bugatti veyron specs

PlayaFlow

I think i heard this guy say that the 1001bhp 8.0ltr 16cyl Bugatti Veyron has "a pretty phenomenal torque of 250nm"

Surley hes wrong , thats pathetic!!....just to give you an idea my dads merc has 400nm.

250nm is pretty patehetic for a quad-turbo 8.0 ltr , im sure he must be wrong ...even though he said somthing about being the boss on some dept.

haha, well anyway enjoy.

http://www.yourdailymedia.com/media/1129715440

dahamsta

You can't Google? Put a 1 in front of the number you heard.

adam

chern0byl

It could be possible though. A F1 car generates less torque than most family cars.(obviously generates all its power from reving so highly).

qz

Generic sexy picture.

unkel

chern0byl wrote:

It could be possible though

Nope, torque is 1250NM alright

chern0byl wrote:

A F1 car generates less torque than most family cars.(obviously generates all its power from reving so highly).

That's a bit exaggerated

Torque is mainly based on engine displacement. For a N/A car a rule of thumb is about 100NM/l, so for a 3.0l F1 car you'll roughly get 300NM. A 3.0l BMW 530i, not quite a typical family hatch, also has 300NM torque

The Veyron is 8.3 liters and has 4 turbos so the figure of 1250NM is quite credible

chern0byl

unkel wrote:

so the figure of 1250NM is quite credible

AMG/Mercedes were able to pull that out of a 6.5 Twin Turbo. Its not exactly astonishing.

unkel

chern0byl wrote:

AMG/Mercedes were able to pull that out of a 6.5 Twin Turbo

Any linky?

Squirrel

chern0byl wrote:

AMG/Mercedes were able to pull that out of a 6.5 Twin Turbo. Its not exactly astonishing.

Was that from the CL65?? Top Gear proved that wasn't usable, something like 7 men could beat it in tug-of-war. The rear wheels just spun with the torque, or the traction control cut the torque, this could be a problem for the Veyron, but the 4wd system should assist in counter-acting this

unkel

Squirrel wrote:

Was that from the CL65??

The CL65 AMG produces 1000NM torque. Not too shabby, but not quite 1250NM either...

Squirrel wrote:

that wasn't usable, something like 7 men could beat it in tug-of-war

LOL, missed that on top gear

chern0byl

unkel wrote:

The CL65 AMG produces 1000NM torque. Not too shabby, but not quite 1250NM either...

You are quite right that the huge torque procduced by both the cl and sl65 is almost entirely useless as only the rear tires contain it as opposed to the 4wd of the bugatti.

As for the cl/sl 'only' producing 1000Nm. They both actually have detuned engines so their gearboxes can provide modern day mercedes style "reliability"...detuned from 1250 originally.

ssh

It's also worth pointing out that (as may or may not be the case with the big cylinder AMG engines, I honestly don't know) peak torque is by itself somewhat meaningless. It's more a question of how sharply that peak torque falls off and at what rev range it occurs that makes a difference to performance. An engine could be tuned to produce silly amounts of torque for a narrow segment of the rev range and have relatively little on either side of it. It still allows the marketing material to claim a peak torque of a bajillion Nm - even if the 0-60 times of the car are poorer than those of something with lower peak torque.

In reality, judge the Veyron on what matters: insane off the line power, insanely short times between any two points on the speedo and an incredible top speed.

As I understand it anyway...