Top Speed

Discussion in '2002 Bugatti 16/4 Veyron Preproduction' started by ryan8624, Jun 15, 2003.

  1. #201 Monkey, Feb 29, 2004
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Re: Top Speed

    DodgeMS-4,
    I don't recall BMW ever competing in the Can-Am series. If they did, they didn't last long or were simply non-competitive (and thus forgotten about) as Can-Am was dominated by Porsche (the most dominant), Chaparral, Lola, and McLaren. From a lot of your other posts (in other threads mostly), it seems that you are either a BMW nut, a McLaren nut, or both. Nothing wrong with that, but you seem to come across as saying that BMW engines are the best thing since sliced bread. You should note that most of the teams competing in the Can-Am series used large Chevrolet V8's. Including McLaren (although their first year utilized an Oldsmobile V8). The 1,200 hp Can-Am engines belonged to Porsche and those engines were 5.4-liter flat-12's. Check out the following links:
    http://www.cknet.org.uk/html/specification.htm
    http://www.vintagerpm.com/can-am_history.htm

    The BMW engine you speak of sounds more like a Formula 1 engine from the turbo era ( http://www.f1-grandprix.com/history5.html) where manufacturers were indeed making in excess of 1200 hp with 1.5-liter engines running on exotic (and VERY toxic) fuels and pushing very large amounts of boost.

    The problem I have with you calling the W16 pathetic and then comparing the engine with racing engines is that the reality of building a race car and the reality of building a road-going car are very different, especially when we start talking about the drivetrain. Sure, you can make 1,000 hp per liter from a small, turbocharged, high-revving engine, but how suitable is that engine going to be in a road car where at least some low end torque is required and must last at least 100,000 miles? As I said before, the engine wouldn't need the turbochargers to make its 987 hp from 8 liters (123 hp/L is still pretty impressive for a road-going car), it utilizes the turbos to enhance low and midrange torque (like the current VW/Audi, Saab, and Volvo turbo engines). Horsepower per liter is not the end-all-be-all of engine design, nor does it tell you much about an engine's efficiency.
     
  2. Re: Top Speed

    its sad how many people replyd to tphis topic
     
  3. Re: Top Speed

    you did too. anyway slow down so that reading what you typed isnt like reading code.
     
  4. It aint no thang!
    Re:
    Top Speed


    yo! Stop trippin over this, it aint sh!t! Actually its aight. But... I think the DIablo T50 would tear it a new one, no? With only 950 hp, and cheaper...
     
  5. Re: Top Speed

    Sorry about that Monkey i was posting in a different forum at the same time and I posted the wrong info. However here is what i meant to type - In the seventies the rules in formula 1 racing allowed for turbochargers, BMW made an unbeatable F1 car with a 1.5L inline four with 1200hp. I do not think bmw engines are the greatest things since sliced bread as you put it. I however tend to not like BMW very much at all, the same with mercedes benz they are very overpriced and very overrated. I would much rather have a Porsche flat 6 or a Japanese inline 6 or inline 4 over any bmw engine, except the inline 4 i spoke of earlier of course. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A> <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A> The 16/4 being unstable to the point of spinning out and almost killing someone at speeds in excess of 190mph proved that the 16/4 veyron is nothing more then a deathtrap prototype which should never have been tested in its current form.
    I and many others have known for a while that the w16 engine is pointless and useless, their is nothing positive about a w16 engine their never has been and their never will be the design itself is weak. If you want a strong engine with more cylinders go for the flat 12 (which ferrari has used in cars like the F512M, Mythos, Koenig Competition Evolution, etc.) at least the flat 12 didnt almost kill someone at 218mph like the veyron did.
     
  6. Re: Top Speed

    What manufactor makes the engine?
     
  7. Re: Top Speed

    Volkswagon as you probably know owns Bugatti but i am not actually sure who made the engine. Although you dont see the W form engines in many other car types not owned by VW.
     
  8. Re: Top Speed

    Hey, no problem. Just making sure there are straight facts and not just opinions. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/smile.gif"></A>

    While on the subject of straight facts, I seem to recall that I read in a magazine (God knows which one and when, I subscribe to 7 magazines) that the first running Bugatti Veyron prototype was unstable at "high" speed (no mention of the specific speed) which is why the suspension and a few aerodynamic tweaks were employed for the version we see here. I also seem to recall that the wheelbase was lengthened from previous concepts to increase cabin space. So, based on that, I don't see how the Veyron is still an unstable death trap. The reason for limiting it to 218 mph was due to the standard tires which use the Michelin PAX system. As I understand it, special tires must be fitted before the speed limiter can be removed by the dealer.

    Sure the W16 is pointless, but so are countless other supercars (doesn't mean they aren't exciting or fun), and the W16 engine itself I'm sure has absolutely no bearing the instability of the first prototype. It could have had a nitro-methane top fuel engine or a VW 1.8T and had the same problem. <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/emoticons.html"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://speed.supercars.net/cboardhtml/emoticons/PnutSpecial.gif"></A>
     
  9. Re: Top Speed

    i think it would, 1001 hp would be more than sufficient, just as long as everything is geared right, and there isn't to much drag, which i don't think there is.
     
  10. Re: Top Speed

    Yea it looks ayrodynamically sound. It also looks like it could do 250 with 1001 hp. I dont see a reason why it shouldnt.
     
  11. Re: Top Speed

    they tested it but it has not been confirmed. the top speed is only an estimate.
     
  12. Re: Top Speed

    Yea actually i mis spoke last time... this is actually pretty ayrodynamically unsound.. they still need to work on that a little bit.
     
  13. Re: Top Speed

    ??? right, ayrodynamically unsound... sure..

    its got some problums up around 250mph, but other then that im sure its been more then throughaly wind tunnel tested.
     
  14. Re: Top Speed

    Umm where did you get the above info ryan8624? Especially since the Veyron never exceeded speeds of 218 mph. While doing a topspeed test the Veyron spun out uncontrollably at 218 mph and Bugatti themselves has never shown a topspeed higher then that. After which the new chairman made a good decision and decided to limit the topspeed to 218mph. About you saying the veyron isnt aerodynamically unsound, where did you get that line of bs? You would have better off saying the veyron has a nuclear reactor for a engine. At leas tthat would have been funny. Bottom line no matter what anyone on this board says, the veyron in its current form is NOT aerodynamically sound, if it was aerodynamically sound it would have not spun out uncontrollably on a straightaway at 218mph almost killing the driver in the process, the veyron is nothing more then a overpriced, over- estimated deathtrap, it needs alot of work in its current form, bugatti would be better off re-designing the body and getting rid of the piece of crap w-16 in favor of something which has been proven.
     
  15. Re: Top Speed

    i belive it has the potential for over 250 mph but due to the drag coefficient it could never be efficient enough to surpass about 240 mph.
     
  16. Re: Top Speed

    the car loses horse power when it is AWD because of the heat, friction, and other factors generated by the extra drive, by even though the car has the aerodynamics and still enough power to top at 400 km/hr, and the heavier it is the more stable it is
     
  17. Re: Top Speed

    isnt it this car that can go past 250?
     
  18. Re: Top Speed

    who will drive a car worth that much that fast?
     
  19. Re: Top Speed

    That thing run at 406 km/h with a eletronic limitation .. maybe without it go at 408 but i'm sure this care have limitation
     
  20. Re: Top Speed

    this guy needs a smaller sig
     
  21. Re: Top Speed

    yes
     
  22. Re: Top Speed

    Bad news Bugatti said that they dumb the speed down to 225 mph so this is not that fastest car that title is still held by the 962
     
  23. Re: Top Speed

    In a recent interview with the CEO of Volkswagen, (who owns Bugatti,) he said that they will make sure that the car still gets up to 252 mph. He also said that the car was designed the wrong way. Most supercars are designed in the wind tunnel so they can be aerodynamic, and then designed to look better. This car was designed to look good, and then put in the wind tunnel. If they wanted to make it more aerodynamic, then they would probably have to change the way that the car looks.
     
  24. Re: Top Speed

    In that same interveiw, Bernd Pischetsrieder (VW's CEO) said that the next Bugatti will go back to Bugatti's roots of lightweight, high-performance sports cars.
     
  25. Re: Top Speed

    The Camaro ZL1 will take this......But what a Monster this is still and I wish, Oh How I wish I had one of these as well as a Camaro ZL1, a Buick GNX and a fast Iroc Z Camaro, Oh ya a WS6 Trans am (new) a Lingenfelter COrvette 427, Plus a stock Z06, Plus a Chevelle SS 454 1970, a 1969 Chevy Camaro RS...OH ya and One 1979 Pontiac Trans AM!!!
     

Share This Page