Then explain it because again, it has zero relevance to Bugatti & doesn't make any sense to imply them to theft.I know what you're referring to.
Clearly my joke went over your head... And no, Bugatti is not fast enough I'm afraid. Then again it never really was was it?
It should be noted that the Venom GT's top speed is not recognised by Guinness world records, as it was achieved in only one run, not the two runs in opposite directions that resulted in the Veyron SS's top speed. In addition, it doesn't count as a production car under their rules, as at least 30 must be built, not the 29 that Hennessey will build. In addition, the Venom GT is only 0.2 % faster than the Veyron SS, a gap which could easily be due to weather, wind, or track conditions.
Actually, in the end, top speed was one of 3 main objectives that had to happen for Piech to green light it.
Then explain it because again, it has zero relevance to Bugatti & doesn't make any sense to imply them to theft.
And the Super Sport isn't fast enough? Mkay.
You haven't tried to explain it once.Gee, I guess I can't explain it slow enough for you...
What a stupid argument. The idea was to claim the record in a reliable, usable super car...in 2003. There's only so far Bugatti can take this car anymore because the basic design has not changed.
You haven't tried to explain it once.
And it's bc you can't explain it at all to start. You tried to jump in on a joke & now you're that guy that everyone awkwardly pauses around bc you don't get it.
What a stupid argument. The idea was to claim the record in a reliable, usable super car...in 2003. There's only so far Bugatti can take this car anymore because the basic design has not changed.
Obviously over time, other cars will steal the record & the Hennessey will be surpassed as well. But given your logic, 270mph isn't fast enough either.
And it's not another production car. Even if the original 250mph was as fast as it could go, everything about how it does it makes it a technical marvel that no manufacturer will likely ever attempt anytime soon. The sheer fact everyone likes to use the Veyron as a benchmark shows it has cemented itself in history. The Venom will not.
The Venom didn't have enough track to reach it's full potential.
Indeed, a marvel of utter inefficiency.
They designed it to go very fast. The reason it's heavy is because at high speeds, weight is almost irrelevant. Aerodynamics are much more important. The Venom may not have had enough track, but it's still a tuner special in my eyes. Built by a tuner company using a Lotus based chassis and a GM engine. The Veyron is totally bespoke. The other cool thing about the Veyron is that it was built from the dream of one brilliant man, Ferdinand Piech. Hennessey is a tuner, Piech is an engineer.
That's really making you look mature. Someone's unable to prove his point, and it's not McLaren.Sure, whatever you say. Seem's it's what you did actually but I totally get the oh oh oh if I claim this first internet attitude you're using.
Keep the insults up, sooo mature. But I'm 12 right?
Better is a very vague term. I don't think either one is definitively better, which is why this argument is happening.The VenomGT by all accounts from those who have driven both is the better car. It's not a full production car, but it's a better car. I would guess anyone this thread saying otherwise has driven neither.
Further more production based cars have been going 250 plus for years. The Bugatti is nothing new other than being a official production car.
Post some sources then.The VenomGT by all accounts from those who have driven both is the better car. It's not a full production car, but it's a better car. I would guess anyone this thread saying otherwise has driven neither.
Recall another 1000hp car that's usable, easy for anyone to drive, & comes with a factory warranty prior to the Veyron.
How many people have actually tested the Venom GT? I've found this Evo review, where the closest it actually comes to comparing the two is saying this:The VenomGT by all accounts from those who have driven both is the better car. It's not a full production car, but it's a better car. I would guess anyone this thread saying otherwise has driven neither.
Which is hardly anything resembling "by all accounts from those who have driven both is the better car." Certainly not with Hennessey's history of the cars he provides for magazine tests (themselves being no gold standards) being much better than the ones he bothers to get around to making for the people that pay him.
And yet no virtually no one knows about the Callaway Sledgehammer, or even the Dauer 962 (despite the latter's fame as a race car and actually having something more closely resembling serial production than hacking apart Lotus Elises), so there's clearly something involved that made the Veyron a seemingly greater accomplishment to make people take notice. People similarly still lust after Koenigseggs even though that brand's period of time at the top of the heap was extremely short lived.
