Veyron opinions?

well, as we all know, the veyron is finally out... while waiting there have been quite a few threads on the car, most of them ending up unfavorably to the car... honestly, i didnt really like the car either, but its starting to grow on me... i think it looks nice plus the fact that it CAN actually go 253mph which before it was just an estimate... has anyones feelings changed about it or do you all still hate it?

I've never hated it. I think it's kinda ugly but in a unique way. I look at the performance over the looks anyways.

whats it look like ive never seen it.

Just type "Bugatti Veyron" under Google Images.

I think it looks just as appropriately as a Bugatti just as the EB110 was. And like the EB110, it is getting allot of negative responses, but ironically for mostly opposite reasons.

pretty fugly. it would be ok except the front end wtf is up with that.

My friend loves to yap about the top end cars. He'll say things like "man, if i had a koenigsegg I'd whoop all these ricers". He is always thinking complete overkill and out of his league. I can't argue with the veyron's performance, but I tend to concentrate in the realm of cars below $50,000.

For the top enders I like the style of the S7, the bugatti looks too fat to be so fast

you dont need a konessig to whoop ricers. i dont know if id want a million dollar car. get yuor ass carjacked or vandalized. the exotics are a little much for me id prefer under 50k liek you not that i could even afford that. more like 5k for me lol. i like ur name muscle and rice the ultimate oxymoron.lol

Yea I love the muscle, but right now im sitting on a pile of rice.

I couldnt afford anything over 5,000 either. Im a senior in high school. 50k is as far as my imagination takes me

Veryon, love it.

Looks like a...

A. Souped up VW Beetle with alot more cylinders.
B. A real bettle.

What's not apparent from the photos is the actual size. The Veyron is actually much smaller than it looks in magazines. It does sort of look like a tight and lean VW New Beetle. I saw one at VW's showroom in Berlin a couple of years back (a neat place, with separate showrooms for each make in the BMW/Audi family, including the Seat and Skoda models we don't see in the states). Anyway, it's the size of a Ford GT or so, except with a blunt nose. Read more actual driving impressions and see more pictures of the Bugatti Veyron here (http://www.carbuzzard.com).

Is it ugly. To paraphrase, ugly is as ugly does, and the Veyron doesn't do ugly. Along that line, the Porsche faithful were very upset when the then new 911 was introduced. They said it was ugly. Now Porsche is having trouble weaning its fans from what's a really difficult bease to fly. Like the Raptor, electronics lets it fly...

Figured id kill the fun for you 56k ers

http://www.blaha.net/images/Bugatti_Veyron_Web.jpg

IMO its a little plump, and doesn't look nearly as aggressive as the CCR, Enzo, or F1

but the top speed is amazing, its lightening fast, and just the engineering of an engine that complex,that size, with 4 turbo's impresses me enough

its too fat. It weighs over 4,000 lbs. I'm the kinda person who likes exotics that are light, fast, and don't have 80 computers. Like the Ferrari F40, McLaren F1, Koenigsegg CC8S, Pagani Zonda C12S , Lamborghini Diablo SE30. abs is good. TCS and STM i guess you could live without it.

i admire the engine in it very much. When I was a 12 I was wondering y people used 2 large turbos in engines cos they took too long to spool, and it took a team of a couple hundred engineers to figure out that smaller turbos spool faster and can produce similar boost. The engine is a masterpiece, but I wish I could say the same about the car.

BTW what is the point of a car that can reach 400 km/h if you can only do 120 in it?? for me looks and sound are the way.

Well, I think fast is an understatement, so it gets my respect, but it looks horrible. Give me a Vanquish any day, at least it'll look good while the Veyron goes screaming past.

the problem is that the veyron will be looking shit and going the same speed at the Vanquish, where as the vanquish looks good.

i think it looks great. nice smooth style, but edgy at the same time.

I saw pics and heard specs and thought it was aight, but then Top Gear did a whole episode on it. After that I just fell in love with it, even the styling.

I just like the idea of 1000HP, and the styling is I guess, ok. Thats my opinion.

i don't understand why people bash on the styling so much. i think it's pretty classy. not as sexy as a vanquish or ford gt, but it's definitely not an ugly car. you might even say it looks almost simple considering how fast it really is, and i like that a lot. the interior is outstanding too, very luxurious
i've never read an unfavorable review on this car, so i really must conclude that it is an amazing car. so what if it costs a million dollars? the fact that it costs that much only makes it more desirable to the people rich enough to buy this car, and bugatti knows that.
it can go 0-250mph in 55 seconds and then from 250-0 in 10! that is absolutely incredible.

Anyone know if the F1 and the veyron full throttle myth is true?

what's the full throttle myth?

the problem is that the veyron will be looking shit and going the same speed at the Vanquish, where as the vanquish looks good.

when you're traveling along at, let's say 100, and somebody goes by you at 150. that's a huge difference. it'd be like you were standing still, no? i can't even imagine what it would be like to be traveling along at 200 and have somebody go by you at 250mph. that's just crazy.
no, my friend, the vanquish may be one of the sexiest cars ever made (in fact, i would choose it over the veyron if i had the choice), but the bugatti would fly by you so fast you would barely have time to see what it looks like

i don't mind the styling, the interior is pretty sexy, but the biggest beef i have with this car is that it could have been so much more so easily. the mclaren f1 reached 230 or 240mph with 600-650hp, the bugatti reached only 10-20mph more with almost double the horsepower. why you might be asking? becasue it has the aresdynamics of my toilet. it was designed for a certain look, then they engineered it to reach a certain speed. they could have easily taken that engine and made a much more aerodynamic body and reached 260, 270, maybe 280. but they didn't, they got their priorities mixed up, they thought show before go, and i just don't respect that. yes it is a complex engine and the engineering that went into that is impressive, the fact that they get 1000hp on pump gas is impressive, but that's it, the car in itself i don't find impressive, in fact i find it disappointing.

There is a really good article out there where Gordon Murray (the maker of the McLaren F1) gives alot of concrete reasons why the Veyron is, in fact, a bad supercar. There are two major kinds of supercars, ones that are designed to be street legal equivalents of F1 cars (Enzo, Zonda, Ford GT) and ones that are designed to be great GT cars (SLR McLaren, 612 Scaglietti, V12 Vanquish). There are even some that try to take parts from both worlds (McLaren F1 and 575m).

Now, to be one of the high performance supercars, you can't just be fast in a straight line, but around a track as well. Handling is equally important (if not more important) then straight line speed and top speed. The Enzo is a great car partly because of how much F1 derived downforce it creates. It supposedly handles like a dream around the track. Real driving enthusiasts need their supercars to handle very well, or else they are pointless. The Veyron weighs in well over 4,000 lbs which is, lets face it, way way too much. Even with its 1,000hp, it isn't going to be winning any races anytime soon. The Enzo, McLaren F1,Saleen S7, Koenigsegg CCR, and Zonda F are all far better high performance cars then the Veyron, for alot less.

To be a good GT car (which many people argue the Veyron is supposed to be), it needs to be a car that you can drive long distances with. Its the car that you drive from Paris to Monaco with to see the Grand Prix. Only problem is, if you have a passanger with you, you have no where to put your bags. There is no trunk or luggage space on the Veyron. So you won't be going far from home because you won't have a change of clothes.

The Veyron seems to have been made completely wrong. True supercars should be designed first by the engineers, then followed up by artists, and finally the businessmen. With the Veyron, VW took the opposite approach. The head guys at VW made an arbitrary demand of 1,000hp and a top speed of 250mph (neither of which are very important as any engineer will tell you). Then some artists made a design that is aerodynamically not very sound. Then they tossed all of these demands over to the engineers to do what they can. Murray did some calculations, and found that the McLaren F1s would have only needed around 750hp in order to reach the Veyron's top speed of 253hp, and could have reached over 260mph with the Veyron's 1,000hp. The Veyron could have been a much better car had the engineers gotten to it before the beaurocrats did. For this reason, the supercars made by small companies like McLaren, Pagani, Koenigsegg, Ascari, etc and ones made by the people who really do know the supercar world and have been around in it for a lond time like Ferrari and Porsche are better then the ones made by VW. A better approach would have been if they had imitated Ford with their GT, where they let the engineers do their jobs, and gave them the resources that they need.

That is what I got from the Murray article, and I agree with everything he said, after all, he is arguably the best car maker to ever live. Now my personal opinions about the Veyron... I think its ugly. I don't like the two toned look, and I think the body looks like a giant beetle (the insect, not the other VW). It isn't classy like the Aston Martins, it doesn't have the Italian flair like the Lambos and Ferrari 575m or 612, and it doesn't have the function before form mentality that the Enzo has. It has to be one of the ugliest supercars I have ever seen (well, I havn't seen it in person, just pictures). Most of them are going to end up locked away in peoples garages, never to be used. The SLR, Vanquish, and 612 are far better GT cars, and it would lose to the Enzo and others on the track. It is a great display of technology, but it is executed for the wrong reasons in a terrible fashion. I really don't like it and if someone gave it to me, I would turn around and sell it for something I might actually use (personally I would pick an M5, a F430, and a 575m). It just isn't special to me like the McLaren or the Zonda or the Enzo are.