10-12-2006, 09:27 PM
|
#1
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: :noitacoL
Posts: 2,670
|
Motortrend Bugatti test numbers
0-30mph_______1.2 sec
0-40__________1.7
0-50__________2.2
0-60__________2.7
0-70__________3.4
0-80__________4.0
0-90__________4.8
0-100_________5.7
Passing 45-65mph____1.1
Quarter Mile_______10.4 sec @ 139.9mph
Braking 100-0mph_______293ft
60-0__________________104ft
Lateral Acceleration 0.96g
__________________
|
|
|
10-12-2006, 10:28 PM
|
#2
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,413
|
SO, other than the accelleration, it is about as handy as an S Class Benz on the road. **yawn**
|
|
|
10-12-2006, 10:28 PM
|
#3
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,413
|
SO, other than the accelleration, it is about as handy as an S Class Benz on the road. **yawn**
|
|
|
10-12-2006, 11:00 PM
|
#4
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: north-south of nowhere
Posts: 6,869
|
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
__________________
|
|
|
10-12-2006, 11:02 PM
|
#5
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 417
|
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well
__________________
Doodle!
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 12:53 AM
|
#6
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: France
Posts: 5,373
|
Cool numbers, coherent with Autocar's numbers but not as impressive as I thought  it's really porky ...
__________________
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 12:56 AM
|
#7
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 3,446
|
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 01:52 AM
|
#8
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: :noitacoL
Posts: 2,670
|
yeah its not that bad of a handling car when you factor in the weight of the darn thing.
__________________
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 02:06 AM
|
#9
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,413
|
|
Originally Posted by ae86_16v
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
.96 G is not worth a million dollars.. and neither is 104ft 60-0 braking
Sports cars have been doing that for 10 years now.
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 04:29 AM
|
#10
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 417
|
|
Originally Posted by RC45
|
Originally Posted by ae86_16v
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
.96 G is not worth a million dollars.. and neither is 104ft 60-0 braking
Sports cars have been doing that for 10 years now.
|
2 tonne GT cars havent, however.
__________________
Doodle!
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 05:23 AM
|
#11
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,418
|
2 tonne to 60mph in 2.7 sec is quite the achivement!
*waiting for a proper roadtest*
__________________
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 07:07 AM
|
#12
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,106
|
quad turbo? achievement? Just overdone thats all.
2.7 secs is impressive i must admit. Wonder how it would b made lighter.
__________________
Guess who's Back!
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 08:08 AM
|
#13
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 2,497
|
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by RC45
|
Originally Posted by ae86_16v
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
.96 G is not worth a million dollars.. and neither is 104ft 60-0 braking
Sports cars have been doing that for 10 years now.
|
2 tonne GT cars havent, however.
|
I don't think the veyron is meant as a GT car.
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 08:59 AM
|
#14
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 1,418
|
|
Originally Posted by Ghostbat
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by RC45
|
Originally Posted by ae86_16v
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
.96 G is not worth a million dollars.. and neither is 104ft 60-0 braking
Sports cars have been doing that for 10 years now.
|
2 tonne GT cars havent, however.
|
I don't think the veyron is meant as a GT car.
|
What would you call it? A sportscar?
__________________
|
|
|
10-13-2006, 09:12 AM
|
#15
|
|
Regular User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: north-south of nowhere
Posts: 6,869
|
|
Originally Posted by davide
|
Originally Posted by Ghostbat
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by RC45
|
Originally Posted by ae86_16v
|
Originally Posted by JoeHahn
|
Originally Posted by saadie
^^ wo0t .. double post lol ....
sooo the veyron is nothing more then a ricer's dream ? .. right ?
|
It brakes and handles well 
|
104ft from 60-0mph is pretty damn good. 0.96g isn't bad either.
|
.96 G is not worth a million dollars.. and neither is 104ft 60-0 braking
Sports cars have been doing that for 10 years now.
|
2 tonne GT cars havent, however.
|
I don't think the veyron is meant as a GT car.
|
What would you call it? A sportscar?
|
status symbol
__________________
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|