Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

Discussion in '2002 Bugatti 16/4 Veyron Preproduction' started by mclaren777, Aug 9, 2002.

  1. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    You really don't understand cars, do you?<!-- Signature -->
     
  2. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Heh, Truckman
     
  3. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Why would you ever, EVER turbocharge a McLaren? It is the champion of naturally aspirated engines and it is a beautiful machine. To alter it at all is blasphemy, to alter its nature by turbocharging it is unthinkable. There were only a hundred made (including the LM and GSR and the yearly GT version), so if you screw one up, you've effectively decreased the goodness of the whole world by 1%. Owning a McLaren is a privilidge and a responsibility. As I said before, don't mess with the McLaren.<!-- Signature -->
     
  4. Let's all just sit back and think about these two cars that we're comparing, first: The McLaren F1, a road car built to race at Le Mans, its 2500 lbs or so, it doesn't have power assisted everything, it was built for acceleration, cornering, braking, turn-in, Hell- a central mounted seating position?

    And here's the Buggati, a road car built to be a road car, Volkswagen didn't engineer this thing to haul ass around a race track, they built it to take the top speed record for any production car.

    Just compare the two interiors first.
    then compare the mechanicals, I.E. the Buggati's probly got about as many computers as a BMW or Mercedez, the McLaren was built by a very succesful racing marquee, and has 1 computer to manage the engine.

    All i'm trying to say here folks, is you cant compare these two.

    Why dont ya'll try the F1 against the XJ220, the McLaren might accelerate faster but it only pulls .86g on the skidpad while the Jaguar does .98g and has a faster slolam.
     
  5. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Which is what people probably should do, not compare cars that were actually made and are *classified* as production, not *assumed* to be produced.

    So, we can compare the McLaren to the F50, Xj220 etc...

    While we compare the Bugatti to the prototype Caddy/Porsche/Ferrari or anything else someone chooses to pull out of their monkey ass.

    BTW, dont respond with that "it will be production" crap. When it rolls off a production line and when they make enough of them its production. Till then its another "street legal" callaway or another prototype.

    Additionally, there is so much BS you trolls post about this VS that; I cant even find out what outside party did the performance tests for accuracy and unbiasedness (like I could honestly believe it if it was posted here anyways lol)<!-- Signature -->
     
  6. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    I think the Bugatti has The McLaren on acceleration. With the all wheel drive and that monster 16 cylinder. That is a very big engine.<!-- Signature -->
     
  7. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    I just wanted to clear something up. The Mclaren was not designed to race. In fact, the designer was adamant that it wouldn't. The Veyron will clearly be faster though. But really, who cares?<!-- Signature -->
     
  8. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from Dai Zhong The Marvelous Traveler</i>
    <b>I think the Bugatti has The McLaren on acceleration. With the all wheel drive and that monster 16 cylinder. That is a very big engine.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->


    If you think that is such a big engine why aren't you critacizing the Viper it's engine is the same size. It has 10 cylinders but the engine is still around 8 litres. <!-- Signature -->
     
  9. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    well if it were me i'd take this.
     
  10. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Why am I not criticizing the Viper? Because it is a very good car. Made under supervision of Caroll Shelby himself. If you think I'm criticizing the McLaren, then there has been a misunderstanding. It is an awesome car. Any car that fast cannot "suck". I just think the Veyron will accelerate faster because of the four wheel drive.<!-- Signature -->
     
  11. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Very hard to say. The McLaren is 8 years old now, and still no true production car has beaten it's top speed. It was the first of its kind, featuring the first ever carbon fibre body on a production car. It won Le Mans at its first attempt. It is the car every other is compared to. Built with world class Formula 1 technology. So both these cars are incredible, but the McLaren is a legend.

    But I have one more thing to say. If the McLaren was built today, nothing would stand a chance. The McLaren is a 6 litre V12, no turbos or supers, just 630 raw horses. And here we have a QUAD turbo, 7 speed, 8 litre W16 1000 hp monster that can still only crank out 12 more mph then the McLaren, which added an easy 28 to the XJ220's previous record.

    Like I said, a legend.<!-- Signature -->
     
  12. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    The Koenigsegg CC is better than the Veyron and the F1. When combining design, performance, and price, the CC wins hands down. It's also faster than the F1 and the Veyron only beats it by .2 seconds. The CC has a v8 while the Veryon has 2 V8's side by side to make a W16. You'd think that it would perform better. In conclusion the Koenigsegg CC is the best supercar on the planet!!!<!-- Signature -->
     
  13. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    i will admit this thing would prob. beat a mclaren.you cant compare a 8 yr old mclaren to this veyron. a mclaren is a NA car, doesnt have a w16, isnt quad turbo, and jeez its actual production. im just wondrin if they could be serious it only does 0-60 in 3 sec? thats sad. many cars with alot less hp do it much faster. im just wondrin the gas milage on this one would be? a w16 with 1000hp eek. also only 1000 horses aint that much outts 16 cylenders. the vielside supra could smoke this thing lyk a lil joint with only 6 cylenders and its lil 3.0ish engine. this car aint that impressive.
     
  14. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    <!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from phanofmuzik2</i>
    <b>i will admit this thing would prob. beat a mclaren.you cant compare a 8 yr old mclaren to this veyron. a mclaren is a NA car, doesnt have a w16, isnt quad turbo, and jeez its actual production. im just wondrin if they could be serious it only does 0-60 in 3 sec? thats sad. many cars with alot less hp do it much faster. im just wondrin the gas milage on this one would be? a w16 with 1000hp eek. also only 1000 horses aint that much outts 16 cylenders. the vielside supra could smoke this thing lyk a lil joint with only 6 cylenders and its lil 3.0ish engine. this car aint that impressive.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->

    You don't get it do you?
    What the h#ll do you think happens if you put 1000 hp to the weels in first gear?<!-- Signature -->
     
  15. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    I can't believe someone would try to compare the veilside to this production of manufacturing genius... This car isn't just hauling anything... This thing has got every creature comfort combined with speed and acceleration that surpasses most cars besides possibly the Maclaren and more likely the V8 Koenigsegg CC. <!-- Signature -->
     
  16. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    all i have to say is; give the mclaren QUAD TURBOS AND I BET
     
  17. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    if any one of you had a chance to have one of these cars you would take it and not compare it to another car you would take it and enjoy the ride.
     
  18. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Well look here retards...the mclaren probably has way better handling,it looks a lot cooler, it holds more people, and i bet if it had 4 freakin turbochargers it would kick the gay bugatti's ass because it is 300hp less then the (gay)bugatti,and it has no turbo, the bugatti's are big losers that are to cheap to build a real car... so they load it with turbo chargers
     
  19. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    It is true Gordan Murray (the excellent designer of the McLaren F1) didn't want the McLaren F1 to be a race car, its a road car built for the road.<!-- Signature -->
     
  20. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    well i look at it this way mclaren doesnt have any real goal when it was built as a road car and it doesnt have anything cool in the inside except the middle seat. but cars like bugatti have real class and are the best in their class beat out every car in mostly everything. the koenigsegg is another car which has a great amount of class and is made almost like a race car with a perfect interior. i would take the bugatti as my every day street racer and the koenigsegg as my club racer on the curcuit with a ferrari spyder a lambo a sl55 a bmw 760il limo and a s55 and also a audi avantismo with a caddy escalade and 20s on all of them. cool huh! yeeeeaaaaah! yeah
     
  21. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    oh of course a mclaren, duh, they cost a million dollars that totaly means its waaay better
     
  22. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    I say the McLaren is too old to be comparing to this. I'd like to see what people think of this once some real stats are released and once people outside the design team get to drive them. The McLaren is almost 10 years old now, and was built for a different purpose than the Veyron. Nothing is known about this car for sure, and yeah...yeah.

    Don't mess with the Mac. It will haunt you in your sleep. It is the world's greatest road car. Shove it. Also, have you guys seen the interior of this thing? Ugly as sin. Ivory crap everywhere. Damn Volkswagen and their ivory this and their ivory that...it's definitely past my bedtime. I just love the McLaren and I don't think this car should be able to beat it because it's awesome. And the Koenigsegg CC thing? The CC stands for Crappy Car. I came up with that just now. DON'T TURBOCHARGE A SUPERCAR. You can't get the same responsiveness and there's nothing like the hum of a naturally aspirated engine. It just sounds right. I feel bad when there's a turbo on an engine. It's like whipping the rowers on a boat. It hurts them. You don't want to hurt the rowers, right? I don't want to hurt my engine. Although it's ok in some cars, like the Integrale or the 959 or the WRC cars. I like them, so it's ok. Their engines are strong, so they don't get hurt. FOUR TURBOS? That's insane. I don't like it. To many turbos. They should call it the 16/4 Veyron TTTT. One T for each turbo. Are they KKK turbos? Then they could call it the Veyron KKKKKKKKKKKK. Good night. I'm not high, just tired. Long live Supercars.net!<!-- Signature -->
     
  23. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    has anyone put turbos on a mclaren then? If not, what in the motherloving #$%# are they waiting for!
     
  24. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    I would take Bugatti due to its excelence plus its extrodinary history. Cheaper than McLaren and overall same performace.<!-- Signature -->
     
  25. Re: Bugatti 16/4 Veyron -vs- McLaren F1

    Get it right dipshit, it's 374 hp more, why the #$%# do you need to hold more than two people if your traveling at 200+ anyway's.
    besides the fact that you have the #$%#in viper in your name speaks volumes about your intellect.<!-- Signature -->
     

Share This Page