<center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote> <b>THIS CAR IS TOO HEAVY! Watch out for cornering...</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center>
Mclaren F1 Will still kill this car and its nicer y u ask Come Ok first off the F1 has much. And i mean much better proformance. Speed dont matter unless u can keep it under control. Second this car defines ulgy. Also the veron around a trak wouln't stand a chance v.S. a f1. It would have to slow down to much to make a turn while the F1 slows down not even half as much giving it the advantage SO HOW U LIKE THEM APPLES<!-- Signature -->
I really hope you read this because your post is based on nothing. There have been no performance statistics released regarding the 16.4 Veyron's handling characteristics yet. Besides, your quote about speed not meaning anything, that's all the McLaren excelled at. It was NOT a great handler due to the weight of the engine which cause oversteer. I guess you're just another blind McLaren fan. It's a good car, but it's not the best.
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from xXstatickidXx</i> <b>Ok first off the F1 has much. And i mean much better proformance. Speed dont matter unless u can keep it under control. Second this car defines ulgy. Also the veron around a trak wouln't stand a chance v.S. a f1. It would have to slow down to much to make a turn while the F1 slows down not even half as much giving it the advantage SO HOW U LIKE THEM APPLES</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE --> No matter what this crap got even F1 shift paddle, it's still too heavy which will certainly affect its balance and corner handling.
I think it's hilarious how so many people keep claiming that the 16/4 is heavy porker, seeing as how there are NO figures out as to the mass of this vehicle. The only things that give a clue as to how much it will weigh are the body/engine materials, all of which are alloys, hence very light but strong materials. I can almost guarantee, that the McLaren will still be a lighter car, but not by much. And as far a roadholding...nope, no specs on that either. You can bet that it'll pull more G's on the skidpad than the McLaren due to the all-wheel drive (Road&Track 12/97: McLaren F1 - 0.86G's...Corvette Z06's pull more). I am a McLaren F1 fanatic, hell, I even drove a few hours out of my way on a roadtrip just to gawk at one through a dealer window(Newport Autosport in Newport Beach), but I think this is SOOOOO much more car than the F1 is. I think if you pitted the McLaren to the 16/4 on either the track or the strip, you'd find the 16/4 would embarass the McLaren.
I love going to the Newport auto place my friends mom know the owner and we get to drive some of the cars. ((But the owner will never tell))OH and the Callway Sledgehammer corvette would bet this thing <!-- Signature -->
I am going to have to agree with kaken944. No one has any idea what this car is capeable of yet. Accept that we all know it can do 250+. I think that it will be able to run with the Mclaren. You who say that the Mclaren will kill this car on the track do not know what you are talking about. If this car is going to do 250+ mph, it had better darn well be able to handle that speed on the track; and I think it will. This car is absolutely sweet.
It's moot to compare the Callaway Sledgehammer and the 16/4...the Callaway's a tuner car and the 16/4's bone stock. If Callaway can tune a car that had a top speed around 170 up to 250+, you better believe you could work the 16/4 over to at least better that, even with a simple boost controller or "chip" solution. If you wanna really get nuts, as some really rich people are known to do(John Carmack's Turbo F50 for example), you can drop the compression, slap some larger turbos on, and get an even nastier car. Just trying to shake it up a little more.
I am a BIG fan of this car and the F1 but like said above I have to wait because there isn't enough info on this car availible yet.
Vipers suck ass. this is a terrible looking car but holy shit, it puts out some good numbers....<!-- Signature -->
Ok first off the F1 has much. And i mean much better proformance. Speed dont matter unless u can keep it under control. Second this car defines ulgy. Also the veron around a trak wouln't stand a chance v.S. a f1. It would have to slow down to much to make a turn while the F1 slows down not even half as much giving it the advantage SO HOW U LIKE THEM APPLES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mclaren...... THE PIMP ASS CAR 240 MPH!!!!!!!!!!!! SO HOW U LIKE THEM APPLES Listen your an idiot. Your bragging about the 240 mph well incase you havent read the stats on this car or cant do math 252mph is a lot faster and in answer to your question APPLE PIE biatch!
ha damn how can some people be so dumb your talking crap about the 16/4 and you havent even seen alll the stats yet... the mclaren is a good car but im bure that this car beat it Engine Quad Turbo W16 0 - 60 mph est 3.0 seconds Horsepower 746.5 kw / 1001.1 bhp @ 6000 rpm 0 - 100 mph Not Available Transmission 7-Speed Topspeed 406 kph / 252.3 mph <!-- Signature -->
When you guys say this car can beat a McLaren what do you mean by that? Do you mean it can beat it in a 1/4 mile? in acceleration? top speed? on the race track? Those who compare this car to a McLaren must realize a couple of things: 1) A race is won by the driver not the car. It don't matter how good a car is, if the driver sux, he'll lose the race. 2) We basically have no stats on this car. And are the known stats estimates or true facts. 3) The last made McLaren was years ago. This car has much more technology put in it than the McLaren. Stats wise, this car is amazing. But until it's released and tested, we can not know for sure. Besides, I won't say any car is better than the other until I drive them for myself (which may be never). It's all based on the eye of the beholder. But style wise, the McLaren beats this car senseless. P.S Did the Mc Laren F1 have any turbos? I don't think they did, but that fact would make much of difference in the comparison of these two awesome supercars.<!-- Signature -->
Actual the top speed of the McLaren F1 was done through a N/A 370 engine (BMW) so to compair this car to the McLaren straight out is stupid for one reason the BMW engine used in the F1 is Smaller and doesn't have 4 turbos, I love the looks of this car but untill I have more stats it's only eye candy, The F1 still hold the title of worlds fastest production car be because all these cars that claim stakes higher than the F1 were not considered production cars, actually the point about this car being tuned and that it costs more because of it is actually quite a missconception, the company Bugatti makes their cars by hand, wich brings the price up considerably, most of the extra cost is consumed by the areo dynamic research, more of this cost is consumed on the expensive lightwieght material used to build this car (rumored to be lighter than the F1 I'll belive it when I see it) When this car is finally produced I would love to see it up against the McLaren (I'm sure the engine is considerably heavier) Lastly what were you talking about, with that stupid out of no were coment about the Viper?<!-- Signature -->
Since we don't have all the stats on this Bugatti, let's compare what it has to what the F1 has. Does the F1 have 1001hp? What's the F1's 0-60 time? How big is the F1's engine? What is the F1's drivetrain like? If the F1 is better in three of the four questions asked then you'll see which one is better. <!-- Signature -->
Let me start off by saying that this car would be RAPED by the Mclaren around a track. The Mclaren would totally humiliate this thing. First off, lets look at the engine of the Bugatti. This car has 8 liters of displacement, and 4 turbos. It is making 125hp per liter. THAT BLOWS. The 1992 Bugatti EB100SS had a 4 liter V-12 quad turbo that made 185hp per liter. This Veyron is 10 years newer, and it falls flat on its face with this one. If it had the same power/liter ratio as the EB100SS, this car would be 1500hp. Then, in comparision to the engine on the Mclaren F1 LM. The BMW V-12 in the Mclaren makes 110hp/liter. The Mclaren has almost the same efficiency as the Bugatti and it is NORMALLY ASPIRATED!! NO TURBOCHARGERS!! Then, you must take into account the weight of these cars. I have not seen any numbers for the Bugatti, but it has got to be more than that of the Mclaren. The Mclaren weighs less than Civics, Integras, S2000's. This is one of the lightest cars in the world, and in addition to that, it has a huge amount of power. The Mclaren uses advanced materials everywhere to save weight. What do you see when you look inside the Bugatti? Heavy stuff that is in there to make it comfortable. This car cannot even hope to approach the low weight of the Mclaren. I just read estimated numbers for the 0-100mph times of this car... and they were .6 seconds slower than the Mclaren. Granted, this car would blow the Mclaren away from there on, but with AWD, this car should jump off the line like no other. It doesn't. The only explanations are weight and wheelspin... Wheelspin is not that much of a factor considering that this car has 4 HUGE drive wheels... That leaves weight, which is something that this car must have lots of... Another thing that needs to be considered here is the history of the two companies. Bugatti has historically made luxury cars, while Mclaren is the second most sucessful F1 racing team in history. This reflects in the two cars being compared here. And granted, this car probably will have a higher top speed than the Mclaren, but who the hell cares? The only thing 250mph is good for is to claim the title. Everything about the Mclaren was put there to enable this car to be the fastest ALL AROUND car in history. That is what many people are losing sight of here. As I said before, the Mclaren would totally kick the crap out of this thing on a track. Peace
Estimated numbers on 0-100? The bugatti would destroy the F1 in acceleration, to 60,to 100,to whatever. For example, there's a video floating around the 'net where an F1 takes on a tweaked Supra in a standing kilometer run. The F1 finishes in 19.5sec @276kph(171.5mph). The bugatti's ONLY acceleration figure is 0-300kmh(186.4mph)in UNDER 14sec. Given the Bugatti's advantage of an extra gear and nearly twice the amount of torque over an even greater rpm range, the F1 wouldn't stand a chance in a straight line to ANY speed. 125HP/liter DOES NOT BLOW, not when you have an absolute MOUNTAIN of torque available. People buy horsepower, but drive torque. Granted, the F1 has it's share of torque(around 250+ lb.ft at as little as 1500rpm, up to a max of 479lb.ft), but it's NOTHING compared to having 920lb.ft from 2200-5500rpm, which is what the 4 turbos are there for. Will the bugatti weigh more than the F1? I think it will, but I think its mass will still be within a few hundred pounds of the McLaren, which considering how light the f1 is, isn't bad for a car with full-luxo amenities and a sound system that would put nearly ANYTHING to shame. Would an F1 embarass a 16/4 around a track? Hardly...the F1 is known for it's excessive oversteer and less than steller roadhandling(0.86g's on the skidpad). Even if it weighs more than the F1, the 16/4 WILL out corner it with it's full-time AWD system, and those 20' rims will be able to contain massive brakes, possibly(and I emphasize possibly, since there is no spec for the brakes as of yet) out brake the F1. Given it will out-accelerate the F1, out-corner, and possibly even out-brake it, the F1 would be the one getting the crap kicked out of it. I am a McLaren nut, but I know a faster car when I see one.
holy shit, kaken944, u be the man. ur one-a the only people around here who has atleast half an idea of what ur talkin about(uve got much more than that.) though the sumptuous and extravagant interior hints at a wieght gain over the MC1, it shouldnt be overwhelming.
xXstatickidXx: how about u take ur goddamn apples and shove them down ur stupid mouth.SHUT UP. ur comments were halarious.im laughing at u.seeing as no specs have been put out for the various performance characteristics u were refering to in ur idiotic query there, u have no proof, and, therefor, no businuss saying that.how the #$%# do u like them apples.
Kaken 944__i have to say....you are the stupiest idiot i ever seen__ Listen to this and learn__ 1. Bugatti have no chance to accelerate under 14 sec upp to 300 kmh_ 2. Yes Maclaren would beat Bugatti around the track 3. There is only 2 cars who can beat mclaren around the track and that is>_962:an and Ferarri f-50 gtr LM_ 4. This cars weight is gonna be over 1300 kg_thats what they say now. 5. This aint pure racer_ 6. Please nOObs learn this>>>>Horse power isnt everything_ Kaken 944_ you said >>>I know faster car when i see it? you must mean ON straights`? cauze there your right....Mclaren would loose on straights.....but around the track_! LoL it would beat buggatis ass__ PS>>i dont need and i dont want nOObs comments ON THIS_
first off i gotta say that both of these cars are #$%#ing amazing!!!! BUT what about the weight if the Bugatti, i can tell u now that the car is quite heavy, and that the center of gravity in the car is actually quite high, so in a cormer it would tend to slide, however, the very short wheelbase, the possibility of huge brakes, and the massive power on tap, i think that it would be very hard to decide which one of these cars would win around the track, however, the F1 GTR longtail would destroy the Veryon, it has incredible grip and is faster than the F1 by about 5-10mph, so the Veryon would have no chance!!!!! if it was down to the Veryon and the regular F1 though i would have to see it first!!!! if u want a look at the future of supercars, look no further than the Murcielago, low center of gravity, lots of power, an estimated top speed, with certain areo setup and sport exhaust, of 225mph, i would go for the Murcielago. the stats that Supercars.net have are correct for the base model, but Lambo have been doing some modifying and these are the latest stats!!!!!
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from kaken944</i> <b>I think it's hilarious how so many people keep claiming that the 16/4 is heavy porker, seeing as how there are NO figures out as to the mass of this vehicle.</b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->motortrends newest mag. 'wheel base=106.3in. track f/r=67.4/64.6in. width=78.7in. hieght=47.5in.', unless youre talking qabout something else. <!-- Signature -->
<!-- QUOTE --><center><hr width="90%"></center><blockquote><i>Quote from VetteMan69</i> <b>I love going to the Newport auto place my friends mom know the owner and we get to drive some of the cars. ((But the owner will never tell))OH and the Callway Sledgehammer corvette would bet this thing </b></blockquote><center><hr width="90%"></center><!-- END QUOTE -->the top speed isnt set yet. we put that down. its 250+ in motortrend. and the callaway is alone. its only one car.<!-- Signature -->