Forgotton?

Discussion in '1994 Dauer 962 Le Mans' started by RRPhantom, Feb 26, 2006.

  1. how do you say dauer
     
  2. Da-wer.
     
  3. Wtf? Serious?
     
  4. I�m German, trust me
     
  5. for real its forgotten. i didnt kno about this car untill like 3 years ago. thats what i think
     
  6. The good old legend...
    I knew about this car since 96 or 97, cant really remember.
    Will always have respect for this car, even when im 70 years old and owned. :S
     
  7. What are is it's lateral acceleration? I'm not sure I've ever read anything in regard to this. I bet Dauer themselves has lots of data on this, but was it ever released/independently tested?
     
  8. What is its lateral acceleration? I'm not sure I've ever read anything in regard to this. I bet Dauer themselves has lots of data on this, but was it ever released/independently tested?
     
  9. its probably 1.something
     
  10. this does deserve more respect, one of the greatest cars ever made
     
  11. best car ever, its very fast for only a flat six. this is way better than a bugatti veyron
     
  12. I've seen flat-sixes putting out over 1500 horsepower.

    And I disagree about the Veyron. The Veyron can be used every day for just about anything, it will last for over 20 years, and it destroys everything in a straight line, including the 962LM.
     
  13. The veyron will never outlast the 962 in anyway, it hasn't happened and it will never happen. How long has porsche been using the flat 6? How long has the 16/4 been around? How many races has the 962 been in? How many races has the 16/4 been in? I rest my case. The callaway sledgehammer corvette is faster then the 16/4 in a straight line btw, then again most drag queens are fast in a straight line.

    "The Veyron can be used every day for just about anything, it will last for over 20 years, and it destroys everything in a straight line, including the 962LM."

    I would love to know where you got the idea of the veyron being able to last for 20 years or more, seeing as how in the few years it has been around it has been the most problem prone, expensive piece of crap supercar ever built. The last time I checked the porsche flat 6 used in the 962 and variations of the 962 has been in racing for more then a decade, whereas the 16/4, the 16/4's drivetrain, the 16/4's awd have not been in any race to date, yet you say it "it will last for over 20 years,". Where did you manage to find this info of it lasting this long at? Last I saw and read the veyron has never been in any sort of a race, a veyron hasn't even been brought to the united states, do you have any clue what someone would have to go through just to bring a veyron to the united states? Not only would you have to prove it crash tested (the auto manufacture donates 5 or more of the same car to a government program to test how safe the car is. Numerous other auto manufacturers including porsche, ferrari, lamborghini and so on have done this many, many times. Bugatti still has yet to have any of their supercars past and present crash tested.) You would also have to detune the engine if it somehow manage to pass crash testing so that the car can pass emissions and be street legal in the U.S. (which it never will in it's current design) even then the chances of one being legalized in the united states are slim to none. It most indeed does not beat the 962 in anything, oh wait I know how it beat the 962. The veyron beat the 962 because its topspeed was 2.5 mph faster then the 962's topspeed right? Well goddamn that is an achievement right there. It took millions upon millions of dollars, going through bankruptcy almost 2 times, being successful in damn near killing 4 test drivers, just to be 2.5mph faster then a car which has 10 less cylinders....seriously if you are not able to see the irony here, then their is something seriously wrong wth you. I recall the very person who did the topspeed run of the 962 saying that at 251.25 he was too scared to take it past that, and the test track that they were using did not have enough room to go passed that speed (the same test track the 16/4 was tested on supposedly which still has not been proven since the 16/4 used a 1/4 mile of straight track near the test track). Yes, I have seen the proof of the veyron on its topspeed run, however being that the veyron was maxxed out at its topspeed which was only 2.5mph then the 962's ESTIMATED topspeed, and the 962 not even being at 6,500rpm at 251.25mph (keep in mind the driver of the 962 still had 1 more gear to go through as well as 1,600 - 2,400 rpm, when he stopped) all that proves is that the veyron was successful in nothing, it't not faster then the 962 because the 962's topspeed isn't known, and since the veyron wasn't tested against other drag queens like the callaway sledgehammer when the 16/4 was tested on a 1/4 mile track, that once again proves nothing.

    I wish I could build a multi-million dollar piece of $hit, spend another few million fixing the problems it had and still has, to only achieve a topspeed of 2.5mph faster then the fastest street legal supercar in the world, keeping in mind that the fastest street legal supercar in the world (the 962's) topspeed isnt even known because there is currently no safe test track to achieve that topspeed. I also recall the veyron doing its topspeed run on a very long straightaway, while the 962 held 235+ mph throughout 3/4 of the course including banked corners (thevery same course the mclaren was tested on), something the veyron will never, ever be able to do. That also reminds me, in the pictures and info included with the topspeed run of the 16/4, the 16/4's topspeed was tested on a 1/4 mile track (any drag queen on a 1/4 mile track can reach speeds in excess of 253 mph and higher, I seem to remember the callaway sledgehammer doing just that more then 5 years ago, so sorry to break it to you but the 16/4 has not done anything special), while the 962 was not. So as I have previously told you divinerage, before you go about making assumptions of things you don't even know all the facts for, save yourself some time, and dignity and just don't post anything involving the 16/4.
     
  14. That flat six is over 20 years old. And the Veyron has been out for less than two years. Whats your point? That makes the 962 instantly better?

    The Sledgehammer is a one-off and is currently in a showroom.

    The Veyron is not problem prone, its extremely reliable. When you see a Veyron breaking down in front of you, you tell me. But I'd be very surprised.

    The Veyron hasnt been in any race, so what? Neither has the Koenigsegg, again, whats your point?

    It has never been to the USA? Tom Cruise owns one.

    Only 200+ production (or something like that) cars have to go through crash tests.

    VW owns Bugatti, VW is far from bankrupt.

    It did not nearly kill 4 test drivers, and I have no idea where you got that idea from.

    The number of cylinders doesnt change much in power output. You could make a 2-cylinder engine put out 5000 horsepower if you'd want to.

    You're saying that the Veyron managed to beat the 962, while only having one fourth of a mile to work with, while the 962 didnt have enough of Nardo to reach its top speed? (the F1 was tested at Nardo by the way). Only you saying that the Veyron reached 253mph on a 1/4 mile track is wrong beyond belif.

    Its not my fault if the 962 has bad gearing. From what your saying, it would require a ridiculously long straight to use even half of its last gear. In fact I believe it wouldnt even be able to reach it.

    Because the 962's top speed is unknown, its faster than the Veyron??? Hey guess what, I dont know the top speed of my Accord, hell, it has to be faster than a Veyron!

    Check your sources, seriously.
     
  15. the 962 LM was tested to 404.25 at the Volkswagen test track Ehra-Lessien under the eyes of the Volkswagen engineers in April 1997
     
  16. this sint the fastest! it want made for the best speed it was only made for 250 mph!!!! there isa new car comming! it was build for speed!!!! speed like not seen before!!!!! stay tuned!!!!
     
  17. ...
     
  18. "That flat six is over 20 years old. And the Veyron has been out for less than two years. Whats your point? That makes the 962 instantly better?"

    I never once said that makes the 962 instantly better, what I was hinting at is the fact that since the flat 6 has been around for more then 20 years, been involved in alot of racing, while the 16/4 hasn't. So you're above response which entailed the following

    ""The Veyron can be used every day for just about anything, it will last for over 20 years, and it destroys everything in a straight line, including the 962LM."

    is complete bullshit. You have no idea what the Veyron pos 16/4 can or can't be used for because you don't own one and you have never driven one, and you never will drive one period. The last time I checked Bugatti hasn't sold a 16/4 to a kid from montreal, canada. Need I add the fact that at the moment it is near impossible to get already street legal supercars to pass emissions in canada and the united sates, so the idea of bringing a 16/4 to canada or the united states is impossible.


    "The Sledgehammer is a one-off and is currently in a showroom."

    So what if the callaway is a one-off and is currently in a showroom. What's you're point? I remember a while ago on another thread about the topspeed of the 16/4 when it was a prototype (at the time i am talking about bugatti had only produced 2 16/4's, 1 of which they took to car shows which was not driveable; and the other being driveable, thus making the 16/4 a prototype one-off) where you divinerage and other's kept trying to compare the 16/4 to actualy street legal production cars like the 962; however when I said the following nooone listened and in fact went off on rants like a bunch of moronic fanboys because their beloved 16/4's topspeed had been beaten 7 years prior and you all knew it. - "Instead of acting like a bunch of idiotic fanboys, why dont you compare the 16/4 to another drag queen like the callaway sledgehammer."



    "The Veyron is not problem prone, its extremely reliable. When you see a Veyron breaking down in front of you, you tell me. But I'd be very surprised."

    So the Veyron 16/4's awd system and drivetrain having problems dont matter? The last time I checked when a car spun out uncontrollably at 183 mph on a straightaway because the awd system failed, that could be considered a very serious problem. So the 16/4 is extremely reliable is it? Well seeing as how noone can possible know that at this moment in time; that would mean you're above comment is bullshit. I'd love to see a 16/4 in real life, so I could demean the idiotic owner of the car and tell him how a 962 which cost roughly $325,000 is faster then the pos he is driving. However since no 16/4's have been imported to the united states, canada or mexico, because bugatti won't put a 16/4 through crash testing and emission, that more then likely won't happen anytime soon.


    "The Veyron hasnt been in any race, so what? Neither has the Koenigsegg, again, whats your point?"

    The veyron hasn't been in any race, involved in any race, tested by a driver other then someone whom doesn't work for bugatti. Therefore since the 16/4 has never been in a race of any kind, you're above comment on how

    "The Veyron can be used every day for just about anything, it will last for over 20 years, and it destroys everything in a straight line, including the 962LM." is complete bullshit, because it has no racing backgroun like the 962 and has not undergone anywhere near as much testing as the 962 has.

    This topic is on the 962 and the 16/4, not the 16/4 and the Koenigsegg, so as you have attempted to do before; don't try and change the subject.



    "It has never been to the USA? Tom Cruise owns one."

    Yes he does own one, however since the 16/4 that tom cruise owns isn't even in the united states, (he hasn't had it brought to the united states because bugatti still hasn't gone through crash testing and emissions, and his car wont be coming to the united states anytime soon until Bugatti completes those 2 things) that doesn't help you're argument out in anyway now does it?


    "Only 200+ production (or something like that) cars have to go through crash tests."

    Actually no, there is no set vehicle limit for cars that have to go through crash testing, if their is then it hasn't been applied to numerious ferrari's, porsche's, lamborghini's and so on over the years. Just recently when the Lamborghini Gallardo came out; even before the gallardo was available to anyone to buy Lamborghini had already sent a few to the united states to be crash tested. Porsche and ferrari have done the exact same thing with their latest supercars.

    "VW owns Bugatti, VW is far from bankrupt."

    When Bugatti first started building the 16/4, around the time when Bugatti took a Veyron to a car show in england (some car show they have over there, I used to know the name, but as I pay more attention to car shows in the united states and japan versus car shows in england I could care less.) Bugatti stated publicly that the 16/4 had completed all test, and is ready for production. Funny thing about that is in the following days Bugatti went bankrupt trying to fix the problems with the 16/4; meaning that the Veyron was not ready for production. Bankruptcy almost hit Bugatti again recently before vw bought the company, because yet once again Bugati was attempting to fix problems with the 16/4 (ie. drivetrain and the awd system.)

    "It did not nearly kill 4 test drivers, and I have no idea where you got that idea from."

    Back when Bugatti was testing the car on a closed course (this was after they had gone bankrupt) the 16/4 spun out uncontrollably sending the car into a rail almost cuttin the vehicle in half, the test driver sustained seriousy injuries. This was not the only time the car had crashed because the all wheel drive system or the drivetrain failed, it however was the worst crash.

    "The number of cylinders doesnt change much in power output. You could make a 2-cylinder engine put out 5000 horsepower if you'd want to."

    Actually the # of cylinders does change. However when you have a company who is attempting to get as much advertisement as they can their is really no point in setting an actual goal for mph, especially when you can attempt to go almost 3 mph faster then the most recent supercar. Their have been many vehicles in the past which had a 4 cylinder or a straight 6 that beat vehicles with a v10 or bigger engine in hp, topspeed, 0-60 and so on.



    "You're saying that the Veyron managed to beat the 962, while only having one fourth of a mile to work with, while the 962 didnt have enough of Nardo to reach its top speed? (the F1 was tested at Nardo by the way). Only you saying that the Veyron reached 253mph on a 1/4 mile track is wrong beyond belif."

    1. The 962 was never tested at Nardo, it was in fact tested at the Volkswagen test track Ehra-Lessien, so now might be a good tim for you to do some research on the 962.
    2. The 16/4 was not tested on Ehra-Lessien, the 16/4 however was tested on a one quarter mile straight track whereas the 962 was not. On the track Ehra-Lessien that the 962 was tested on the 962 reached its estimated topspeed of 251.25mph on a straightaway that isn't even half as long as the drag queen track where the 16/4 was tested. You may notice where I previously typed the following - "its estimated topspeed of 251.25mph" I typed that because the actualy topspeed of th 962 isn't even known. The section of track where the 962 reached 251.25 isn't even half as long as the one quarter mile track where the 16/4 was tested. I guarantee that if the 962lm was tested on the same one quarter mile track the 16/4 was tested on, that the 962 would reach a speed in excess of 265+ mph.


    "Its not my fault if the 962 has bad gearing. From what your saying, it would require a ridiculously long straight to use even half of its last gear. In fact I believe it wouldnt even be able to reach it."

    The 962 doesn't have bad gearing, in fact the 962lm has better gear ratios then the Veyron 16/4 does. No I did not say that it would require a Redicoulisly long straightaway to use half its last gear. What I was trying to tell you even thought you still aren't able to grasp the idea, is that the straighaway of the course the 962 was tested on wasn't even half as long as the straight track the 16/4 was tested on. Therefore meaning that everything everyone has typed about the 16/4 is complete bullshit because the 2 cars weren't even tested on the same track. Then again it must be hard for a drag queen like the 16/4 to stay in a straight line on a one quarter mile track, while the 962lm held 221mph and higher on banked turns on Ehra-Lessien.


    "Because the 962's top speed is unknown, its faster than the Veyron??? Hey guess what, I dont know the top speed of my Accord, hell, it has to be faster than a Veyron!"

    No I did not say that either. Seriously I know that some countries have bad public schools but you just act like a complete moron on these forums. You can't even comprehend what I have been trying to get across to you. When you do seem to grasp the first sentence of what I have typed you continue to twist everything I type around so that it resembles soemthing I havn't even typed.

    I'm going to attempt to write the following in a way that you divinerage can understand, if you aren't able to comprehend the following then please tell me and I will find a way to write it in 2 syllable words so that you're primitive mind can understand.

    The fastest topspeed the 16/4 could reach on a straight track (that means a track in a straight line with no turns) was 407.2 kph / 253 mph, keep in mind by fastest topspeed for the 16/4 that the Veyron's speedometer and rpm gauges were buried as far as possible at only 407.2 kph / 253 mph. The estimated topspeed for the 962lm was 251.25mph on Ehra-Lessien, which unlike the quarter mile straight track the 16/4 was testted on; the track Ehra-Lessien actually has turns!

    So let's figure this out, to date the fastest that the 16/4 has been able to go was 253mph, whereas the 962's estimated topspeed was 251.35mph. If you cannot understand that a car with an unknown topspeed, a car that wasn't even in it's final gear, a car that did not have the spedometer and rpm gauges buried can manage to reach 255mph or faster if it was tested on the drag queen track where the 16/4 was, then you sir need to not interact with a human being ever again as simple math problems are too complicated for you.


    "Check your sources, seriously."

    Who was the one that swore up and down he has done research on the 16/4 and the 962 and still managed somehow to not even know the track where the 962 was tested? I'm pretty sure that was you DivineRage. So like I have told you time and time again, before you choose to run you're mouth on subjects you know nothing about, actually do some research so that you don't look like a moron as you do now.




     
  19. #20 DivineRage, Nov 7, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    1. I havent driven a Veyron, but Jeremy Clarkson did. He said it would last over 20 years, and that it was simply the best car he had ever driven.


    2. The Sledgehammer was never MEANT for production, the Veyron is.


    3. Tom Cruise's Veyron IS in the USA.



    That's in Hollywood.


    4. Jeremy Clarkson tested the Veyron, and he doesnt work for Bugatti.


    5. Last I heard, the Gallardo had a production higher than 200. Same goes for the Porsche Carrera GT (2500), the 911 (wont bother coming up with a number), and every street legal Ferrari, such as the Enzo (399). However I doubt the 962 has been crash tested, seeing as it takes at least 4-5 cars to crash test, and the 962 only having a production of 13, I dont think Dauer could afford it.


    6. Volkwagen is nowhere close to bankrupt, stfu.


    7. Show me an article saying it almost killed 4 test drivers. Show me WHATEVER saying that its AWD system failed.


    8. You said the 962 was tested at the same track as the F1, the F1 was tested a Nardo. And you obviously have no idea what the hell a "quarter mile" is.


    9. If the 962 didnt have enough of Ehra-Lessien to reach its top speed, it has bad gearing, period.


    10. The highest speed the 962 has reached was 251.25 mph, the Veyron did 253. Until the 962 goes above 251.25 mph, its top speed is considered to be 251.25 mph, and thats it.
     
  20. qoute from DivineRage:

    8. You said the 962 was tested at the same track as the F1, the F1 was tested a Nardo. And you obviously have no idea what the hell a "quarter mile" is.

    9. If the 962 didnt have enough of Ehra-Lessien to reach its top speed, it has bad gearing, period.

    10. The highest speed the 962 has reached was 251.25 mph, the Veyron did 253. Until the 962 goes above 251.25 mph, its top speed is considered to be 251.25 mph, and thats it.


    re: 8. both, the McLaren F1 and the Dauer 962 LM were tested at Ehra-Lessien

    re: 9. the 962 LM H A S achieved a top speed of 251.25 mph at Ehra-Lessien

    re: 10. The highest speed the 962 has reached was 251.25 mph, the Veyron did 253. Until the 962 goes above 251.25 mph, its top speed is considered to be 251.25 mph, and thats it.
     
  21. 8. Wasnt the F1 tested a Nardo? I thought it was.

    9. Yes, thats what I said. He was saying that it had a higher top speed, just that it didnt have long enough of a track to reach it.

    10. Yep.
     
  22. #23 DodgeMS-4, Nov 8, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    "1. I havent driven a Veyron, but Jeremy Clarkson did. He said it would last over 20 years, and that it was simply the best car he had ever driven."

    If the above quoted paragraph is you're only proof then you fail.


    "2. The Sledgehammer was never MEANT for production, the Veyron is."

    That doesn't matter, as I stated in the other thread which I was speaking of above when I said the following "why don't you guys actually compare a prototype to a prototype like the callaway" out of the few people that actually responded, all of the people that did respond said some bullshit about how that wouldn't be a fair comparison. I'm so sure that had nothing to do with the recorded top speed of the callaway...give me a break you're precious miracle car's topspeed was beaten years before the 16/4 was even designed and when offered the proof by me you and other's chose not too look at it, but to rather fling insults in my direction.

    You should do some research and you will find that many callaway corvettes have been built and legalized in the united states. Seeing as how the callaway package was that of addons added to a pre existing street legal production car guess what? The callaway much like the dodge viper venom upgrades did not need to be crash tested, because the viper and corvette had already undergone crash testing.


    "3. Tom Cruise's Veyron IS in the USA.



    That's in Hollywood."


    Yes it WAS in the USA for that movie premiere, however you may notice that the car had no legalization of any kind on it anywhere. Do you see a license plate? The reason the car has no license plates is because the 16/4 that tom cruise drove to that premiere wasn't and still is not legalized in the united states. The vehicle passed customs, however tom cruise's 16/4 has not undergone emissions, registration or crash testing, and there is no license plate for it. There was a law spoken of before on these forums that someone mentioned a while ago, something like the show and display law or something like that, which allowed non-registered, non -licensed supercars to be driven on the road for very few days out of a year. Other then the car being driven because of that rule or law w/e, at this moment in time no 16/4's are street legal anywehre in the united states period.


    "5. Last I heard, the Gallardo had a production higher than 200. Same goes for the Porsche Carrera GT (2500), the 911 (wont bother coming up with a number), and every street legal Ferrari, such as the Enzo (399). However I doubt the 962 has been crash tested, seeing as it takes at least 4-5 cars to crash test, and the 962 only having a production of 13, I dont think Dauer could afford it."


    If you actually attempt to read my above post you may notice how I said the following -

    "Just recently when the Lamborghini Gallardo came out; even before the gallardo was available to anyone to buy Lamborghini had already sent a few to the united states to be crash tested."

    When Lamborghini had produced the first few Gallardo's that they shipped off to the united states to be crash tested, lamborghini hadn't even realeased a production #, there wasn't a production # till after it passed the testing (most car manufacturer's like lamborghini, ferrari and so on, wont even bother to produce a car if it doesn't pass crash testing). As for other car makers like Ferrari; even before the enzo and the berlinetta were issued a production #, the first few of each model that Ferrari producded (and other models) were shipped to the united states for crash testing. That in itself says that Bugatti knows their vehicle is not safe nor reliable, because they havn't even spoken of getting a 16/4 crash tested, yet ferrari sent the very first enzo they produced (which costs more then a 16/4 to build) to get tested.



    "6. Volkwagen is nowhere close to bankrupt, stfu."

    I never once said VW went or came close to bankrupt, you un-intelligent idiot. I said before vw bought Bugatti, Bugatti had gone bankrupt one time, and had almost gone bankrupt a second time BEFORE VW bought the company (amazingly during these times Bugatti was spending insane amounts of money on the 16/4 trying to work all the problems out, and is still trying to work problems out). Seriosuly learn to #$%#ing read.



    "7. Show me an article saying it almost killed 4 test drivers. Show me WHATEVER saying that its AWD system failed."

    Why should I? You waisted near 1 and a half years of my time blabbing you had the 16/4 topspeed proof, which you didn't. Because you waited all that time and someone posted the proof for you, because you were too lazy and stupid to find it yourself; guess what? I'm not going to post a damn thing. Good luck finding the info because you're not getting me to provide the info for you this time.



    "8. You said the 962 was tested at the same track as the F1, the F1 was tested a Nardo. And you obviously have no idea what the hell a "quarter mile" is."



    I have told you repeatedly that the 962 was tested at Ehra-Lessien, the very track where the f1 was tested. That being said you're above quoted attempt to change the subject failed. Do everyone here a favor and re-read a simple paragraph until you understand it before you decide to shoot you're mouth off.

    Yeah I bet I have no idea what the hell a quarter mile is huh? I wonder how I was able to tune a friend/client's many buick regals which he builds for his business, especially since I tuned EACH CAR HE HAS BUILT AT A 1/4 MILE TRACK WITH MY LAPTOP. I also suppose when I had to recalibrate the fuel maps on the ecu for my nissan 200sx I didn't test it on the local 1/4 mile track, but i tested it on a dirt road alongside a mountain huh?. (their are dyno's here in town, however since a 1/4 mile track gives better info then a dyno does, I and other's who live in the same town calibrate and tune cars the real way; on a 1/4 mile track) DivineRage are you seriously so thick headed that you can't even remember something I have told you repeatedly?? For #$%#s sake just don't respond anymore.

    What is really quite hilarious about this whole thing is that in a topic quite some time ago where you blabbed on and on about having the topspeed of the 16/4, but you never posted it because you didn't actually have it, you had to wait for someone to post it for you. The proof that someone else provided for you were pictures of the 16/4 on a 1/4 mile track, even though the 1/4 mile track that the 16/4 was tested on is far longer then the 1/4 mile tracks we have here in the united states. I find it very funny knowing that you have seen those pictures many many times and never once asked yourself or anyone - "I wonder why that 16/4 was testt for it's topspeed on a 1/4 mile track and not on a real course." So keep it coming with the idiotic replies Divine, as I havn't laughed this hard in some time.

    BTW never start a setence with the word "and", as you look very un-intelligent when you do.



    "9. If the 962 didnt have enough of Ehra-Lessien to reach its top speed, it has bad gearing, period."

    As I have told you going on 15 times now (maybe more as i can't remember the many times I have had to endure you're incredible stupidity, and you're need to not read anything anyone who you are disagreeing with types) the 962lm does not have bad gearing. What I typed above and countless other time's was the following -

    "The 962 doesn't have bad gearing, in fact the 962lm has better gear ratios then the Veyron 16/4 does. No I did not say that it would require a Redicoulisly long straightaway to use half its last gear. What I was trying to tell you even thought you still aren't able to grasp the idea, is that the straighaway of the course the 962 was tested on wasn't even half as long as the straight track the 16/4 was tested on"

    I find it absolutely hilarious that every car which has been tested at the track Ehra-Lessien has had the same problem of not building up enough topspeed on the straighaway in question simply because THE STRAIGHTAWAY IS NOT LONG ENOUGH, almost every car tested on this same track has had to have their topspeed recorded after a certain banked turn, which even then is not accurate. The straightaway on Ehra-Lessien has nothing to do with gear ratios, it has only to do with the straightaway on Ehra-Lessien not being long enough to be considered as a place to get an accurate top speed reading.

    Obviously you still do not understand the main problem here. When the 962lm was tested at Ehra-Lessien the vehicle reached its top speed of 251.25 mph AFTER COMING OUT OF A BANKED TURN, AND NOT ON A STRAIGHTAWAY. However the 16/4 on the other hand reached it's topspeed of 253 mph ON A 1/4 (I should have wrote a 1/4 mile like track since the 1/4 mile tracks in europe seem to be longer then the 1/4 mile tracks here in the states, but i'm too lazy atm) MILE TRACK WHICH HAS NO TURNS AND ISN'T A REAL COURSE. The aforementioned would be the exact same as me saying "my 200sx can beat a 16/4 because my nissan has 1500 horsepower."

    Fact is neither the 92lm or the 16/4 have been tested in similar conditions, so the 2 cars cannot be compared together, and shouldn't be compared by anyone until the 2 cars are tested on the same type of track. So out of all the people that said the 16/4 is faster sorry to say but you are a moron. The 962lm was tested and recorded an a actual racetrack, which is the best place to test a vehicle. The 16/4 was tested on a 1/4 MILE OF TRACK, WHICH IS WHERE ALL DRAG QUEENS ARE TESTED.


    "10. The highest speed the 962 has reached was 251.25 mph, the Veyron did 253. Until the 962 goes above 251.25 mph, its top speed is considered to be 251.25 mph, and thats it."


    I couldn't agree with you more, however what bothers me and it appears bothers only me about the above quoted response is that on one hand the 962's topspeed was recorded on an actual track, a course that better simulates daily driving. On the other hand the only topspeed run the 16/4 has been tested on was a 1/4 mile of straight track, (though it appears the track that the 16/4 was tested on is actually longer then 1/4 mile tracks here in the states) in no way simulates, daily driving, or how the car will react in any number of ways.

    Therefore if people on this board consider a 1/4 mile track to be the best place for testing a car, then I'm sorry but I do not share the same feelings. I like a car that can actually handle a real course and not a 1/4 mile track, but that might just be me.
     
  23. #24 DivineRage, Nov 8, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    1. Of course I have no proof, the Veyron has been out for less than two years, how the hell do you expect me to prove it will last 20?


    2. Comparing a prototype to a prototype you say.

    Let me make something clear

    Callaway = one-off
    Veyron = production car, NOT a prototype.


    3. There is a licence plate.... you cant read what it says because the camera is blurry and far away, but there is one.


    5. They knew they would sell a lot more than 200 Gallardos, as soon as they came up with the idea, they planned everything in order to be able to sell a lot more than 200, which means crash testing. The Veyron on the other hand, isnt meant to go above 200 production, so they dont have to do that. The same as the Gallardo applies for every production Ferrari and Porsche.


    6. VW came up with the idea of the Veyron, they didnt buy the company halfway through the Veyron's production, they built it from start to finish, and never got even remotely close to being bankrupt.


    7. There isnt, I just google'd a couple things including "Veyron, AWD fail", and guess what? The ONLY link saying it failed, was from you in another thread from this forum, which brings me to believe that you entirely made this up.


    8. Oh well thats new, a quarter mile in the USA is shorter than a quarter mile in Europe. Guess what? A quarter mile is 402 meters, wether you're in the USA, or in Europe, a quarter mile is a quarter mile. Yes, the track does keep going after to leave enough room for the car to stop, but it doesnt go on for miles and miles.

    Perhaps you could explain to me how this car: http://www.hpcoatings.com/images/Warren_Johnson.jpg
    has a hard time reaching 200mph on a quartermile, and requires parachutes to stop in time, while the Veyron not only did 253mph, but also did it without any parachute?

    Oh and by the way, the Veyron didnt do 253mph at a quarter mile, guess where it did it? A simple google research can help a lot you know?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron

    Go to "Performance" and read the last sentence of the second paragraph. Let me help you out with a copy/paste.

    ------------------------
    This test, at Volkswagen's Ehra-Lessien test track, reached a top speed of 253 mph (407 km/h).
    ------------------------
     
  24. #25 DodgeMS-4, Nov 9, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    DivineRage if you still do not understand what I have been atttempting to tell you repeatedly, then please do not reply ever again, because I am getting sick of having to write the same thing over and over again many times, just so that you can skim through the first sentence not even reading what I have typed.

    "1. Of course I have no proof, the Veyron has been out for less than two years, how the hell do you expect me to prove it will last 20?"

    Their is no way for you or anyone to prove that because even the frame which was built brand new for the 16/4 hasn't been around for more then 5 years, therefore it is impossible for anyone to say how long it will last.
    It is also very stupid and illogical for someone to say that the 16/4 will last for over 20 years as you said the following in a perovious response which you made on page 2 of this topic -

    "The Veyron can be used every day for just about anything, it will last for over 20 years, and it destroys everything in a straight line, including the 962LM."

    Yet you previously typed the following - "Of course I have no proof, the Veyron has been out for less than two years, how the hell do you expect me to prove it will last 20?"

    It must be very hard for you to remember what you typed 1 day before....




    "2. Comparing a prototype to a prototype you say.

    Let me make something clear

    Callaway = one-off
    Veyron = production car, NOT a prototype."

    The callaway is not a one-off, it never has been and it never will be. As I have told you in my previous responses the callaway was and is a upgrade package to a existing street legal production corvette. Guess what that means? Since the callaway package which has been used on many many corvettes over the years is a UPGRADE PACKAGE it is not a one-off and it does not need to be crash tested simply because THE CAR THAT THE PACKAGE IS AN UPGRADE FOR HAS ALREADY PASSED CRASH TESTING AND IS A PRODUCTION STREET LEGAL CAR. The same exact thing is going on with the dodge viper and the upgrade packages for the viper, and yes the callaway package is still offered by many shops. Interestingly though, shops which primarily handle the dodge viper upgrade packages also have several corvette packages they sell/offer to the public which include the callaway package and variations of the callaway package.

    In an older forum where certain people were comparing the 16/4 Veyron to other cars (this was back when Bugatti themselves still spoke of the Veyron being a prototype) I posted on the thread in question and said the following "why don't you guys actually make a fair comparison and compare a drag queen versus a drag queen?" Not only did I type that, but after waiting a few days for responses on said thread I compared the 16/4 and the Callaway. Funny thing is many people on that thread said ok let's do it, except for you and 2 other 16/4 fanboys who started flinging insults my direction as soon as you saw the topspeed of the Callaway. You must have felt really bad knowing that you're favortie car had its topspeed beaten almost 10 years prior by a stock corvette with a upgrade package.


    "3. There is a licence plate.... you cant read what it says because the camera is blurry and far away, but there is one."

    Actually no their isn't a license plate. Unlike you I have the newest codecs, movie player's and so on on my computer, that being said any video I watch is hardly ever blurry, and if they are blurry their are programs which I have to clean the image up. I have looked at the movie you provided more then 10 times wherein I repeatedly paused it and still I do not see a license plate or any registration anywhere on the vehicle. What is really hilarious is that the people who imported the 16/4 for tom cruise just barely got the car through customs (had to do with alot of kickbacks and knowing the right people to get the car through customs) to this date the 16/4 which you see Tom Cruise driving in that video is not street legal, registed, has not passed emissions, and has not gone through any sort of crash testing, that means if Tom Cruise every chooses to drive his veyron on the street in the united states and decides he doesnt need a police escort guess what happens? The police come arrest and fine him, the police then impound the vehicle until is it is legalized, passes emissions, is registered in the united states, and passes crash testing.




    "5. They knew they would sell a lot more than 200 Gallardos, as soon as they came up with the idea, they planned everything in order to be able to sell a lot more than 200, which means crash testing. The Veyron on the other hand, isnt meant to go above 200 production, so they dont have to do that. The same as the Gallardo applies for every production Ferrari and Porsche."

    By "they" I hope you are referring to Lamborghini, and sorry to be the one to tell you but no even back when the Gallardo and other Lamborghini's were given the prototype title by Lamborghini themselves, Lamborghini had already shipped a few of each model to the united sates for crash testing. Ferrari did the same with the Enzo the berlineta and many others. As did Porsche with many models including the carrera gt (the one with the v10 engine; I may have typed the wrong name for the porsche supercar I'm referring to, but im tired atm and I really dont give a fuc$.)

    I'm sure most cars don't have to go through crash testing if they don't want to sell their vehicles in the united states, and know their vehicles aren't safe. But when auto manufacturers design and produce a few prototype vehicles and then send those prototype vehicles off to the united states to be crash tested, even before those vehicles are given a production # that says something, it also says something when a auto manufacturer chooses not to have a certain car crash tested.


    "6. VW came up with the idea of the Veyron, they didnt buy the company halfway through the Veyron's production, they built it from start to finish, and never got even remotely close to being bankrupt."


    Vw may have come up with the idea of the Veyron if what you typed is true. However Bugatti and not VW designed and built the 16/4, and yes Bugatti designed and built the 16/4 before VW bought Bugatti. My guess is that Bugatti and Vw had already been talking about VW buying the company and would only do so after Bugatti built the first few prototype 16/4 Veyron's (which is what happened). Also sorry to be the one to tell you yet again; as if I havn't told you this enough already but Bugatti has declared bankruptcy one time, and almost gone bankrupt one other time BEFORE VW BOUGHT BUGATTI. That is the last time I am going to type that, I have told you that repeatedly on more then 35 occasions. If you still can not grasp what I have just typed then that is your problem and you need to learn how to better understand the english language.



    "7. There isnt, I just google'd a couple things including "Veyron, AWD fail", and guess what? The ONLY link saying it failed, was from you in another thread from this forum, which brings me to believe that you entirely made this up."

    You didn't look hard enough apparently. Is this like when you spoke of having the proof of the topspeed for the 16/4 in another thread but "couldn't" post it for reasons which you have never spoken of? (I should say you never posted said proof because you never had the topspeed 16/4 proof to begin with, but kept blabbing on and on that you did. Yet you waited 1 year and almost 7 months for someone to find and post the information for you, where after you chose to fling insults in my direction to make yourself appear to be the bigger person. I mean damn you couldn't find the info you spoke of having on numerious occasions, and then when someone who wasn't even involved in the conversatoin posts it for you, you act like you posted it. You are a very pathetic person.)

    The very article which talked about Bugatti limiting the vehicle's topspeed spoke vaguely of the reasoning behind that. Look for that article. By the way you might find it amazing if when you search for something using google.com that you actually scroll down to the bottom of the search page and click the #2, #3 page and so on. But then again I might be asking too much of you, and I don't want you to hurt yourself by actually doing something which requires you to read more then 1 sentence.





    "Perhaps you could explain to me how this car: http://www.hpcoatings.com/images/Warren_Johnson.jpg
    has a hard time reaching 200mph on a quartermile, and requires parachutes to stop in time, while the Veyron not only did 253mph, but also did it without any parachute?


    ...posting a picture of a drag car is in no way going to help you're argument. Especially since the car that you posted a picture of has over 5,000 horsepower and more then likely jsut as much torque. I did a google search on warren johnson and I found the following -

    http://www.gmgoodwrench.com/Racing/NHRA/WarrenJohnson.jsp

    After going to that website if you click on the 5th page and read the first paragraph you see the following -

    "Driving Oldsmobiles, Chevrolets and Pontiacs of all shapes and sizes, he has made the NHRA record books his personal diary, including being the first Pro Stock competitor to post a top speed above 180, 190 and 200 mph."

    The yellow pontiac that you posted the picture of above has gone over 210mph numerous times.

    The main reason that drag cars like the one you posted need a parachute to slow the vehicle down is because even if you were to let off the gas pedal you would have to wait a long time before you could touch the break pedal, thus having a parachute slows the drag car down to a reasonable speed where the brakes can take over. If in that car warren johnson even touched the break pedal during a run before the parachute had deployed and he waited till a certain preset mph, the car would spin out of control possibly flipping and crashing into wall or the other driver he is racing against at over 200mph more then likely destroying the car and killing warren johnson and possibly others.

    Apparently you have never seen a drag car in person up close. If you have then you would know that when a driver does a run in a drag car, they do not ever want to touch the brake pedal until after the parachute has been deployed and the driver reaches a preset safe speed. Driver's of drag cars want to turn the drag car as little as possible because drag cars are very unstable and have bad weight distribution, which causes the vehicle to become unstable and crash. Need I add the fact that most drag cars people see on tv or in real life can not be running for more then 10 minutes because the engine will explode, these same cars don't idle very good either.

    I honestly don't know why you chose to post a picture of a drag car to compare to the 16/4. You said previously that you can't compare a callaway to a 16/4 because the callaway is a drag car. But now you find a real drag car to compare to the veyron? I've had enough of you and you're retarded, illogical, pathetic responses. Either think of something intelligent to comeback with or don't type anything at all.













    "Oh and by the way, the Veyron didnt do 253mph at a quarter mile, guess where it did it? A simple google research can help a lot you know?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron

    Go to "Performance" and read the last sentence of the second paragraph. Let me help you out with a copy/paste.

    ------------------------
    This test, at Volkswagen's Ehra-Lessien test track, reached a top speed of 253 mph (407 km/h)."

    That is great. However when I clicked on the above link that you provided it did not show any proof of the 16/4 doing this on a track, the article only spoke of it. Therefore since you once again have not provided any tangible proof (ie. photos or a movie) we are going to go back to a thread where you spoke of having the topspeed for the 16/4 which you never once posted, but in fact waited almost 1 year and 7 months hoping someone would post it for you. I also went to caranddriver.com hoping to see this so called proof of when car and driver tested the 16/4 -

    http://www.caranddriver.com/carreviews/2007-bugatti-veyron/bugatti_veyron_16.4.html

    however I found no such proof on their site. All I found were the topspeed in articles, not 1 picture or movie of the 16/4 being tested anywhere. The one picture which looks like the car might be on a actual course is the picture of a 1/4 mile track which showed the topspeed of 402kph on sign, and a 1/4 mile track is nowhere close to being an actual course.

    I also went to Bugatti's own site www.Bugatti.com and looked for everything on the 16/4 veyron. Interestingly Bugatti chose not to post picture's or movies which included the topspeed on their own site.
     

Share This Page