In what distance would a Bugatti Veyron beat that Vauxhall dragster?

Doc wrote:

>> As Burgerman says, in a give and take race on the motorway, where speeds
>> probably aren't going to venture above 200mph that much
>
>
> Over a couple of miles, why not?

Traffic

> Not familiar with this "noddy" I keep seeing pop up. ?? Please
> translate to American. Also, what about the phrase "not a lot in it"
> I've seen.

Noddy = err... I guess you have to be English for this one. A bit the
same as saying something is 'Mickey Mouse'.

'Not a lot in it' = just as it sounds, not much difference.

--
Abo

"Doc" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 10, 7:40 pm, "Burgerman" > wrote:
>
>> Well we dont know. The veyron according to conventional wisdom and an
>> aerodynamics calc wouldnt actually be able to catch the vauxhall
>> anyway...
>
>
> An aerodynamics calc says a car purpose-built to go the better part of
> 300 mph has an aero *disadvantage* compared to a mass-produced
> passenger car from the '70's? He's got some mods on the Vaux body, but
> still.

A brick can go 500 miles per hour if you push it hard.


>
>
>> > That Veyron wouldn't have to hit anywhere near its top speed to beat
>> > that Vauxhall. At 180 the Vauxhall is sucking wind, the Veyron is
>> > accelerating hard. While the Vauxhall can go around 190, how long can
>> > it maintain it?
>>
>> Err who knows what it can "maintain" - it has the power to go faster than
>> the veyron anyway. Just.
>
>
> It has the power and gearing to go a 1/4 mi about 2.5 secs faster - on
> a dragstrip on drag tires - ending up at just about its top speed if
> it's set up correctly as a drag car.

No drag car or bike goes through the lights at top speed. Some may run out
of gearing depending on setup but we dont know that do we. And in any case a
gearing change to go to its top possible speed on the power available is a
simple diff change.



> "What it can maintain" is certainly a crucial issue under the highway
> race scenario proposed. If you put taller gears in it to theoretically
> give it more top speed, as well as tires made for maintained speeds
> near or over 200mph it's going to lose a lot of that short-distance
> advantage. And pushing that brick any faster would be inviting
> disaster.

It would lose some acc only in the first few yards where grip is the big
issue off the line in low gear. But not a lot.

>
> Also, unless we see a verified dyno test of that Vauxhall's engine,
> we've got only his word for it that it makes 2000hp. People are known
> to embellish such claims. And where is that engine making its power?
> Aren't the powerband characteristics of the engine important?

No. And the weight of the car and the quarter mile time as well as the top
speed over the quarter says hes about right with his claims.

>
>
>> > And how stable is it going to be at that speed
>>
>> > compared to the Veyron?
>>
>> Not very. Who said anything about stability?
>
>
> It's pretty obviously implied when talking about a highway race.
> There's probably as much $$ in just the high-tech suspension and
> hardware to keep that Veyron stuck to the road as that guy spent total
> on the Vauxhall dragster.

A soggy brick does not need to be unstable as such, and in some ways its
easier to make a brick more aerodynamically stable than something slippery.

>
> You say there's not enough distance to get to full speed - if it gets
> over 220 in 1.5 miles, doesn't seem he needs much distance to go
> plenty fast. Aren't there straightaways longer than that in Europe?
> That Vaux normally only needs to maintain that top speed for a couple
> of seconds before shutting down. A whole different game than going
> down the highway.

No the vauxhall is still acc like a ******* at its quarter mile finish
line... It has neve reached its top speed. But it would do so MUCH faster
than the veyron.


> If that Veyron ever gets even with the Vauxhall at speeds like 120,
> 130, and I don't see any reason why he wouldn't, how do you figure
> he's not going to leave the Vaux in the dust when he's getting into
> his powerband and has at least another 120 mph in his back-pocket and
> isn't in danger of going airborn approaching and beyond 200?

Pretty easily! The vauxhall is accelerating harder than the veyron at ALL
speeds. If the top theoretical speeds were the same (and they calculate out
that the veyron is slower) then the one with bags of drag and bags of power
will ALWAYS accelerate harder at any speed. Simple physics. The Vauxhall has
a much superior power to weight ratio.




> With streetable tires, drag-race suspension, laughable aerodynamics,
> even with taller gears, I just don't see that Vauxhall looking like
> such a hero in a "highway chase" scenario vs the Veyron.


Maybe you dont. Physics on the otherhand tends to disagree.


> Btw, how does your bike compare to a Yamaha R1? There's video on
> YouTube of an R1 getting repeatedly, seriously smoked by a Veyron.

About the same. I was talking about the Mclaren. And at lower speeds the
bike leaves it.

>

"Albert T Cone" > wrote in message
...
> Doc wrote:
>>> Well we dont know. The veyron according to conventional wisdom and
>>> an aerodynamics calc wouldnt actually be able to catch the vauxhall
>>> anyway...
>>
>> An aerodynamics calc says a car purpose-built to go the better part
>> of 300 mph has an aero *disadvantage* compared to a mass-produced
>> passenger car from the '70's? He's got some mods on the Vaux body,
>> but still.
>
> Yeah, but the cdA only needs to be under 30% more than that of the
> Veyron - it's not easy to get a 30% reduction. According to Gordon
> Murray in
> http://www.roadandtrack.com/article....rticle_id=3075 ,
> the cdA of the Veyron isn't _that_ low anyway. As Burgerman says, it is
> probably close a close-run thing.
>
>>>> While the Vauxhall can go around 190, how long can it maintain
>>>> it?
>>> Err who knows what it can "maintain" - it has the power to go
>>> faster than the veyron anyway. Just.
>>
>> It has the power and gearing to go a 1/4 mi about 2.5 secs faster -
>> on a dragstrip on drag tires - ending up at just about its top speed
>> if it's set up correctly as a drag car.
> That 2.7 seconds is a *HUGE* difference. The average acceleration is
> almost twice as high in the Vaux over the quarter mile. Almost certainly
> it will be good for over 200mph, because the power will drop off after the
> peak, and it will definitely get there a hell of a lot sooner and be a
> hell of a lot further down the road when it does.
>
> As Burgerman says, in a give and take race on the motorway, where speeds
> probably aren't going to venture above 200mph that much, the vaux is
> pretty certain to win. If you throw in nasty surfaces, bends or long
> smooth straights, then it becomes less clear and probably favours the
> Veyron. Possibly :-)
>
> > Also, unless we see a verified dyno test of that Vauxhall's engine,
>> we've got only his word for it that it makes 2000hp. People are known
>> to embellish such claims. And where is that engine making its power?
>> Aren't the powerband characteristics of the engine important?
> Of course, but then it does post a 1/4 mile time which roughly corresponds
> with what you might expect for the claimed power figure. The video showed
> it to be surprisingly tractable when tootling.
>
>> You say there's not enough distance to get to full speed - if it gets
>> over 220 in 1.5 miles, doesn't seem he needs much distance to go plenty
>> fast. Aren't there straightaways longer than that in Europe?
> There are plenty of straight sections of that sort of length, but the Vaux
> gets to 200+mph in less than 0.5 mile, so it will have made rather a
> significant lead by the time the Veyron matches it's top speed, one would
> imagine.
> OK, stuff it, lets do the geek thing properly I've done a noddy excel
> drag-race, using the available data for both cars. Assuming that the Vaux
> has a max speed of 200mph then we get:
> http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.k.kirby/images/drag/vaux_200.jpg
> The veyron overtakes after 36s, 3km down the road
>
> If the Vaux can hit 210mph, then it looks like:
> http://www.dur.ac.uk/a.k.kirby/images/drag/vaux_210.jpg
> This time the Veyron takes 42s and 3.5km to overtake.
>
> I haven't produced the graphs, but if V-max for the vaux were 240mph, then
> it takes just over 100s and 10.5km!
>
> I should point out that this is entirely based on noddy physics and
> googled data, so should be taken with a pinch or 10 of salt :-D
>
>> Btw, how does your bike compare to a Yamaha R1? There's video on YouTube
>> of an R1 getting repeatedly, seriously smoked by a Veyron.
>
> Heh, our Burgerman was/is the full-fat nutcase type of drag biker - I'm
> not sure about the specifics, but it was some sort of fast sports bike
> with a huge turbo and nitrous, getting about 300HP at the wheel, IIRC.
> Quite a lot quicker than an R1, anyway, I'd imagine.


No I was on a stock water cooled 136bhp rear wheel quiet Suzuki gsxr. Well
it had nitrous fitted but was not being used. 10.3 quarter mile, 0 to 60 in
about 3secs.

Burgerman > wrote:
>"Doc" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> On Jul 10, 7:40 pm, "Burgerman" > wrote:
>>
>>> Well we dont know. The veyron according to conventional wisdom and an
>>> aerodynamics calc wouldnt actually be able to catch the vauxhall
>>> anyway...
>>
>>
>> An aerodynamics calc says a car purpose-built to go the better part of
>> 300 mph has an aero *disadvantage* compared to a mass-produced
>> passenger car from the '70's? He's got some mods on the Vaux body, but
>> still.
>
>A brick can go 500 miles per hour if you push it hard.

However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
Vauxhall.

It's very easy to make things go fast. It just takes energy. It's hard
to make them stop and MUCH harder to make them turn corners when they are
going fast.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Doc" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On Jul 11, 6:48 am, Albert T Cone > wrote:
>
>> > It has the power and gearing to go a 1/4 mi about 2.5 secs faster -
>> > on a dragstrip on drag tires - ending up at just about its top speed
>> > if it's set up correctly as a drag car.
>>
>> That 2.7 seconds is a *HUGE* difference. The average acceleration is
>> almost twice as high in the Vaux over the quarter mile.
>
>
> But the point that keeps getting ignored are the conditions under
> which it does it. Take away the dragstrip tires and the sticky
> dragstrip surface and what does it then become? Weren't the Veyron's
> times on street tires on concrete?
>
>> Almost certainly
>> it will be good for over 200mph,
>
>
> Strictly speculation. We know it's good for I believe they said 183
> (186?) was its trap speed. Whether it can go much faster than this is
> speculation. Not speculation is how much less control he's going to
> have over it at those speeds.
>
> We KNOW the Veyron is good for 253 mph - there's video of it doing it
> and STILL incrementally climbing.
>
>
>> because the power will drop off after
>> the peak, and it will definitely get there a hell of a lot sooner and be
>> a hell of a lot further down the road when it does.
>
>
> Define "a helluva lot". Assuming 1.) they start from a standing start
> as opposed to "they encounter each other driving down the highway and
> have a go at it" 2.) he matches his record time he's 2.7 secs ahead
> at 1/4 mile. Except he's not going to since he's going to be on
> street tires on a street surface so we can safely hack off what, at
> least 1.5 secs or so? If he's been allowed to put taller gears in it,
> all that will do is reduce his 1/4 mile time even further. Under THOSE
> conditions, how much is he going to be ahead?


It wont reduce times by much and the increased final drive will actually
help to put the power down as less torque gets delivered to the wheels but
up to a higher speed. If it effected its quarter mile terminal speed by more
than a few mph I would be amazed but it could ad say half a sec max to the
time.


> Burgerman already related what happened when he had a considerable
> head start on the Veyron. He got trashed at 1.5 miles even though he
> was doing close to 180.

But it was a mclaren, and I was on a bike with low power to weight compared
to the vauxhall!


> And if the Vaux and Veyron were to go at it from a highway speed
> start, how do you figure the Veyron as the underdog?

Because both have a similar top speed potential but the vauxhall has much
much better power to weight! It will accelerate TWICE as hard.



>
>
>> As Burgerman says, in a give and take race on the motorway, where speeds
>> probably aren't going to venture above 200mph that much
>
>
> Over a couple of miles, why not? Of course, in the case of the Vaux,
> it's unknown whether it can even do it.

With the correct gearing of course it can do it.


>
>> the vaux is
>> pretty certain to win.
>
>
> Have you seen that video of the Veyron vs the Audi R8? If the specs I
> saw are correct, that Audi is a near 190 mph car .

Flat out it is. It has the power to weight of a moped with a fat bloke on
it.
The Vauxhall has about ten times that power to weight and double the veyron.






They punch it from
> a highway speed start - with the Audi going first. When the Veyron
> floors it, it looks like the Audi slammed the brakes on even though
> he's accelerating, and damn quickly given how fast he's reading off
> the speed 100 - 110 - 120 about as fast as he can say it. Yet by the
> time he hits 120 that Veyron is GONE.

Its a slow low powered car.
Put the veyron on the drag strip compare that to the vauxhall and you will
see that its just driving off going on a shopping run.. Its a different
world of performance.



>
>
>> The video showed it to be surprisingly tractable when tootling.
>
>
> At what, 50 mph? Let's see how it holds the road at 170+ over a
> distance.

We cant. But why not? My V8 nitrous sierra (was an old reps 1.6) with
knackered suspension and Colway 205 60 13 remoulds would go 150 for mile
after mile. Whats another few mph?


>
>
>
>> > You say there's not enough distance to get to full speed - if it gets
>> > over 220 in 1.5 miles, doesn't seem he needs much distance to go
>> > plenty fast. Aren't there straightaways longer than that in Europe?
>>
>> There are plenty of straight sections of that sort of length, but the
>> Vaux gets to 200+mph in less than 0.5 mile,


I dont think he quite gets how powerful and how hard this thing lauches and
goes! Its accellerating harder at 150 than the veyron can off the line! May
I suggest a trip to the drag strip and watch a few pro mods go. They run the
same sort of times. Once you have had your idea of power recalibrated you
will just see a veyron as a low powered streamlined car that does its 250
due only to good aerodynamics and a long 2 plus mile run up.


>
> On drag tires on a dragstrip. And we don't know it'll do 200 or if the
> guy will be toying with suicide trying to pilot it down the road near
> that speed. He normally goes in a straight line and for a few
> seconds. And from a highway speed start, the entire scenario
> changes.

In your mind it seems to. Its really not a problem! It might not be as good
as a veyron but that does not make it dangerous or unstable.


>
>
>> so it will have made rather
>> a significant lead by the time the Veyron matches it's top speed,
>
>
> Again, which is going to be considerably shortened under street
> conditions. Now who wins in a "drag race" from say 120 to 200?

The vauxhall would absolutely murder the veyron under ANY speed range
acceleration. Gearing allowing of course.

>
>
>> would imagine.
>> OK, stuff it, lets do the geek thing properly I've done a noddy
>> excel drag-race, using the available data for both cars.
>
>
> Not familiar with this "noddy" I keep seeing pop up. ?? Please
> translate to American. Also, what about the phrase "not a lot in it"
> I've seen.
>
>
> :-)

Means very close! noddy = http://pbskids.org/noddy/ Think micky mouse tools
or whatever!


>
>

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> Burgerman > wrote:
>>"Doc" > wrote in message
roups.com...
>>> On Jul 10, 7:40 pm, "Burgerman" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Well we dont know. The veyron according to conventional wisdom and an
>>>> aerodynamics calc wouldnt actually be able to catch the vauxhall
>>>> anyway...
>>>
>>>
>>> An aerodynamics calc says a car purpose-built to go the better part of
>>> 300 mph has an aero *disadvantage* compared to a mass-produced
>>> passenger car from the '70's? He's got some mods on the Vaux body, but
>>> still.
>>
>>A brick can go 500 miles per hour if you push it hard.
>
> However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
> Vauxhall.
>
> It's very easy to make things go fast. It just takes energy. It's hard
> to make them stop and MUCH harder to make them turn corners when they are
> going fast.
> --scott
>
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Burgerman" > wrote in message
...
> "Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Burgerman > wrote:
>>>"Doc" > wrote in message
groups.com...
>>>> On Jul 10, 7:40 pm, "Burgerman" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well we dont know. The veyron according to conventional wisdom and an
>>>>> aerodynamics calc wouldnt actually be able to catch the vauxhall
>>>>> anyway...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> An aerodynamics calc says a car purpose-built to go the better part of
>>>> 300 mph has an aero *disadvantage* compared to a mass-produced
>>>> passenger car from the '70's? He's got some mods on the Vaux body, but
>>>> still.
>>>
>>>A brick can go 500 miles per hour if you push it hard.
>>
>> However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
>> Vauxhall.

A shattered vauxhall?
Mmmm
Not very likely now is it...


>>
>> It's very easy to make things go fast. It just takes energy. It's hard
>> to make them stop and MUCH harder to make them turn corners when they are
>> going fast.
>> --scott
>>
>>
>> --
>> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
>
>

In article >,
says...
>
> >> However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
> >> Vauxhall.
>
> A shattered vauxhall?
> Mmmm
> Not very likely now is it...
>
>
>

Still remain:

- does the Vauxhall stays aerodynamical stable at sustained high speeds
- is the Vauxhall mechanically strong enough to cope over a longer
periode of time with the forces induced by its topspeed?
- how many minutes will his engine be able to produced 2200 HP? How
accurate are the 2200 ponies?
- how many minutes can he drive (fuelwise) at WOT?
- how do his tires cope on a longer run? (remember the Hamster)

The Veyron stays something completely different. If you step in the
Veyron, turn the key, you can drive from London to Monaco only stopping
for fuel and the human inconveniants of such a journee. When starting
form London I would be very surprised if the dragster got to the ferry
under his own steam (that being not on the back of a recovery truck)
Maybe something for next year Top Gear?

However: the streetlegal dragster is still a mayor achievement. I like
people who build something possibly lethal and then go to the limit with
it.

Tom De Moor

"Tom De Moor" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> says...
>>
>> >> However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
>> >> Vauxhall.
>>
>> A shattered vauxhall?
>> Mmmm
>> Not very likely now is it...
>>
>>
>>
>
> Still remain:
>
> - does the Vauxhall stays aerodynamical stable at sustained high speeds

No reason why not. Many drag cars go faster and are the same shape.


> - is the Vauxhall mechanically strong enough to cope over a longer
> periode of time with the forces induced by its topspeed?

Probably. Who can know. Seems to me that if it copes over a quarter without
anything breaking or melting its not going to be a problem.

> - how many minutes will his engine be able to produced 2200 HP?

Unknown. Long Enough...


How
> accurate are the 2200 ponies?

Pretty good estimate based on his times/terminal and weight.


> - how many minutes can he drive (fuelwise) at WOT?

Long enough! Its a road car! If it normally does 300 to a tank and the thing
has 20 times the power then it should go 1/20th of the 300 miles. So 15
miles?

> - how do his tires cope on a longer run? (remember the Hamster)

The hamsters car had ordinary treaded zr rated tyres. At least it did when
it was at santa pod... And they were not changed very often. Sammy millers
450mph car had road car tyres too.



>
> The Veyron stays something completely different. If you step in the
> Veyron, turn the key, you can drive from London to Monaco only stopping
> for fuel and the human inconveniants of such a journee. When starting
> form London I would be very surprised if the dragster got to the ferry
> under his own steam (that being not on the back of a recovery truck)
> Maybe something for next year Top Gear?

Well if you reduced the boost a bit it should be OK since on public roads
you can hardly drive it at wot much!


>
> However: the streetlegal dragster is still a mayor achievement. I like
> people who build something possibly lethal and then go to the limit with
> it.
>
> Tom De Moor

In article >,
says...
> "Tom De Moor" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> >>
> >> >> However, it will shatter when it finally comes to a stop. As will the
> >> >> Vauxhall.
> >>
> >> A shattered vauxhall?
> >> Mmmm
> >> Not very likely now is it...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Still remain:
> >
> > - does the Vauxhall stays aerodynamical stable at sustained high speeds
>
> No reason why not. Many drag cars go faster and are the same shape.

That is not what I ment: the car travelles at 200 Mph and is blown off
line by a gust of wind. What happens? Or the car travelles at 200 mph
and hits a bump. Does it take off?


>
>
> > - is the Vauxhall mechanically strong enough to cope over a longer
> > periode of time with the forces induced by its topspeed?
>
> Probably. Who can know. Seems to me that if it copes over a quarter without
> anything breaking or melting its not going to be a problem.



Then you think an endurance car is no different to a sprint car? A
hillclimb-specific engine (a run takes about 60 sec) nothing diffent to
a drag racer?

Last time I looked engines on dragsters weren't even that reliable in
the sense that the real dragsters suffer regulary engine problems. It is
just becasue the engine are but for 6-15 sec at full power that they
survive, idem for transmissions.

>
> > - how many minutes will his engine be able to produced 2200 HP?
>
> Unknown. Long Enough...
>

I think that 1 minute or 60 seconds, will be allready a very very good
estimation.
>
> How
> > accurate are the 2200 ponies?
>
> Pretty good estimate based on his times/terminal and weight.
>
>
> > - how many minutes can he drive (fuelwise) at WOT?
>
> Long enough! Its a road car! If it normally does 300 to a tank and the thing
> has 20 times the power then it should go 1/20th of the 300 miles. So 15
> miles?

It doesn't do 300 miles on full power, never has but OK : 15 miles it
is. At WOT the 15 miles are gone in 4 min 30... That if the fuel cell is
standard which I doubt a lot.

>
> > - how do his tires cope on a longer run? (remember the Hamster)
>
> The hamsters car had ordinary treaded zr rated tyres. At least it did when
> it was at santa pod... And they were not changed very often. Sammy millers
> 450mph car had road car tyres too.

Once again: there is a major difference between hitting topspeed a
fraction of a second and then backing off compared to hitting topspeed
and staying there.

The latter I know only from planes and there too engine life goes down
in dramatic fashion, fuel and oil consumption go just the opposite.

Just to put it perspectif: 75% of the cost of the Veyron is justified
because the car must remain safe at speeds above 200 mph.

Tom De Moor