does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachieving?

Discussion in '2002 Bugatti 16/4 Veyron Preproduction' started by 1 Evolution VIII, Mar 28, 2003.

  1. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Could you make a better quad turbo W16?
     
  2. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    How is it underachieving? Just look at that torque figure! Someone in some thread a while back said that they could put out that much power naturally aspirated, which is true, but it wouldn't have nearly that amount of torque. Flexibility is the key to great engines.
     
  3. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    my simple answer, NO!!!
     
  4. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Actually, yes. Its very underacheiving. When you consider it has a w16 quad turbo engine, it should be pumping out a #$%#load more power. If the Escudo can get 981 hp out of a 6 cylinder engine, then 10 more cylinders should be able to get more then 20 more hp. See what I am saying. Now the Escudo's engine is the most amazing thing I have ever seen Ii will admit that but still. And I don't know how they got that much power out of it...
     
  5. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    But will the Escudo engine in that state of tune go 150,000 or more miles? Nope. This engine probably will. Remember, it's a street car. It has to last longer than a race car engine. It's like saying every engine on the planet is underachieving because top fuel dragster engines pump out well over 7000 hp from 8 cylinders... come on, you aren't going to drive around town very long with a top fuel engine sitting under the hood. People say, well Supra engines can put out 1000 hp from 3 liters. True, but for how long? I guarantee they won't last even close to as long as a stock Supra engine or this engine. In addition, most street car engines don't put out more than 100 hp/L (heck, most don't put out 70 hp/L), this engine puts out 125 hp/L using the DIN 1001 hp measurement (about 123 hp/L using the SAE power measurement). Underachieving?
     
  6. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    " But will the Escudo engine in that state of tune go 150,000 or more miles? Nope. This engine probably will. Remember, it's a street car. It has to last longer than a race car engine. It's like saying every engine on the planet is underachieving because top fuel dragster engines pump out well over 7000 hp from 8 cylinders... come on, you aren't going to drive around town very long with a top fuel engine sitting under the hood. People say, well Supra engines can put out 1000 hp from 3 liters. True, but for how long? I guarantee they won't last even close to as long as a stock Supra engine or this engine. In addition, most street car engines don't put out more than 100 hp/L (heck, most don't put out 70 hp/L), this engine puts out 125 hp/L using the DIN 1001 hp measurement (about 123 hp/L using the SAE power measurement). Underachieving? "


    very well put, i applaud you =]
     
  7. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    The Escudo is majorly majorly tuned, and has twin turbo. If Bugatti tuned their engines more, then we'd have 1500hp or somefing
     
  8. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Underachieving? The only cars I can think of off hand with more power were Can-Am cars and older F1 cars, where they ran virtually on rocket fuel.
     
  9. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Rocket Fuel is made of Hydrogen gas and Oxygen Gas. The merge together, then explode. They use it on Rockets, so they call it rocket fuel <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>. The GM Hi-wire Concept used Rocket fuel (Hydrogen Gas, and intakes Oxygen), but is at a much lower concetration. See peoples, i know my science.
     
  10. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    its not underachieving. IM sure the turbos are on really low boost, for response, otherwise it wouldnt get the sposeivly 3.0 0-60 time. that would explain why it doenst have some ridiculous hp figure. im sure if they put it on high boost, they could get 2000 hp, but what would be the point? its also sposed to be reliable, not a racecar, so hence the low boost on the turbos. and its still only a 8 liter engine. the Viper has a bigger displacement and gets 500 horsepower. so its not underachieving....if you think about it, which most of you dont : )
     
  11. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    good boy. I was going to mention the Viper <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>

    If u think about this peoples, then u may understand

    Ur average car probably has a 1.8Litre engine, and maybe 140hp or so. thas 70hp per litre. This has over 100hp per litre.
     
  12. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    OK, I guess you got me there. You are right, I never even thought of that. I must of got carried away with the thought of horsepower. lol. But hey, did you know that this Veyron only lasts 20 minutes on a full tank of gas, they obviously didn't take everything into consideration into making this a road car.
     
  13. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    the amount of time and money it takes to engineer an engine like that is very great. it is in no way underacheiving whatsoever. they could get more power out of it if they wanted to
     
  14. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    LOL. Yeah, I'm sure the gas mileage is pretty abysmal. Oh well, I guess if you can afford the car, you can afford the fuel. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     
  15. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    the escudo has twin v-6's ppl on in the fornt one mid therefore its naturally awd
     
  16. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    No, i think thats the old one, the new one, has a Twin Turbo V6.
     
  17. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    You are right. The first version of the Escudo had two V6 engines. I used to think it had two, and I took part in a good argument in the Escudo forum. Yip but don't get angry at him if he doesn't believe it. I know I had a really hard time accepting it too.
     
  18. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    ok, i always though it had 1 twin turbo v6
     
  19. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Well you thought correct.
     
  20. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Thats right thats what I was trying to say it only has one.
     
  21. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    ok, i was gonna say....
     
  22. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    ........yes?
     
  23. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    the viper costs 80,000 new
    good price for 500 hp

    this cost 800,000 but im sure ppl who can get a hold of one will pay alittle more...


    u failed to mention and make a point of that...
     
  24. Re: does anybody else think the Quad Turbo W16 is underachievin

    Rich people dont care.
     

Share This Page