Which would you rather have?... and why?

[DieterCabral]

They are both very different... but they are (and were) built upon the same principle... (the S principle) ... speed & style-

Its a simple question (or 2)... which one would you rather have... and why

- KOENIGSEGG CC-R

Acceleration: 0-100 km/h (0–62 mph) under 3.5 seconds
Top speed: 390 km/h (240 mph)
Standing quartermile: 10 seconds, end speed 217 km/h (135 mph)
Braking distance: 32 m (100–0 km/h)

- JAGUAR XJ220

Torque 641 Nm / 472.8 ft lbs @ 5000 rpm
Power to weight ratio 0.40 bhp/kg
Top Speed 211.3 mph / 340.0 km/h
0-60 mph Acceleration 3.60 s

[eyebrows]

really, i would like to have either car but if it came down to it i would say the KOENIGSEGG CC-R because if im going to spend that kind of money on a car i want the biggest top speed i can get and lets face it 390km/h is a top speed (looks i think their about even but even if they wern't i would still go for the faster of the two)

[Matra et Alpine]

They are both very different... but they are (and were) built upon the same principle... (the S principle) ... speed & style-

Well the jaguar suffered the C principle - Cost and compromise.

The chassis was designed for the V12 and AWD, but ended up using the Twin turbo 3.5l V6 from the Group B Metro and only RWD

With a bit of courage from the British company imagine what we COULD have had ??
Maybe Murray's F1 wouldn't have been the only one at the peak of performance car production

[crisis]

Well the jaguar suffered the C principle - Cost and compromise.

The chassis was designed for the V12 and AWD, but ended up using the Twin turbo 3.5l V6 from the Group B Metro and only RWD

With a bit of courage from the British company imagine what we COULD have had ??
Maybe Murray's F1 wouldn't have been the only one at the peak of performance car production

So were the performance figures you posted for the V12 or the 6? The Jag looked so nice only to be let donw by the motor. As you say, what could have been!!

[Sweeney921]

Koenigsegg CCR, because the styling is much more classy, it's faster (even though i could never reach 240 mph), and the interior is amazing.

too bad it doesn't matter, since i got my learner's permit 5 days ago.......

I aced the test first try!

[Matra et Alpine]

So were the performance figures you posted for the V12 or the 6? The Jag looked so nice only to be let donw by the motor. As you say, what could have been!!

That's the production unit figures he posted.

The V6 was still a great engine and the car still performed well in RWD form.
The only thing wrong was the promise of how it might have been ....

... a bit like the Koenigseg

[crisis]

That's the production unit figures he posted.

The V6 was still a great engine and the car still performed well in RWD form.
The only thing wrong was the promise of how it might have been ....

... a bit like the Koenigseg

Sorry. I thought you started the thread.

[DieterCabral]

You are right... this is a great car ( XJ 220 )... but if it had had the V12... Wow!, we could be looking at about 530hp (natural). No, the twin turbo V6 engine is not less powerful ( it has 542hp). But let‘s keep in mind that the V12 is naturally aspirated, maybe if the Jag’s engineers had taken the chance of using a V12 and turbo-charging it… well just imagine that, because well never know.

Dieter

[brb]

the pic of that jaguar isnt an origional jaguar. it has been messed with a bit by the owner!!!!!!!

[Egg Nog]

the pic of that jaguar isnt an origional jaguar. it has been messed with a bit by the owner!!!!!!!

Yes, it's a TWR XJ220 S... mmm.... 680hp powering just over one tonne