Jay Leno Review Of SSC Ultimate Aero

[Arctor]

Originally Posted by SuperStalin

Imagine that crap... going 250mph, and then the car slows down by itself because its sensors
detect a potential threat to your life and your 1.5 million car ( which costs 5 million to make ).

What's wrong with the world today? Where's that old macho stuff when you could
drive 250mph realistically on public roads?

By your logic we should all be driving nerf cars with 30mph speed limiters. I'm sorry but if you're on a TRACK using a car and it's too busy nannying you. If you really want me to delve further into this I can but electronic aids should not be a replacement for driving skill or judgement.

Originally Posted by SuperStalin

As Jay Leno said, there's no electronic crap here, only brute horsepower coming from that engine,
and horsepower is the end-all be-all of driving, along with top speed and cornering
oops, I'm sorry, Leno said nothing about SSC's cornering abilities...

Well, he didn't even drive it 250mph either...

Wat?

Did I mention that the Ultimate Aero has air-conditioning?
Cool eh?

So because Leno didn't put much time (although he did say it cornered well IIRC) into the car's handling it must must have been bad since it's an American car or because Leno likes high-horsepower monsters? I'm sorry but the conclusions you make are no better than the ones you are criticizing others for. To be honest I don't care how the car's handling is because it's a great technical achievement at a fraction of the cost it took to develop the Veyron. I'm not sure you realize how much of a difference in power/aero is needed to make the jump from 253mph to 257.

[LurkerPatrol]

Originally Posted by BlaRo

There's not enough in the world to express my sentiments at SuperStalin and Aston Martin. Nobody here said anything about whether it was American, Canadian, Indonesian, or Martian. But can you blame an American for taking pride in something his fellow countrymen did? If TVR built the world's fastest car, then JC would be circle-jerking himself all over it in the same way that "America's Clarkson" did here.

Maybe because he lives in a country where patriotism hasn't been ruled out by limp-wristed politically-correct pandering sycophants.

Agreed. How many times have we seen British patriotism on Top Gear? No complaints then right? So there should be no complaints here.

I don't understand why some people hear patriotic sentiments from a country they don't live in and then start bleeding from the ears, and crying in a corner. It's so easy to filter it out, and it's so subtle and mild and not the majority of the context. Besides if a company in your country built a car, out of parts they manufactured themselves and spent a whole load of time on, and which defeated all the major rivals of theirs, you'd be proud wouldn't you? Same reasoning here.

Anyways, I loved the review. Leno is great, and its always good to see his auto-head side of his personality. He seems more silly and happy-go-lucky when he's doing the late show, so to see him serious but excited about cars is a complete 180. The car is more well-built and a lot of thought and effort was put into it than I first realized. The engine noise and the noise from the wastegate is fantastic. Quite possibly one of the best drivers cars out there. I'll still stick to my Lambo but I'll keep this on it's well-deserved plinth.

And hey this is coming from an Indian boy, so stick that up your "No... I can't stand the patriotism" pipe.

[SuperStalin]

Originally Posted by Arctor

By your logic we should all be driving nerf cars with 30mph speed limiters.

Nope. But production cars offering extreme performances for which
99% of potential buyers are not prepared, NEED to have safety methods.

I'm sorry but if you're on a TRACK using a car and it's too busy nannying you. If you really want me to delve further into this I can but electronic aids should not be a replacement for driving skill or judgement.

Bugatti Veyron is not a racecar, it wasn't made to be one.

The fact it needs special circumstances and preparations to achieve
250mph is more realistic than having a car that's "always up for it",
plus, it makes it a more usable everyday vehicle.

Plus, the Veyron is made to last, its components are made to survive
the massive torque, accelerations, braking, going 250mph etc.

So because Leno didn't put much time (although he did say it cornered well IIRC) into the car's handling it must must have been bad since it's an American car or because Leno likes high-horsepower monsters? I'm sorry but the conclusions you make are no better than the ones you are criticizing others for. To be honest I don't care how the car's handling is because it's a great technical achievement at a fraction of the cost it took to develop the Veyron. I'm not sure you realize how much of a difference in power/aero is needed to make the jump from 253mph to 257.

How difficult do you think it would be for Bugatti (VW) to develop
a Veyron which is faster than the SSC UltimateAero?

Would that make a 1500hp Veyron which runs 260mph "a greater technical achievment" than the previous Veyron?

[starfox07]

Your logic doesn't make sense because nobody will drive a Veyron every day, which is the point I was trying to put out there for you to see in my last point. So whats the point of having a car that could be driven every day if you have a Bentley for that? SSC never claimed that they made a better car than the VW, but they did prove that its faster. I'm anxious to see how their two new models turn out, this could be the beginning of something good.

[the Interceptor]

For me the whole thing looks like this. I either want a drivers car, but then I have more than a handful with a 600+ hp McLaren F1, or I want a car that goes as fast as possible in a straight line with enormous power. If I choose the latter however, it would be quite helpful if I have the devices to prevent me from dying and help me to actually put the power on the road.

Like I said, I am surprised by the level of refinement the SSC seems to have, but I see no point in that car other than that it was made to beat the Veyrons top speed. And that definitely isn't the right reason for making such an automobile.

[Labcoatguy]

Forget the reasoning behind the car. Look at the actual CAR; this is a vehicle that's definitely not art, so there's no need to bother with "why". After all, the entire Lamborghini auto business was built on even flimsier foundations than that. What this car is best compared to is the Koenigsegg, both brutal and raw RWD cars with loads of forced induction that go really fast and are big and wide. If they can annoy the performance figures of the Veyron, more power to them, even if they have plenty of it already. At the risk of parroting JC, what's wrong with having another supercar on the planet?

[NAIDANAC A]

This car is really really ugly...I mean Focus headlamps? COME ON...they even made the body around it curl over top to change the design of the lights.

It actually looks like its made with care, but I still do not like it, especially when looking at the gaps in the rear spoiler...those just felt like a backyard job.

And for people who are saying its not art...EITHER IS THE VEYRON...its ugly too.

I still think the Koenigsegg looks the coolest of any of the generic super cars...maybe because of the cool doors.

[THGL]

I know they needed a low drag coefficient, but damn it's UGLY!

Can someone explain Jay's comment of steel rotors being better for the street than carbon fiber?
Thx.

[the Interceptor]

I think it looks quite okay. Not McLaren F1 beautiful, but fine. A bit too 80's maybe. And I may get killed to death for it, but I don't like the look of the Koenigsegg at all. Sorry to the aboard Swedes, but it just looks too Ikea for me, it has some Swedish looks to it I just can't live with (got nothing against the Swedes in general whatsoever).

Another subject: I think steel rotors are better for street cars because they work better in real life conditions. Carbon fiber brakes can feel numb, be hard to control, may squeak badly and probably only work when warmed up properly.

[Shawn]

Originally Posted by TomCat

I disagree. The Veyron, for example, can't ever really hit it's top speed because of all the electronic nannies. As Tiff pointed out, you have to pull the Bugatti over, shut it down, take the key out of the ignition, put in the other slot on the floor, set it to "top speed mode", and then re-fire the car. But if you hit a bump over a certain size, or turn the wheel more then 10 degrees, it will automatically kick back into normal mode, making it's top speed impossible to hit. So unless you know of a drag strip long enough to hit 250+mph or a stretch of autobaughn long enough with no bumps, dips, or bends... then it's top speed is just an unrealistic gimmick. Not even at a proper race track could you hit it's top speed, since there are corners and you'd have to stop the car and shut it off, etc, etc, etc, in order set it to hit it's top speed.

The Aero, on the other hand, only has 1 setting. No "protect you from yourself" bullshit.

Oh come on, like the Aero can achieve it's top speed on the alley behind your building.

Okay, so the Veyron has various settings but that doesn't mean you can just step into the Aero and go up to 250mph.

And I'll just repeat myself: the Veyron and SSC should not be compared. Did you all forget why the Bugatti took so long to make and cost VW so much? All the stuff about VW making sure things like the gearbox on the 1001hp beast would last as long as they would on a regular car?

Yeah, I haven't driven either car, but I'm willing to bet the Aero is gonna be just another fickle supercar along the lines of the McLaren F1 and Koenigsseggs... the Veyron is in a league of its own.

[Vector]

Originally Posted by NAIDANAC A

And for people who are saying its not art...EITHER IS THE VEYRON...its ugly too.

Who ever said art had to be beautiful? The Veyron may not be 'classically beautiful' but it sure is nice looking, very interesting in design and the styling cues are both retro and ultra-modern. It looks like the sort of car a superhero would drive.

The Aero, on the other hand, is just a bland generic wedge of a car that -- to be honest -- looks cheap, like a kit car. There are already so many other cars who have been there and done it better.

[prizrak]

Originally Posted by THGL

I know they needed a low drag coefficient, but damn it's UGLY!

Can someone explain Jay's comment of steel rotors being better for the street than carbon fiber?
Thx.

Interceptor already touched on that. Basically carbon brakes and pretty much any high performance brakes need to reach a certain temperature to work properly. It's like slick tires on F1 cars, they are excellent when going 100+ on average during a race but would be useless in normal commute.

I have Hawk carbon steel pads on my car and they stop worse than my worn out brakes did until I make 2-3 stops on them to get them up to temp. When I was driving down a nice little road in Poconos (downhill) the brakes started to warm up and squeek but were grabbing with insane amounts of power much harder than they do during normal driving.

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Oh come on, like the Aero can achieve it's top speed on the alley behind your building.

Okay, so the Veyron has various settings but that doesn't mean you can just step into the Aero and go up to 250mph.

That's not really the point. The whole thing that made the Veyron special was the fact that it was the fastest production car in the world. That's why it took so long to produce. They could have released it sooner, but they found it was incredibly unstable at 200+mph due to it's shape. They could have released it then, limited to 200mph, with it's amazing acceleration and unbelievable luxury and refinement. But they didn't. They pumped more and more money into the project to get that top speed claim.

The fact that it's near impossible to achieve, unless you get some VW engineers to disable the system as they did for James May when he drove it, makes it pointless. It's like building the fastest accelerating car ever, but building systems in place that prevent you from accelerating fast. The Veyron might as well be a 2 seater Bentley Continental GT with 1000hp, for all it's worth.

When you buy a supercar, it's not about what you can do with it in the real world. It's about what is possible. You can't drive a Ferrari 430 even half way to it's limit without breaking a dozen traffic laws. The fact that the Aero is capable of speeds well above any production car sold today is what makes it special, it has nothing to do with whether or not you'll ever see those speeds.

[Hidden_Hunter]

same reason people buy diving watches to 200m

[Cold Fussion]

I'd much rather have a ccx. The ccx looks better, almost as fast (like the difference between 395 and 415 at all matters), it sounds better and it doesn't have that stupid sound of the waste gate.

[SuperStalin]

Originally Posted by TomCat

That's not really the point. The whole thing that made the Veyron special was the fact that it was the fastest production car in the world. That's why it took so long to produce.

You're totally wrong.

They could have released it sooner, but they found it was incredibly unstable at 200+mph due to it's shape. They could have released it then, limited to 200mph, with it's amazing acceleration and unbelievable luxury and refinement. But they didn't. They pumped more and more money into the project to get that top speed claim.

They did all that because Ferdinand Piech wanted that design,
and no other, and wanted it to run 250mph, plus, he wanted it to
be durable and usable.

The Veyron is an experiment of sorts, with its top speed being
only one of the features.

It was made to re-introduce the Bugatti brand, and to
showcase the excellence of VW engineers. It's a landmark in the history of automobiles... can you remember some other car that was made with absolutely no expenses spared, which costs 5 million to make,
goes like hell, lasts, has all sorts of luxuries...

[Aircooled]

Originally Posted by Aston Martin

"This is an American car, the engine is American, the wheels are American, the badge looks like the flag, the record is owned by America, my socks are American...
O! say can you see."

Give me a fucking break.

I don't advise you to watch top gear then. Jeremy's patronizing of British manufactures may get on your nerves.

[TomCat]

Originally Posted by SuperStalin

You're totally wrong.



They did all that because Ferdinand Piech wanted that design,
and no other, and wanted it to run 250mph, plus, he wanted it to
be durable and usable.

The Veyron is an experiment of sorts, with its top speed being
only one of the features.

It was made to re-introduce the Bugatti brand, and to
showcase the excellence of VW engineers. It's a landmark in the history of automobiles... can you remember some other car that was made with absolutely no expenses spared, which costs 5 million to make,
goes like hell, lasts, has all sorts of luxuries...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it was the TopSpeed that was the selling point. Wrapping it in a nice package was secondary. We use to joke and laugh about the Veyron, because no one thought it would ever come out. VW would talk and talk and talk, and still no car. It took them forever to get the high speed handling sorted so they can finally sell the thing without looking like a complete failure.

[SuperStalin]

Originally Posted by TomCat

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it was the TopSpeed that was the selling point. Wrapping it in a nice package was secondary.

Nope. As you yourself mentioned ealrier, the package was primary,
the engineers struggled to fit everything into that look.

Besides, the Veyron isn't sold for direct profit, so it has no "selling points".
It's all about prestige, but VW are losing over 3 millions for each sold.

We use to joke and laugh about the Veyron, because no one thought it would ever come out. VW would talk and talk and talk, and still no car. It took them forever to get the high speed handling sorted so they can finally sell the thing without looking like a complete failure.

Again, the Veyron is made to be perfect in all those areas, just so they can
re-introduce the Bugatti brand.

The Bugatti brand was something special decades ago, it was forgotten,
now it's synonimous with the most ludicrously perfectionist car ever in existence.
So, the next Bugatti will already have a pedigree. It's like being the child
of someone who's a record breaking runner, rock star, movie star and the winner of Nobel prizes for science and peace, all rolled into one...

I suppose the next Bugatti will be nothing like the Veyron,
it'll probably be some big luxury car like a Rolls Royce... and they can
make it look like anything they want, because it will be a Bugatti,
and it will still sell ( unlike the Maybach ).

I'm guessing VW are trying to make a brand that will position itself
above Bentley in their lineup.

Then you have the SSC Ultimate Aero, which manages to run faster,
because it's hooked on cattle steroids.

Personally, I don't really care about any of them, because it's just corporations trying to make a buck, but I am impressed with the brains
invested in engineering the Bugatti Veyron. The other one, not so much.

[starfox07]

Originally Posted by petarkb

Wha?

I realize my country don't have much to brag about, but your suggestion sounds as if you're telling me to be irrational about things and act like I contributed to other people's achievements, or the achievements of people before me.

How can you say you're a rational human being and be proud of things you weren't responsible for?

When a personal friend, or a member of a family accomplishes something reasonably important, you are not proud of them? Pride doesn't necessitate personal responsibility or involvement. I'm certainly proud of all of our soldiers around the world (of whom I'm friends with a few) for serving our country. I myself am not a soldier, but that doesn't exclude me from feelings of pride whenever I see an American flag in the air. Can you hold that against me? You are European and I am American, so theres no doubt you can try.

And SuperStalin is plainly a fanboy of Bugatti. No amount of common sense will tame that beast.

EDIT: In spite of my staunch defense of the Aero, I'm not hopelessly infatuated with the car. In fact I would easily take the Bugatti over it; but just because a car that had exponentially more money and time for its development is the better car, it doesn't detract from the Aero. It may look a bit finicky, but I'm sure everyone on this forum would be giggling like a child if they got to ride in, or drive one.