The Swedes are back again!

[McLaren]

February 9, 2006 Less than twelve months ago, the Koenigsegg CCR was the most powerful and fastest production car in the world, having just achieved a top speed of 388 kmh (Caution: large WMV movie) , raising McLaren's mark of 372 kmh set in 1993 by a whopping margin.

Prior to the CCR, the company’s CC8 was the world’s most powerful production car and the Swedish company has a proud history of creating brutally powerful roadsters. Then Bugatti finally put the long-awaited Veyron into production in October last, and it immediately became the world’s fastest (407 km/h), most powerful (987 bhp), most torquey (1,250 Nm at 2,200 rpm) and most outrageous (16-cylinder engine with four turbochargers and that’s just for starters) production automobile in automotive history.

But like the Viking warriors from which they descended, the folks at Koenigsegg haven’t conceded just yet and the company sent us this image and a quaint invitation to the launch of a new car at the 76th Salon International de l´Auto in Geneva. Be afraid … be very afraid.

It’s caused a stir around here. What will Bugatti do, with all the might of the Volkswagen empire behind it, should Koenigsegg manage to usurp the crown it has regarded as its rightful inheritance. Watch this space.

Well, with the CCR being a great supercar that still fell short of the Top Speed record, will Koenigsegg be able to snatch it this 3rd time around?

 

[High-Test]

I hope...


Isn't it powered by a Ford sourced V8?

That would really shove it in the face of the VAG, to be upstaged by a small specialty car builder with much less capital to back their projects.

 

[Poverty]

The bugatti was limited due to its tires. The only way I can see the konigsegger beating it is by taking huge safety risks.

 

[High-Test]

The bugatti was limited due to its tires. The only way I can see the konigsegger beating it is by taking huge safety risks.

Yeah, but all cars are limited by their tires. The whole point bahind the fastest car thing is a safety risk, to see how fast one can go without killing themselves or their machine.

 

[YSSMAN]

Isn't it powered by a Ford sourced V8?

If I remember correctly, it is. The website says its a DOHC 4.7L unit, which leads me to believe that it is a highly modified version of the Ford 4.6L unit that can be found in your neighbor's Mustang.

 

[High-Test]

First On Race Day...


Ha! to think that a zillion dollar W-16 could be beaten out by a modified Ford 4.6...

 

[fangorn_forest]

Those wheels! Those wheels!

 

[YSSMAN]

...I'm surprised they havent picked up the 5.4L unit that shares it's design with the powerplants found in the Ford GT and Shelby Mustang Cobra.

 

[Raghavan]

If this CCX beat the Bugatti Veyron, it's a sad day for VW indeed.

 

[Pebb]

If I remember correctly, it is. The website says its a DOHC 4.7L unit, which leads me to believe that it is a highly modified version of the Ford 4.6L unit that can be found in your neighbor's Mustang.

I must admit the V8 from the CCR sounds so nice. But I reckon the new Koenigsegg will not be able to beat the Veyron.

 

[Poverty]

Yeah, but all cars are limited by their tires. The whole point bahind the fastest car thing is a safety risk, to see how fast one can go without killing themselves or their machine.

Not really. You can do top speed runs in the veyron safely enough.They dont want to have any fat law suits on their hands.

Either way the veyron will still annahilate all over this in terms of pure acceleration.

 

[YSSMAN]

I wouldnt count the 'Egg out in acceleration numbers. If an 850bhp Lingenfelter Corvette 427TT can accelerate from 0-60 in 1.9 seconds (see Motor Trend's Vette vs Jet comparo) just having AWD doesnt save your butt...

Quickest-Accelerating Tuner Corvette:

Pitted against a Blue Angels F/A-18 jet, Steve Dumler's stock-looking '01 C5 fitted with a Lingenfelter Performance Engineering twin-turbo 427 LS-1 V-8 ran 9.24 at 150.27 mph (June 2002, page 84). Zero to 60 mph took just 1.97 seconds.

Fastest Tuner Corvette MT Has Tested:

Lingenfelter Performance Engineering built a twin-turbo C5 that ran 226 mph on Transportation Research Center of Ohio's 7.5-mile high-bank oval test track-- accomplished using street radial tires and pump gas.

 

[Poverty]

Yeah but thats a drag strip and plenty of tuner cars go around the 230mph. Especially brabus mercs.

But look at it like this. VW brought along a Saleen S7 TT with 1000bhp to show everyone that the veyrons 1000hp is a engineering feat compared to regular 1000bhp if you understand what I mean. Basically the veyron showed up a car with the same power and lower weight.

 

[High-Test]

regular 1000bhp? So there are special kinds of 1000bhp? I'm confused..


And the veyron doesn't go 230 on the drag strip? What, does it go 250 on a turn? THat to me made as much sence as the Thrust SSC's record being out because it went in a straight line at the slat flats.

 

[iceburns288]

I swear to f'in goodness, man, if I EVER see that f'in Lingenfelter Vette in one more supercar thread... !

 

[xcsti]

regular 1000bhp? So there are special kinds of 1000bhp? I'm confused..


And the veyron doesn't go 230 on the drag strip? What, does it go 250 on a turn? THat to me made as much sence as the Thrust SSC's record being out because it went in a straight line at the slat flats.

Well I think he may be talking about how much power is spread across the range of rpms. You may have a turbo car that makes a whole heft of power but for only a brief range of rpm. That car may be beaten in acceleration by a similar car that has a lower peak but produces a good amount of power over a long range of rpm. Also the way the car puts the power to the ground. I'm sure the s7 handles its power well but the awd is certainly giving the veyron a leg up.

So I guess what it means is that the veyron isn't just simply a numbers car (though it is extremely impressive in that sense) but is more usable performance wise (note the use of more, who the hell needs 1000hp) than other tunercars or low key super cars that have similar figures. It speaks to the quality of the car.

 

[YSSMAN]

...He may have a point in the difference in engineering between the quad-turbo W-16 and the twin-turbo OHV V8, but they still make 1000HP, and thats impressive no matter what way you put it.

...Interestingly enough, didnt Cadillac do the same thing with their naturally aspirated V16? That was what, 1000HP and 1000lb-ft of torque, baisicly slapping togehter two LS7s...

 

[1X83Z]

if i may throw my two cents in here, i would like to remind/notify everyone that the bugatti veyron does not have 1000 horsepower; it's rated at 987.

 

[YSSMAN]

if i may throw my two cents in here, i would like to remind/notify everyone that the bugatti veyron does not have 1000 horsepower; it's rated at 987.

Its rated at 987 in the United States, in Europe it gets the 1001HP rating due to their different horsepower ratings and cleaner fuel.

 

[xcsti]

if i may throw my two cents in here, i would like to remind/notify everyone that the bugatti veyron does not have 1000 horsepower; it's rated at 987.

Meh, but 1000 is so much cooler than 987, enough to counter balance any inaccuracies.

 

[Revheadnz]

I'm guessing that that Lingenfelter Vette had slick tyres on it when it ran its 1.97 to 62mph/100kph which kind of puts it out of the comparison.

Run it on street radials and see if it can get anywhere near the Veyrons 2.5 seconds to 100kph.

 

[1X83Z]

Its rated at 987 in the United States, in Europe it gets the 1001HP rating due to their different horsepower ratings and cleaner fuel.

indeed - but i just find it comical that after waiting fifteen thousand years for the vehicle to debut, supposedly because it wasn't "quite" 1000 horsepower, we're left with a vehicle that's not 1000 horsepower. they can say that it's 1000 in europe, but as america is the biggest market for supercars, i think they screwed up. obviously they didn't screw up as in they "forgot" to convert it to us standards, but they screwed up by not giving us 1000 horsepower.

 

[xcsti]

indeed - but i just find it comical that after waiting fifteen thousand years for the vehicle to debut, supposedly because it wasn't "quite" 1000 horsepower, we're left with a vehicle that's not 1000 horsepower. they can say that it's 1000 in europe, but as america is the biggest market for supercars, i think they screwed up. obviously they didn't screw up as in they "forgot" to convert it to us standards, but they screwed up by not giving us 1000 horsepower.

Well I don't think any market is "big" for supercars.

 

[Driftster]

it's a magic 1000HP from VW..which means...it's like having 6 Herby the love bugs doing wacky hijinx on the race track instead of just one..

Saleen can't match wits with one herby...let alone 6..They havn't got a chance.

 

[YSSMAN]

Saleen would have had to modify the gearbox on the S7 to top 253MPH, and last I had herd, the gearbox ratios are exactly the same on the stock S7. C/D had mathematically figured out the car would max out at 223MPH at it's 6500RPM redline, and being that the origional S7 couldnt do it, the 1000HP S7TT most certainly should...

 

[Poverty]

indeed - but i just find it comical that after waiting fifteen thousand years for the vehicle to debut, supposedly because it wasn't "quite" 1000 horsepower, we're left with a vehicle that's not 1000 horsepower. they can say that it's 1000 in europe, but as america is the biggest market for supercars, i think they screwed up. obviously they didn't screw up as in they "forgot" to convert it to us standards, but they screwed up by not giving us 1000 horsepower.

Man that is bullllllll. Go buy some cleaner fuel then. Regardless the machine makes 1001hp minium at a time when using high quality fuel for a highely tunesd machine. The veyron makes alot more power than 1001hp but thats just the minium figure it will always make. It all depends on the surronding conditions. Its meant to make up to 1500hp and rumoured to be capable of near 2000hp.

 

[Dave A]

if i may throw my two cents in here, i would like to remind/notify everyone that the bugatti veyron does not have 1000 horsepower, it's rated at 987.

It's rated at 987bhp or 1001bhp depending on where you are but thats only on paper. The reality is, it actually produces closer to 1100bhp. Remember also that the actual engine produces around 3000bhp.

Wolfgang Schreiber, Bugatti engineering’s technical director is quoted saying the following:

“The maximum combustion energy in fact adds up to 3000 bhp - 1000 bhp is swallowed by the cooling system, 1000 bhp goes through the exhaust apparatus, and 1000bhp is relayed to the four driven wheels.”​

​

 

[Freddie]

It'll be interesting to see if the CCX can beat the 16/4's 0-400km/h time. Remember, it has to beat 55 seconds to be faster.

 

[Dave A]

I don't think it will, what VW has done with the Veyron is an astounding achievment.

 

[Driftster]

yes it is..

Shoving a giant engine into an equally bulbous car....

Amazing..