Bugatti Veyron

[nath]

Christ alive, did anyone see it on Top Gear? Aside from anything else, that's the most amazing sounding car I've ever heard.

 

[ECA]

Widiculous

 

[GDW]

Now if you had all heeded my post here then you could have saved £50k !

 

[DaGaffer]

Despite being nuts about cars for most of my life, I just can't bring myself to care about the Veyron. Clarkson is impressed by the fact that every one is sold at a massive loss and costs nearly £5m a unit to build; the engineer in me (I keep him very repressed these days), just thinks that shows pretty poor project management.

And that 'race' was the most ridiculously staged of all the ones they've done to date.

 

[nath]

Very true indeed, however - did you hear that thing?

 

[Bodhi]

Despite being nuts about cars for most of my life, I just can't bring myself to care about the Veyron. Clarkson is impressed by the fact that every one is sold at a massive loss and costs nearly £5m a unit to build; the engineer in me (I keep him very repressed these days), just thinks that shows pretty poor project management.

And that 'race' was the most ridiculously staged of all the ones they've done to date.

You can't judge cars like the Veyron logically though, as logically they shouldn't exist. I mean who really needs a car with 1000bhp that can do 253mph? Where exactly can you do 253mph? Exactly. But to look at cars like the Veyron, the Enzo, the F1 in logical terms like that is to completely miss the point. VW didn't create they Veyron to fill a gap in the market, they created the Veyron to prove that it could be done. It's about man pushing the boundaries of what's possible, and in today's climate it's like a breath of fresh air. It's an awesome machine. and like nath says, it sounds like teh sex.

 

[Dommers]

Just got one

 

[Furr]

Despite being nuts about cars for most of my life, I just can't bring myself to care about the Veyron. Clarkson is impressed by the fact that every one is sold at a massive loss and costs nearly £5m a unit to build; the engineer in me (I keep him very repressed these days), just thinks that shows pretty poor project management.

And that 'race' was the most ridiculously staged of all the ones they've done to date.

If thats a true engineer in you he wouldn't think that at all.

The Veyron is one of those rare things these days. Its something that is done to prove that it can be done. Like the Apolo missions.

I think its great that they said we are going to make a 1000Bhp car that goes whatever speed it goes and spared not price on achieving their goal. Its like the spirit of the Victorians. If you don't try how do you know it can't be done?

 

[DaGaffer]

If thats a true engineer in you he wouldn't think that at all.

The Veyron is one of those rare things these days. Its something that is done to prove that it can be done. Like the Apolo missions.

I think its great that they said we are going to make a 1000Bhp car that goes whatever speed it goes and spared not price on achieving their goal. Its like the spirit of the Victorians. If you don't try how do you know it can't be done?

Cost is part of a specification, just like everything else. With the possible exception of the Moon landings, engineers almost always have to work to a budget, even if, like Concorde or the Great Western, they fuck it up.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not getting all righteous about it because its a pointless supercar, I like supercars, I just can't bring myself to care about it. I certainly don't put it in the same class as engineering feats like Concorde, it doesn't move the car on like Concorde could have done with some balls behind it. A 200 Mph zero emissions hydrogen-powered supercar that seats four, that would be rewriting the rules, and until we get that, refining existing tech (which is what the Veyron does), is just fiddling while Rome burns.

 

[old.user4556]

I don't really have anything to add that hasn't already been said.

I think it's a technical masterpiece, there is no logic to it, there is no reason for it other than to say "it can be done and look what we can produce when all the stops have been pulled and no expense is spared".

It's a bit like a watch that costs £27000, just to say "look how bling this is, look at the minute attention to detail, look at what we can create when no expense is spared". Ok it's just a "watch" in the same way the Veyron is "just a car" - it gets from A to B, and that's all it does.

Better than a McLaren F1?

No, but perhaps not the right question; I put them both up there as the best/fastest cars in the world for totally different reasons.

 

[old.user4556]

it doesn't move the car on like Concorde could have done with some balls behind it.

Concorde, like the Veyron, is/was just a loss making money pit - i don't think that Concorde is anything more than "look, we can get to NYC from London in 4 hours" for the elite and super-rich.

Imo, like the Veyron, a lot of people don't care how fast it is; there wasn't money to be made by Concorde and there is no money to be made on the Veyron - so they're both financially flawed for the same reason.

 

[MYstIC G]

tbfh, without getting technical, it just looked the shit and normally I couldn't care less about motors like this.

 

[DaGaffer]

Concorde, like the Veyron, is/was just a loss making money pit - i don't think that Concorde is anything more than "look, we can get to NYC from London in 4 hours" for the elite and super-rich.

Imo, like the Veyron, a lot of people don't care how fast it is; there wasn't money to be made by Concorde and there is no money to be made on the Veyron - so they're both financially flawed for the same reason.

Yeah but Concorde wasn't intended to be a loss-making money pit; it was supposed to be the precursor of high speed transport for the masses; the fact that things didn't quite turn out that way is besides the point. And Concorde did have a budget and a profit target; but it was also one of the first co-operative European aerospace projects, so its hardly surprising the budget soared; subsequent projects (Tornado, Eurofighter) have proved to be no easier to manage. The Veyron is pointless from the outset, an ego-trip for one man, Ferdinand Piech.

 

[old.user4556]

Name one supercar that isn't an ego trip.

 

[DaGaffer]

Name one supercar that isn't an ego trip.

That's for the people who drive them, not the ones who create them. The ones who create supercars as an ego trip usually don't make a very good job of it, certainly when it comes to making a profit. VW is pretty fucked up right now, (to the extent that Porsche of all people are bailing them out), and Veyron hardly helps...

 

[Tom]

It looks great. It sounds great. It goes like shit off a shovel. Its extremely expensive. Its pointless.

Its a supercar. Thats what they're there for. To be stupidly expensive, fast, and pointless. And the Veyron is the fastest and most pointless of them all - which is why I like it.

 

[DaGaffer]

It looks great. It sounds great. It goes like shit off a shovel. Its extremely expensive. Its pointless.

Its a supercar. Thats what they're there for. To be stupidly expensive, fast, and pointless. And the Veyron is the fastest and most pointless of them all - which is why I like it.

The McLaren F1 wasn't pointless; it won races and was a showcase for McLaren, who want to be a real car manufacturer. The Enzo isn't pointless; it makes money and the technology is being passed down to 'lesser' Ferraris. I suppose the Veyron has some PR value, but that's about it. They don't intend to race, and I doubt you'll see the technology used much elsewhere within VW; after all they have plenty of supercar expertise already at Lamborghini, and their technology is being used (e.g. at Audi).

I'm also surprised everyone seems to think it looks wonderful; *shrugs*, I think it has an interior like a tart's boudoir, it's two-tone, (what next, white-wall tyres?) and that stupid retro grille on the front rankles every time I see it. Oh, and there's no point debating whether its good-looking or not; its a personal thing. I think part of the reason why I can't be arsed about the Veyron is that I don't particularly like its looks; same as the Pagani Zonda. Whereas I love the looks of the Enzo, the Current Lambos, any Aston and even the Koenigsegg.

 

[Tom]

Just like most of us DaGaffer, you've never driven a supercar, and you never will.

 

[Bodhi]

the point of the Veyron is here -----------------> .



















DaGaffer is over here somewhere --------------------> o-|-<

 

[DaGaffer]

Just like most of us DaGaffer, you've never driven a supercar, and you never will.

Wanna bet? My Chrissie pressie

And I've been a passenger in an F1

 

[Tom]

4 laps. I bow to your expertise in this field.

 

[DaGaffer]

4 laps. I bow to your expertise in this field.

Ooh hello, everyone who says the Veyron is wonderful is entitled to an opinion but I'm not? I never proclaimed to be the guru of all things supercar, but I don't slavishly follow the pronouncements of Mr. Clarkson and his lackeys either.

I think I made it fairly clear that my personal opinion was that I couldn't be arsed about the Veyron, mainly because of its looks and that I don't think it's the engineering revolution Clarkson makes it out to be (evolution by all means, but like the Giant Panda, an overspecialised dead-end).

You were the one who said I'd never drive a supercar, I was just pointing out that you were wrong, I never said it would make me an expert.

 

[Draylor]

Fair enough Dagaffer your not a fan.

Now close your eyes, listen to the thing, and tell me you dont smile.

 

[Tom]

Ooh hello, everyone who says the Veyron is wonderful is entitled to an opinion but I'm not? I never proclaimed to be the guru of all things supercar, but I don't slavishly follow the pronouncements of Mr. Clarkson and his lackeys either.

I think I made it fairly clear that my personal opinion was that I couldn't be arsed about the Veyron, mainly because of its looks and that I don't think it's the engineering revolution Clarkson makes it out to be (evolution by all means, but like the Giant Panda, an overspecialised dead-end).

You were the one who said I'd never drive a supercar, I was just pointing out that you were wrong, I never said it would make me an expert.

You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. I am of the opinion that you're talking out of your bottom.

Lots of people say the Enzo is an ugly car. I have seen one in the flesh, and it looks very different. Personally I think if you saw a Veyron in the flesh you'd be similarly surprised.

Going on about engineers working to budgets? They had a budget, and it was pretty much unlimited. Project management - WTF? Since when did creating a supercar involve rational thought and design processes? I think you've missed the point by about 252 miles.

Not an engineering revolution? Neither was Concorde then, after all they just created a streamlined aeroplane with a bendy nose and then stuck some massively loud engines on it. Gosh, how technically advanced of them....

 

[old.user4556]

That's for the people who drive them, not the ones who create them. The ones who create supercars as an ego trip usually don't make a very good job of it, certainly when it comes to making a profit. VW is pretty fucked up right now, (to the extent that Porsche of all people are bailing them out), and Veyron hardly helps...

Can't help but feel (from what I read) Gordon Murray had his dick in his hand a bit on the F1 (everything was his decision), again a loss making car.

Titanium spanner set to keep the weight down? come on... just a sprinkling of ego surely..

 

[DaGaffer]

You're entitled to your opinion, as am I. I am of the opinion that you're talking out of your bottom.

Lots of people say the Enzo is an ugly car. I have seen one in the flesh, and it looks very different. Personally I think if you saw a Veyron in the flesh you'd be similarly surprised.

Going on about engineers working to budgets? They had a budget, and it was pretty much unlimited. Project management - WTF? Since when did creating a supercar involve rational thought and design processes? I think you've missed the point by about 252 miles.

Not an engineering revolution? Neither was Concorde then, after all they just created a streamlined aeroplane with a bendy nose and then stuck some massively loud engines on it. Gosh, how technically advanced of them....

Have you seen a Veyron in the flesh? If not, your comment is pointless. I've seen an Enzo in the street and liked it, but I liked it in pictures too, so I don't see your point; the Veyron will still be two-tone and still have that stupid grille.

The veyron engineers DID NOT have an unlimited budget, and fucking up the project management caused two project directors to lose their jobs over it. Of course creating a supercar involves rational thought and design processes; what you think they used The Force or something? The 'rationale' (such as it was) was that Ferdinand Piech thought that as Mercedes and BMW were moving down into 'his' territory with premium hatches etc. he had to move the VW group 'up' to cover every base (the logic of this is highly suspect and most analysts believe it was a mistake, especially as they already owned Audi). That was the logic behind the Phaeton, the cancelled W12 supercar and the acquisition of Lamborghini and Bentley. They ended up with Bugatti as well (at a knock down price), but had no idea what to do with it, so Piech decided on yet another supercar, how imaginative of him. By the time Bernt Pischetsrieder took over, it was too late to cancel despite the fact the VW was already in huge trouble and didn't really need nearly a billion quid loss on Bugatti. This isn't to say VW engineers aren't very, very good, but VW execs rightly think the whole project was a huge mistake, and they should have been working on the niche and crossover cars that everyone is making with.

And no, its not an engineering revolution. Comparing the Veyron to the step up Concorde was when it first flew, just shows how little you know about the subject. Concorde required whole new industrial processes to make it work, new areas of understanding in materials technology, aerodynamics, engine technology; it was more advanced than most contemporary fighters ffs (actually, make that ALL contemporary fighters in service in 1969). The only area where the Veyron has genuinely required new industrial processes is its tyres.

 

[Tom]

 

[Louster]

Hahaha wow. Your arguments sure are compelling, man. I mean, what a comeback! Holy moly.

 

[nath]

Lots of people say the Enzo is an ugly car. I have seen one in the flesh, and it looks very different.

The several times I've seen an Enzo it's always looked pretty similar to how it looks in photos. I always liked the Enzo - seeing it didn't change that. Hearing it however, made me wet myself.


Anyhoo, I don't see why there's an arguement here - Gaffer has listed plenty of totally valid reasons why the Veyron does little for him. I personally thing it looks spanktastic and sounds jizztacular. Horses for courses tbh - is there any need for more disagreement?

 

[old.user4556]

The only area where the Veyron has genuinely required new industrial processes is its tyres.

If only the concorde engineers used new industrial processes for concorde's tyres .

Was that in bad taste?