[Famine]

Many will.

You :censored:ing me?

Most Clios are worth both halves of squat. The subscription for a Tracker is £400 a year. Most Clios don't even have alarms (until 2001) or immobilisers (until 1998).

Hell, I don't even have a Tracker for my car.

 

[Leonidae]

I would take Veyron. Why? because I like big numbers.

For example, in city driving, I would have approximately 200km range before the 100l tank would be empty.
Then, insuring the thing would cause sudden heart-attacks among the insurance company's chairmen/women.
And of course, I'd just love to visit every Greenpeace meeting/demonstration and rev those 16 cylinders up to 6k rpms, just to see how mad they would get.
Then, if a police patrol car would be tailgating me, I'd of course drive as fast as the speedlimit tells me to.

oh yes, I know exactly why Veyron was created.

It was created to make environmentalists mad, piss off other performance car owners, refresh the leaderboards of insurance companies, waste clean air and ruin our childrens future. it came out that way, and it fulfills everything what was promised.

Whereas Saleen twinturbo is the second coming of second american mid-engined supercar and you know what? I saw a vid where it was driven on public roads, and the owner almost hit the rear bumpers when coming to trafic lights, because the brakes were softish. and this car is supposed to reach 248mph+?

I think I'm better off with Bugatti. After all, it does same things as S7 TT.. but it does them better.

 

[Danny]

You :censored:ing me?

Most Clios are worth both halves of squat. The subscription for a Tracker is £400 a year. Most Clios don't even have alarms (until 2001) or immobilisers (until 1998).

Hell, I don't even have a Tracker for my car.

Renaultsport Clios and Clio V6's are more likely to have them.

 

[Famine]

Renaultsport Clios and Clio V6's are more likely to have them.

Certainly. But you said "most will" - they shifted about two hundred Clio V6s and 3,500 182s a year, compared to 20,000 regular Clios a month...

 

[Tornado]

Most Clios are worth both halves of squat. The subscription for a Tracker is £400 a year. Most Clios don't even have alarms (until 2001) or immobilisers (until 1998).

Hell, I don't even have a Tracker for my car.

Which raises the question, Famine: Is your car worth two halves of squat?