Which is the finer achievement?...

Which of the two do you think is the better achievement? The big, brawny, super developed, money lavished, mind blowing Veyron? Or the technical, specific, precision engineered, purity of the Mclaren F1?

My choice is the Mclaren. The Veyron certainly is a respectable achievement for a road car. 8 litres, sixteen cylinders, 1000 horsepower, 254 mph, four wheel drive, supreme luxury, near-perfect aerodynamics, and yet still retaining the same driver ease as an Audi for around town driving. But the Veyron is a Veyron. There can only ever be one Veyron. It can never be copied, because it would just be too obvious, and its many derivatives (Grand Sport, Super Sport, etc) cannot really capture the original impact of the mighty Veyron. So, in essence, the Veyron is like seeing an asteriod burning up in the atmosphere. Awesome, but you will probably only see it happen once.

The Mclaren, on the other hand, is like the Aurora Borealis. It may not be the most accessible phenomenon to experience, but it happens much more often, and you can experience it many times. The Mclaren F1 was not designed just to be the fastest car in the world. Anyone can do that. Just slap a couple of big turbos onto a Corvette. No, the Mclaren was designed to be the ultimate benchmark. A car which others could work from. A standard set to show what could be done, if you tried hard enough.

That is a really tough one. Both of them are in my top 5 favorite car list.

The McLaren is an incredible achievement of it's time, and even today, 20 years after when it was first sold, remains the fastest naturally aspirated production car ever built. It is a design master piece, as even today, it still looks modern. Its innovations are incredible too, such as the carbon monoque, first car to use such a thing, the gold lined engine bay, and the 3 seater layout.

The Veyron on the other hand is incredible for it's perfection, and it's engineering complexity. Koenigsegg screwed 800+ hp from a 4.3 lt V8. So 1001 hp from an engine with 2 V8s and 4 turbos isn't exactly an achievement. What is amazing about the Veyron is that while most hypercars will bleed your ears, and shatter your buttocks after you've driven it from your garage to the road, the Veyron is a Grand Tourer, so it'll drive you wherever in absolute comfort. It was intended to be a luxury car in the first place, and for a 2 tonne limo to do 400+ km/hr, that's quite an achievement.

So I really think both cars are amazing achievements. I don't think there is a finer one. I admire them both equally, and massively, and voting for one over the other just seems... wrong.

It could be argued that the McLaren is the highest sublime expression of old technology... while the Veyron is the most overwrought.
Drivability and usefulness counts IMHO. If the 959 had been included the choice might have been harder.

nice to see you back killKevscorsas

Definitely the Mclaren F1 although the Bugatti Veyron is a great achievement

If the McLaren 'happens' much more often, how can it be the finer achievement? I'm with csl177 here, the Veyron and 959 are much rarer due to their luxury and usability than the Mc F1, F40, F50, XJ220, EB110 et all. I don't know that I can pick the finer between the F1 and the Veyron, as they are very much different beasts. Personally I'd have the hard core option (but it'd be the F40) but I couldn't fault anyone for taking their pick from the pack.

McLaren for me as it was designed to be great.

The Veyron was "designed" to grab a headline and then took years and many engineers to find a workable solution. More of a bodge on an idea :)

I'm hugely biased to the F1. To be honest though, the Veyron is probably the bigger achievement simply because of what it can do. I mean lets face it, physics makes life pretty difficult in the areas that the Bugatti impresses. At the same time, I don't like to admit it because I really just don't like the car. I can appreciate what they've set out to do with it though.

Very tough decision indeed. Both cars are revolutionary in their own right. Both cars are halo cars that showed what was achievable.

By a margin thinner than a piece of paper, I am going to have to say the Veyron, for its ability to do 250+ mph in such a controlled fashion (which very few, if any, other cars can even come close to doing), the fact that the car was developed and engineered with a money-no-object mentality that didn't restrain engineers (in fact, it was said VAG actually [U]loses[/U] money for every Veyron made), and mostly because the car was built as an [B]engineering statement[/B] where there probably won't be another car for a very long time that will have the shock value that the Veyron had once it was officially launched.

However, it is still very, very difficult to decide.....as both cars are simply amazing in their own rights. ;)

The Short Version:
Bugatti Veyron = the ultimate cost-no-object publicity stunt and engineering achievement in automotive history, but without any real identity, a reason to exist beyond stockpiling impressive stats in one clumsy, lumpy shape. Yes, it is amazing, but what is it?
McLaren F1 = The ultimate no-compromise driver's car (of its day*), representing purity of form and clarity of vision. It is exactly what it sets out be, nothing less, nothing more.

The longer version:

I'm inclined to agree with excellent points on both sides here, but I fall on the side of the McLaren F1.

The McLaren represents a purity of form driven function and no-compromise solutions to create Murray's vision of the [I]Ultimate Driver's Car[/I]. (Damn close to my vision of it, too!) It was so successful at fullfilling the targets of this design brief, that customers insisted a racing version be produced, resulting in a truly magnificent and, for a time, dominant track machine, even over dedicated ground-up factory racing efforts of the time.

The "Bugatti," on the other hand, was designed around a set of specs and then engineered to achieve those outrageous numbers. It was never designed to be the Greatest Driver's Car On Earth, it just turned out to represent that to people who look solely at numbers to determine who holds that crown. But, factually, it was always designed to be an outrageous statement, a "look-what-we-can-do" moment, an example of everything good taken [I]further[/I]. It goes by the edict "If a little is good, a lot is better, and too much doesn't exist." 8 liters, 16 cylinders, 4 turbos, 1001bhp, 252 MPH, sub 14 sec. to 300 kmh. Very impressive. But not my cup of tea. It weighs too much (almost 1700 lbs more than the McLaren), it hurts to look at - at least it hurts my eyes - and it simply doesn't represent what I want in my dream car. Anyone can drive it 250, as demonstrated by Captain Slow on Top Gear, and, other than the display registering those staggering numbers, there isn't much to say for the experience. Kinda like seeing the display light up "Mach 2.0" on the Concorde. Nice story, but what did it feel like? The McLaren is visceral machine, one that involves the driver in a way an over-engineered (by which I mean too much Intel inside, not enough passion and petrol fumes), over-insulated and sound-deadened luxury rocket never will.

To me, the Veyron, while completely staggering in its capability and stats, is driven more by publicity and sheer rediculous shock and awe, an excercise in excess, designed for its effect on the crowd outside rather than for the driver's benefit, his smile and adrenal gland while alone on the Karussell. The McLaren, in contrast, was not designed with anyone or any audience other than the person seated in the middle in mind. It might not outsprint an F1 car to 60 (the Veyron does). It might not be capable of over 400 km/h (the Veyron is). It might not have the latest and greatest or, in the Veyron's vein, the [I]most[/I] of everything. But what it does have is a perfect balance of power, comfort, and usability to keep the adrenaline flowing like the Mississippi at flood-stage levels, the ability to outperform every car of its day, and almost every car since. No driver's "assists," no paddle shift, just a seat in the middle, three pedals, a wheel and six speed stick, and a one way ticket to heaven.

I like the idea of including certain other benchmarks or landmark achievements in this discussion, such as the Porsche 959. It would definaely fit in with these two as representing a huge leap forward in technology and performance.


* - I only say the F1 is the ultimate driver's car of its day (rather than all-time) because it could be argued others have passed it in recent years, such as the creations of Horatio Pagani or Koenigsegg, using similar design briefs. Personally, the center driving position still gives it a leg up on them in my book. Give me a center-seat Zonda, then we'll talk about passing the F1 for that title!

^ whilst that's persuasive the problem I have is the Veyron FAILED at so many attempts to meet it's targets and took the pouring of money to achieve it. IF they'd designed and then built I'd put it up there with the F1, but because it tried/failed, tried/failed and then completely failed on profits I cant see it.

It's like Schwarzenegar becoming a governor or GWB becoming president :)

The Veyron is certainly an amazing achievement, a car which does deserve a significant amount of respect. But it has no secret. They Veyron runs on pure brute force.

The finer achivement? The Nissan GT-R. This car works on whichcraft.

which craft is that ?

( sorry Ferrer, I only smile as English is my first langauge and I mix up Portugese and Spanish when I try either :) )

Maybe we should change the forum's language to Spanish...

(You know what I meant ;))

^^ Don't ... I'm now re-learning Italian before daughter heads to Garda to work.

I'd like to learn Italian as well. I'm for a change to Italian. :)

[quote=Matra et Alpine;959012]^ whilst that's persuasive the problem I have is the Veyron FAILED at so many attempts to meet it's targets and took the pouring of money to achieve it. IF they'd designed and then built I'd put it up there with the F1, but because it tried/failed, tried/failed and then completely failed on profits I cant see it.

It's like Schwarzenegar becoming a governor or GWB becoming president :)[/quote]

Nice analogy! And yes, it did fail over and over to meet its targets and then was a failure as far as profits are concerned, but 1) It did eventually meet its targets (and they were LOFTY!), and very few in the general populace will remember those failures but every carnut ages 6 and up knows what the Veyron is and what it can do, and 2) it was, as previously stated, an excercise in engineering (this is what we can do when given a seemingly impossible target and unlimited resources) and a publicity coup that lasted for years for its parent company. Every time there was a new unveiling of a preproduction car or news of progress on this awesome project, it took over the automotive press and took control of our attention and imaginations, even if only for a moment. That makes it one heck of a commercial achievement regardless of recovering the money invested from that specific project.

Well, the F1's top speed record certainly lasted quite a bit longer.

They're both incredible achievements but in different automotive strata. It's like asking what the better drink is: a fine martini or a well-crafted microbrew.

The McLaren F1 is the ultimate supercar in the rawest sense of the term. The Veyron is also the ultimate supercar, but can be driven by just about anyone with luxury to boot.

[quote=092326001;959116]Well, the F1's top speed record certainly lasted quite a bit longer.[/quote]

Yeah, just a week or two longer... give or take a decade...

Both are incredible achievements and it is hard to pick just one, but I am leaning towards the Bugatti, but as I typed that I realized maybe I should say the McLaren....ugh I don't know it's tough.

I think the McLaren. It set the benchmark for supercars, it was meticulously developed and it broke the mold with it's technology and carbon fiber build. You could argue that without the McLaren the Bugatti may never have seen the light of day.

mclaren f1 can still beat a bugatti in a 1/4 mile drag race, and i adore the center seat racing position. its still my favorite car.

The Veyron is actually a bit faster according to some tests, by some 0.3 tenths. Not that it particularly matters to me.

[quote=LeonOfTheDead;965831]The Veyron is actually a bit faster according to some tests, by some 0.3 tenths. Not that it particularly matters to me.[/quote]

According to the Top Gear drag race in Dubai, the Heavier Veyron won out in the 1 mile drag race, but the lighter mclaren was in the lead until about half way. I just like the center driving position, and I like the way the Mclaren looks and sounds better. it is a raw racing machine1

I don't remember last time I considered TG valuable for automotive facts.
Anyway, the McLaren official time is 11.1 secs, the Veyron was clocked at 10.8 secs.

I still think the Veyron would be much less satisfying to own, but those are the figures you can find all over the internet.

[quote=LeonOfTheDead;965848]I don't remember last time I considered TG valuable for automotive facts.
Anyway, the McLaren official time is 11.1 secs, the Veyron was clocked at 10.8 secs.

I still think the Veyron would be much less satisfying to own, but those are the figures you can find all over the internet.[/quote]

is that the veyron SS or the original 1001 hp veyron?

[quote=FastDriver;965860]is that the veyron SS or the original 1001 hp veyron?[/quote]

The standard Veyron, as the one discussed here or tested in TG.

oh ok. yeah i see on one site it says the Mclaren F1 did 1/4 in 10.8 and the Veyron 16.4 did it in 9.9. maybe it was the half mile that the Mclaren was quicker in, but it doesnt have a half mile time on that site for the mclaren, only the veyron.