Gordon Murray to Bugatti (Veyron), "Son, I am dissapoint."

[freedomperiod]

I can appreciate what he's saying, especially because it's Gordon Murray, but I think the point of the Veyron is to be a fighterjet and a luxury Learjet at the same time. It's supposed to be ultra-civilized on the streets.

Thought I'd share.

[Señor Peligro]

All Gordon Murray ever does is compare supercars to the F1...it's really getting old at this point.

[mhjett]

Murray hasn't driven an MP4-12C? WTF?

[phryxis]

Great article, thanks for sharing.

I want the car Murray is working on.

[Olisser]

i think they mean 1955-57 thunderbird....

[turbo_nine]

All Gordon Murray ever does is compare supercars to the F1...it's really getting old at this point.

Probably. But then again if I had that car on my résumé from 20 years back, I'd probably find myself wondering why something substantially better hadn't come along by now.
.

[worth_fixing]

Give me a break. His supercar test is flawed; not everything fits into a little box of perfections, and not every car is designed to fulfill the same purpose. As a matter of fact, I'm a believer that sometimes, it's the imperfections that make a car. Yes, it has turbo lag. Surprise surprise. Don't like it? Well, it's not a car for you. To say that the Veyron is not a sports car? Go pick some flowers. I hate people who try to bring out the ****tiest things in the best creations.

[Turbio!]

The Veyron is a curious artifact. I don't respect the demands that were placed on its development, but it's pretty amazing that the engineers managed to satisfy both Doktor Peach's insane bull**** and make the thing go 250mph without killing anybody.

[Son]

Gotta read the full article later, but it needs turbos to go 400 km/h and also because it's a heavy car because it needs to be luxorious, not just another stripped down racecar.

[powellt28]

The Veyron also has to meet MUCH more stringent mandates regarding emissions and safety!

[venom600]

I don't recall Bugatti ever saying that the Veyron was supposed to be a sports car. I always assumed it was just a really fast GT, sort of a Bentley Continental with two seats and a huge motor. Looking at it from the wrong perspective, as I believe Murray has, is bound to lead to disappointments. This guy is stuck in the past. He seems extremely averse to using modern technology.

[nickthaskater]

How the f*ck much turbo lag can an 8-litre 16-cylinder engine have? It's not like it's spinning up a single giant turbo, rather it has four smaller turbos.

Methinks Murray is a tad jaded... From what I've heard, the original spec F1 wasn't exactly all things to all men, either. Reports of relatively horrible understeer seemed pretty common, for example. There's a reason why the high-downforce kit was retrofitted to so many F1s after the fact.

[venom600]

How the f*ck much turbo lag can an 8-litre 16-cylinder engine have? It's not like it's spinning up a single giant turbo, rather it has four smaller turbos.

I'd imagine it would be similar to a 2.0T with one turbo... I know the SuperSport is even worse in that regard.

[nickthaskater]

I'd imagine it would be similar to a 2.0T with one turbo... I know the SuperSport is even worse in that regard.

How do you figure that would be comparable in any way shape or form? The Veyron's engine surely makes enough power even without the turbos to negate any real "lag". Even with the turbos, the specs report that maximum torque is delivered as low as 2,200 RPM. Really? "Lag" below 2,200 RPM?

[venom600]

I guess my thinking (however flawed it may be) is that the W16 engine would react similarly because each turbo feeds 2.0l and four cylinders of the 8l W16 while making about the same power as the 2.0T in the Golf R. I'm almost certain that I'm wrong, but that was my thought process.

[Señor Peligro]

Probably. But then again if I had that car on my résumé from 20 years back, I'd probably find myself wondering why something substantially better hadn't come along by now.
.

Probably because...

His supercar test is flawed; not everything fits into HIS little box of perfections, and not every car is designed to fulfill the same purpose

More often than not, Murray comes across as a pretentious snob that is totally incapable of leaving his own cars and achievements out of any discussion or comparison, even if they have absolutely no place in them. It just seems to always be the same thing...Fast car? Bring up the McLaren. City car? Bring up the T25. Track day toy? Bring up the Rocket. I don't discredit his tremendous achievements, but I think he should stick to engineering instead of writing, because it usually comes across as an ego stroking session.

[MB_Fahrer]

Even with the turbos, the specs report that maximum torque is delivered as low as 2,200 RPM. Really? "Lag" below 2,200 RPM?

I hate to compare apples to peanuts, but my father has a 2006 S65 with lots of RENNtech goodies. I drove it to get the emission test done, and naturally had to see what all the hype was about. Well the turbos kick in at about 1900-2000rpm (or about 20-25mph). Up until that point, it does feel fairly quick, once the turbos spool up, everything begins to melt by at a ludicrous rate. I have never driven a Veyron (nor do I want to), but Murray could be trying to convey the message that it has what feels like 400hp up to 2,200rpm, at which point the turbos are spooled and the 400 becomes 1000hp.

Just thinking out loud here

[arethirdytwo]

Never driven nor even seen one move, however, all the review mention it. Watch one take off. Slow, slow, slow, slow, WHAT THE **** JUST HAPPENED!?

How the f*ck much turbo lag can an 8-litre 16-cylinder engine have? It's not like it's spinning up a single giant turbo, rather it has four smaller turbos.

[JLJetta]

I suspect the 'turbo lag' is not 'no power'.

But rather, it is the time between "Great Power" and "OMFG WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE IT IS SO FAST" kind of power.

[HalvieCuw]

Never driven nor even seen one move, however, all the review mention it. Watch one take off. Slow, slow, slow, slow, WHAT THE **** JUST HAPPENED!?

so for like how many of the 2.4 seconds from 0 to 60 is it slow for?

[nickthaskater]

so for like how many of the 2.4 seconds from 0 to 60 is it slow for?

This. Saying the Veyron takes off slow is like saying Keira Knightley has tits.



For the record, I adore her.

[kindofblue59]

All Gordon Murray ever does is compare supercars to the F1...it's really getting old at this point.

That's what you do when you create the benchmark against which all other supercars are compared.

[Señor Peligro]

That's what you do when you create the benchmark against which all other supercars are compared.

That's what you do when you're without an ounce of humility.

[ClownCar]

Turbo lag experienced by Gordon Murray during his "sports car test" of Bugatti Veyron vs. MacLaren F1...

The single most obscure white guy problem ever.

[nickthaskater]

That's what you do when you create the benchmark against which all other supercars are compared.

I'd say the benchmark has moved on a few times since the F1's heyday. The Enzo, the Zonda, the Veyron, the Huayra... The F1 is still amazing, but more so for sentimental reasons than it still being the "benchmark".

[NashGTI]

so for like how many of the 2.4 seconds from 0 to 60 is it slow for?

Completely irrelevant comparison as starting from a dead stop you can spool the turbos, something more like 5-60 would be a better question.

[.:FrankRizzo:.]

I'd say the benchmark has moved on a few times since the F1's heyday. The Enzo, the Zonda, the Veyron, the Huayra... The F1 is still amazing, but more so for sentimental reasons than it still being the "benchmark".

None of those cars have reset the bench mark for a sports car. The Veyron has a higher top speed but isn't a sports car. The McLaren F1 has had the best overall performance numbers of most cars in the past 20 years. I think the only cars that can really compare are the Konnigsseeegeegeg and Aventador for pure power, acceleration, and speed. I also think the 458 and MP12-4C, while not having the top speed, show overall performance numbers better than the cars you mention.

The McLaren F1 is still the ultimate super car. While apes like Jermey Clarkson hate it because they can't drive it well, you have those like Tiff Needell who have no trouble driving the car at the limit. I still think the engineering feats in the McLaren are much more impressive than the Veyron.

[nickthaskater]

None of those cars have reset the bench mark for a sports car. The Veyron has a higher top speed but isn't a sports car. The McLaren F1 has had the best overall performance numbers of most cars in the past 20 years. I think the only cars that can really compare are the Konnigsseeegeegeg and Aventador for pure power, acceleration, and speed. I also think the 458 and MP12-4C, while not having the top speed, show overall performance numbers better than the cars you mention.

The McLaren F1 is still the ultimate super car. While apes like Jermey Clarkson hate it because they can't drive it well, you have those like Tiff Needell who have no trouble driving the car at the limit. I still think the engineering feats in the McLaren are much more impressive than the Veyron.

The F1 was more of a super tourer than an outright sports car itself, much like the Veyron.

And really? You think the 458 etc. are more on-par with the F1 than the likes of the Enzo, Zonda F, Veyron and Huayra? Crack: you're smoking it.

[nickthaskater]

Completely irrelevant comparison as starting from a dead stop you can spool the turbos, something more like 5-60 would be a better question.

Veyron -
0-60 mph: 2.5 seconds (Car and Driver)
0-60 mph: 2.6 seconds (Road & Track)

5-60 mph: 3.2 seconds (Car and Driver)

F1 -
0-60 mph: 3.2 seconds (Car and Driver)
0-60 mph: 3.4 seconds (Road & Track)

The F1's peak torque of 479 lb-ft doesn't come until 4,000 RPM, with "only" ~280 lb-ft at 1,500 RPM. The Veyron's peak torque of 922 lb-ft comes in at 2,200 RPM.

[alfafan]

so for like how many of the 2.4 seconds from 0 to 60 is it slow for?

The first 2.0. The last .4 are a blur

Dude was asked, so he gave his opinion. It did sound a lot like Michael Jordan commenting on the current U.S. Olympic Basketball team though.

[NashGTI]

Veyron -
0-60 mph: 2.5 seconds (Car and Driver)
0-60 mph: 2.6 seconds (Road & Track)

5-60 mph: 3.2 seconds (Car and Driver)

F1 -
0-60 mph: 3.2 seconds (Car and Driver)
0-60 mph: 3.4 seconds (Road & Track)

The F1's peak torque of 479 lb-ft doesn't come until 4,000 RPM, with "only" ~280 lb-ft at 1,500 RPM. The Veyron's peak torque of 922 lb-ft comes in at 2,200 RPM.

That's the answer then, nearly 2/3 second of turbo lag in the Veyron, what are the 5-60 times of the F1?

[Harv]

Turbo lag at 3,000 rpm? Rigghttt..

[nickthaskater]

That's the answer then, nearly 2/3 second of turbo lag in the Veyron, what are the 5-60 times of the F1?

There aren't any. 5-60 is hard enough to find today, let alone in the early '90s.

And 5-60 will always be slower. The Mercedes-McLaren SLR is supercharged (read: no lag) and it is 2-tenths slower from 5-60 than from 0-60 (3.8 and 3.6 seconds respectively).

Carrera GT? 0-60 in 3.5 seconds, but 5-60 in 3.8 seconds.

The Veyron is far from an anomaly.

Here's a cherry example for you:

C6 Z06
0-60: 3.6 seconds
5-60: 4.3 seconds

[ClownCar]

Turbo lag at 3,000 rpm? Rigghttt..

No kidding.

Bugatti Service Bulletin for this 'problem' would read:

"Have customer press accelerator pedal."

[esrballa]

Gordon is full of ****, this is the first time from anywhere we have even heard the words turbo lag when describing the Veyron. If you dont like the car, just say it, dont create garbage reasons.