Bugatti Veyron vs SSC Standard Aero

[rev440]

Well if a cars running 8 seconds its trap speed will most likely be in the 160's so a car that has a 200 mph top end doesnt change a whole lot. Does any one know if these cars do ther 1/4 on slicks , street slicks, or street tires?

[Coventrysucks]

Does any one know if these cars do ther 1/4 on slicks , street slicks, or street tires?

What does it matter?
The difference between the Ultima and SSC - 0.1s can easlily be swallowed up by:
Driver reaction time
Driver skill regarding control of wheelspin & gearchanges etc
Weather conditions
Wind direction + speed
Track surface - as Ultima point out a proper race track surface, with lots of grip would improve the times considerably over a concrete runway surface
Timing gear accuracy
Tyres - not only slick/street slick/street, but different types of tyre. Could be on "street" tyres that are absolutely useless for the street - i.e. no wet weather performance, short lifespan, or proper "all-round" street tyres.
Tyre quality during the runs - are they new, worn in or one the way out?
And so on and so on.

Same situation with things like 0-60 times and "g" numbers. They give you a rough indication of performace limitations in specific circumstances, but they can never be directly compared from one day to the next in the same car, let alone different cars.

[JakRcr]

The Ultima clearly outperforms nearly all other supercars in all aspects - including one that the others cannot - price!

To condense this arugement:and I know it's going to anger you, but please don't take it to heart.

You're making an arguement similar to that of people who strip and tune their Civics to out perform higher end cars. And I understand that the numbers are there, but supercars have a certain prestige to them that the Ultima, etc, do not.

Simply put the Ultima, Noble, etc. are GREAT cars but they are kit cars "low power to weight ratio, great suspension". I don't want to ignite a long arguement, so I'll just say that I understand your point and agree with you. My only difference is that the Ultima, Noble, etc, fall under another category other than supercars.

[rev440]

Slicks provide better traction for high horspower cars. Its awfully hard to keep a car with 1000 horse stuck to the track without slicks and they can increase your time dramitcally.

[JakRcr]

I am almost certain that they are on street tires.

[rev440]

Street tires would be so hard to keep on the track with 900+ horse they have to be running half slicks or drag radials. O and btw I drag race

[Rebirth of Xar]

I cant belive that... i dont see how it works can somebody please explain it 2 me..
The ssc aero has 908 hp and runs a 10.44 down the quarter ? with that amount of power shouldn it be doing a better time possibly in the 8's or 9's? its jus a theory of mine seein as here in aus weve got 500HP torana's doing 10's

it has to do with the gearing. this car is geared for 250mph where as the ultima is geared for 230mph. that extra 20mph can make a big difference on the strip.

[Cyco]

You're making an arguement similar to that of people who strip and tune their Civics to out perform higher end cars. And I understand that the numbers are there, but supercars have a certain prestige to them that the Ultima, etc, do not.

As SSC have done

Simply put the Ultima, Noble, etc. are GREAT cars but they are kit cars "low power to weight ratio, great suspension". I don't want to ignite a long arguement, so I'll just say that I understand your point and agree with you. My only difference is that the Ultima, Noble, etc, fall under another category other than supercars.

A Noble is a kit car?

I'd love to hear your deffinition of a super car, as you appear to be contradicting yourself in this thread.

Unfortunatley your beloved SSC has neither the low weight or the great suspension that the Noble (with leather and a sound system) or Ultima have.

[JakRcr]

The SSC and Ultima were meant to be driven everywhere, not just on a drag strip, that's why the 1/4 was done with street tires, on the Ultima website they even state they drove the car to the test track.

SSC didn't strip and tune an exsisting car they did it all from scratch minus the engine (with is more or less a total variation of the C5 R), so SSC has not done what I was previously discussing, you misunderstood.

A Noble is a kit car?

Yes, a Noble is a kit car, what else would you call it? By the way I am not suggesting that it is not a great car, it is. It's just not a supercar.

I'd love to hear your deffinition of a super car, as you appear to be contradicting yourself in this thread.

How am I contradicting myself?

Unfortunatley your beloved SSC has neither the low weight or the great suspension that the Noble (with leather and a sound system) or Ultima have.

The SSC is 2600lbs., has a great suspension system, and the body minus the doors, hood, and trunk weights only 160lbs. I started this thread to compare two supercars (SSC and Veyron), the introduction of the Ultima was an ok comparison b/c it is a great car but 1) was not the topic of discussion 2) the Ultima has some, more fairly most supercar characteristics but still isn't a supercar.

[Coventrysucks]

SSC didn't strip and tune an exsisting car they did it all from scratch minus the engine

So why is an Ultima GTR or Noble; cars both designed and built from scratch (both by Lee Noble btw) minus the engines, and all of the other major running components, not?

Just because the SSC is assembled in a factory and costs a lot of money, and the Ultima isn't (the factory do build some of them) and doesn't?
Noble build all of their cars themselves.

(I'm willing to bet large sums of money that SSC don't build their own gearboxes, shock absorbers, dampers, batteries, engine ancilliaries, brakes etc, etc)

Noble is a kit car, what else would you call it?

Like the Dodge Viper then?

Noble build sports cars.

I'm sorry for driving this off topic (no pun intended), I introduced the Ultima because I would have neither of the cars originally proposed.

I don't like the Veyron - it is base. Performance achieved by simply throwing things at the car. We want it to go 250mph, so we'll just keep giving it more and more power. It's too powerfull, so we'll just give it 4wd. Its too heavy now so we'll just give it more power...

The SSC is a complete unknown. I have seen no independant tests, no idea of quality, no idea of their financial status etc.

How many are they planning to build every year? As many as they can sell?
I'd hate to find out after buying one that they were going to go bust after 6 months because everyone who wanted one had one.

I don't know what price bracket they are aiming for, but I can probably guess that there would be several other cars that I'd think about first.

[Pando]

You're making an arguement similar to that of people who strip and tune their Civics to out perform higher end cars. And I understand that the numbers are there, but supercars have a certain prestige to them that the Ultima, etc, do not.

Yes the supercars you've mentioned are different mainly when it comes to price, sometimes quality and in many cases image. Is the prestige worth the price? If I had more money than I ever could spend I could see my self driving a Veyron, but if I wanted speed the Ultima would be a good choise of the cars mentioned in this thread... and I'd buy the Noble instead of the SSC anyday. Come to think of it I really don't know if there's a market for cars like the SSC... What are they really competing with? No-proof stats and wasting horsepower don't impress me much, perhaps it's the american way. Hmm. ...and stripped civics are in a totally different cathegory.

[JakRcr]

Before I go any further, I deeply share the passion for cars the same as you all do, so I hope nobody takes any of the comments to heart.

Secondly, to be honest I am almost certain I am going to be doing some work for SSC in the near furture, so if anyone has any questions about the car let me know, I've done my research. I started the thread to see what people had to say about the car, for my personal interest. I have also been able to drive it (more like park it) but hope to get the chance to take it for a serious drive in the near future. I did not mention this before because I wanted an unscrupulous view of the car from all of you.

Thirdly, I love the Noble, I have been lucky enough to be a passenger in one and it was a magnificent experience. The cars under discussion on this thread have all been great. I was just trying to point out that cars like the Noble and Ultima are in categories other than supercars and this in no way takes away from their performance or awe.

Here is why the SSC has been "unknown", I found it on their website a while ago:

The owner of SSC, Jerod Shelby -- no relation to Carroll -- chose to keep the Aero under the car industry's radar for the last couple years because of problems he witnessed with other manufacturers premature claims. "Every six months, you see another car company claiming to have the latest and greatest 200-plus mph car, when in actuality what they have is a computer drawing and a virtual idea of how the car will run. These companies start the buzz, try to live up to the hype, and then end up falling short of their expectations. Our philosophy was to keep everything quiet and not introduce the car until it was completed, tested, design and performance proven and ready to take orders. And here we are." Shelby commented. The Aero SC/8T will make its U.S. debut at the famed Monterey Sports & Classic Car Auction, August 12th-15th in Monterey, California.

Here is the link for the full release: http://www.sscautos.com/20040804.asp

[Coventrysucks]

The owner of SSC, Jerod Shelby -- no relation to Carroll -- chose to keep the Aero under the car industry's radar for the last couple years because of problems he witnessed with other manufacturers premature claims. "Every six months, you see another car company claiming to have the latest and greatest 200-plus mph car, when in actuality what they have is a computer drawing and a virtual idea of how the car will run. These companies start the buzz, try to live up to the hype, and then end up falling short of their expectations.

He obviously doesn't think very much of himself or his car then!

If he believed, that unlike these "other" manufacturers, he had a good car in development, and was capable of producing that car - why keep it a secret?

Companies such as Koenigsegg, Pagani, Farboud, Ascari, Marcos etc are all in the same position.

All producing new cars to compete against some very well established marques.

They are serious about their creations though, so they arrange interviews and test drives of development prototypes with the automotive media.

That way their progress can be monitored - the general public can see that these cars are going to perform as promised, what quality they will be, and they can see what investment is being put into the company and the product.

It can backfire - i.e. Bugatti's well documented saga of utterly foolish errors in the development of the Veyron.

However, I believe that it would be better for a company to announce a car before it goes into development.

That way you can guage reaction to it.

If you suddenly pop up with a finished car that no one wants you are done for.

What if none of your potential customers like the exterior?
What if they would like a different interior?
Maybe it should have more, or less luggage space
Exactly how many people would be interested in buying one?
What price would people actually pay for one?
The car might cost $100,000 to make, but if people only think it is worth $50,000 of their money you are in trouble.

I'd want to know that I could tailor a product to the tastes and needs of the paying public, rather than decide what they want, spend a fortune building it and end up with something that nobody wants.

[rev440]

He obviously doesn't think very much of himself or his car then!

If he believed, that unlike these "other" manufacturers, he had a good car in development, and was capable of producing that car - why keep it a secret?

Companies such as Koenigsegg, Pagani, Farboud, Ascari, Marcos etc are all in the same position.

All producing new cars to compete against some very well established marques.

They are serious about their creations though, so they arrange interviews and test drives of development prototypes with the automotive media.

That way their progress can be monitored - the general public can see that these cars are going to perform as promised, what quality they will be, and they can see what investment is being put into the company and the product.

It can backfire - i.e. Bugatti's well documented saga of utterly foolish errors in the development of the Veyron.

However, I believe that it would be better for a company to announce a car before it goes into development.

That way you can guage reaction to it.

If you suddenly pop up with a finished car that no one wants you are done for.

What if none of your potential customers like the exterior?
What if they would like a different interior?
Maybe it should have more, or less luggage space
Exactly how many people would be interested in buying one?
What price would people actually pay for one?
The car might cost $100,000 to make, but if people only think it is worth $50,000 of their money you are in trouble.

I'd want to know that I could tailor a product to the tastes and needs of the paying public, rather than decide what they want, spend a fortune building it and end up with something that nobody wants.

Some extremly good points. That car has so much shit on it i bet the demand wont be very high just like that dam S7

[JakRcr]

Although I see your point, I believe SSC wanted to have a proven car before claims were made (why would you produce a car if you were so unsure of it?). Just like your example about the Veyron, Bugatti kept making claims and then tried making the car to live up to the expectation. I think they did this since Bugatti as a company was floundering they kept interest by making claims, hence keeping Bugatti afloat. In a way Bugatti strung us all along for so long, granted in the end the Veyron is amazing. Car companies do not have to follow this almost mythical contention that most do (claims before actual results). In SSC's case they wanted to make a car from pure passion and have confidence in the car and its proven performance and numbers, if this car indeed breaks the world speed record for a production car, does it not prove itself?

I know I am being biased towards the SSC but am I being totally unreasonable?

Keep an open mind, and solidify your opinion after you see more results!

(By the way it's nice to be in a forum with people who's feedback isn't just "cool dude", or "that's dumb".)