Was "Veyron poll" - Then "VAG/GM discussion" - Now "Veyron discussion again"

[Joey D]

I do understand your point, but it is not really comparable. The Z06 is up there, but why does the Viper with a bigger engine "only" have the same power? And the Mustang - 300hp from a 4.5 litre V8. That's not a lot, but then again ... maybe the manufacturers didn't want to get more power out of those engines. You don't always have to go to the limit, instead you may pay more attention to other things like reliability.

Like I've said, I've been told anything made by Europeans is next to God and so are there engines. I'm just merely pointing out the fact that they could have gone with a smaller engine with the same results.

It also has to do with them showing off. There are so many twin turbos, so why not make a quad turbo if you want to impress people? And engineering-wise, four turbos may be better than two. BMW and Opel for example are just beginning to use two turbos for their Diesels. A small, quick one for low revs and little lag and a bigger, slower one for high boost at higher revs. Of course, you could get the same power with one turbo, but not as sophisticated.

Well more or less it's two twin turboed W8's, it'd be like quad turboing the caddy 16 if they made it. Pointless. It just adds a bunch of extra weight and more things to break.

 

[Poverty]

Like I've said, I've been told anything made by Europeans is next to God and so are there engines.

BMW M5

 

[the Interceptor]

Like I've said, I've been told anything made by Europeans is next to God and so are there engines. I'm just merely pointing out the fact that they could have gone with a smaller engine with the same results.

There are some very good engines from germany, but then again look at the japanese. Honda has some of the best engines when it comes to hp per displacement (NA), and they also have the reliability. I agree there is the received opinion that americans do everything with displacement, and germans do it with engineering, and it's not entirely untrue in my eyes. But the Z06 is one of the examples where this goes absolutely wrong. Sure, it does have a huge displacement, but then again it has the power as well.

Well more or less it's two twin turboed W8's, it'd be like quad turboing the caddy 16 if they made it. Pointless. It just adds a bunch of extra weight and more things to break.

True, but look at it this way. Imagine you are stinkin' rich and you buy everything you want to buy. You read about this new Bugatti with a twin-turbo W8. How lame does that sound in comparison to quad-turbo W16? Yes, they could have made 1001hp with a smaller engine and less turbos, but they wanted to make a one-off. They wanted to create a car you can't even compare with anything else, so they made it a W16 quad-turbo.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Famine]

Like I've said, I've been told anything made by Europeans is next to God and so are there engines. I'm just merely pointing out the fact that they could have gone with a smaller engine with the same results.

And got a landmine.

The point of the four turbos is not to get power, but to get it easily, reliably and consistently. If they'd gone with a smaller engine, or fewer turbos, they'd have had to drop the service interval and the warranty claims would have been astronomical (considering they lose about £4 million just selling the car), and the power and torque delivery would have been peaky and intractable.

The image they like to put about is that VAG = Reliable. Having their flagship grenade itself every 5,000 miles, or end up upside-down in hedges as 1001hp all appears suddenly at 4,500rpm would look bad.


Bottom line: The turbos aren't there to make power. They're there to provide it, smoothly (peak torque is available from 2,500rpm all the way up to 5,500rpm), and prevent undue stress on the rest of the engine.

 

[Leonidae]

*ahem* it's 2200-5500rpms..

 

[niky]

Maybe he meant metric rpms.... Famine is never wrong.

But considering that those turbos are there to make the engine more tractable, isn't it weird that some test drivers have reported huge lag?

 

[Ghost C]

(snip)...Honda has some of the best engines when it comes to hp per displacement (NA), and they also have the reliability...(snip)

Because we all know, hp/liter is the deciding factor of a good engine.

As for the whole quad turbo W16 thing, it's not that impressive. I could twin turbo an LS-Series V8, get the same power with half the weight, and it'd be every bit as reliable. I'm thoroughly more impressed with the 1,000hp and 1,000ft/lbs normally aspirated Cadillac V16. Now if they'd just produce it...

 

[the Interceptor]

Because we all know, hp/liter is the deciding factor of a good engine.

Finding an engine good or bad is a matter of taste, but you can't deny it's an engineering archievement.

As for the whole quad turbo W16 thing, it's not that impressive. I could twin turbo an LS-Series V8, get the same power with half the weight, and it'd be every bit as reliable. I'm thoroughly more impressed with the 1,000hp and 1,000ft/lbs normally aspirated Cadillac V16. Now if they'd just produce it...

Like several people said before, the figures only tell half the story of the Veyron. There are quicker, faster, cheaper and more powerful cars, but still, the Veyron didn't fail to do what it was supposed to. I understand that some people won't like it, but you should still separate dislike from acknowledging a technical archievement.

Regards
the Interceptor

 

[Poverty]

Wasnt the cadillac like 13 L engine capacity?

Just look at Evolutions. 2.0l 4pot turboed with 340hp, but you have to service it every 4,500 miles. The veyron you service like a normal VW.

As for the whole quad turbo W16 thing, it's not that impressive. I could twin turbo an LS-Series V8, get the same power with half the weight, and it'd be every bit as reliable

I doubt it. Its not the engine thats heavy, its all the equipment which keeps it comfortable quiet and reliable thats heavy. Just imagine all the sound deading material VW used to make the veyron quiet in the cockpit and that transmission is huge. every car with over 700hp would not make it around the world without a servicing inbetween. The veyron can.

 

[Joey D]

The veyron you service like a normal VW.

So all the time? VW aren't the most reliable things in the world.

True, but look at it this way. Imagine you are stinkin' rich and you buy everything you want to buy. You read about this new Bugatti with a twin-turbo W8. How lame does that sound in comparison to quad-turbo W16? Yes, they could have made 1001hp with a smaller engine and less turbos, but they wanted to make a one-off. They wanted to create a car you can't even compare with anything else, so they made it a W16 quad-turbo.

True enough, I never doubted that part of it.

 

[Poverty]

So all the time? VW aren't the most reliable things in the world.

No they arent. But theyre more reliable than their GM of europe or europe equivelant though.

When someone goes to buy a VW and they start having 2nd thoughts it wouldnt be about reliability.

 

[Dave A]

VW's are generally very relaible, cheap parts too.

 

[Tornado]

There are still a few cars, like I said Audi A3 is a VW Golf, a VW Phaeton was a Audi A8, and I'm sure there are cars you guy have that we don't.

The Audi A8 and VW Phaeton are completely different cars. Different chassis, platform, etc. Otherwise, VW and Audi share everything.

Caddy and Chevy don't use the same platforms, but lots of the technology is shared. I mean there is a Vette engine in a CTS. They are still all part of the same company.

I thought the C6 shared it's platform with the XLR?

Like I've said Henessy can take the V10 with the same displacement and bump up the power to the same level. They are an aftermarket company with a budget, according to you guys the Veyron was pretty much built with out cost in mind. Hence they should've done more.

I'm not so sure you understand how they measure engine capacity. It's swept volume, not actual engine size. So, in reality, the Viper has exactly as much air in it at any given time as the Veyron does, and the SRT-10 has more. The Veyron, with 6 more cylinders, is most definately a hell of a lot smoother than the Viper as well. And again: The simple fact that the Viper is FR makes the entire statement about it invalid. I could go out to Autozone and buy a single $15,000 turbo, max the boost and have more power than the Veyron on a Viper. It would lag enough for me to eat a sandwich, spit fuel and run rich, and I could probably blow out my eardrums from the sound of the turbo. Oh, and theres a good chance the engine block would crack when the boost did start. But cooling would be a non-issue. Tell me if the Veyron suffers from any of those things, other than lag (which is common on non-sequential turbos anyways). Also, tell me how a V10 would have been produced by VW. VW has no engine on which to base it, as I don't think they make the VR5 anymore, so explain how they could have made it.
Also, I'm sorry if you won't buy "because they didn't want to" as an excuse for not making more power out of the Veyron, but the problem is that that is the reason. They only wanted it to go faster than 250MPH. It coudln't possibly be made to go faster than 255. So, truth be told, they didn't need any more power than they had, because 1001 BHP was sufficient in acheiveing all of the goals the car was required to acheive..
​

 

[Jay]

So, in reality, the Viper has exactly as much air in it at any given time as the Veyron does.

Well not really, if the Veyron is on boost the turbo's are forcing more air into the cylinders, but yes the volume of the cylinders are the same but the amount of air in the cylinders are not always the same.

 

[Tornado]

Well not really, if the Veyron is on boost the turbo's are forcing more air into the cylinders, but yes the volume of the cylinders are the same but the amount of air in the cylinders are not always the same.

I know, forgot to mention "if the Veyron wasn't using forced induction".
​

 

[Dave A]

The Hennesesey 800TT and 1000TT are both forced induction too.

 

[YSSMAN]

VW's are generally very relaible, cheap parts too.

What kind of VW are you driving, and where are you buying your parts? Doing anything with my Jetta, or even my old Fox has cost an arm and a leg in comparison to some of the Chevrolets and Hondas my family has owned. I don't mind in particular, as it is part of owning a VW, but I would probably put thier service costs in atleast the top ten here in the US, which of course explains the obsurdly high insurance rates.

...I've never had too many problems with my VW, but that is because it always recieves regular maintainence not only by me, but also by it's previous owners. She is still running strong at nearly 160,000 miles, and although the idle can be rough at times (I think I have dirty fuel-injectors), she still purrs like a kitten.

 

[Dave A]

Your VW's are built in different factories to our VW's and yes the quality is different, I drive a Bora (which is a Jetta in the US) it's a 2000 model 2.3 Va . Also parts for them over here are dirt cheap, on that one all I can say is they're cheap to repair or the buy parts for, which is probably a Europe thing with VW's.

 

[GT4_Rule]

The Audi A8 and VW Phaeton are completely different cars. Different chassis, platform, etc. Otherwise, VW and Audi share everything.

I thought the C6 shared it's platform with the XLR?

I'm not so sure you understand how they measure engine capacity. It's swept volume, not actual engine size. So, in reality, the Viper has exactly as much air in it at any given time as the Veyron does, and the SRT-10 has more. The Veyron, with 6 more cylinders, is most definately a hell of a lot smoother than the Viper as well. And again: The simple fact that the Viper is FR makes the entire statement about it invalid. I could go out to Autozone and buy a single $15,000 turbo, max the boost and have more power than the Veyron on a Viper. It would lag enough for me to eat a sandwich, spit fuel and run rich, and I could probably blow out my eardrums from the sound of the turbo. Oh, and theres a good chance the engine block would crack when the boost did start. But cooling would be a non-issue. Tell me if the Veyron suffers from any of those things, other than lag (which is common on non-sequential turbos anyways). Also, tell me how a V10 would have been produced by VW. VW has no engine on which to base it, as I don't think they make the VR5 anymore, so explain how they could have made it.
Also, I'm sorry if you won't buy "because they didn't want to" as an excuse for not making more power out of the Veyron, but the problem is that that is the reason. They only wanted it to go faster than 250MPH. It coudln't possibly be made to go faster than 255. So, truth be told, they didn't need any more power than they had, because 1001 BHP was sufficient in acheiveing all of the goals the car was required to acheive..

​

Isnt it more like, VW had lost enough money on the Veyron project that at the point where the test car exceeded 250mph, VW put a stop to the development and kept the car as is?

 

[Joey D]

When someone goes to buy a VW and they start having 2nd thoughts it wouldnt be about reliability.

VW's are generally very relaible, cheap parts too.

Not so in the states, VW are very unreliable cars.

I thought the C6 shared it's platform with the XLR?

Yes they do, but the Vette doesn't really even have a platform, look at the chassie of a Vette, or lack there of. But for sake of arugement you are right.

I'm not so sure you understand how they measure engine capacity. It's swept volume, not actual engine size. So, in reality, the Viper has exactly as much air in it at any given time as the Veyron does, and the SRT-10 has more.

What's your point? They both have the same amount of air going through the cylinders. I'm saying for 1/10th the cost you can have a Henessy TT with 1000hp and it would more then likely be lighter.

Also, tell me how a V10 would have been produced by VW. VW has no engine on which to base it, as I don't think they make the VR5 anymore, so explain how they could have made it.

Lambos have V12's in them, just hack 2 cylinders off and have a V-10, or better yet use the V12. 16 cylidners is pretty absurd for a car to have, I mean you don't need them to create that kinda of power, plus its just more stuff to break. It's not that had to come up with an engine, look at GM, they have very few engines with a million different combinations.

Also, I'm sorry if you won't buy "because they didn't want to" as an excuse for not making more power out of the Veyron, but the problem is that that is the reason. They only wanted it to go faster than 250MPH. It coudln't possibly be made to go faster than 255. So, truth be told, they didn't need any more power than they had, because 1001 BHP was sufficient in acheiveing all of the goals the car was required to acheive..

Cite saftey, cite reliability, cite anything thing and I might by it, but because they want to is a stupid reason. If I punched someone in the head I better have a better reason then "I wanted to".

 

[Poverty]

Isnt it more like, VW had lost enough money on the Veyron project that at the point where the test car exceeded 250mph, VW put a stop to the development and kept the car as is?

VW spent a couple billions on veyron development. They wouldnt have done it unless they make theyre money back in the long run, and they will as they introduce veyron technology into the rest of their cars. Also if VW thought they lost too much money they wouldnt be rumoured to be developing a 1200hp version. To VAG its an investment, all top manufacturers do it. To make money you have to spend money. GM wouldnt be in the mess they are in now if they would have spent more money on development.

 

[Dave A]

Not so in the states, VW are very unreliable cars.

I've heared this from other American's, the standard of the VW plants must be very different in the US.

What's your point? They both have the same amount of air going through the cylinders. I'm saying for 1/10th the cost you can have a Henessy TT with 1000hp and it would more then likely be lighter.

Weight was never an issue with the eyron, the fact the Viper is lighter doesn't mean it's fast, better on a track or better overall, who's betting it's harder to drive and a hell of a lot less comfey than the Veyron. Because for that price I'd want a comfey car. Anyway as a Piech said, the Veyron isn't a track day supercar, it's the ultimate Grand Tourer, and it's weight is pretty ball park for a GT.

Lambos have V12's in them, just hack 2 cylinders off and have a V-10, or better yet use the V12.

16 cyliders is damn smooth for a 1000 bhp car compared to 10 cylinder's, is one better than the other, that depends what you want to use the engine for, the W16 fit's a super Grand Tourer far more than a super track monster.

16 cylidners is pretty absurd for a car to have, I mean you don't need them to create that kinda of power.

you don't need 10 to create that kind of power, so.

Plus its just more stuff to break. It's not that had to come up with an engine, look at GM, they have very few engines with a million different combinations.

But will it break, whatever you say your specualting, but the fact the Veyron has the standard warranty I'd say they're pretty confident that ti won't break.

Cite saftey, cite reliability, cite anything thing and I might by it, but because they want to is a stupid reason. If I punched someone in the head I better have a better reason then "I wanted to".

The reason they didn't add more power has already been given, they didn't need it, more power = more stress = lower reliability. The power they have does the job, more power won't make the top speed any higher because the tyre's have become the limiting factor now.

The Veyron was created to re-launch Bugatti, it's the ultiamte halo car for bugatti, a light track monster doesn't fit bugatti's true image, neither does second rate.

 

[Poverty]

Not so in the states, VW are very unreliable cars.


Cite saftey, cite reliability, cite anything thing and I might by it, but because they want to is a stupid reason. If I punched someone in the head I better have a better reason then "I wanted to".

1. You are wrong. If VW's are very unreliable then so too would be a good share of audi's and going by the forums I visit there havent been any americans complaining about poor reliability. Very different story though on the MB forums. Also your VAG cars are 99% the same as ours, why are our VW's the exact opposite from very unreliable, especially when there are more of them in europe? I know they have a reputation still from a couple years back that they wernt all that reliable but those days are gone.

2. it goes to 250mph because they wanted to.

 

[Joey D]

I've heared this from other American's, the standard of the VW plants must be very different in the US.

American VW's are typically built in Mexico. I think some in Brazil as well, but don't quote me on that. I remember M5Power telling me sometime ago.

Weight was never an issue with the eyron, the fact the Viper is lighter doesn't mean it's fast, better on a track or better overall, who's betting it's harder to drive and a hell of a lot less comfey than the Veyron. Because for that price I'd want a comfey car. Anyway as a Piech said, the Veyron isn't a track day supercar, it's the ultimate Grand Tourer, and it's weight is pretty ball park for a GT.

Maybe someone needs to explain Grand Tourer and give other examples, I've always been told the Veyron was a Super or Hyper car....which I can sort of see, but not fully.

you don't need 10 to create that kind of power, so.

Totally agree with that, you could do it with 8, 6, or even 4.

But will it break, whatever you say your specualting, but the fact the Veyron has the standard warranty I'd say they're pretty confident that ti won't break.

It goes back to phyics, after enough stress and strain the parts wear out and fail. I'm sure parts on a 1001hp car will wear out and fail much quicker then parts on a 100hp Civic. There is still a structral limit with metals and alloys, I learned this in my materials class during high school.

The Veyron was created to re-launch Bugatti, it's the ultiamte halo car for bugatti, a light track monster doesn't fit bugatti's true image, neither does second rate.

Another reason I can by, "because they wanted to" is pretty stupid, but at least there is substance behind that.

1. You are wrong. If VW's are very unreliable then so too would be a good share of audi's and going by the forums I visit there havent been any americans complaining about poor reliability. Very different story though on the MB forums. Also your VAG cars are 99% the same as ours, why are our VW's the exact opposite from very unreliable, especially when there are more of them in europe? I know they have a reputation still from a couple years back that they wernt all that reliable but those days are gone.

2. it goes to 250mph because they wanted to.

No I am not wrong, ask many Americans and you'll see that VW has a bad reputation of being unreliable. Like L4S said, he's heard it to. There is a big difference between Euro spec VW's and US Spec VW's. Some of our VW's are built in Mexico and like I said I think Brazil.

And no it goes 250mph because there is some limiting factor...I'm guessing the tires, heat, and massive amounts of stress.

 

[Dave A]

1. You are wrong. If VW's are very unreliable then so too would be a good share of audi's and going by the forums I visit there havent been any americans complaining about poor reliability. Very different story though on the MB forums. Also your VAG cars are 99% the same as ours, why are our VW's the exact opposite from very unreliable, especially when there are more of them in europe? I know they have a reputation still from a couple years back that they wernt all that reliable but those days are gone.

Because our's are built in factories over here and they're arn't. I have heared that US VW's arn't as good as our's a few time's before including from someone who's driven both.

 

[Poverty]

Because our's are built in factories over here and they're arn't. I have heared that US VW's arn't as good as our's a few time's before including from someone who's driven both.

That must be it then. I know most audi's are built in europe.

It goes back to phyics, after enough stress and strain the parts wear out and fail. I'm sure parts on a 1001hp car will wear out and fail much quicker then parts on a 100hp Civic. There is still a structral limit with metals and alloys, I learned this in my materials class during high school.

Thats why we rate it so highly. Germans dont like things breaking.

And no it goes 250mph because there is some limiting factor...I'm guessing the tires, heat, and massive amounts of stress.

Then why are they making a more powerful and faster model?

 

[Joey D]

Thats why we rate it so highly. Germans dont like things breaking.

I don't care where your are from phyics > all. We live in a world based around phyiscal limitation, if you can figure out how to break them, you get a Nobel Prize...and no car companies is going to defy physics.

That must be it then. I know must audi's are built in europe.

Not all
http://www.audi.com/audi/com/en1/company/production_locations.html

Brazil, and some Asian countries are on this map

 

[Poverty]

I don't care where your are from phyics > all. We live in a world based around phyiscal limitation, if you can figure out how to break them, you get a Nobel Prize...and no car companies is going to defy physics.

The barrier of physics is only as high as the best piece of engineering. It will get constantly broken.

 

[Joey D]

The barrier of physics is only as high as the best piece of engineering. It will get constantly broken.

Wrong, the barrier of physics is the speed of light, although Famine will do a much better job of explaining everything then I ever will.

But in real world materials everything has a breaking point which takes x amount of newtons to break it. There is a ton of physics that goes into this like shape, size, density, postion, etc. It's hard to explain in short since I toke a 30 week class on the subject.

Then why are they making a more powerful and faster model?

To waste more resources and knowledge on a car that hardly anyone will buy, why not put effort into creating something that will out do the F-150 in global sales? That seems like a better use of resources.

 

[Wolfe]

I don't care where your are from phyics > all. We live in a world based around phyiscal limitation, if you can figure out how to break them, you get a Nobel Prize...and no car companies is going to defy physics.

But VW did their best to create a relatively reliable 1001hp 4WD quad-turbo 16-cylinder supercar. Its reliability is an engineering accomplishment on its own.