Car Forum / Mercedes-Benz Cars / March 2006
World title fight: McLaren F1 v Bugatti Veyron / Can an SLR get a look-in?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Dori A Schmetterling - 28 Feb 2006 22:24 GMT http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,26789-2056987,00.html
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- World title fight Is the new pretender to Best Car on the Planet really better than the old champion? Nicholas Rufford and Andrew Frankel of The Sunday Times duelled it out View exclusive video footage of the Bugatti and McLaren F1
BUGATTI VEYRON
It was to be the face-off the world has been waiting for; the duel between the two greatest road cars, the like of which will almost certainly never be seen again in an oil-hungry, emissions-regulated, eco-friendly world.
Not since Ben Johnson took on Carl Lewis in the 1987 Rome world championships, or Muhammad Ali rumbled George Foreman in the sweltering heat of the Zairean jungle in 1974, would two such evenly matched heavyweights contest the right to be the greatest. And where better for the Bugatti Veyron to meet the McLaren F1 than the Nürburgring in Germany, scene of some of the most awe-inspiring races in history.
That, at least, was the plan. Things started well: Bugatti would make the Veyron available. But the F1 proved more difficult. McLaren at first said it would be delighted to help. Then it had second thoughts and a PR lady called Ellen wanted to know what the F1 was going to be tested against. When she heard it was a Veyron an iron curtain suddenly descended.
"I have checked with our customer care department and I'm afraid that we are unable to help on this occasion," said a final frosty e-mail. This is the effect the Veyron has on people. It is feared like a mythical creature.
The contest would have to take place in absentia. We would test the Veyron near the Bugatti factory in Molsheim, France, then fly back to Britain and drive a privately owned F1 on an airfield in Wiltshire.
McLaren's concern was understandable (though it would have been braver to accept the challenge). The statistics for the Veyron are fearsome. Its 1001bhp engine delivers 922 lb ft of torque - three times as much as a Land Rover Discovery and yet it weighs a third less. At top speed it covers the length of a football field every second; truly it is a monster.
It has been claimed that the Veyron, named after a 1930s racing driver, is so quick that it could allow the F1 to start first and reach 120mph and would still reach 200mph first. In fact this claim is unfair to the McLaren - but not by much. You can let the McLaren reach 65mph and the Veyron will still beat it to 190mph before leaving it for dust.
That is not the only advantage the Veyron has in a straight fight with the McLaren. In every way - performance, build quality, ingenuity of design - it is the better car. It will fool you with just how well behaved it is, cruising quietly on B roads or nosing through the traffic. But it is cuddly in the same way as a polar bear. Put your foot down and it sprouts teeth and claws. It's like being in a Ferrari F430 going through an Incredible Hulk metamorphosis. Being pushed back in your seat on the way to 60mph is one thing, but experiencing the same acceleration passing 160mph is a new sensation. The landscape becomes speed-blurred like a cartoon. Other cars appear to be going backwards. You expect to look in your mirror and see you've blown their doors off and sucked out their radiator grilles.
Flipping between gears with the steering wheel paddles takes just 0.015sec. The power delivery is seamless, the engine note rising from a deep burble like a powerboat tethered to a jetty to a howl like a Formula One car.
Flipping between gears with the steering wheel paddles takes just 0.015sec. The power delivery is seamless, the engine note rising from a deep burble like a powerboat tethered to a jetty to a howl like a Formula One car
It's hardly surprising the Veyron is the stuff of myth. Europe's richest car company poured tens of millions of pounds into developing it in a fit of extravagance. Exactly how much, Volkswagen won't say, but it was a lot more than poor old Gordon Murray had to spend when he was knocking up a prototype F1 back in 1992.
In 1998, the year that McLaren stopped production of the F1, VW bought the Bugatti marque. Quietly, it started going around Europe like Yul Brynner in The Magnificent Seven, recruiting the best component suppliers. What it was asking for was as far-fetched as using only seven men to defend a Mexican town from a small army: a transmission that didn't disintegrate; tyres that didn't explode; brakes that didn't melt. Furthermore, every part of the Veyron had to be tested to engineering tolerances closer to those applied by Nasa than in car manufacture. Not too ambitious, then.
Remarkably, Bugatti got almost all it wanted. The seven-speed double-clutch gearbox is produced by Ricardo in Leamington Spa. The carbon-fibre monocoque chassis is from ATR, which also makes the chassis for the Porsche Carrera GT and the Ferrari Enzo. The body shell is spray-painted by Weiss, which has the contract for Maybach. The leather interior is stitched by Boxman, supplier to Bentley; the seats are by Sparco, which also supplies Ferrari and the World Rally Championship, and the brakes are made by AP Racing of Coventry, one of the most renowned suppliers of racing brakes.
The alloy fascia with analogue instruments has the feel of old-fashioned, burnished quality. You can choose your colour or combination of colours for the interior for the basic price of £810,345 (if you want safety belts to match it's an extra £24,000). Compare that with the F1, which is more like an overgrown go-kart with no comforts, just a big carbon-fibre baby seat for the driver, a three-point harness and a smell of petrol.
Thomas Bscher, the suave former banker who is now Bugatti's president, used to own an F1. He drove it to work every day for two years from his home in Cologne to his office in Frankfurt before selling it in 2003 to an American collector Miles Collier. He doesn't like comparing the two cars but says the Veyron is better in every respect bar one: the McLaren was lighter (". . . although it didn't feel it. It felt much heavier than it was").
Bscher won't reveal who his customers are but confirms 60 Veyrons have been ordered by discreetly wealthy buyers - "old money" car enthusiasts as opposed to internet entrepreneurs or gangsta rappers. One of the first cars, an all-black model, has been bought by Ralph Lauren, a man who already owns an F1 and, according to some accounts, two of them.
You can understand why every billionaire wants a Veyron; only 300 will be made and there will probably never be anything like it again. When it was conceived by Ferdinand Piëch, former boss of VW, it was nicknamed Piëch's folly. The rumour goes that as a youngster Piëch was never satisfied with his hand in Top Trumps and wanted a car that could beat all rivals.
The Veyron is that car. VW's chances of recouping Piëch's huge investment are the same as seeing Jeremy Clarkson in a tutu. Already the car's days are numbered. Within five years Bugatti will have tamed the mighty engine and gearbox and put them in a more practical and slower four-seater car. The Veyron will remain unsurpassed.
We eventually borrowed an F1 from Nick Mason, the drummer from Pink Floyd and author of Into the Red, a book about the world's best cars. Mason is rich enough not to care whether his McLaren F1 isn't the fastest road car any more. Indeed, he's so rich he wants a Veyron.
Nicholas Rufford
VITAL STATISTICS
Model Bugatti Veyron Engine 7993cc, 16 cylinders Power 1001bhp @ 6000rpm Torque 922 lb ft @ 2200rpm Transmission Seven-speed DSG, manual and auto Performance 0-62mph: 2.5sec Top speed: 253mph Price £810,345 Verdict Masterpiece that gives everything a good spanking Rating Five stars
Page two: Andrew Frankel on the McLaren F1
McLAREN F1
The first two days of May 1994 are unlikely to slip my mind. On May 1 Ayrton Senna, the only hero I've ever had, was killed, and on May 2 I became the first journalist to test the McLaren F1, a car created by Gordon Murray, who had also designed Senna's Formula One cars.
I drove the F1 to 211mph on an airfield runway and then predicted that the twin pressures of budgetary constraint and political correctness meant that there would never be a faster road car than this.
Well, I got that wrong. It's taken more than a decade but as Nick Rufford will doubtless delight in telling you, the Bugatti Veyron is indeed faster than a McLaren F1. It will do 253mph, while the fastest a McLaren has gone is a mere 240.1mph.
But this is meaningless to all bar the statistically obsessed. Achieving the maximum possible speed was so far off Murray's and McLaren's agenda when he made the F1 that it was four years before they bothered to find out. The brief, in Murray's own words, was to produce "the best sports car in the world". Not the fastest, just the best.
What he wanted was much more subtle. He wanted a car small enough to thread through city streets, yet big enough to take three people and their luggage. He wanted it to have a 6.1 litre V12 engine - the most powerful then seen in a road car - yet weigh less than a small family shopping car. All he had on his side was vision, determination and technical brilliance.
The car he designed was made from carbon fibre and was so strong it could drive away from its front-impact crash test because the damage was so light. To save weight and keep the driving experience pure there are no airbags, ABS or power steering. You sat in the middle of the car just as you would in an F1 car, with your passengers to the side and slightly behind.
The V12 produced 627bhp, which may seem a far cry from the Veyron's 1001bhp, but when you factor in weight a different picture emerges. The Bugatti provides 513bhp for every ton of car, the McLaren a touch more than 550bhp per ton. The Bugatti accelerates faster because it has four-wheel-drive traction.
The F1 was so fast that when customers told McLaren they wanted to race theirs at Le Mans, Murray created a stripped-out racing version that promptly went out and destroyed all-comers at its first attempt.
The F1 was so fast that when customers told McLaren they wanted to race theirs at Le Mans, Murray created a stripped-out racing version that promptly went out and destroyed all-comers at its first attempt
The car you're looking at is more powerful than the standard road car. It is a racing F1 modified for road use by its owner Nick Mason, the drummer with Pink Floyd. More than 220lb lighter than the road F1, and with those tiresome engine race restrictors removed, it has 53bhp more than the road car. In short this is a car like no other you'll find wearing a tax disc.
I've never known another road car that, even on a dry, straight runway, requires courage just to press your foot to the floor. Wheelspin renders first and second gear useless, and even in third you can light up the gargantuan rear tyres at speeds under 100mph. The forces on your body are so strong you struggle to accept that it is a mere car rather than an aircraft. On the two-mile runway, and being mindful of the trust Mason had placed in me, I ran it up to about 180mph seemingly in an instant.
But this is not what distinguishes it from the Veyron. The Bugatti is not only apocalyptically quick, it's also comfortable, quiet and refined.
Which is good for those who like long-distance cruising, but not for those who want to be reminded what it's like to be alive. The Veyron has a sense of remoteness, a result of its weight and electronic complexity, that removes you from the driving experience.
By contrast, nothing puts you closer to the action than this F1. The steering provides feel comparable to running your fingers over the road. Think about turning and it turns, tread just a smidgeon too hard in a tight corner and you'll be facing the way you came before the first expletive forms in your head. Get it right, however, and it will corner at a speed that beggars belief.
The V12's sound is mesmeric not simply for its race-bred purity but also the jack-hammer volume. This is a car that will reward good driving like no other and punish even slight mistakes with unparalleled severity.
The truth is, apart from being the two fastest cars to set foot on the public road, there is little common ground between the Bugatti and the McLaren. Which is preferable depends on who you are. Would you rather sit in supersonic luxury in seat 1C on Concorde, or be deafened, frightened and thrilled beyond description flying an F-22 fighter? Me too.
Andrew Frankel
VITAL STATISTICS
Model McLaren F1 GTR Engine 6064cc, 12 cylinders Power 680bhp @ 7500rpm Torque 525 lb ft @ 4700rpm Transmission Six-speed manual Performance 0-60mph: 3.2sec Top speed: 240mph Price £627,000 in 1994; about £1m now Verdict No longer the fastest supercar, but still the best Rating Five stars
Hazey - 01 Mar 2006 18:53 GMT When describing the Veyron this article mentions weight to power, but fails to talk at all about drag and lift. Road and Track published an article written by Gordon Murray in which he describes the extraordinary amounts of drag that had to be added to the Veyron in order to overcome the lift generated by the bug shaped design. It's that drag, which slows the Veyron to within shooting distance of the F1 even though it carries hundreds more horsepower. As for the SLR, I would guess that it wouldn't have a shot of beating either of these cars in acceleration or top speed or cornering. As a matter of fact in pure question of weight to power ratio, a Corvette Z06 is a better performer than a Mercedes SLR. The Porsche carrera GT could crush both the SLR and the Corvette, and be beaten by the two above. Having seen all but the Veyron up close and personal enough to check into their carbon fiber chassises, I would believe that between the GT and the SLR, the GT would detroy the SLR, but I will never drive any of them. Not just because I would prefer to own a house than a car, but because I do not believe in super cars. It is purely a personal opinion, but for me super cars are too removed from the utilitarian manners of a road car. They are refined to the point of silly much like thorobreds. I'm a draft horse kind of guy. I respect these over the previous super cars like the F40 and F50 for being able to be driven in traffic and on normal streets, but they aren't my cup of tea.
greek_philosophizer - 01 Mar 2006 20:49 GMT So next time you run to the 7-11 for a jug of milk you would just hate to be driving a Veyron?
>From what I read , you would be lucky to get more than 75 miles out of a tank of gas from the car so really it is only good for going to parties and exotic romps.
Still wouldn't kick it out of the driveway for that.
.
Dori A Schmetterling - 02 Mar 2006 16:12 GMT Saw the Veyron (stationary, on display) at a motoring event in London a few months ago (MPH '05). Didn't have a chance to get a good look at it as I had to rush home, but I thought it ugly (despite it having bags of that well-known aphrodisiac, power).
Maybe it was the thought of that Grand Canyon of a hole in the wallet it would cause that put me off but, no, I would not kick it off the driveway if someone put it there...
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling ---
> So next time you run to the 7-11 for a jug of milk > you would just hate to be driving a Veyron? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > . Hazey - 02 Mar 2006 17:37 GMT I would not "hate" to drive the Veyron. I think that I would not be happy to drive the Veyron. It would be sitting there wanting to go, and where could I take it to go? Nowhere. I would have trouble finding a track where I could really open it up. I would hate the fat feeling that it has, what the above article and others that I have read have referred to as distance from the feel of the road. I would rather see that set up in a luxury sedan where I could sense the luxury element of too much power. In a sports car, I would get twitchy wanting to use it. I had a similar problem driving the AMG CLK55 recently. It was too much power. I couldn't use that anywhere, and it started to annoy me. I wanted to put my foot down, but there was nowhere in my little world that I wouldn't run out of road immediately or be driving in such a dangerous manner that I would hate myself. I am a slow car guy even if that car is a sports car. My '67 Alfa has wonderful road feel, a decent top speed, good acceleration, tremendous balance between acceleration, handling, braking. It feels great to drive and I can push around with a heavyish foot without causing trouble since it only has a 1.6 litre engine. I think that I wouldn't "kick" the Veyron out of my driveway, but I would sell it if it showed up on my doorstep and buy a lotus Elan (and a house to put it in). It reminds me of the Jaguar XJ-220 (or whatever that super expensive super car was that they built in the early nineties). That car failed because it didn't make a connection between the driver and the road. I think that the Veyron will have the same problem. It is something which the Carrera GT has, I think, avoided looking at the one that lives near me. I have no idea where the SLR falls into that spectrum. Whether it has a driver connected to the road or a driver insulated from the road. That is the question in which driving pleasure is determined for me, and for me personally, that question is answered at much, much less horse power and much, much less weight. What would you do with a Veyron if you had one? Could you use it?
Dori A Schmetterling - 02 Mar 2006 21:59 GMT Veyron production is limited to 300.
At 810K quid you would not sell many... Will they sell out the planned production run?
I expect that the VW car range will benefit from the development programme -- which doesn't address your question except in the sense that it is expected that almost nobody (out of the millions of 'luxury' car buyers) will buy a Veyron. It was more of a technical exercise and the CEO's ego trip.
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling ---
>I would not "hate" to drive the Veyron. I think that I would not be > happy to drive the Veyron. It would be sitting there wanting to go, and [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > weight. What would you do with a Veyron if you had one? Could you use > it? Hazey - 05 Mar 2006 04:46 GMT I couldn't agree with you more. This car was all about the CEO's ego trip. Certainly there was very little business case for it. Even less than there have been for other million dollar super cars like the F1, SLR or Carrera GT. My feeling is that the Veyron will not sell out the planned production run, except perhaps at steep discounts, simply because it fails to make a connection, but then I am not the target market who might perhaps see something that I don't. I also agree that the development project should reap benefits for Bentley, Lamborghini in the short term then Audi and VW a little further down the road. There are benefits to the project from an engineering stand point. I believe that there may also be a benefit in corporate oversight since the current financial situation at VW was caused by this and similar projects (read Phaeton) and that the financial situation pushed their board to dig around into a messy operation that needed cleaning up. Perhaps that will be the best benefit for VW. Interesting discussion though. Thanks
Hernando Correa - 03 Mar 2006 01:19 GMT > I would not "hate" to drive the Veyron. I think that I would not be > happy to drive the Veyron. It would be sitting there wanting to go, and [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > weight. What would you do with a Veyron if you had one? Could you use > it? Hazey, I sure was pleased reading your well written comments. You not only summarized my thoughts and feelings about the Veyron but you also expressed them in a most enjoyable style.
I have seen the newest exotics here in Silicon Valley's showrooms and often wondered what would potential buyers do with them. They sure cannot show off their super cars' performance driving along on any of our congested freeways. Maybe at Laguna Seca, but then again, how would they dare to drive their one-of-a-kind engineering marvel to the speedway?
Hazey - 05 Mar 2006 04:53 GMT Thanks for the kind comments. I don't think that the Veyron would perform as well as it should on the track, and that it could be a.s kicked in the corners due to its rather heavy weight making cornering a little more difficult than a lighter car even though its power is so great. I also wonder what kind of snap the acceleration would have. I used to think that no one raced cars this expensive . . . then I went to an Italian car event sponsored by the Ferrari club of America. There were a lot of those cars missing almost all of their paint from sand blasting of the nose. They get raced. F1s get raced. I'm sure that someone will try to get a Veyron running around the track. Actually, rip the luxe equipment out of an SLRF, and you might really have something there too. That is something that I would enjoy to watch. Cars like that running down the track against one another. I wouldn't want to drive, but I think that watching them would be more fun than most motorsport races.
Dori A Schmetterling - 10 Mar 2006 12:48 GMT I have enough trouble with my 3.2 l car (having moved up from 2 l a few years ago), given the 70 mph speed limit in the UK. In that sense a Veyron would be a real frustration (never mind its ugly looks).
DAS
 Signature For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling ---
[...]
> Hazey, I sure was pleased reading your well written comments. You not > only summarized my thoughts and feelings about the Veyron but you also [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > congested freeways. Maybe at Laguna Seca, but then again, how would they > dare to drive their one-of-a-kind engineering marvel to the speedway? Alan Mudd - 03 Mar 2006 01:52 GMT I respect these over the previous super
> cars like the F40 and F50 for being able to be driven in traffic and on > normal streets, but they aren't my cup of tea. Strange how peoples taste differs, out of all these cars listed if I ever had the opportunity Id buy the F40 simply for it's purity.
No electronics, manual gearchange, no radio, nothing in the way of creature comforts, it's a pure race car and it's designed as such and would be used for track days and the few times on a sunny day when you just wanted to go out for a drive for the hell of it.
Personally I also think it's one of the most agressively beautiful designs ever, but then it's really a race car, and all these others are actually road cars.
Money no object...my daily driver would be a 1989 Aston Martin V8 Vantage X-Pack, and the weekend car would be the F-40, but I'd not be able to stop there, I'd have garages full of late 50's and early 60's ferraris, Pinninfarina penned some of the most attractive cars ever built.
250GT california spyder 250GT SII pf spyder 410 superamerica SIII
Ok I can stop daydreaming now. But having thought about it, I'd never be inclined to buy one of these modern Hypercars, I'm more intersted in how the car looks than how fast it goes. I think about them like many peple think about art.
James Dyson (the vacuum cleaner guy) does this very thing, instead of art he collect cars, has an enourmous lit covered area with a single pane of glass from his living room where He parks one of his car collection, like changing the painting on the wall every now and again...I totally got that.
But most of the time you'll find me on the inside lane pottering along and letting the rush pass me by.
Alan M
Hazey - 05 Mar 2006 05:09 GMT I understand what you are saying about the F40 being a pure race car, and I can respect that. I have a friend who used to sell super cars in the North Eastern US. He told me that the F40 was the car none of the sales people wanted to touch. It was too hard to handle. The car would stall at any slow speed maneuver. To move it around the lot, you had to slip the clutch or it would either take off or stall (they mostly moved it with a rolling dolly). You're absolutely right. It's a race car. The other thing about it is that it is very, very hard to drive. The last article that I read about it being driven at speed was in Automobile magazine about two years ago. The professional driver that they hired to drive it spun it out. Didn't hurt it, but he had a great deal of trouble with the turbo transition as have many drivers. I'll say this though. When it was built it was the absolute furthest the technology could be taken. It is a pure sports machine. The Aston is an inspired choice. I love those things.
I'm guessing you're English? I lived in Birmingham for a while, and at one point while going back to visit a friend he took me down town to check in a very dirty window at some old Astons. There was a DB4 DB5 and next to them a Gulf kit Ford GT40. The GT40 was the one that won Le Mans twice two years in a row. I was in awe. My friend thought that it was a kit car. I had to send him some articles to set him straight. It was a lovely thing, but for me . . . it's back to the Mazda on Monday, and my '72 Mercedes sedan is currently getting repainted and some minor body work to set it back to newish. I can't wait. I have owned the car for fourteen years now, and that's my love; not super cars, but great real cars that I can really wrap myself around. I think that that's the fun of cars. That everyone has what they love out of them from dreaming about super cars to thrashing about in beaters. There is something for everyone to enjoy with their car if they so choose, and it's just great fun all the way around.
Alan Mudd - 06 Mar 2006 20:20 GMT http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4618235782&rd=1&sspagename= STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1
....Yup I'm English:-)
One of these please, sure it's expensive, but it's never going to deprecaite, infact, one like this will appreciate, in which case they don't look as much of a pipe dream as you think.
The GT40 was the F40 of it's day, a no compromise out and out GT racer, deafaningly load and outrageously fast but also incredibly beautiful through function.
|
|
|