Can't do 200mph then go home!

BigglesPiP · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:13

2 things I notice.

The Veyron is stock, the viper is not.

The Viper has more power than the chassis can take, the Veyron does not.

divine` · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:14

BigglesPiP said:
The Veyron is stock, the viper is not.

Well, only in the same way the RUF 'is not stock'

silversurfer · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:33

I watched this vid & out of those cars I think I'd have the Ruf.
It seems the most effortless of the lot, no doubt the veyron is fab and all but I cant help think of it as a super barge and if I really want 200+ that bad I could just see easyjet - less is more

Ruf is registered as its own brand in Germany, in theory its stock then?

Rufs are built from unmarked Porsche chassis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RUF_(automobile)

divine` · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:42

My basic point is, you can order that Viper if you wanted one. It's not like Keith Cowie's R32 or something that's a one off tuned monster. Hennessey sell them.

Obviously in a way it's a tuned Viper but you see what I mean I hope.

volospian · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:43

The_Dark_Side said:
Top class humour IMHO.
(well it made me chuckle anyway )

LOL, not exactly.
I'd like to claim the above wisdom as my own, but i have to admit it's what i was told. For example, when you win the lottery Camelot send financial bods (usually 2 of them) to speak to you and offer advice. One of the first things they say is that what you've had drummed into you to do as a working man is NOT necessarily what you need to do when you're at the other end of the financial spectrum.
As a working man you are constantly told to buy, as rent is dead money. It's often the other way around when you're playing with 5 or 6 zeros at the end of your lucky number. Rent and you can claim some of it back, buy and you end up paying depreciation. Don't GIVE your brother a car, register yourself as say Volospian ltd and lease the car as a company car. They pay the tax+servicing costs, you can claim back the taxes and some of the expenditure and you chop it in every 2 years for a new one.
It's a head wrecker.

Incidentally, the Camelot guys.
£250 per day per man, although the advice they give is worth many times that.

lol, I'm glad I'm not a millionaire. It sounds like hard work

silversurfer · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:53

Renting sounds like good advice except for expensive cars that might possibly appreciate in value at all. No capital gains tax is liable on cars for some reason, which would make Nick Mason is a wise man I guess

Jonny ///M · 3 Aug 2007 at 20:53

So a mclaren f1 can do 0-200 in 28s and a bugatti takes 4 seconds less 10 years on... :confused:

The_Dark_Side · 3 Aug 2007 at 21:54

Jonny ///M said:
So a mclaren f1 can do 0-200 in 28s and a bugatti takes 4 seconds less 10 years on...

Taking an average figure based on what i've read, i'd say that although there isn't an official 0-200 mph figure for the Veyron it's generally agreed that you're looking at sub 20 seconds.

The_Dark_Side · 4 Aug 2007 at 12:36

volospian said:
lol, I'm glad I'm not a millionaire. It sounds like hard work

There are benefits.

<i'm not one of them however, but i do know more than a few that are>

silversurfer · 4 Aug 2007 at 12:46

Jonny ///M said:
So a mclaren f1 can do 0-200 in 28s and a bugatti takes 4 seconds less 10 years on...

The forces are exponential so 4 seconds sounds good enough but I'd rather have the F1 too

The_Dark_Side · 4 Aug 2007 at 12:58

silversurfer said:
The forces are exponential so 4 seconds sounds good enough but I'd rather have the F1 too

ahem...post#68 if you please.

The F1 wasn't just about it's performance, it's the ultimate drivers car.
The Veyron is all about performance, comfort and the ease with which the ordinary driver can push it hard.

"andy" · 4 Aug 2007 at 13:05

im not a fan of the f1 at all for some reason

id take a veyron over it anyday

and id possibly take an f40 over that

or take the veyron , sell it , buy f40 , keep change maybe

BigglesPiP · 4 Aug 2007 at 16:32

The Meclaren F1 cheated its top speed run.

It will not do 230mph. To achieve that speed they had to relax the rev limiter on the BMW engine by 1000RPM.

The_Dark_Side · 4 Aug 2007 at 17:17

BigglesPiP said:
The Meclaren F1 cheated its top speed run.

It will not do 230mph. To achieve that speed they had to relax the rev limiter on the BMW engine by 1000RPM.

but who really cares?
the whole point of the car wasn't to make the fastest car in the world, that was just an incidental outcome.

Jonny ///M · 4 Aug 2007 at 17:53

BigglesPiP said:
The Meclaren F1 cheated its top speed run.

It will not do 230mph. To achieve that speed they had to relax the rev limiter on the BMW engine by 1000RPM.

At least spell the name correctly. The McLaren F1 will do 230mph but needs the rev limit removed to do 241mph.

The only areas where the McLaren was compromised was its brakes and suspension. Ceramic brakes where lighter and more powerful and also more modern BUT you could argue it was a road car so the fact they needed to be warmed up before they worked well wasnt good for a road car. The suspension was set up soft with 17" wheels so it wasnt as stiff as hell and you could feel every bump on the road.

I feel the bugatti isnt about solving problems with proper thought. Omg the car is heavy.......lets strap a W16 quad turbo to it......instead of trying to make it as light as possible. Two totally different cars though.

I do prefer a car that you have to tame...

The_Dark_Side · 4 Aug 2007 at 18:01

Jonny ///M said:
The only areas where the McLaren was compromised was its brakes and suspension. Ceramic brakes where lighter and more powerful and also more modern BUT you could argue it was a road car so the fact they needed to be warmed up before they worked well wasnt good for a road car. The suspension was set up soft with 17" wheels so it wasnt as stiff as hell and you could feel every bump on the road.

there are NO compromises in the F1.
anywhere in the car.
I don't even know when ceramics were fitted to the first road car, but even if this had happened before the Mac was produced there's another good reason it doesn't have them. feel...or lack of.

hell the Mac doesn't even have a servo.

BigglesPiP · 4 Aug 2007 at 18:16

There is no such thing as a car with no compromises.

Comfort for speed is a compromise.

If there are no compromises, why are there 3 seats?

Edit: After a bit of research, the F1 which did the speed test mentioned was one of the prototypes. And not one of the 100 "production" units.

Cyber-Mav · 4 Aug 2007 at 19:12

i prefer the looks of this:

Jonny ///M · 4 Aug 2007 at 19:37

The_Dark_Side said:
there are NO compromises in the F1.
anywhere in the car.
I don't even know when ceramics were fitted to the first road car, but even if this had happened before the Mac was produced there's another good reason it doesn't have them. feel...or lack of.

hell the Mac doesn't even have a servo.

**** my point in the post was to outline thing that were done for better use ont he road as it was a road car i.e brakes that worked and didnt need heat in them first and suspension that was soft enough for day to day use but just a bit too soft for track use(watch the mclaren under hard braking and acceleration).

sigma · 4 Aug 2007 at 20:27

Nitro_Junkie said:
the sign of a proper car, 1000bhp shouldn't be accessible and easy to drive for anyone, it should take a special kind of nutter who can handle raw power to do it

Totally agree, I'd much rather have the Viper. Where's the fun in being able to feel all safe and travel to 200+ and smooth as **** :confused:

I want to be fighting the car and feeling rather scared

I'm suprised Gibbo had not test driven some Vipers before choosing his CSL? I don't really know much about them so I guess the Z06 is better?