[sujaylahiri]

Now that we are talking about Veyron Killers, the Lingenfelter Corvette Z06 comes pretty close to it at 1/10th the price.
Lingenfelter C6 ZO6 427 CID Twin Turbo Corvette
Also with new Corvette coming up in 2009, wait until Lingenfelter twin turbo's it. Then that'll be the new Bugatti Veyron.
You don't need 1001 HP to reach that kind of speed. A lighter car with lesser horsepower can also do the job.
Good job by 9ff though. If the flat-6 is capable of 900 HP, imagine what the V10 (Carrera GT) is capable of!!!

[ananthkamath]

Originally Posted by sujaylahiri

Then that'll be the new Bugatti Veyron.

Tut, tut. The veyron is not just about its 253 mph (or whatever number it is ) top speed. its about the overall package. its not about 1001 hp. its about making that 1001 hp all day long. its about reliability and customer satisfaction. its about quality. its about the rest of the drivetrain which puts that to the ground. 1000 hp and more has been extracted from american v8s before. the keith black chrysler V8s used in drag racing make 1300+ hp when using methanol and 8000+ hp when using top fuel (nitro mix). hp is not the veyron's forte. its just incidental that it makes that much. its about WHY and HOW it makes that much. when will you guys ever understand that?

[Rtech]

Originally Posted by v1p3r

You must remember no one tried to break the McLaren's record because that period was when the supercar bubble burst.......

The Mclaren was never about the top speed. its the whole story behind it, right from the way it was conceived, to the man behind it, to the way it was allowed to be built in the first place. It's so very human. I love it. Plus, I have had the chance to actually sit in one, see it on a race track, listen to it cooling down with the sun reflecting off the gold engine bay. Trust me, that is forever engraved in me now. I couldn't care less if someone builds a 3,000bhp car that does 300kmph. For me, and a lot of other people out there, there simply is nothing better than the Mclaren F1.

To me, the Veyron, though technically awesome, just never cut the mustard. It seems far to clinical, too much of the "built to be the fastest/most powerful".

[pawan]

hey sujay there are lot of american cars that can take on the veyron for about 1/10 the price.

the reason why the f1 is still remembered because at that time closest to a f1 car and also what ananth told that the first will always be remembered is one of the main reason why the veyron will be remembered even if its beaten.

rtech-you are a lucky guy.

[ac 427]

the way i look at it is . . .VW boss has shown the middle finger to the whole world by making the Veyron. All . . i mean ALL criticized him, called him mad when he promised a 1000 bhp car.

Anwys it will be fun . . .now that the 1000 hp (production car) barrier has been broken it is anybodys game.

Franly

[v1p3r]

Robin, I never said the F1 was about the record. I said no one else tried to break the record. The F1 was an amazing feat of engineering for its time, much like the Veyron is now.

[sujaylahiri]

Originally Posted by ananthkamath

Tut, tut. The veyron is not just about its 253 mph (or whatever number it is ) top speed. its about the overall package. its not about 1001 hp. its about making that 1001 hp all day long. its about reliability and customer satisfaction. its about quality. its about the rest of the drivetrain which puts that to the ground. 1000 hp and more has been extracted from american v8s before. the keith black chrysler V8s used in drag racing make 1300+ hp when using methanol and 8000+ hp when using top fuel (nitro mix). hp is not the veyron's forte. its just incidental that it makes that much. its about WHY and HOW it makes that much. when will you guys ever understand that?

So you actually think that the Z06 is some punk a** American drag racing car which can just go in a straight line. You should check the Top Gear lap timings buddy.
According to me, when it comes to performance, an enhanced Corvette is equal to a Z06. Part of the reason being that I'm studying Automotive Engineering myself and mechanically there's nothing the Corvette can't do which the Veyron cannot. Or for that matter any other car like the 9ff.
Even talking of stuff like high speed stability, extreme braking and sharp handling.
The only difference being that the Z06 was meant to be sold in larger numbers than the Veyron and GM actually wanted to make a profit out of it. Unlike VW which is actually making a loss on every Veyron because it wants to show it as an engineering masterpiece and compete with the Ferraris and the Zondas. Hence the difference in stying, practicality, fuel consumption etc etc.
I think that cars like the 9ff 911 deserve equal amount of respect if they can match the performance of their bigger cousins.

[ananthkamath]

Originally Posted by sujaylahiri

So you actually think that the Z06 is some punk a** American drag racing car which can just go in a straight line.

dont put words in my mouth. i never said anything about Corvettes at all.

Originally Posted by sujaylahiri

Part of the reason being that I'm studying Automotive Engineering myself and mechanically there's nothing the Corvette can't do which the Veyron cannot.

Is that so? Then we would all like to know, in pure engineering terms, what it is you think that matches the Corvette to the Veyron. Is it lateral acceleration? Is it in-gear acceleration? Is it ride over broken surfaces? WHAT?

Your avatar indicates you're probably a big corvette fan. we all understand that. on the other hand, i am not. neither am i a fan of the bugatti veyron or any other supercar on this planet. i am just an impartial observer and I am just expressing my opinion, thats all. There's no need to put words into my mouth and go off on a tangent here.

if you're such a corvette fan, how come you dont know about the Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette which did 253 mph in 1988?

[sujaylahiri]

Originally Posted by ananthkamath

dont put words in my mouth. i never said anything about Corvettes at all.

Your avatar indicates you're probably a big corvette fan. we all understand that. on the other hand, i am not. neither am i a fan of the bugatti veyron or any other supercar on this planet. i am just an impartial observer and I am just expressing my opinion, thats all. There's no need to put words into my mouth and go off on a tangent here.

I'm not exactly a Corvette fanboy, but I do appreciate the fact that a $70,000 American car can perform at par with cars which cost 5 times as much. That's engineering at its best.
Now if I say anything more about the Z06, the mods are gonna warn me not to go off-topic. So I'll finish this discussion right here.

Also since you had given examples of 1300HP drag racers, I thought that you were thinking that all American sports cars are drag racers, which many people still think. Maybe you weren't.

@pawan, I have nothing against the McLaren F1. The fact that it's dashboard looks more like a cockpit simply amazes me. You can't get any more technical than that. Check out this clip from Fifth Gear if you already haven't seen it yet.

YouTube - Fifth Gear: Ferrari Enzo vs. Mclaren F1

It is one of my favourite sports cars and I think RTech is lucky who has actually had the experience of being in it.

[veyron1]

@himanshugoswami; Actually, 1001 ps would make 987 bhp. Also, the Veyron makes 1037 ps, variable due to air density and temp.

Just a thought. Now that all these companies are gunning for the Veyron, hasn't Bugatti achieved what they wanted to do? They've already set the benchmark. There'll be cars. Faster cars, better looking cars, and what not. But the result has been achieved.

IMHO- since we're on the engineering front. The 'vettes have an advantage of sharing existing platforms and engine schematics. It's just a matter of fine tuning- which is not child's play as well; but, takes lesser effort. Strictly in terms of engineering. I'm sure all will agree that blueprinting and building a W16 AWD from scratch is no joke.

We all know that there are many machines that give 100 times more VFM than the Veyron. But, the Veyron isn't just another car. It's not about VFM. Like the F1, it's a marvel. A model showcasing the achievements of man and science. It is a piece of history, encompassing the Bugatti of yore. The F1 was a legend. It still is. And the Veyron carries the flame forward.

Until somebody comes up with a 6-wheeled, 450 kmph, all-wheel drive, all wheel steered, electric/nuclear fission reactor engined car that'd run lifelong, here's where the buck stops.

[v1p3r]

Originally Posted by veyron1

here's where the buck stops.

I don't think so. Bugatti themselves are working on a super-Veyron. And you would know, with cars, the buck never stops.

[ananthkamath]

Originally Posted by sujaylahiri

I do appreciate the fact that a $70,000 American car can perform at par with cars which cost 5 times as much. That's engineering at its best.

In what aspect of performance does a stock corvette perform on par with a Veyron or Enzo or any other car that costs 5 times as much? If you cant present solid facts, dont mouth off your opinion about which car is better. Its worse than having opinions about technical facts.

[pawan]

since there is a lot of corvette talk going on the c6r the racing version is the best track corvette.it has a lower drag and added front and rear spoiler.regarding the performance between the enzo and z06 is 0-62mph z06-3.7 enzo-3.65 and the torque figures are close.

The aerodynamics of the Z06’s exterior were shaped by the experiences of the Corvette racing program, where high-speed stability and cornering capability are paramount. And while the racecars use large rear wings, the Z06’s elevated spoiler provides sufficient downforce to balance the road-worthy front splitter without adversely affecting aerodynamic drag. The Z06’s Cd is 0.31.

dont know about the enzo.

this is the c6r has some preety amazing wins at le mans like in 2007 1st place in gt1 class 2005 1st and 2nd(c5r)

hey sujay

If the flat-6 is capable of 900 HP, imagine what the V10

can you please explain to me what this statement means because more cylinders is not equal to faster cars.

[BUSA]

Originally Posted by pawan

can you please explain to me what this statement means because more cylinders is not equal to faster cars.

More cylinders mean you can extract more power from the cylinders and yes more torque.

I do appreciate the fact that a $70,000 American car can perform at par with cars which cost 5 times as much. That's engineering at its best.

Its totally irrelevant starting such threads because any modded car can be made to be faster then a stock car. If you want to compare these tuned cars with the Veyron then compare them in stock form or else wait for the Super-Veyron and then we are talking

[pawan]

Originally Posted by BUSA

More cylinders mean you can extract more power from the cylinders and yes more torque.

No. Configuration has nothing to do with power generation at all. The addition of cylinders can typically flatten out the powerband. Since most exotic car manufacturers stick with lower displacement, it pays off to smoothen out the powerband a bit by adding more combustion strokes per revolution. Furthermore, by keeping components small it is easier to tolerance said components, making them more suitable for high rpm use.

Displacement is key. The larger the engine is, the more fuel and air can be added. The more fuel and air, the bigger the bang that produces our beloved torque and horsepower. This is why the V8 is actually a far better power generation platform than a V12. Not only do V8 engines make significantly more power than exotic V12's, they do so without the cost inherent complexity embedded in a V12 design. Furthermore as displacement goes up in V8 trim, it stays relatively compact especially in comparison to a large 6+ liter V12 (if you truly want to retain an oversquare engine anyways).

Think more in terms of displacement and less in terms of configuration. A 4.6 Liter 6 cylinder hypothetically can make easilly as much power as a 4.6 liter 8 cylinder, however the size of the cylinder bore on the 6 cylinder would more than likely make it cost prohibitive, and if you went the stroke route it would be a torquey engine, but not necessarilly be suitable for high power output due to excessive stroke length.