Discussion in '2002 Bugatti 16/4 Veyron Preproduction' started by Gallucci, Nov 2, 2002.


    true. haha

    EVO Magazine, a far more reliable source than Motor Trend or Car and Driver.

    And what makes it more reliable? The fact that it's not American? I've found no problem with the credibility of C&D or Motor Trend.

    I question the skill of their drivers, they consistently come up with slower track times than many other magazines, and official tests.

    The skill of their drivers has nothing to do with either their reliability or their credibility. Which car is the 'ultimate driver's car' could just as easily be determined by you (had you driven all the cars). It's all opinion really, and I don't think either of us having driven all the cars that could compete for ultimate driver's car.

    thats exactly what i think. and alos +1 karma to the guy who started this forum

    Yes, but, if you're not as good of a driver, it's easier to post faster lap times if it's naturally a faster car, also the driver's don't always like the feel of a better handling car because they find them too "touchy". ex: Magazines have tested the NSX-R at Nurburgring and had lap times of over 8 minutes, however one professional driver who tested the car managed a Lap time of 7:56, this is obviously an example of the NSX-R's handling, as he was able to use it to maximize it. On the other hand. Many magazines have achieved lap times in the Corvette C5 that are much closer to the fastest time (sorry, can't remember what the C5's lap times have been), this is reminiscent of the C5's faster speed, but poorer handling, as the car was easier to drive, and the speed of the car was mainly responsible for the lap time. Basically the better driver was able to make quicker times through the corners while anybody driving the C5 was able to make quicker times by straight line acceleration.

    Personally (if I were to drive it and all the other contenders) I don't think I wouldn consider the NSX the Ultimate driver's car - though I'm quite sure it would be very close. (I'm quite sure the Lotus 340R - among a few others - is more driver oriented)

    i gave him +1 karma but then it was taken away by some other guy, and a cant rate one thread more than once<A BORDER="0" HREF=""><IMG BORDER="0" SRC=""></A>
  9. #84 venomGTR, Jan 9, 2003
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016

    there are lots of cars that make enough mumbo to go this fast, all you need is some fancy aerodynamics and your sitting on four times the legal seed limit.
    the sledgehammer Crapvette made what about 800hp? on most of the toyota supras there make 800 at the rear wheels.
    pick up a hot rod mag and theres probably a dozen big blocked machines in there just under 1000hp.

    do some aerodynamic tuning and find some tires that can handle that speed and records can fall easy.

    so in conclusion there is NOTHING special about that vette and this bugatti is all class.
    do bear in mind the sledgehammer cost $400,000 to build up! i think these two cars are about the same price...
  10. Re: PLEASE STOP.

    Actually the Vette had its body completely rebuilt to handle the high speeds. This car was built for a top speed challenge, but the construction was delayed. Funny thing happened at that challenge though. Ferrari and Porsche brought cars, and while Porsche managed to increase about 10mph faster than stock, the Ferrari managed a few mph SLOWER than stock, this despite more hp and torque in a car designed for top speed. Simply put, top speed isn't as easy as it would seem.
  11. Re: PLEASE STOP.

    Hey Sherlock, if it's that easy why don't you go and try it yourself? ThereŽs good money available if one actually breaks any records. And if those records "fall easy", well duh, why haven't they fallen yet?

    FYI, getting a dyno chart for xx00 hp is actually COMPLETELY another thing, than putting those horses into ground under real life situation, as well as is keeping the car in one piece and one direction at those speeds.

Share This Page