The official new Bugatti Veyron specs!! [Archive]

jorismo

09-05-2005, 05:58 AM

Well, Bugatti has now offical released the new specs of their ultimate supercar! Just watch en drool...

Sizes:
Length: 4.46 m
Width: 2.00 m
Heigth: 1.20 m
Weelbase: 2.71 m
Weigth: 1.888 kg

Engine:
W16
7.993 liters
1001 bhp @ 6.000 rpm
1.250 Nm @ 2.200 - 5500 rpm
7-gears DSG

Figures:
max speed: 407 km/h!!
0-100 km/h: 2.5 seconds
0-200 km/h: 7.3 seconds
0-300 km/h: 16.7 seconds
100-0 km/h: 31.4 meters

Price tag: estimated 1.000.000 euro

The Veyron has a 100 liter fueltank. Not a superfluosly luxurie, because the Bugatti use 40.4 liters of fuel at 100 km (in city) meaning: 1:2,5. Outside the built-up area is manages a acceptable 1:6,5. The average fuel-usage is 1:4,1. If we handle current Shell gas prices, a filled up Veyrons tank costs 160.30 euro ($200 - 108 pounds). With a filled tank the Veyron can reach 410 km and one kilometer costs 0.39 euro. (26 pence - $ 0,49).

jorismo

09-05-2005, 05:59 AM

some more...

RazaBlade

09-05-2005, 06:09 AM

Those specs are just...amazing. They're just too fast!
Some Autocar dude says "it acclerates to 180mph just over a minute quicker than an Aston DB9.". Thats just mental!!
It must feel reaaaal good to be super rich now!

McLareN

09-05-2005, 06:23 AM

FYI, you can find bigger pics in the hide-out.

Pinin

09-05-2005, 06:24 AM

"Engine:
W16"

Last I heard they decided to make it a V16.. ?

danno

09-05-2005, 06:35 AM

pinin is correct.

R34GTR

09-05-2005, 06:36 AM

Nope it's a W16 every press statement says so, btw 2,5 sec 0-60 mph it must have a starting mechanism of the 2005 Renault F1 car

lightweight

09-05-2005, 07:06 AM

It reaches 300 km in 16.7 secs, not 13 as was reported in the initial stages of development. God dammit...

man 430gt

09-05-2005, 07:06 AM

"Engine:
W16"

Last I heard they decided to make it a V16.. ?
A W16 is to v6's put togeather, like the flying spur. and if that could reach 200+ they would prefer using that maybe?

Matra et Alpine

09-05-2005, 07:11 AM

A W16 is to v6's put togeather, like the flying spur. and if that could reach 200+ they would prefer using that maybe?
two narow angle V8s
See http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=371080&postcount=29

Pinin

09-05-2005, 07:21 AM

This pic shows a V16 though.
http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/1447370b.jpg

Mustang

09-05-2005, 07:21 AM

A W16 is to v6's put togeather, like the flying spur. and if that could reach 200+ they would prefer using that maybe?

lol 6+6 = 12 and somehow those amazing designers managed 16 cylinders from it :eek:

Matra et Alpine

09-05-2005, 07:24 AM

This pic shows a V16 though.
http://www.supercars.net/pitlane/pics/1447370b.jpg
how are you getting V16 ?

It's W.

There is a narrow V8 in each bank ( or an overlapping V8 across the crank, depending on whcih way you prefer to describe W-configuration engines )

See the link I gave to Bugatti's Flash on the engine

Pinin

09-05-2005, 07:33 AM

Ah, I see it now. I was going by something that I heard on another website (That they had problems with a W16). Oh well.

Nemesias

09-05-2005, 10:01 AM

do we need an aircraft license to ride it?

The_Canuck

09-05-2005, 10:09 AM

its fast but so terribly ugly IMO

QuattroMan

09-05-2005, 10:35 AM

do we need an aircraft license to ride it?
its fast enough might as will. :)

"Clevor" Angel

09-05-2005, 11:18 AM

It'll be interesting to see when the guys at Top Gear get their hands on one.

jorismo

09-05-2005, 11:43 AM

It'll be interesting to see when the guys at Top Gear get their hands on one.

Didn't think of that yet... :D

RazaBlade

09-05-2005, 12:37 PM

its fast but so terribly ugly IMO

I actually think it looks awesome! I think Bugatti should get an applause, super fast car that looks cool too, in my opinion anyway!!

ruim20

09-05-2005, 05:37 PM

I think it looks great to, it really brings out it's heritage, it's a beautifull machine, the only thing i don't like about it it's the over machanic, there's just to much going on it makes it too heavy, i think some things should have been left out.

Apart from that, this one is for the history books!

Vindesh17

09-05-2005, 06:39 PM

very interesting specs but not that great of an overall first impression.

Aero

09-05-2005, 07:04 PM

Personally, I think it looks pretty good considering some cars with similar specs are ugly, such as the Orca C113.

_TriPLe_X

09-05-2005, 08:04 PM

It'll be interesting to see when the guys at Top Gear get their hands on one.

agree.
and see how it will behave at the hands of Stigg at their track.. :D

Spastik_Roach

09-05-2005, 11:15 PM

NuclearCrap

09-05-2005, 11:36 PM

It reaches 300 km in 16.7 secs, not 13 as was reported in the initial stages of development. God dammit...

Don't worry about it, 16.7 secs is still the fastest, McLaren did 28 secs.

BTW it's 1100hp, Bugatti added 100 because they said that 1001 wasn't enough to get this car to the promised 400km/h.

Clique

09-06-2005, 01:56 AM

Its the worst supercar ever made. Its fast. So ****ing what? Its absolutely hideous, it weighs as much as a friggen oil tanker, and makes Lamborghini drivers look safe and conservative. Its a VERY, VERY big turd on wheels.
Isnt this the point of supercars... Supercars are pointless from a mature point of view but isnt that what makes them sooooooo desireable???
BTW i think the Veyron look nice and the specs speak for themselves...
Will 2.5secs 0-60 be possible on standard road tires???

Spastik_Roach

09-06-2005, 02:14 AM

Isnt this the point of supercars... Supercars are pointless from a mature point of view but isnt that what makes them sooooooo desireable???
BTW i think the Veyron look nice and the specs speak for themselves...
Will 2.5secs 0-60 be possible on standard road tires???

I knew someone would bring that up. I know supercars are supposed to be outrageous, but theres a fineline between outrageously cool and just downright stupid. This crosses the line, and sets up camp in stupid.

Spastik_Roach

09-06-2005, 02:15 AM

Don't worry about it, 16.7 secs is still the fastest, McLaren did 28 secs.

BTW it's 1100hp, Bugatti added 100 because they said that 1001 wasn't enough to get this car to the promised 400km/h.

And yet the Mclaren needed 500hp less to get to about 10mph less :) Do the people at Bugatti even know the meaning of the word "Lightweight"?

oodis

09-06-2005, 02:34 AM

that car is insane

Matra et Alpine

09-06-2005, 03:24 AM

And yet the Mclaren needed 500hp less to get to about 10mph less :) Do the people at Bugatti even know the meaning of the word "Lightweight"?
it's the laws of aerodynamics

Adding that 10mph to top speed will have doubled the drag and so they need to double the power.

THEN they need to make the chassis stronger to coep with the power, then the suspension stronger to cope with the weight of the chassis and the brakes bigger to slow the increasing weight. So it ends up in the spiral of diminished returns :(

You dont' get high speeds from light cars but you do get faster lap times and shorter journey times and a lot more fun :D ( though less bragging rights )

:Exige:

09-06-2005, 04:40 AM

Lol - reminds me of something I read on SC.net. Some noob said something like "Yeah, the McLaren F1 can go to 320mph when its tuned". Thats my all time favourite SC.net saying :)

Vaigra

09-06-2005, 05:57 AM

amazing stats. Almost scary :eek:
thanx for the info.

GT F1

09-06-2005, 03:21 PM

Haven't seen you in a while.^^^

matek

09-06-2005, 04:59 PM

u also have to keep into consideration the fact the bugatti weighs so much is because of that interior which super cars recently havent had as they have been stripped out. so this car has everything luxury and pace so its not pontless for that rich git that want a car thats comfortable and can prance around showing of that hes the fastest. travel in comfort at the same time as blowing away all the nearest rivals.

Vaigra

09-06-2005, 05:17 PM

Haven't seen you in a while.^^^
yeah, been busy with work and whatnot. Hope y'all didn't miss me :p

aNOBLEman

09-06-2005, 07:21 PM

I knew someone would bring that up. I know supercars are supposed to be outrageous, but theres a fineline between outrageously cool and just downright stupid. This crosses the line, and sets up camp in stupid.

I completely agree with you. I think that it just looks weird and I'd much rather have a S7TT or McLaren F1. And notice how the only specs are straight line speed specs because it's so dang heavy that it can't handle worth a crap.

Spastik_Roach

09-06-2005, 09:47 PM

it's the laws of aerodynamics

Adding that 10mph to top speed will have doubled the drag and so they need to double the power.

THEN they need to make the chassis stronger to coep with the power, then the suspension stronger to cope with the weight of the chassis and the brakes bigger to slow the increasing weight. So it ends up in the spiral of diminished returns :(

You dont' get high speeds from light cars but you do get faster lap times and shorter journey times and a lot more fun :D ( though less bragging rights )

Fair enough, thanks for clearing that up.

Type 59

09-07-2005, 09:34 AM

Alain Prost tested Bugatti Veyron at the time of the day of presentation which A took place with Molsheim last weekend. He made party of the 800 guests present, he obviously appreciated the test of the beast.

More on this page : http://www.bugattipage.com/#News

MrVette83

09-07-2005, 07:31 PM

lol 6+6 = 12 and somehow those amazing designers managed 16 cylinders from it :eek:

That's some of that newfangled German engineering for ya right there.