McLaren F1 vs Veyron - Top Gear Drag Race (Unexpected Result)

[Z07]

Looks like they do a slow start to eliminate the Veyron's AWD advantage:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXxVszw20Sc

[The RS6]

Why is that "unexpected"?

The start was unexpected, but the result wasnt, not for me at least :)

[Z07]

Why is that "unexpected"?

The start was unexpected
That was my point. I expected the Veyron to win all the way but once you remove it's launch it's a fat pig and only pulls level at about 170mph.

[Z07]

Here's the other drag:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4jcmvDeQeE

[Erik]

I am quite sure the Veyron would leave the McLaren for dead in a true acceleration.

But Top Gear is good, exciting entertainment!

Bugatti Veyron, as tested by AMS

0 - 100 km/h 2,5 s
0 - 150 km/h
0 - 160 km/h
0 - 200 km/h 7,4 s
0 - 250 km/h 11,4 s
0 - 280 km/h
0 - 300 km/h 18,2 s

another: Porsche GT1, 544 horses.


0 - 100 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 150 km/h
0 - 160 km/h 7,1 s
0 - 200 km/h 10,5 s
0 - 250 km/h 17,4 s

vs. Koenigsegg CCX, 806 horses...

0 - 100 km/h 3,9 s
0 - 150 km/h
0 - 160 km/h 6,8 s
0 - 200 km/h 9,6 s

[Z07]

I am quite sure the Veyron would leave the McLaren for dead in a true acceleration.

But Top Gear is good, exciting entertainment!

Bugatti Veyron, as tested by AMS

0 - 100 km/h 2,5 s
0 - 150 km/h
0 - 160 km/h
0 - 200 km/h 7,4 s
0 - 250 km/h 11,4 s
0 - 280 km/h
0 - 300 km/h 18,2 s

McLaren F1 takes about 22s to 300kph but is a second slower to 160kph, so there isn't that much in it. I reckon 60-125mph, through 2nd and 3rd, with good traction, the F1 will out accelerate a Veyron. 560hp/ton and RWD and zero turbo lag.

[Toto89]

Don't want to say anything wrong about Top Gear, but i think a non-english car (mainly if it is initially a german car) will never beat an english one...

[Z07]

Don't want to say anything wrong about Top Gear, but i think a non-english car (mainly if it is initially a german car) will never beat an english one...
Even if the gearbox is designed and produced in the UK?

[Toto89]

You mean the Ricardo gearbox of the Veyron? I don't think it counts that much for them:blush:

[Z07]

You think they used a 100-shot?

[Kram]

McLaren F1 takes about 22s to 300kph but is a second slower to 160kph, so there isn't that much in it. I reckon 60-125mph, through 2nd and 3rd, with good traction, the F1 will out accelerate a Veyron. 560hp/ton and RWD and zero turbo lag.

As Erik said it was just a not so good joke on a very good entertainment show.

The mc does not have even a chance against the Veyron.

Just to add more test numbers:

MclarenF1 x Veyron
~60-125mph
100-200km/h - 3,1 x 1,8 sec. :bigeyes:


the real race would be
Bugatti Veyron: 0 to 200 mp/h - 22.2 s
Mclaren F1 : 100 mp/h to 200 mp/h - 21.7 s


The Mc is a bit faster than Carrera GT, Enzo, and in some tests it is a bit slower. The Veyron is in another league.

This is all about acceleration, nothing with felling or other subjective things.

[chewym]

McLaren F1 takes about 22s to 300kph but is a second slower to 160kph, so there isn't that much in it. I reckon 60-125mph, through 2nd and 3rd, with good traction, the F1 will out accelerate a Veyron. 560hp/ton and RWD and zero turbo lag.

Veyron
0-60 in 2.5 seconds
0-130 in 8.5 seconds

F1
0-60 in 3.2 seconds
0-130 in 10.4 seconds.

Of course you could possibly create a situation where something like this could happen. The only time when acceleration really, really matters is in a 1/4 mile drag race. The Veyron wins by a second in that race.

[Erik]

The Veyron wins by a second in that race.

Quite a few car lengths that ;)

Just imagine 1 seconds difference when the cars are doing at least 200 km/h... :cool2:

[Speedou]

Every time after start you can see the Veyron is catching the F1 VERY fastly, but the they always cut it and make it last much longer to past.

[f1esp]

F1:
Born in... 1992.
:bow:


All said.

[AndyBG]

F1:
Born in... 1992.
:bow:


All said.

Exactly...!

Its pointless comparing these two...

[Erik]

Every time after start you can see the Veyron is catching the F1 VERY fastly, but the they always cut it and make it last much longer to past.

= Entertainment.

Yes, the F1 was born in 1992 and it's also one of the answers to why it gets whipped by a modern car.

[f1esp]

We need a car 15 years younger and with +1000hp to beat F1 numbers (in straight line)...:bow:

Well done Gordon Murray!!!:0:


:cheers:

[Clio16V]

Quite a few car lengths that ;)

Just imagine 1 seconds difference when the cars are doing at least 200 km/h... :cool2:

The Veyron isn't 1s faster at the 1/4 mile the difference is about 1/2s. The Veyron does it in 10.4s and the F1 in <11s

Take a look at this movie:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsNUvDeu-j8
And the guys of Best Motoring used the 550hp version of the F1, Top Gear of course the 627hp.

And about AWD or RWD, that doesn't say anything. The McLaren can be very fast of the line as show in the movie above.
AWD is no guarantee that you'il be faster of the line.
Take a look at Top Gear when they did a drag race with the Zonda (RWD) vs Lambo Murcialago (AWD) The Lambo was spanked. Also the test saw in a magazine of the Porsche 997 Carrera 2s vs Carrera 4s. The 4s was 0.2s slower from 0-100kph.
So i think the F1 could be faster of the line because it's much lighter, of course at the end Veyron catches him.

[Erik]

Please notice that there is a difference when measuring acceleration and distance ;)
It's the first car over the line that is the fastest, not the one with the highest speed.

The F1 shouldn't have a chance vs. Veyron's DSG, AWD and 1001 hp.

Just calculate how much the gear changes add upp for in time in the F1 when going to 300 km/h.

[Kram]

This is how it should be:

http://www.motortrend.com/multimedia/virtual/112_0611_dream_drag_race/index.html

[f1esp]

And the guys of Best Motoring used the 550hp version of the F1

:confused:
Sorry mate, but that doesn´t exist

[f1esp]

Hi guys.
New comparison:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/images/_raquel-welch-012.jpg
(born in 1940)

&

http://eletrostars.blogtv.com.mx/img/Image/Eletrostars/2007/Outubro/megan_fox_wp_800_m.jpg
(born in 1986)

[Z07]

As Erik said it was just a not so good joke on a very good entertainment show.

The mc does not have even a chance against the Veyron.

Just to add more test numbers:

MclarenF1 x Veyron
~60-125mph
100-200km/h - 3,1 x 1,8 sec. :bigeyes:

Both them figures are wrong.:hihi: The figure you quote for the Veyron is Buggati's figure for 160kph to 200kph. The figure for the F1 is one test result for 60-100mph.



Veyron
0-60 in 2.5 seconds
0-130 in 8.5 seconds

F1
0-60 in 3.2 seconds
0-130 in 10.4 seconds.

Of course you could possibly create a situation where something like this could happen. The only time when acceleration really, really matters is in a 1/4 mile drag race. The Veyron wins by a second in that race.
So the delta is 6s vs 7.2s. Now factor is 0.5s for the DSG shift and the difference up to the point before the 2nd-3rd shift is way smaller.


You're confusing increase in speed with distance coverage. From the moment of hitting 60mph and selecting 2nd, both cars have full traction. The McLaren has 500rwhp/ton and the Veyron has about 420awhp/ton. The F1 will pull away, scientific fact. From that point forward, in order for the Veyron to pull back it must be at a higher speed, which probably happens around 120mph. It then has to come back and the 2 probably don't draw level until 150mph.

There's also no telling how much an F1 with a few miles on the clock is laying down!

60-100mph
Veyron - 3.0s (this involves a 1st-2nd DSG shift at 60-70mph)
F1 - 3.0s (this involves a manual 1st-2nd shift at 65mph and a manual 2nd-3rd shift at 95mph)

Tell me which car is faster in 2nd gear?

[Z07]

Hi guys.
New comparison:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/dailymusto/images/_raquel-welch-012.jpg
(born in 1940)

&

http://eletrostars.blogtv.com.mx/img/Image/Eletrostars/2007/Outubro/megan_fox_wp_800_m.jpg
(born in 1986)

How about:

McLaren F1 born in 1993

http://www.hollywoodrag.com/images/celebrity/jessica_alba_bikini_008.jpg




Veyron born in 2006

http://fatgirls.narod.ru/photo/mk2005/mk05_009.jpg

[chewym]

Both them figures are wrong.:hihi: The figure you quote for the Veyron is Buggati's figure for 160kph to 200kph. The figure for the F1 is one test result for 60-100mph.


So the delta is 6s vs 7.2s. Now factor is 0.5s for the DSG shift and the difference up to the point before the 2nd-3rd shift is way smaller.


You're confusing increase in speed with distance coverage. From the moment of hitting 60mph and selecting 2nd, both cars have full traction. The McLaren has 500rwhp/ton and the Veyron has about 420awhp/ton. The F1 will pull away, scientific fact. From that point forward, in order for the Veyron to pull back it must be at a higher speed, which probably happens around 120mph. It then has to come back and the 2 probably don't draw level until 150mph.

There's also no telling how much an F1 with a few miles on the clock is laying down!

60-100mph
Veyron - 3.0s (this involves a 1st-2nd DSG shift at 60-70mph)
F1 - 3.0s (this involves a manual 1st-2nd shift at 65mph and a manual 2nd-3rd shift at 95mph)

Tell me which car is faster in 2nd gear?

Why make such a convoluted "race"? That's like arguing which car is quicker between 11 and 13 mph? The Veyron can start a 60-100mph race in first gear hence no need to be in second gear if you don't want to. Either way doing 60 mph in first or second is silly on the highway. Usually you would be in top gear at that time, and I really doubt anything will beat the Veyron in top gear acceleration.

Where are you getting the gear change times? The Veyron tops out @ 67 in first and 94 in second. It takes the Veyron only half a second to go from 60 to 70 including the gearchange. 90 to 100 only takes .8 of a second.

[Clio16V]

:confused:
Sorry mate, but that doesn´t exist

The first F1's had 550hp. I'm not sure but i think the codename is XP4 and the XP5 is the 627hp version.
The one used in the video of Best Motoring is the 550hp version. I have the full episode on my harddrive.

[Z07]

Why make such a convoluted "race"? That's like arguing which car is quicker between 11 and 13 mph? The Veyron can start a 60-100mph race in first gear hence no need to be in second gear if you don't want to.
Starting at the end of a lower gear would not be helpful, especially in a turbocharged car.



Either way doing 60 mph in first or second is silly on the highway. Usually you would be in top gear at that time, and I really doubt anything will beat the Veyron in top gear acceleration.
Really? The Veyron pulls 41mph/1000rpm in top, so at 60mph it is at only 1450rpm, producing approximately 600lbft.
http://www.bugatti.com/en/veyron-16.4/technology/acceleration.html

The McLaren F1 pulls 30mph/1000rpm in top putting it at 2000rpm. At 2000rpm it produces 90% of peak torque or about 440lbft. Now because the Veyron gear is 37% larger, to correct for gearing reduction and hence actual torque at the wheels, relative to the Veyron, this figure is the equivalent of 602.8lbft (30 vs 41mph/1000rpm). And it weighs 1650lbs less and it's RWD and therefore has less transmission loss. The Veyron will be annihilated in a top gear race from 60mph.:lovl:

Then you've got the fact that unless you've used the special key, the Veyron's drag coefficient will increase from 0.36 to 0.41 and it will top out at 236mph, below the F1's 241mph.:hihi:



Where are you getting the gear change times? The Veyron tops out @ 67 in first and 94 in second. It takes the Veyron only half a second to go from 60 to 70 including the gearchange. 90 to 100 only takes .8 of a second.
Where do you get that from?

[Z07]

The first F1's had 550hp. I'm not sure but i think the codename is XP4 and the XP5 is the 627hp version.
The one used in the video of Best Motoring is the 550hp version. I have the full episode on my harddrive.
There were all sorts of prototypes with different exhausts. The earlier F1s were also fitted with an S70/2 engine, whereas the later ones got the S70/3 engine.

Nobody has really dyno-tested one that's been ran in.

[chewym]

Starting at the end of a lower gear would not be helpful, especially in a turbocharged car.


Really? The Veyron pulls 41mph/1000rpm in top, so at 60mph it is at only 1450rpm, producing approximately 600lbft.
http://www.bugatti.com/en/veyron-16.4/technology/acceleration.html

The McLaren F1 pulls 30mph/1000rpm in top putting it at 2000rpm. At 2000rpm it produces 90% of peak torque or about 440lbft. Now because the Veyron gear is 37% larger, to correct for gearing reduction and hence actual torque at the wheels, relative to the Veyron, this figure is the equivalent of 602.8lbft (30 vs 41mph/1000rpm). And it weighs 1650lbs less and it's RWD and therefore has less transmission loss. The Veyron will be annihilated in a top gear race from 60mph.:lovl:

Where do you get that from?

All of your calculations are mathematically and theoretically relevant but don't mean anything to the Veyron driver because of its gearbox. All of the times that I have used are from the Car and Driver Veyron test. In the same test they tested its top gear acceleration times. 1.8 second from 30-50 and 2.3 from 50-70 mph. Car and Driver top gear times are only relevant for autos vs. autos and manuals vs. manuals. But as an example that's .9 of a second quicker in each category than the MB SL 63 with its 7 speed auto.

Of course they do become relevant in the real world, where the Veyron driver floors it and explodes ahead versus needing to manually downshift or ride it out in top gear which takes a lot longer (depending on gearing even fast manuals take 5-10 seconds for the same tests)

[f1esp]

The first F1's had 550hp. I'm not sure but i think the codename is XP4 and the XP5 is the 627hp version.
The one used in the video of Best Motoring is the 550hp version. I have the full episode on my harddrive.


All the 7 XP's were factory cars!
(XP1, XP2, XP3, XP4, XP5, XP1LM and 56XPGT)

These cars were prototypes...

XP1 was crashed in Namibia by the BMW test driver.
XP2 was the crash test model.
XP3 is in the hands of Gordon Murray.
XP4 is in California (sold as a "normal" 627hp version).
XP5 is still in the hands of McLaren at the factory (as XP1LM: the car Lewis Hamilton will get after his third F1 world championship...).


Please show me your info (I'm really interested).


1993-1994 articles (as you can see, engines always had over 550hp):
http://redirectingat.com/?id=252X400&url=http%3A//img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%2520F1%2520G/Untitled-Scanned-04.jpg

http://redirectingat.com/?id=252X400&url=http%3A//img.photobucket.com/albums/v482/Peloton25/McLaren%2520F1%2520G/fast5.jpg


:cheers:

[Z07]

All of your calculations are mathematically and theoretically relevant but don't mean anything to the Veyron driver because of its gearbox. All of the times that I have used are from the Car and Driver Veyron test. In the same test they tested its top gear acceleration times. 1.8 second from 30-50 and 2.3 from 50-70 mph. Car and Driver top gear times are only relevant for autos vs. autos and manuals vs. manuals. But as an example that's .9 of a second quicker in each category than the MB SL 63 with its 7 speed auto.

Of course they do become relevant in the real world, where the Veyron driver floors it and explodes ahead versus needing to manually downshift or ride it out in top gear which takes a lot longer (depending on gearing even fast manuals take 5-10 seconds for the same tests)
You can quite easily predict an opening and change down in anticipating. Also the top gear times you quote are probably auto kickdown which isn't the same thing as a manual top gear run.

[buzz]

Pure Marketing from Top Gear favoring McLaren cars..

The new McLaren will be out soon... so public awareness and preparation is in a must...

Buzz

[Zyklon5]

Fact 1 - Top Gear is an entertainment show and the artful editing of the "race" doesn't make the problem any clearer. A proper quarter mile and 1 KM run would settle the issue

Fact 2 - Buzz is right ...

It would have been nice a full on comparo between Zonda, Koenigsegg, Gumpert, the so called super car :D Ultimate Aero SSC and a couple of the classics thrown in for good measure Enzo, Carrera GT, LP670 SV.

[Z07]

1. Marketing the McLaren? Errrr.... production has ceased and the cars are fetching £2.5m each. Don't see why marketing is required really.

2. You do not know what 'classic' means.

3. A roll race from 30mph in 2nd gear or 10mph in 1st gear would settle the issue.

[Zyklon5]

Marketing the next McLarens or at least making damn good entertaining TV for car ethusiasts;

Ahh c'mon there isn't a set in stone definition of what cars should be called classics, in that context those are the classics ... except for the LP670

Roll race ? that is utterly pointless - in a roll you take out part of the stuff that matters, car technology and/or driver skills. An insightful comparo should also include track times, not only drag races.

PS: roll races are for american cars that had a general dislike for cornering and other driving finesses

[chewym]

3. A roll race from 30mph in 2nd gear or 10mph in 1st gear would settle the issue.

What issue? Since when is this type of "race" a widely used performance benchmark?

[Ruergard]

It would have been nice a full on comparo between Zonda, Koenigsegg, Gumpert, the so called super car :D Ultimate Aero SSC and a couple of the classics thrown in for good measure Enzo, Carrera GT, LP670 SV.

That's something I'd really like to see. Veyron vs. CCX-R, perfect race.

On topic I think this outcome is a Top Gear outcome only. The Veyron is in a different league from the F1. At least in straight-line performance, cornering is something else. But that's my opinion until another race proves me wrong. :incar:

I really like Top Gear, but it's very much entertainment. :revs:

[Leadfoot]

The Veyron isn't 1s faster at the 1/4 mile the difference is about 1/2s. The Veyron does it in 10.4s and the F1 in <11s

Take a look at this movie:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsNUvDeu-j8
And the guys of Best Motoring used the 550hp version of the F1, Top Gear of course the 627hp.

And about AWD or RWD, that doesn't say anything. The McLaren can be very fast of the line as show in the movie above.
AWD is no guarantee that you'il be faster of the line.
Take a look at Top Gear when they did a drag race with the Zonda (RWD) vs Lambo Murcialago (AWD) The Lambo was spanked. Also the test saw in a magazine of the Porsche 997 Carrera 2s vs Carrera 4s. The 4s was 0.2s slower from 0-100kph.
So i think the F1 could be faster of the line because it's much lighter, of course at the end Veyron catches him.

Just back from holidays and watched the Topgear race on SKY+.

First the Bugatti wasn't using launch control, whether the owner of the car had requested Hamster not to use it or the more likely reason was that the lack of LC made for a tighter race and more entertaining viewing. ;)

The reality is that when a Veyron uses LC it destroys cars like the F1. To match or better the Bugatti you also need at least similar amounts of power because as speeds build power to weight is not the deciding factor.

As for the difference between C2S and C4S, well the 911 never did have a traction problem in rwd form, i.e. the engine is in the optimum position for getting off the line quickly so adding awd only added more weight. What awd does do is make the 911 more user friendly with predictable handling compared to it's two wheel drive brother, this is true for just about every car I can think of, add awd and the car becomes easier to control near the limits.

What I would much prefer to see is a Veyron vs an F1 around somewhere like Silverstone against the stopwatch to see if technology is king over having the ultimate driving experience as Gordon Murray insisted having with the F1.

P.S.
I never knew there was indeed a 550hp version of the F1. Are you sure about that?

[Z07]

PS: roll races are for american cars that had a general dislike for cornering and other driving finesses
Explain why one of the best roll-racing cars is actually a Supra then.

[Z07]

What issue? Since when is this type of "race" a widely used performance benchmark?
Since reality.

[Zyklon5]

Explain why one of the best roll-racing cars is actually a Supra then.

I think it's a little besides the point, but i don't see a problem in the fact that a Japanese designed car is one of the best roll-racing .. as the top car on the Ring is an american ... I actually enjoy the looks of american cars but all around performance wise i don't see many great examples. CTS-V and Z06/ZR1 being the notable exceptions.

Roll races are idiot proof and that is the problem, add a fast automatic gearbox, lane departure warning and all you need to race is a monkey to hold on to the steering wheel ... :stick:

Disclaimer: this is a very personal stance and i do not expect everybody else to adhere to it .. so i'd rather not spoil the thread.


Since reality.

Please show me any kind of automotive press using roll race at all. 80 - 130 times in various gears maybe but NOTHING else that includes a rolling start.

Quarter Mile
Standing KM
Standing Mile
0-100 / 0 - 200 / 0 - 300 including the braking to standstill variations
Track testing

These are performance benchmarks ... rolling start not really.:noshake:

[Clio16V]

Just back from holidays and watched the Topgear race on SKY+.

First the Bugatti wasn't using launch control, whether the owner of the car had requested Hamster not to use it or the more likely reason was that the lack of LC made for a tighter race and more entertaining viewing. ;)

The reality is that when a Veyron uses LC it destroys cars like the F1. To match or better the Bugatti you also need at least similar amounts of power because as speeds build power to weight is not the deciding factor.

As for the difference between C2S and C4S, well the 911 never did have a traction problem in rwd form, i.e. the engine is in the optimum position for getting off the line quickly so adding awd only added more weight. What awd does do is make the 911 more user friendly with predictable handling compared to it's two wheel drive brother, this is true for just about every car I can think of, add awd and the car becomes easier to control near the limits.

What I would much prefer to see is a Veyron vs an F1 around somewhere like Silverstone against the stopwatch to see if technology is king over having the ultimate driving experience as Gordon Murray insisted having with the F1.

P.S.
I never knew there was indeed a 550hp version of the F1. Are you sure about that?

I've heard more magazine and TV programs about the 550hp F1
When you take a look at the full episode of Best Motoring you see that they report that the F1 they used had 550hp at 7000rpm.

Of course when the Veyron uses LC it will be faster than he did now but i'm sure not it will 'destroy' the F1 at the start.
For example the 0-60mph time difference for the M5 with or without LC is not much. Of course that is not quite a Veyron.

F1 owners could always upgrade the car with this:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/attachments/gtboard-com-general-sportscars/85199d1246908386-bugatti-veyron-vs-mclaren-f1-top-gear-mclaren-f1-2010-upgrade-package.pdf

:dig:

[Leadfoot]

I've heard more magazine and TV programs about the 550hp F1
When you take a look at the full episode of Best Motoring you see that they report that the F1 they used had 550hp at 7000rpm.

I just checked the official McLaren website and all versions from the road car to the LM have had 627hp @ 7500rpm, so no version according the manufacturer has ever had only 550hp. May be that is why Best Motoring used the figure at 7000rpm instead. ;)


Of course when the Veyron uses LC it will be faster than he did now but I'm sure not it will 'destroy' the F1 at the start.
For example the 0-60mph time difference for the M5 with or without LC is not much. Of course that is not quite a Veyron.

The M5 isn't a Veyron, hack it isn't even a RS6. Bad choice of car to use as an example. :hihi: Oh and yes the Veyron would destroy an F1 with LC, what you witnessed in the TG program was a Veyron coming from a very poor start to passing the F1 at 240km/h and then pull out about 12 car lengths at the end of a 1 mile standing start race. In my mind that is pretty impressive.


F1 owners could always upgrade the car with this:

http://www.m5board.com/vbulletin/attachments/gtboard-com-general-sportscars/85199d1246908386-bugatti-veyron-vs-mclaren-f1-top-gear-mclaren-f1-2010-upgrade-package.pdf

:dig:

Considering that most examples of the F1 are worth close on 2 million pound I doubt too many would have their brain removed to seriously consider tuning it. :lovl:

[Clio16V]

I don't think you're info about the F1 is correct.
The F1LM had more hp and torque, 680hp/705Nm, less weight, about 1060kg,and shorter gear ratios(not sure) so it accelerates like hell.

[Leadfoot]

I don't think you're info about the F1 is correct.
The F1LM had more hp and torque, 680hp/705Nm, less weight, about 1060kg,and shorter gear ratios so it accelerates like hell.

Sorry your are correct, I must have clicked the GT version instead. :cheers:

But I am right about all the road going version though. :brag:

[Clio16V]

The 550hp F1 has maybe been a prototype with one of the first S70 engines that has been used at some programs and magazines.
:vhmmm:

Let's email Gordon :hihi:

But one thing is sure, the Veyron is faster :cheers:

[Leadfoot]

Let's email Gordon :hihi:

Not bother, I'm having dinner with him tomorrow. will ask him then. :lovl:

[Clio16V]

Send him my regards :jlol:

[Erik]

Not bother, I'm having dinner with him tomorrow. will ask him then. :lovl:

I had dinner with Gordon too yesterday. But it was Mr. Ramsay, at Heathrow. :cheers:

[Clio16V]

LOL, that must haven been a nice dinner! ;)

[Leadfoot]

I had dinner with Gordon too yesterday. But it was Mr. Ramsay, at Heathrow. :cheers:

Great meal there, hope you enjoyed it. :thumb:

[Erik]

The food was a little bit above average ;)

I think in Top Gear (Issue 193, July 2009) they pretty much clear the case themselves, in their own words. As I said, it's excellent entertainment.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6962/tg2009.jpg

[Erik]

And...the McLaren F1 they used had the following specs:

627 hp
1.1138 kg
550 bhp per tonne
0-60 mph 3.2 secs
Top speed 240 mph

I would have liked to compare torque as well ;)

[Clio16V]

Torque of the F1 is 651Nm.

Of course the F1 launched perfectly not only because of the Stig but it's simply the better car :hihi:

[Z07]

Please show me any kind of automotive press using roll race at all. 80 - 130 times in various gears maybe but NOTHING else that includes a rolling start.

Quarter Mile
Standing KM
Standing Mile
0-100 / 0 - 200 / 0 - 300 including the braking to standstill variations
Track testing

These are performance benchmarks ... rolling start not really.:noshake:
Please show me more than a handful of drivers (who are usually retarded) who drop the clutch from 5000rpm everytime they want to make a quickish getaway in their own car? That's reality, you just don't do full-bore launches at every stoplight and junction. And 30-70mph is widely used in the UK, as well as 50-70mph in top gear. When I want to know how fast a car really is I look at the difference between the 0-60 and 0-100 times. Launches depend on too many things. Surface, weather, drive layout etc. and for all the times you're going to launch in a daily driver, or even a weekend car, completely pointless.

[Z07]

Considering that most examples of the F1 are worth close on 2 million pound I doubt too many would have their brain removed to seriously consider tuning it. :lovl:
And off we go to Brunei.....

where the Sultan already has a 7.3 710bhp CLK GTR.

With the mods done by McLaren, it might not be so bad for value. Not as bad as having them done at Brucie's Executive Autos anyway.

What I don't get is why the package says PWR rises to 478bhp/ton when it's already at 560????