Dont you Think That................................

Discussion in '1994 McLaren F1' started by FireBird175, Feb 10, 2003.

  1. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Fair enough, just so long as dumbasses stop saying it was the first production car.
     
  2. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    I have a vid of the bugatti EB110 beating the F1.
     
  3. Re:

    i think i know what video ur talking about. it was a blue EB110 ahead of a blue/green F1. they werent anywere near racing each other, they were doing demonstration laps aroung the track.
     
  4. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    You #$%#in idiot, i said i have the vid! Not the #$%#n link!
     
  5. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Its hard to make intelligent posts when your dealing with idiots like you who dont know anything.
     
  6. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Im serious.

    Still no link to that other Veyron video?
     
  7. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Bugatti wont necisarily make anything ground breaking, just insane [think about whats going to happen in the years to come] hypotheticaly a car like a 48L X24 octturbo in 50-70 years would be like the vyron today.
     
  8. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Obviously you were banned because no one likes you on this site.
     
  9. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    I like the Veyron!!
     
  10. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Soo....where ae the ones of you sitting in it??
     
  11. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    I think about alot of things. Mostly cars actually and yes, they have started a trend and a new breed of cars are being developed every day because of what McLaren has Started.
     
  12. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Well ya see, the W16 actually produces alot of ho anyway, they are very small and low boost turbos, and dont make up most the power of the engine. I think that if you took of the turbochargers, the ho would be very minimally changed. If you do some background research youll know what im talking about, for more info please visit the Veyron forums.<A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>
     
  13. Re:

    i dont mind the Veyron using turboes to go faster, but when someone says taht the four turboes dont add much more power, thats just a lie. the W16 makes 550bhp without the turboes. subtract that from 987bhp and u get +437bhp on the turboes alone! thats about 110bhp/turbo!! about 45% of the power from Veyrons W16 is just from the turboes.

    "very minimally changed" and is complete and utter BS

     
  14. Re: Re:

    how much power does the W16 make as NA without the turboes?
     
  15. Re: Re:

    The previous W16 in the concepts was very different to the current W16, almost completely different engines. You cant say what you just said.
     
  16. Re:

    i just said what i just said. i wont take it back unless i am proven wrong. give me a link to an article that says that the current W16 is different from the previous generation W16 (not the W18). only until u give an article that says that will i shut my mouth and belive u.
     
  17. Re: Re:

    How about you prove to me instead that the current W16 (without turbos) has the exact same power as the older W16?
     
  18. Re:

    proof? how about the fact that Bugatti NEVER made any big anouncements on the improvements they made with the newer W16? they didnt say anything about the engine other than they are able to keep the it cooler. nothing about any power increases

    now why dont you just quit stalling and prove to me that the W16 is infact substantially different...or is that only because you cant?
     
  19. Re: Re:

    LOL!
    Prove to me that it wasnt changed!
    You still havent dont that!
     
  20. Re: Re:

    1-you have no idea how wrong you are

    2-SupraMan is always right

    3-Dont question him!
     
  21. Re: Re:

    Yeah, pretty much.
     
  22. Re:

    now that we heard from your alter boy, he can take his leave.

    i have already proved to you that the W16 in the 2002 model and the W16 in the 2003 are virtually the same engine. Bugatti didnt change much between the two pre-production models. all they did was work on the cooling of the engine, sure they have done a few other things, but not much. both engines still had the quad-turboes, both still had 8L displacement. naturally aspirated, the 2002 W16 makes over 550bhp, so why is it so hard for you to believe that the 2003 W16 -- being the almost identical to its predecessor -- also makes around 550bhp without its turboes?
     
  23. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Mmmm ughh I don't know where to start.

    Oooo errr... How about here >.

    I refuse to believe the Veyron is everything it's hyped up to be infact I believe its just another car. Why? Well I'll probably get flamed for this but I don't care. My opinion and facts will be shared.

    The Veyron is a car, just a car with a big engine, a car with a big engine and turbos. Congratulations to Bugatti they made a large car with a big engine and a luxurious interior. That’s great, it can reach 252.3mph and accelerates quickly (0-60 in 2.9) its generally a quick car (apart from on the track because it's really not designed for that. It’s all right if you want a car but nothing when you want something SPECIAL.
    You may say that how is it not special? When it has 1001BHP and gobs of torque, and when it has a funky 7-speed gearbox?!
    It's fast, nothing else. I want to know what its done for the automotive industry? We've seen the W16 before they've just put into a production car, yes its different but it does not achieve much. I believe they were lazy; they did not take time to refine it to make it something special. They make up for this with the turbos to a disappointing extent. I think it would be great if Bugatti got those numbers out of the engine, naturally aspirated. Yes its a seven speed gear box but they nearly had to do that because of the engine, they simply didn't go out of their way to make this car sensational. I appreciate the work to make the car what it is but ultimately is just isn’t there.
    I don't know of any ground it’s broken how it’s pushing the industry, what its taken from F1 to help itself. Nothing, nothing.
    It's just Bugatti's of way of getting back in the limelight; slap a car together, little different nothing special because they realised they were losing the supercar battle. This is a Volkswagen not a Bugatti. You see the real special cars are not owned by a parent company (yes I know Ferrari is owned by Fiat).
    I believe under further investigation the Bugatti will turn out to be not that great of a car.
     
  24. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Yeah, er, this car is like - er, cool... Or whatever... I would, like, totally get one if I, like, er, could.
     
  25. Re: Dont you Think That................................

    Im not too impressed with the Buggati either. 8L and turbo charged and it gets 1000 hp. And has heat issues while its doing that. Whoohoo. Thats brutaly simliar to the Viper 1000TTs of all cars enginewise.

    If you want to run over 180mph I think, you have to have Bugati send a guy out with special wheels and tires. Lame.

    As Murray put it, yes it will beat the F1 in top speed, but it wont touch it in other important areas.

    In terms of supercars, the F1 set the benchmark of performace. companies are compared to it all the time. The formulas might be different for going fast now, but but the goals are still quite similar.
     

Share This Page