|
I get the feeling they confused the number of cylinders and turbos with the capacity :)
|
|
|
The engine in the Veyron says 16.4 and refers to 16 cylinders and the four turbo chargers. I thought the Veyron had an 8 litre engine? Essentially two of the W8's stuck together.
As for that thing doing 342mph ... even if it does (and I'm cynical) I would not want to be in it. Not so safe. But I'd bet that the Veyron at it restricted top speed (253mph) feels solid, stable and safe. I wonder when they can come up with new tyre designs to allow the Veyron to go faster - isn't it meant to be capable of about 270mph?
Watched the video clip about the Veyron vs. Mclaren F1 on the times website again. Apparently the engine internally produces about 3000bhp and only 1000bhp gets to the road. The rest is therefore output as heat (?) and therefore all the radiators and plumbing and no cover over the engine.
If I had a choice between Veyron or this motorbike thing (i.e. very rich).... hmm think it would be the Veyron every time ;-)
|
At 62mph, it can travel almost 1,500 miles on a 90-litre tankful - around 75mpg.
My Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi can almost do that, and it costs a fraction of the price to buy.
|
"My Ford Focus 1.6 TDCi can almost do that, and it costs a fraction of the price to buy."
And how many miles could you do for the price difference? I could drive a Bentley Contintental GT for quite a few miles for the price difference between a £115k car and a £1m car. In fact a second hand Mclaren F1 might go quite far on the change from £1M!
If we could afford a £1m car would we be worried about mpg?? Strange marketing.
|
|
|
|