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

[Dave A]

Oh, yes in that case, the Z06 is quite heavy compared to a Sagaris, T440R or any TVR at that. I'd never pass an opportunity to help TVR go one up on a Vette but let's not forget this is a Veyron thread and not a TVR vs or Vette vs thread.

 

[Joey D]

No, business sense say's that whatever the cost, you should get more than that back over whatever period of time, not that the product must be affordable. VAG will make back what was spent on the Veyron's development by utilising techniques and technology they've gained from it, and selling more cost effective Bugatti's now the brand has been well and truely re-launched.

But in order to sell it, it must be affordable. How many people thought the first computers were pointless? Most people actually, but once they became affordable everyone got them.

I think I must have worded it wrong as both you and blazibg misunderstood me. I ment that for its simplicity the Z06 is fairly heavy, especially when compared to the likes of TVR.

The Z06 is not heavy, and if you turn this into a TVR vs. Z06 debate...me and L4S will own each other again . That is the biggest reason I respect L4S, he knows his stuff, but will hear everything else out.

 

[Poverty]

1. No you couldn't, but an aftermarket company could and that's with a lot of money.

2. It's a heavy car, it weighs over two tons...thats a lot of weight.

3. But those cars are not in it's class, nor as cheap as the Vette.

4. Yes it is, price is pretty much the leading factor of everything. The world runs on money.

5. The Z06 has a 427 in it because the older Vettes had them, it's a matter of heritage and more marketing then anything. People see 427 and they think Vette.

7. Yes and no, it's only a concept and will never be more then that. They will never build it with 16 cyclinders. Concepts are different then production models...which the Veyron should have stayed.

1. Same thing.
2. No the veyron weighs in at just under 2 tons dry.
3. A tvr is not in the vettes class? The BMW isnt its below but its nearly as fast.
4. The world runs on money, but money isnt everything. I work to live not live to work, and therefore use western europeans like the finer things in life like BMW's and porsches instead of vauxhalls etc
5.Just like the 911 is RR and the bugatti has to be the best car in the world to keep in with heritage.
7. If the 16 was built it would have been alot slower than the veyron, used just as much fuel and be just as comfortable.

 

[Joey D]

1. Same thing.
2. No the veyron weighs in at just under 2 tons dry.
3. A tvr is not in the vettes class? The BMW isnt its below but its nearly as fast.
4. The world runs on money, but money isnt everything. I work to live not live to work, and therefore use western europeans like the finer things in life like BMW's and porsches instead of vauxhalls etc
5.Just like the 911 is RR and the bugatti has to be the best car in the world to keep in with heritage.
7. If the 16 was built it would have been alot slower than the veyron, used just as much fuel and be just as comfortable.

1. No it's not, I would like to see you build the engine right now and take a picture.
2.You can't run a car dry can you?
3. No TVR is not in the Vette class...they don't sell in each other's realm.
4. Money runs the world, to think differently is asinine.
5. Uhh the Bugattis I know are the big old Atlantic look cars.
7. And wouldn't even be remotely used for the same reason. But it's not being built.

 

[Poverty]

The Z06 is not heavy, and if you turn this into a TVR vs. Z06 debate...me and L4S will own each other again . That is the biggest reason I respect L4S, he knows his stuff, but will hear everything else out.

For the equipment, comfort and technology it has, its heavy.

 

[Dave A]

The Veyron weighs 1880kg's dry, that's roughly 100kg's heavier than the SLR, the SLR is probablt the clsoest thing to the Veyron out there.

Some TVR's and Vette's meet performance wise, but that's not got anything to do with the discussion I have to admit. I'm not in this thread trying to discredit the Vette, not that I would anyway. For the sake of the thread, that's the last time I'll mention them... I promise.

Money is everything to a business, but money right here, right now isn't, in the case of the Veyron it's an investment for the future, they hope that the re-lauch of the Bugatti bran will pay off and that getting all the R&D done in one fell swoop will cut R7D costs for cars in the future.

 

[Joey D]

For the equipment, comfort and technology it has, its heavy.

The curb weight of the Z06 is exactly 1 pound less then the 911 S.

 

[Poverty]

1. No it's not, I would like to see you build the engine right now and take a picture.
2.You can't run a car dry can you?
3. No TVR is not in the Vette class...they don't sell in each other's realm.
4. Money runs the world, to think differently is asinine.
5. Uhh the Bugattis I know are the big old Atlantic look cars.
7. And wouldn't even be remotely used for the same reason. But it's not being built.

1.
3. Yes they do sell in each others realms.
4. Re-read what I said.
5. EB110?
7. It would just stay in the garage because it was so big it would be god awful to use in a city, and not athletic enough to take to the gumball rally.

 

[Poverty]

The curb weight of the Z06 is exactly 1 pound less then the 911 S.

The 911 S has a nice interior with loads of electronic goodies. The Z06 is partailly made out of fibreglass and has a interior similiar to a vauxhall corsa SRI.

 

[Joey D]

1.
3. Yes they do sell in each others realms.
4. Re-read what I said.
5. EB110?
7. It would just stay in the garage because it was so big it would be god awful to use in a city, and not athletic enough to take to the gumball rally.

1. You said you could, I want to see this.
3. No they don't TVR's don't sell in America, and Corvettes don't exactly sell in Europe outside of a few importers.
4. I did, I'll stick to what I said.
5. Heritage;

You realize there heritage is more like Rolls Royce right?
7. No it would be about as useful as a Maybach 62 and people would just buy it to have some guy name James drive them to where rich people go. That's what the "first" Caddy 16 was for.

The 911 S has a nice interior with loads of electronic goodies. The Z06 is partailly made out of fibreglass and has a interior similiar to a vauxhall corsa SRI.

Interior quality has exactly 0 to do with weight

 

[Poverty]

The better the quality the parts the generally the heavier the material. Also the 997s uses plenty sound deadning. The Z06 uses some but not alot.

 

[Dave A]

Luxury padded seats and electronic goodies do, the interior can be worth over 100kg's, easilly just on different materials and a couple of extra electronics.

 

[Joey D]

Anyways before this turns into another Z06 thread lets get off that topic.

 

[Dave A]

Well to get that subject line on topic, the Veyron features such things as luxury leather padded heated seats, metal indicator stalks and switchgear, diamonds ont he dash, high tech and powerful stereo system and so on. Considering it also is 4wd I think they've done a great job of keepting it to the weight it is, how about comparing the Veyron to the SLR, now is the weight such a big issue? As I said before, I think the SLR is probably the best comparison around for the Veyron, both are Grand Tourers capable of very high speed and both are expensive halo car's.

 

[Joey D]

It has diamonds in the dash? How in the hell is that benefisical to anyone other then De Beers? And the high tech powerful stereo probably sucks unless someone can show me some info on it. Typically car makers don't know what makes a good stereo.

But comparing it to the SLR is fair since I can bow out now since I don't know enough about the SLR (except it has cool doors but not as cool as the Koniegsegg) and a long ass nose.

 

[Dave A]

It's a Dieter Burmester created system worth a good chunk of money (30 grand to be more specific), Dieter Burmester is known for good quality sound systems. The diamonds in the dash are there for nothng more than the buyers gratification, never would say otherwise, but Bugatti are a very prestigue company, top class hotels don't need gold taps but they have them, same reason applys.

 

[Joey D]

Ok you got me on the diamonds.

But Bose is not a stellar system, my truck came with a Bose system which was promptly ripped out. Auto markers need to partner with higher end audio markers. I have a decent Alpine, Panasonic, and Inifinty in my truck which sounds far better then my mom's Pacifica with it's high end 9 speaker system.

But we have a saying for Bose in America..."All highs, no lows, that's Bose" and I couldn't agree more, there is no low end from those damn things. Now if Bugatti wanted something sweet, they should put something like Klipshe speakers or other insanely hi-fonics in their cars.

 

[Joey D]

Also this is Bugatti's heritage, not so much the EB110.

So why didn't they build a car more to that? Something like this...

 

[Dave A]

But Bose is not a stellar system

My mistake, it wasn't Bose, I've corrected the post.

As for the heritage, I beleive Bugatti's next car is a front engined vehicle, but regardless of engine position, thoes car's were the finest car's of their time and amongst the fastest, which the Veyron is. The EB110 is the most out of place Bugatti in the history of Bugatti, great car imo, but had nothing to do with Bugatti's before it, and little in common with the Veyron besides it being mid-engined and 4 wheel drive.

 

[Joey D]

Dieter Burmester

Ok then, so they went with a good company. I was going to say, Bose sucks.

 

[JCE]

The SLR is long, fat, and very slow when compaired to the Veyron--how is that in the same class? The SLR may be a GT car but the Veyon is like a super/hyper GT car...the same as a 911 is a really fast sports car but the Carrera GT is a super/hyper car. Make sense?

 

[Tornado]

But in order to sell it, it must be affordable. How many people thought the first computers were pointless? Most people actually, but once they became affordable everyone got them.

But, in order to make any profit off of them, VW would have to sell them for $7,000,000. I'd say $1.25 million looks very affordable at the moment.

2. It's a heavy car, it weighs over two tons...thats a lot of weight.

This is from Paul Frere's "911 Story", on the 959:
"Whatever care is taken to save weight, a car carrying such an amount of advanced technology cannot be a lightweight. Originally, Porsche predicted a weight of 1,450 kg with full tanks, but this eventually turned out to be optimistic by anything between 150 and 200 kg ...."
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]And remember, this Bugatti has a whole hell of a lot more stuff than 959 Comfort in it.

[/SIZE]

[/FONT] So why didn't they build a car more to that? Something like this...

They can't build that. VAG doesn't own that design. Bugatti Automobili spA and ItalDesign Guigaro do.

7. Yes and no, it's only a concept and will never be more then that. They will never build it with 16 cyclinders. Concepts are different then production models...which the Veyron should have stayed.

There is a huge difference though: if Cadillac had built the 16 it would not have sold. People have already been buying Bugatti's. And the Bugatti was always production feasible. The Sixteen never was, and never will be.

You could build the best thing in the world and if no one can afford it, it's pointless.

Aha, but people can afford the Veyron! Far more than you think.

They created technology that no one will really ever use, I mean who's going to need a 1000 car that travels 250mph? You aren't. The technology should have been developed on a Golf or a Jetta...something that would actually benefit the world.

Citing the 959 again, let me ask you: Do Porsches today have adjustable height suspension? 4-wheel-drive (granted, a different design, but still, Porsche wouldn't have put 4WD in the 911 if they hadn't known it would work)? Water-Cooled flat-six engines? 4-valves per cylinder? Drag coefficient under .32? 6-speed manual transmissions? I could go on, but you get the picture.

 

[Vasco]

So you don't get it Blazin? You don't get that through the Veyron's development that VAG would have discovered more efficient systems in and around the engine that they could use in the upcoming base VW models?
When a company such as BMW enters Formula 1 they don't use the technology from there and apply it to their cars? Instead you're saying they should just try and miraculously find some new improvement without expensive research and just apply it to the base models straight away?

You do have to understand that the Veyron is just one example of how car companies discover new forms of technology to apply to their other cars. VAG decided that instead of just undertaking billion dollar research they would make a car which would go over 400 km/h and be easy enough to drive so that if someone purchased it everyday they could use it to pop down to the shops and buy milk. They have created a car which is (in my opinion) the best GT at the moment.

 

[Joey D]

They can't build that. VAG doesn't own that design. Bugatti Automobili spA and ItalDesign Guigaro do.

Not that, something more like that.

There is a huge difference though: if Cadillac had built the 16 it would not have sold. People have already been buying Bugatti's. And the Bugatti was always production feasible. The Sixteen never was, and never will be.

People would have bought it, very few people, but people would have bought it. People buy the Maybach 62 don't they? Same thing. But they aren't going to build it and sole reason for the concept was to showcase Caddy's new face. Look at the upcoming CTS...it's a spittin image of the 16.

Aha, but people can afford the Veyron! Far more than you think.

My family is wealthy and we don't have a spare million laying around to spend on some stupid car.

Citing the 959 again, let me ask you: Do Porsches today have adjustable height suspension? 4-wheel-drive (granted, a different design, but still, Porsche wouldn't have put 4WD in the 911 if they hadn't known it would work)? Water-Cooled flat-six engines? 4-valves per cylinder? Drag coefficient under .32? 6-speed manual transmissions? I could go on, but you get the picture.

Porshes still aren't common cars, they should be making things for everyday cars.


And I get it, and I have an opinion on it...like everyone else.

 

[Tornado]

People would have bought it, very few people, but people would have bought it. People buy the Maybach 62 don't they? Same thing. But they aren't going to build it and sole reason for the concept was to showcase Caddy's new face. Look at the upcoming CTS...it's a spittin image of the 16.

A lot less would have bought the Sixteen than the EB16.4. No one does buy the Maybach 62. And, the same way Cadillac was prefacing the "future face," the Bugatti is showcasing future technology.

My family is wealthy and we don't have a spare million laying around to spend on some stupid car.

What is your point? I never said that you could. I said far more people can afford them than you would think.

Porshes still aren't common cars, they should be making things for everyday cars.

I never said that they were. I was just comparing the 959 (which is, in all honesty, an 80's version of the Veyron) to the Veyron and explaining how a company has used the technology in the past. And considering the tangled web of VAG ownership (not even counting the Porsche-owned part of VAG), that is not a coincidence.

 

[Joey D]

A lot less would have bought the Sixteen than the EB16.4. No one does buy the Maybach 62. And, the same way Cadillac was prefacing the "future face," the Bugatti is showcasing future technology.

Except most of Bugatti's technology has already been done. There is nothing new to teh concept of a 1000 hp in a car. Now if they wanted to show off technology they should have built a car that got a ton of horsepower and used some other fuel or something.

What is your point? I never said that you could. I said far more people can afford them than you would think.

What's my point? I come from a wealthy family and we can't afford a Veyron, and I live in one of the richest counties in America and there are exactly 0 Veyrons around here. I'm guessing the only people who will buy a Veyron are rappers and car collectors...so 20 at the most.

 

[vladimir]

What's my point? I come from a wealthy family and we can't afford a Veyron, and I live in one of the richest counties in America and there are exactly 0 Veyrons around here. I'm guessing the only people who will buy a Veyron are rappers and car collectors...so 20 at the most.

so what? i live in one of the wealthiest countries on the world, in a big city, next to a place called königstein, where the density of millionaires is supposed to be the highest in germany...and i have yet not seen more than one enzo, and that was at a dealer...and they supposedly sold 300 of them...what does that tell me? nothing...

a car like the veyron won't be parked outside on just any street and it won't be driven any day. the chance to see one was not measureable even if someone in your area had one.
ferrari could choose the people it sold the enzo to, and they only cost a little less than the veyron...hell, they even sell FXXs, which cost 2.3 million used and can't be driven on the road!

 

[Tornado]

Except most of Bugatti's technology has already been done. There is nothing new to teh concept of a 1000 hp in a car. Now if they wanted to show off technology they should have built a car that got a ton of horsepower and used some other fuel or something.

So, since your so knowledgable on the subject, before Bugatti, what manafacturer (not crap ass tuners, which does not include Saleen; or idiots with Skylines and Supras) made a 1000 BHP car? Who offered it with a 3 year warranty? Who made a car that went 253 MPH, which had a 255 MPH speed limiter?! Who was the last manafacturer to do all of these things at once, with promised reliability? Who was the last manafacturer to produce a 4.5 ton car that lapped the 'Ring in 7:40 and not pushing it? Who was the last manafacturer, since price is so important to you for some reason, to sell a car at a $6 million loss for each car? Hell, not counting Italian Bugatti, who was the last company to produce a car with 4 sequential turbochargers?

What's my point? I come from a wealthy family and we can't afford a Veyron, and I live in one of the richest counties in America and there are exactly 0 Veyrons around here. I'm guessing the only people who will buy a Veyron are rappers and car collectors...so 20 at the most.

So, again your basing your entire rebuttle to an argument on "there aren't any in Michigan."

 

[Joey D]

So, since your so knowledgable on the subject, before Bugatti, what manafacturer (not crap ass tuners, which does not include Saleen; or idiots with Skylines and Supras) made a 1000 BHP car? Who offered it with a 3 year warranty? Who made a car that went 253 MPH, which had a 255 MPH speed limiter?! Who was the last manafacturer to do all of these things at once, with promised reliability? Who was the last manafacturer to produce a 4.5 ton car that lapped the 'Ring in 7:40 and not pushing it? Who was the last manafacturer, since price is so important to you for some reason, to sell a car at a $6 million loss for each car? Hell, not counting Italian Bugatti, who was the last company to produce a car with 4 sequential turbochargers?

Did I say I was knowledge on the subject? No not at all, but I'm saying making a 1000hp engine in a car is nothing new, there has been aftermarket companies doing it for a long time and race teams that have been taking street engines and doing just that for even a longer time.

Crap ass tuners? I think you are sorely mistaken because not only is Hennessey, Saleen, Ligenfelter, etc. reputable tuners, they also work with the companies they tune for. A crap tuner would be some no name company on the internet that sells whistler tips for Civics.

I can't answer the questions you've asked because I don't know, but like I've said a 1000 hp engine is not a new concept at all, neither is multiple turbos. There is a Bel Air with 8 turbos on it. It's not a new concept, people have known and done it for years. They might have been done by people other then a manf. but that doesn't matter.

But as we've seen before, horsepower doesn't mean much, you can take a less horsepower car and do the same thing.

So, again your basing your entire rebuttle to an argument on "there aren't any in Michigan."

I don't base arguements on that, I base them on experiences I've had because to assume isn't exactly the best thing. Most of what I've said I've picked up along the way. But I figure if I live in the one of the top ten richest counties in America, then surely these people can afford one and buy one. If I don't see one at the Dream Cruise this year, its a pretty good certian no one owns one around me then.

 

[JCE]

There is a Bel Air with 8 turbos on it. It's not a new concept, people have known and done it for years. They might have been done by people other then a manf. but that doesn't matter.

WTF, EIGHT TURBOS? Link me I've got to see this. Can you imagine the turbo lag on that thing?