New Supercar beats Bugatti

[Lord Blackadder]

...in horsepower, at least.

I've always thought that the Bristol's products were interesting; this time they've chucked a twin-turbo Viper V10 into a Fighter to create the Fighter T (http://www.topgear.com/content/news/stories/1301/). 1012hp, more power than the Veyron! top speed of 225, though Bristol claims that without the governer it could do "over 270mph". Probably not with any kind of controllability though. :eek:

It also highlights (once again) that the 8 liter as fitted to the Viper is the laziest engine in the world. Should be giving 700-800 horses without forced induction.

[The Mad Kiwi]

Oooooooo Ahhhhhhhhh, that thing looks sexy!

I'll take 2.

[bigandy]

over a second slower on 0-60...

and nowhere near as tasty as the veyron if you ask me.

if i had a car with that much horsepower, i'd expect a sub 2.8 second launch to 60mph..

[MacBoobsPro]

It also highlights (once again) that the 8 liter as fitted to the Viper is the laziest engine in the world. Should be giving 700-800 horses without forced induction.

Americans for yee!

My fav cars (TVR) get 380bhp out of a 4 litre engine. They also have a 500bhp (Typhon) that I believe is a 5 litre.

British engineering is best. Just not enough of it!

[Counterfit]

Too bad those TVRs don't have that much torque. :p (310 @ 5250RPM.)
I wonder much more power you could get out of one of those before going forced. You can do over 800 with a Viper engine (http://www.hennesseyperformance.com/hennesseyperformance/ItemDetail.php?Item_ID=255&cart=WGMCbzlC&DoThis=Dodge+Viper&ActionReq=Where) (well, slightly larger displacement ;))

[Lord Blackadder]

The thing is, the Viper engine should come out of the factory with 700+hp. As it is it's just a hot-rodded truck engine.

The Chevy LS series of engines are kinda lazy too, but they still have significantly higher specific outputsthan the Viper engine, they spin faster and they have a nice LeMans-winning pedigree. The C6 Corvette is a much better car too.

Still, both of these engines pale in comparison (as far as specific output/max rpm goes) to the current M5 engine.

But the Fighter T just puts out insane power...they should make it a Bond car.

[quagmire]

The Chevy LS series of engines are kinda lazy too, but they still have significantly higher specific outputsthan the Viper engine, they spin faster and they have a nice LeMans-winning pedigree. The C6 Corvette is a much better car too.

Still, both of these engines pale in comparison (as far as specific output/max rpm goes) to the current M5 engine.

Did you mean by Redline or by the numbers produced at certain RPM? Or Both. Yes, the V10 in the M5 has a higher redline(8000 RPM) then the LS7 V8 in the Z06( 7000 RPM). But, for power output at RPM, the LS7 is up there with the V10. The V10 makes 500 HP at 7750 RPM. The LS7 makes 505 HP at 6300 RPM. The V10 makes it's highest torque(383 lb) at 6100 RPM. The LS7 makes its most torque( 470 lb) at 4800 RPM. Yes, the displacement in the V10 is 5 liters and the LS7 is 7 liters. But, the difference is in the design. The V10 is a 4 valve DOHC. The LS7 is a 2 valve OHV. But, I don't care about liters. Not because of the " Nothing can beat displacement" tagline, because whats the point of trying to see how good the engine is by the HP/liter thing? Is it impressive if a company can get 900 HP out of a 3 liter V10( actually does exist in a F1 car)? Yes it is, but doesn't mean the LS7 needing 7 liters to produce 505 HP is a bad engine. It also doesn't mean the LS7 is a gas guzzler as the Z06 gets 16/26 EPA fuel economy and thus avoids the gas guzzler tax.

Anyway..... The Gen V Small Block V8 should be even better with 3 valves and maybe even Direct Injection. Don't know when it will be debuted.

[Counterfit]

Is it impressive if a company can get 900 HP out of a 3 liter V10( actually does exist in a F1 car)?
It used to exist. 2006 was the first year for 2.8L V8s (some revving to 20k RPM :eek: ). They're almost back to that power level already.
But note: HP = Torque * RPM / 5,252
A Viper redlines at 6000RPM.

[downhillboy86]

The Chevy LS series of engines are kinda lazy too, but they still have significantly higher specific outputsthan the Viper engine, they spin faster and they have a nice LeMans-winning pedigree. The C6 Corvette is a much better car too.

Still, both of these engines pale in comparison (as far as specific output/max rpm goes) to the current M5 engine.


You guys need to stick to criticizing computers :p

[Sun Baked]

If you only want to go 225MPH quick, there is always the Brabus Rocket -- and it is a similarly priced 4-door sedan, so you can kill the entire family when you crash. ;)

[Counterfit]

If you want to go 225MPH+ REALLY REALLY quick, buy a Tomahawk. 4 wheeled motorcycle with a Viper engine.

[MacBoobsPro]

Too bad those TVRs don't have that much torque. :p (310 @ 5250RPM.)


They dont really need it they way about as much as a fart :D

0-60 in 3.4 seconds kinda illustrates my fart theory.

[bartelby]

Americans for yee!

My fav cars (TVR) get 380bhp out of a 4 litre engine. They also have a 500bhp (Typhon) that I believe is a 5 litre.

British engineering is best. Just not enough of it!

TVR is Russian now Comrade!

[quagmire]

They dont really need it they way about as much as a fart :D

0-60 in 3.4 seconds kinda illustrates my fart theory.

The Z06 does 0-60 in 3.4 seconds in a Motortrend test. GM says 0-60 in 3.7 seconds. All for $70K. The Z06 weighs 3,132 lb.

TVR is Russian now Comrade!

Yeah, sad thing about the British Auto industry. Jaguar, Aston Martin, and Land Rover being bought out by Ford. Rolls Royce and Mini bought out by BMW. Are there any big British car companies left that haven't been bought out?

[Lord Blackadder]

Yeah, sad thing about the British Auto industry. Jaguar, Aston Martin, and Land Rover being bought out by Ford. Rolls Royce and Mini bought out by BMW. Are there any big British car companies left that haven't been bought out?

Noble (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_%28car%29). Fantastic cars.

Anyway I didn't mean to criticize engines with smaller specific outputs. I'd put the LS7 up against just about any engine in terms of being a piece of good engineering. The M5 engine (S85 I believe) is amazing but has its own weaknesses. For one thing, it's heavier than the LS7.

But the Viper engine is still too lazy - unless it's in a Fighter T! :D

[bartelby]

Are there any big British car companies left that haven't been bought out?


Ariel, Noble, Farboud and possibly Marcos
Caterham and Westfield too.


EDIT: Oh, you said "big".

Er... no.

[Butthead]

Did you mean by Redline or by the numbers produced at certain RPM? Or Both. Yes, the V10 in the M5 has a higher redline(8000 RPM) then the LS7 V8 in the Z06( 7000 RPM). But, for power output at RPM, the LS7 is up there with the V10. The V10 makes 500 HP at 7750 RPM. The LS7 makes 505 HP at 6300 RPM. The V10 makes it's highest torque(383 lb) at 6100 RPM. The LS7 makes its most torque( 470 lb) at 4800 RPM. Yes, the displacement in the V10 is 5 liters and the LS7 is 7 liters. But, the difference is in the design. The V10 is a 4 valve DOHC. The LS7 is a 2 valve OHV. But, I don't care about liters. Not because of the " Nothing can beat displacement" tagline, because whats the point of trying to see how good the engine is by the HP/liter thing? Is it impressive if a company can get 900 HP out of a 3 liter V10( actually does exist in a F1 car)? Yes it is, but doesn't mean the LS7 needing 7 liters to produce 505 HP is a bad engine. It also doesn't mean the LS7 is a gas guzzler as the Z06 gets 16/26 EPA fuel economy and thus avoids the gas guzzler tax.

Anyway..... The Gen V Small Block V8 should be even better with 3 valves and maybe even Direct Injection. Don't know when it will be debuted.

If I ever become a multi-millionaire, as the Italians would say, con brio ....a Ferrari, is a Ferrari, is a Ferrari.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=20&article_id=3610

In the guise of the FXX:
789hp@8.5k, 506ft/lb torque@5750 rpm and the kind of normally aspirated 6.3l engine of visceral mechanical orchestral music that only Ferrari can make sing!

Shanghai Auto show, red-leather 'racing suit' model, optional :)

http://image.muzi.com/pfm_image/202932763262460.jpg

[Redneck1089]

If you want to go 225MPH+ REALLY REALLY quick, buy a Tomahawk. 4 wheeled motorcycle with a Viper engine.

That'd be a waste of money. Buy either a Suzuki Hayabusa, or a Kawasaki ZX-14r Ninja and slap an after market turbo on. 250-300++ HP on a motorcycle then... Yeeehaaa!

[Counterfit]

That'd be a waste of money. Buy either a Suzuki Hayabusa, or a Kawasaki ZX-14r Ninja and slap an after market turbo on. 250-300++ HP on a motorcycle then... Yeeehaaa!

Last time I checked, 500>300. The Tomahawk has a theoretical top speed of nearly 400MPH, even without a fairing or windscreen. I bet its 0-60 is only limited by the traction (or lack thereof). I mean, the Viper has a hard enough time, with wider tires and more weight.

[blitzkrieg79]

Americans for yee!

My fav cars (TVR) get 380bhp out of a 4 litre engine. They also have a 500bhp (Typhon) that I believe is a 5 litre.

British engineering is best. Just not enough of it!

Don't make the mistake of comparing engines on a horsepower to displacement ratio. Car enthusists these days compare engines on a horsepower to the engines actual weight ratio as weight is the enemy of cars performance. LS7 in this regard is one of the best mass produced engines in the world. Also, horsepower wins sales, torque wins races.

[quagmire]

Don't make the mistake of comparing engines on a horsepower to displacement ratio. Car enthusists these days compare engines on a horsepower to the engines actual weight ratio as weight is the enemy of cars performance. LS7 in this regard is one of the best mass produced engines in the world. Also, horsepower wins sales, torque wins races.

Sadly, people still( especially Honda fans, no offense guys :) ) brag about HP/litre. While it is impressive that Honda can get 237 HP out of a 2.2 liter N/A I4 in the S2000; we shouldn't decide if it is or isn't a good engine based on HP/Litre.

[MacBoobsPro]

TVR is Russian now Comrade!

Russian owned. British built.

Until last week anyway. They have or are closing the Blackpool factory :eek: :(

To those talking about the BHP and torque etc I just look at the 0-60 :D

Its hard to find much info on the Typhon I mentioned and is still no info on TVRs website. But heres a quote from a website:

"Customers will instead have more luck ordering the supercharged £79,995 TVR Typhon range topper. This 500bhp monster features twin intercoolers and a power to weight ratio that matches the McLaren F1. Insiders predict a top speed of well over 200mph and a sprint to 60mph in 3.5 seconds."

BTW i didnt realise it was supercharged so my earlier post is a bit redundant now :D

Still want one though. Heres a pic of the 440BHP version:

http://www.manworld.co.kr/upload_files/com/TVR%20typhon2.jpg

[bartelby]

Russian owned. British built.

Until last week anyway. They have or are closing the Blackpool factory :eek: :(


Which was my point.:)

[Lord Blackadder]

...sad to hear about TVR (partially) leaving the UK - my father owned a Vixen, back before TVR made supercars.

It certainly will be a huge change for TVRski, but I'm not sure a change for the better.

[bartelby]

...sad to hear about TVR (partially) leaving the UK - my father owned a Vixen, back before TVR made supercars.

It certainly will be a huge change for TVRski, but I'm not sure a change for the better.

It'll be interesting to see if TVR come out with the boat and motorbike that was rumoured to be in developement.

[Jay42]

I don't know why everyone's so obsessed about 0-60 times. Seems to me that rolling 5-60 times would be more useful since you get rid of a few outside factors. Hardly ever see them though.

[MacBoobsPro]

I don't know why everyone's so obsessed about 0-60 times. Seems to me that rolling 5-60 times would be more useful since you get rid of a few outside factors. Hardly ever see them though.

ITs so you know who you can smoke off the line if they pull up along side you at the lights and make them look like twats in front of their mates.

Its great! :D

I drive an Escort Si thats been dechipped (upgrade) so has the performance of a GTi. Its funny to see peoples faces when you waste them as they expected a much slower car. :D Im not a twat when it comes to driving, I am very considerate. But when you get some snot nosed kid with his Von Dutch cap perched on his head like his forehead must be 12inches tall and hes driving a 1.2 Vauxhall Corsa and he thinks he can beat me hes got another thinkg coming.

Its so funny! :D

[Lord Blackadder]

There are a lot of performance numbers that are more important than 0-60...braking numbers, for instance, are not discussed nearly as much as they should be, as well as lateral grip.

Power/weight ratios are ultimately more important than specific outputs or simple power/torque figures...

But hearing that the Veyron can hit 62mph in 2.5 seconds is still impressive as hell - especially when you remember that it weighs two tons! :eek:

[840quadra]

Why that design, and why that engine ?

There comes a point when power of this kind is beyond ridiculous. I am a VWAG man through and through, but I still don't even like their Veyron for the reason of it being so ridiculous in price, how poor it is with fuel economy, and how it is actually costing VWAG $8,000,000 in losses for each Veyron being sold!

Now, give me a Supercar with a V10 or V12 TDI that can get mid to high 20's in MPG, and outrun a Murcielago, then we can talk :) .

[Lord Blackadder]

I go through phases on sportscars that I like; but the ones that usually impress me the most are the silliest ones (like the Bugatti or McLaren) or the most minimalist (Elise, original M3, F40).

The Veyron is less of a car in my mind than a low-rate production technology demonstrator and marketing tool for VW and Audi; of course, it only makes sense that way if it spawns usable technology...but they have to blow their money somewhere since they aren't in Formula One, right? ;)

[Redneck1089]

Last time I checked, 500>300. The Tomahawk has a theoretical top speed of nearly 400MPH, even without a fairing or windscreen. I bet its 0-60 is only limited by the traction (or lack thereof). I mean, the Viper has a hard enough time, with wider tires and more weight.



Keyword: theoretical. I'm talking about a 300 HP Suzuki Hayabusa beating the crap out of this car. But hey, why not turbo charge the Busa to 500 HP. The McCoy's did it with their custom built Hayabusa, and unlike the Tomahawk, it's very driveable.

Everyone is so impressed with that stupid Tomahawk's 0-60 times when the fact is the majority of sport bikes can match it. Not taking anything away from this car--it's 0-60 times are hella impressive for a car.

[Lord Blackadder]

Keyword: theoretical. I'm talking about a 300 HP Suzuki Hayabusa beating the crap out of this car. But hey, why not turbo charge the Busa to 500 HP. The McCoy's did it with their custom built Hayabusa, and unlike the Tomahawk, it's very driveable.

Just like the Fighter T, that custom Suzuki has far more power than it could ever possibly need.

I always thought the Tomahawk was pretty silly myself.

[840quadra]

The Veyron is less of a car in my mind than a low-rate production technology demonstrator and marketing tool for VW and Audi; of course, it only makes sense that way if it spawns usable technology...but they have to blow their money somewhere since they aren't in Formula One, right? ;)

Good points indeed.

I guess I can see that as being a good thing. F1 is a great testing ground, but I hold LeMans to a high ground as well, especially when it comes to real world testing for engine components that will see production!

I wish they did make cars like the Nuvolari Quattro (first car with the current Audi taillight design (and actually came before the Honda Acura copycats)), Avantissimo, and an R8 with more of the LeMans Quattro concept technology in it. All of those cars showcased features that are either recently in production, or currently still in development for that automaker.

[andypress]

Sadly, people still( especially Honda fans, no offense guys :) ) brag about HP/litre. While it is impressive that Honda can get 237 HP out of a 2.2 liter N/A I4 in the S2000; we shouldn't decide if it is or isn't a good engine based on HP/Litre.
BMW managed that one back in the mid 80's...2 Litre 4 cyl engine producing 200hp; n/a.

[Lord Blackadder]

...not to mention that Lotus got some impressive specific outputs from carburated, naturally aspirated four cylinders in the 60s and 70s.

I'd like to see the Bristol Fighter on Top Gear, but I doubt that Bristol would allow Clarkson & Co. within a mile of one of their cars...maybe James May - he's the kind of person that would buy a Bristol.

[Sweetfeld28]

If I ever become a multi-millionaire, as the Italians would say, con brio ....a Ferrari, is a Ferrari, is a Ferrari.

Ditto. :D

[Lord Blackadder]

Ferraris are very, very nice drives generally (mostly anyways), but a bit vulgar. They stink a bit too much of Magnum PI and the Sultan of Brunei. As for looks, the 456 was far superior to the 612 IMHO.

I'd take a Ford GT over a 430.

I love the 599 actually, but for the money I could get a DB9 and a Z06 'Vette...

..and the 612...well, if I needed four seats I'd rather go all the way and get a real four-door like the Bentley Continental, or maybe a Quattroporte for transport with $100k+ left over for something (V8 Vantage, 911 Turbo etc.) when I want to look sporty.:eek:

The Enzo...assuming I could buy one, I'd take a hard look at a Zonda or CCX first. But that would be a tough choice.

...But I have weird taste. For instance, I think the Lamborghini Espada was a really cool car. :cool:

[pseudobrit]

The trick, says Bristol, is all in the drag. A rear wake diffuser gives the Fighter T a drag coefficient of just 0.27 compared to the Bugatti Veyron's 0.39. Which means that the Fighter T is as slippery as a greased eel, and doesn't need much in the way of downforce-inducing gubbins.

All of which is enough to propel the Fighter T from 0-60 in less than 3.5 seconds, and on to an electronically limited maximum speed of 225mph. Bristol says that if it removed the limiter, the Fighter would still be accelerating past 270.

Of course, without those "downforce-inducing gubbins" anything over 225 would take the car airborne if it hit a ripple in the pavement. Come to think of it, I'd not be surprised if it gets a little floaty at 200. There's a reason the Veyron produces massive drag: it needs downforce. It changes its shape and aerodynamic profile depending on the speed at which it's travelling, producing something like its own gravitational field to hold itself down even while it tries to spin off the planet at 252+ mph.

[Lord Blackadder]

I was thinking the same thing when I read that - just because a car can hit a insane speed doesn't mean it's controllable at that speed.

I'll bet the Veyron is more composed at 250 than the McLaren F1 is a 240, and the Fighter is probably scarier still - unless you're on the Bonneville salt flats forget it.