Comments on: SSC sets new top speed record

By: Mclaren19p

Mclaren19p — Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:28:44 +0000

This car cannot be compared to the Veyron. In the same vein that gordon Murray said that the Mclaren F1 was about attention to detail, not on the top speed, the same applies to the Veyron. Dr. Piech stated some guidelines to building the Veyron, which were 1000 hp, 250 mph and W16 engine. That’s it. The Veyron beats this in style, luxury and pretty much all other categories except speed. And remember that the Veyron was built for the road, not the track. This SSC is really ugly, waaaaaay longer and wider that the Veyron, which makes it harder to use in small areas, and since it’s rear wheel drive, alot less safe to use. Give the Veyron the respect it deserves and Shut up. Just because a car with a higher top speed comes along does not make the Veyron redundant. You guys forget the extra something that the Veyron has that most supercars don’t and that is called CLASS

By: CTS DRIVER

CTS DRIVER — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 23:37:18 +0000

posse of pitchfork-wielding irate posters
.
i dont care but this little statement was pretty darn funny.
. and i agree with jack KITT is faster.

By: 1487_GM_SALES

1487_GM_SALES — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 19:21:05 +0000

Who cares how fast it goes if it breaks down on the way? Corvettes never break down.

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:59:55 +0000

KITT’s still faster!

By: Blakkarr

Blakkarr — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 18:39:07 +0000

Got Handling?

We can start today.

By: Z06ified

Z06ified — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 14:04:08 +0000

“GM sales… Are you stupid? wait. That doesn’t need an answer does it. You are wondering if an SSC will hold a candle to it? Z06- 505 hp. SSC-1183hp.If you had one ounce of common sense, you could see that the Z06 is so far out of it’s league, you might as well be racing this SSC against a Pinto.
Comment by Jaguar XJ-S, posted on September14 at 1:56 pm ”

While GM Sales is out of his mind, I would like to point out that the Z06 can be modified *relatively* easily to reach these top speeds. Lingenfelter and several other Corvette tuners will happily build you a twin turbo Z06 with well over 1,000 hp.

Don’t believe it can be done? Remember the Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette? Top speed was 254.8 mph with ONLY 898hp and 772 lbs. of torque. And that was way back in 1988, before many of you were born.

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:47:03 +0000

Yes Vettte the article is about speed, and I started my first post by recognising the achievement of SSC. Both posts however have been responses to the ridiculous statements made in this discussion by Blakarr and Driven suggesting that Bugatti and their customers will feel upset about this .
.
Doublearon, this may be a production car, but the car was not running on pump fuel.
.
Blakarr, why am I not surprised that you spend your day at a workstation worrying about being caught online? The phrase is “Couldn’t care less” by the way (think about it), and you might want to refer the phrases “only marks as a totally knob head” and “behaving you have” to the kids you teach “good clean living” to at YMCA, I’m sure they can help you with your grammar, they might also be able to help you with the spelling of the words “coarse” and “alongside”.
I am humbled by your 19th century reproof however; I shall indeed purify my wicked soul by “washing my mouth out with soap” and only hope that I can evade the posse of pitchfork-wielding irate posters you bring with you when you come to, oh the terror, chase me out of LLN. For now though, why don’t you take your sanctimonious arse somewhere its wanted, like Holmes County, Ohio.

By: doublearon21

doublearon21 — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 01:28:03 +0000

Wickedated-you make a good point but you’ll run out of gas by the 2nd 200+ run. haha and to hyperlite if you look closely those aren’t sponsorship stickers, one is PPG, the paint used on the car, the other is Recaro, no explanation needed, and the other I can’t read, but trust this is a production car. Also when the CCR broke the Mclaren F1’s record it had stickers all over it of manufacturers the were used in production of the car, like Rotrex, the company that builds the twin superchargers it uses. Ugly car, great performance, though a little too much fuction over form for me, change up the front and this will look great.

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:11:31 +0000

blakkarr, i could not agree with you more

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 22:10:27 +0000

“sorry for retarded double post earlier* didnt think it went through

By: Blakkarr

Blakkarr — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:32:46 +0000

As for my appreciation for Bugatti. I could care less. Until someone actually mentioned the Veyron again, I could have cared less. I just doesn’t grab my mind like the Lamborghini Gallardo, Ferrari 430, Ford GT (and GT-40 mk1-4), Vector W8, Corvette, Dodge Viper, and I can go on.

But the Veyron is a “see it, love it for ten minutes, and forget it”. Despite being such a dens package of technology, I’m inclined to file it along side the Mitsubishi 3000GT. Loaded like a Shanghai bay ferry, but a forgettable car if you don’t have a picture of one over your workstation.

My favorite car is still the Lotus Esprit. So I am looking forward to the first full redesign in like… ever in a couple of years.

By: Blakkarr

Blakkarr — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 21:07:52 +0000

Got Handling?,

Before your pot calls my kettle black, wash that mouth out with soap. Cursing, swearing, and name calling only marks as a totally knob head and an ignorant buffoon, even if you are right. You can only undermine anything you are saying or trying to between burst of mindless “monkey noise”.

That said, my mistake. It is a totally different car made by a totally different company. Some of us don’t have all day to hang about web surfing at work.

You are however, the second most immature person I have had the copious displeasure to have to even consider reading the responses of. Trying to shame and intimidate with such course language, half of which I know applies to you or else you wouldn’t be able to string the words together, only helps narrow down exactly what kind of lowly excuse of a lump of gutter trash you really are.

Anonymity online is a wonderful thing as long as you keep your bad habits to yourself. We have ignored and even chased people out of LLN for being “poor company”. You want to discuss. Let’s discuss. You want to flame, go sit in the corner because no one will will be willing to entertain you for long behaving you have.

Punk.

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:51:07 +0000

Who said that i didn’t appreciate the veyron, i think it is an amazing machine, but in case u havent noticed this particular thread is about the SSC overtaking the veyron’s speed record, not which car has diamonds on the dash. Did you read the article?

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:40:59 +0000

Who said i don’t appreciate the veyron? This particular thread is about the SSC beating the veyron’s speed record, not which car has diamonds on the dash. Im not totally sure you even read the article.

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:08:52 +0000

What a surorise, a Corvette owner with a one-dimensional appreciation of the supercar.

By: AgmLauncher

AgmLauncher — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:06:48 +0000

Looks FAR better than the Veyron. The Veyron is just weird looking :S

By: AgmLauncher

AgmLauncher — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:06:23 +0000

Gogo American Muscle

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 15:48:21 +0000

Got Handling?-
Making yourself look like a smartass prick is unnecessary.This is about speed and they veyron lost

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:28:01 +0000

Blakarr you pompous potty-peeping pederast, this isn’t a Koenigsegg, its an SSC. SSC is a completely different company from a completely different country. The Koenigsegg is a beautifully crafted and resolved machine – The SSC is not, and nor is it a prototype, several cars have been delivered already, although not to this specification.
.
SSC use Corvette motors, I know this because I am capable of referencing information other than what is given here. I am well aware that the Bugatti has a W16 motor, if you didn’t have the reading comprehension of an ADD-afflicted teenaged MTV fan you would even see that I mentioned it in my post. You may also have noticed that I view the meticulous development and careful integration of systems that allow the Veyron to perform very close to the extremes of contemporary possibility in safety, repeatedly and for sustained periods while providing production-car reliabilty as a positive characteristic.
.
As regards records, you simpleton, the principal point of my post is that the Veyron is an incredibly carefully developed, sophisticated and refined product, and that it is ridiculous to suggest that it has been belittled just because someone has bolted big turbos onto an off-the shelf motor and strapped it into a cobbled together one-trick-pony that can produce a one-off attention grabbing performance record.
.
I should hope that my reverence for previous masterpieces bearing the Bugatti name, including the EB110, is obvious to other readers of this post. I suppose I should not be surprised that you missed it however.

By: ZR1vette

ZR1vette — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:04:57 +0000

if you have that much of a need for speed simply purchase a corvette and send it to halltech, it will come back with 1300 horsepower and hit an estimated 275 mph for a fraction of the cost (not that youll ever go that fast). its simply bragging rights . not just saying that because i like corvettes, but i do not see the point in buying a veyron or this car no matter how much money i had

By: Burmanesski

Burmanesski — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 02:17:11 +0000

Wickedated, Ya but what is the cost diffrence on a 250hp car to the veyron? O i know because i just bought one. I have a 2006 CTS-V with about 250hp and it can do a top speed of 178mph that to me is impressive for a family car and it only coast me $32,000, but a veyron cost 1.3million and for what a car that can only have two people in it, gas cost a lot, you spend 5times the amount you paid for to keep it in good shape, and where on earth are you going to need to be going 240mph anyways and don’t try and tell me germany’s autobahn highway because i have been there and there are so many cars on that highway that there is no way you could get a car to go that fast. im not trying to say that the car is crap but just keep in mind that there are cars out there that cost very little and they still hit impressive speeds.

the quatrer mile thay said the thing can do, come on thats too slow for that much hp a chevy big block in a 69 camaro can do that with 750hp. i would say the car just dosen’t have the gears. funny a veyron and the ssc would get out run on dragsrips buy big block old american cars. but that would be the only thing that they could beat them on.

By: BLISS

BLISS — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:19:06 +0000

GREAT

By: ///m

///m — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:40:08 +0000

SSC? Shelby Super Cars? Wouldnt it be a Ford V8?

By: Blakkarr

Blakkarr — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 17:46:45 +0000

Got handling?,

I think it’s obvious that this SSC has some tacked on parts. You griping about the quality of this car belies your lack of research or just a biased view trying to stand up for the Veyron that, for all it’s much ballyhooed power and pedigree, did NOT officially post any records, in handling acceleration, or top speed.

All of which, by the way, are owned by RWD super cars not a single AWD.

The Koenigsegg SSC, pictured here, I would assume is a prototype for their next version of what really seems to be one of the best Super cars in a decade. The Engine’s source was not given here. I would not be surprised it it was a Corvette engine, but without more details, that is just speculation. For all we know it could be an original engine or even (snicker) an SRT HEMI.

Also try to recall that the Veyron has a W-16 and FOUR big turbos and redundant intercoolers and colling systems. A vastly more complex engine system than the SSC. So griping about strapping on bigger turbos seems hypocritical when you start trying to compare the two. It’s nothing new. It just works.

Questions about it’s quality should be referred to existing production units and not this apparent prototype. The Koenigseggs I’ve seen are nearly bulletproof, after all the Swedes have certain standards they would like to live up to. Also the Koenigsegg is aimed at being a racer not the fastest luxury cruiser around. I’m sure if you saw an EB110 you’d think it was junk just because fifty cows did not die to upholster the interior.

By: ///m

///m — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 17:29:59 +0000

Ford Focus headlamps lol

By: ///m

///m — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 17:29:24 +0000

Both cars are hideous, this is even worse :X

By: Deanster

Deanster — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 16:08:58 +0000

Wickedated, don’t give me a physics lesson, you ****ing toad. I’m Einstein to your ****ing Corky, I know damn well that small increments in velocity require progressively increasing amounts of power.

Nonetheless, child rapist, I maintain my previously stated position. And the doggystyle position I use on your mother when your father is on those “business” trips.

By: Wickedated

Wickedated — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:15:08 +0000

And all you saying Veyron owners must be feeling stupid, here’s a newsflash. Sure, this car broke the speed record but the Veyron is a real car– you can jump in, go to the country club, hit 200+mph on the way, get a cup of coffee, do another 240mph, go to a restaurant, cruise at 45mph, then hit 240mph again. Unlike this thing, the Veyron is a real car, competent in all situations, even in city streets (I’ve seen one driving around in Manhattan among traffic just like an Audi A6) whereas this is an extreme racing car with the practicality of an F1 car. In any real world situation this car is undriveable. Needless to say, a V8 that cranks out 1000+hp and 1000+ft/lb of torque probably has the same reliability of an engine huffed up on nitro.
Trust me, this thing is a one time thing designed just to break records, you won’t see a wait list for it.

By: Wickedated

Wickedated — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:07:16 +0000

DEANSTER– You clearly need to do a little more research before voice dumb opinions. First of all, yes there are cars that hit 180mph with 250hp. However, this is 260mph we’re talking about. The physics involved in pushing a car to these speeds is exponential. The Veyron, for instance, only needs about 600hp to get to 200mph, but it needs ALL its 1000hp to push it to 240mph. At those speeds, drag and air resistance increase by the ten folds, requiring extreme amounts of horsepower to counteract these forces.

By: meekin111

meekin111 — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 07:52:00 +0000

Id definatly prefer a Veyron or CCX over this, in fact id take almost any supercar before htis.

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 05:58:00 +0000

Lets not take anything away from these guys, its been a long struggle for them to get to where they are, but comparing this car to the Bugatti Veyron and suggesting that Bugatti buyers might be upset about this is ridiculous.
.
The Bugatti Veyron is leagues apart from this thing. The Bugatti is a proper production car with production car levels of reliability and ease of use. It is a luxurious GT that you could comfortably cross continents in. Its all-wheel-drive and has been developed with an uncompromising attitude to safety. The car is completely bespoke from its W16 engine to even the smallest interior fittings which are machined from aluminium and will only ever appear in a Bugatti. The Veyron will take its place in history alongside the Royale as an expression of the pinnacle of automotive engineering for its time.
.
This thing looks like a parts-bin-special kit car by comparison, it is focused on performance alone and will be quickly forgotten as soon as the next builder finds a way to bolt bigger turbos or a more powerful supercharger onto the Corvette engine. You can see the panel gaps even in the photographs, the slabby interior looks like plywood covered with leather, the engine bay is a complete mess and the styling looks like an afterthought.

By: MurcieMe

MurcieMe — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 04:09:14 +0000

Silly question here, but do any of you know if the SSC Ultimate Aero uses the same headlights as the far better looking Ascari KZ1??

Speaking of the Ascari, it’s another one of those dozen ultra-super performace cars coming out of the woodwork. Not quite as an accomplished performer as this or the Veyron, but almost.

The thing is, because of the headlights, these two cars look very simlar.

By: 1c3d0g

1c3d0g — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 00:24:47 +0000

lou3000: the bugatti has style?!? Bahahahaha….ROFL…are you on drugs, kid? Hahaha…this thing eats the veyron for breakfast. And it does it elegantly, with 2 turbos instead of 4 and without 10 radiators trying to cool down that furnace you call an engine. Better yet, it won’t melt the paint off of other cars parked next to it due to the heat produced. So much for your stupid bugatti.

By: Commodore

Commodore — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:21:21 +0000

Looks like a peugeot..and deanster – i agree with you although you should tone it down a bit..you sound way to angry over nothing

By: Arbiter

Arbiter — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:19:45 +0000

“Jerod Shelby” NOT “Carroll Shelby” I think he is from the lucky sperm club and just happens to share the last name. Sorta like Billy Bob “Bubba” Ford…………….