FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[bud]

Rumours have been flying around about this for a while. One even suggested that Gordon Murray was to be involved. I'm convinced its possible to build something faster than the Veyron, and who better to do it than McLaren.

Its been done already http://www.shelbysupercars.com/ultimate-aero.php

[McLaren Fan]

Rumours have been flying around about this for a while. One even suggested that Gordon Murray was to be involved. I'm convinced its possible to build something faster than the Veyron, and who better to do it than McLaren.

Its been done already http://www.shelbysupercars.com/ultimate-aero.php

McLaren can beat that as well.

[welshie]

Rumours have been flying around about this for a while. One even suggested that Gordon Murray was to be involved. I'm convinced its possible to build something faster than the Veyron, and who better to do it than McLaren.

Its been done already http://www.shelbysupercars.com/ultimate-aero.php

McLaren can beat that as well.

It's American . . . home of drag racing and straight roads. It's fast in a straight line but crap at anything else

[texasmr2]

Rumours have been flying around about this for a while. One even suggested that Gordon Murray was to be involved. I'm convinced its possible to build something faster than the Veyron, and who better to do it than McLaren.

Its been done already http://www.shelbysupercars.com/ultimate-aero.php

McLaren can beat that as well.

Not according to the stats:
McLaren: http://members.fortunecity.com/carstats ... 201997.htm
Shelby: http://www.shelbysupercars.com/car-specs.php

It's fast in a straight line but crap at anything else.

Where is your proof?

[McLaren Fan]

Rumours have been flying around about this for a while. One even suggested that Gordon Murray was to be involved. I'm convinced its possible to build something faster than the Veyron, and who better to do it than McLaren.

Its been done already http://www.shelbysupercars.com/ultimate-aero.php

McLaren can beat that as well.

Not according to the stats:
McLaren: http://members.fortunecity.com/carstats ... 201997.htm
Shelby: http://www.shelbysupercars.com/car-specs.php

I'm talking about McLaren have the resources and "know-how" to make a new car which could beat it.

It's fast in a straight line but crap at anything else.

Where is your proof?

Because it's American.

[welshie]

The proof?!!

The SSC is built for one thing, to be the fastest production car in the world. It's not built to be refined, to have a comfortable ride, to be able to be driven in towns and cities, along with many other things that it's not designed for.

The veyron is designed to be the best car in the world. It's top speed is merely a by-product.

[Rivelution]

The proof?!!

The SSC is built for one thing, to be the fastest production car in the world. It's not built to be refined, to have a comfortable ride, to be able to be driven in towns and cities, along with many other things that it's not designed for.

Really? Thats funny because it has a faster slalom than an Enzo, so yeah I guess its handling is sh!t.

[welshie]

The proof?!!

The SSC is built for one thing, to be the fastest production car in the world. It's not built to be refined, to have a comfortable ride, to be able to be driven in towns and cities, along with many other things that it's not designed for.

Really? Thats funny because it has a faster slalom than an Enzo, so yeah I guess its handling is sh!t.

I beg your pardon?!! Did I mention handling?? Although I am surprised it out slaloms an Enzo, I'm not that surprised. The suspension on that thing is super stiff. Jeez try not to be so up tight about things, you'll get a hernia

[Rivelution]

The proof?!!

The SSC is built for one thing, to be the fastest production car in the world. It's not built to be refined, to have a comfortable ride, to be able to be driven in towns and cities, along with many other things that it's not designed for.

Really? Thats funny because it has a faster slalom than an Enzo, so yeah I guess its handling is sh!t.

I beg your pardon?!! Did I mention handling?? Although I am surprised it out slaloms an Enzo, I'm not that surprised. The suspension on that thing is super stiff. Jeez try not to be so up tight about things, you'll get a hernia

Me uptight? I just replied to your comment in a sarcastic manner, I dont know how I was beeing 'uptight.'

[welshie]

The proof?!!

The SSC is built for one thing, to be the fastest production car in the world. It's not built to be refined, to have a comfortable ride, to be able to be driven in towns and cities, along with many other things that it's not designed for.

Really? Thats funny because it has a faster slalom than an Enzo, so yeah I guess its handling is sh!t.

I beg your pardon?!! Did I mention handling?? Although I am surprised it out slaloms an Enzo, I'm not that surprised. The suspension on that thing is super stiff. Jeez try not to be so up tight about things, you'll get a hernia

Me uptight? I just replied to your comment in a sarcastic manner, I dont know how I was beeing 'uptight.'

Evidently

[Rivelution]

GTR in more hot water.

A story has spread on the Internet over the past week about a 2009 Nissan GT-R owner who couldn’t get his warranty to cover a blown transmission. The problem? He says he had turned off the stability control to use the car’s launch control feature. That mistake cost him $20,000 in repairs.

We contacted Nissan about this problem — they seemed well aware of the Internet story — and were told that using the launch control feature or turning off the VDC by themselves would not void the warranty. However, if the two features are being abused and lead to damage than the warranty is void. We list the excerpted warranty below and it includes normal stipulations about modifications, racing and other changes that void warranties.

Nissan wasn’t able to quantify how owners could use the car, meaning how many times it could be driven on a track or other hard uses. There are other GT-R owners who have complained about the transmission, but many on the original Internet forum thread attacked the original story’s author for not being a good enough driver.

The result remains for GT-R owners: Don’t drive your 0-60-mph-in-3.5-second GT-R too hard if you’re not willing to pay for it.

What is not covered: Damage, failures or corrosion due to accidents, misuse or alterations

This warranty does not cover damage, failures or corrosion resulting from:

Accident, theft, fire, driving through water (including engine water ingestion) or misuse, which includes, but is not limited to, operation in violation of any applicable law and racing of any sort whatsoever (Proper use is outlined in your owner’s manual).

Alteration, tampering or improper repair, including but not limited to adding/replacing chips, reprogramming or attempting to reprogram, alter or disconnect any computer or control unit.

Operating the vehicle with the Vehicle Dynamic Control (VDC) off, except when rocking vehicle when stuck in mud or snow (see GT-R owner's manual).

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/10/nissan-gt-r-sup.html

[welshie]

GTR in more hot water.

A story has spread on the Internet over the past week about a 2009 Nissan GT-R owner who couldn’t get his warranty to cover a blown transmission. The problem? He says he had turned off the stability control to use the car’s launch control feature. That mistake cost him $20,000 in repairs.

We contacted Nissan about this problem — they seemed well aware of the Internet story — and were told that using the launch control feature or turning off the VDC by themselves would not void the warranty. However, if the two features are being abused and lead to damage than the warranty is void. We list the excerpted warranty below and it includes normal stipulations about modifications, racing and other changes that void warranties.

Nissan wasn’t able to quantify how owners could use the car, meaning how many times it could be driven on a track or other hard uses. There are other GT-R owners who have complained about the transmission, but many on the original Internet forum thread attacked the original story’s author for not being a good enough driver.

The result remains for GT-R owners: Don’t drive your 0-60-mph-in-3.5-second GT-R too hard if you’re not willing to pay for it.

What is not covered: Damage, failures or corrosion due to accidents, misuse or alterations

This warranty does not cover damage, failures or corrosion resulting from:

Accident, theft, fire, driving through water (including engine water ingestion) or misuse, which includes, but is not limited to, operation in violation of any applicable law and racing of any sort whatsoever (Proper use is outlined in your owner’s manual).

Alteration, tampering or improper repair, including but not limited to adding/replacing chips, reprogramming or attempting to reprogram, alter or disconnect any computer or control unit.

Operating the vehicle with the Vehicle Dynamic Control (VDC) off, except when rocking vehicle when stuck in mud or snow (see GT-R owner's manual).

http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/10/nissan-gt-r-sup.html

Man thats harsh!

[Rivelution]

Man thats harsh!

That is. That makes absolutely no sense to have a feature on a car, that if you use it, you'll void the warranty. I think Nissan are just over-hyping their own car.


Also, after doing more reseach, I found this.

Honda is pulling out all the stops for its replacement for the Acura NSX supercar, confirming it will be powered by a new V10 engine and boasting that it will be faster than Nissan’s GT-R. Expected to be sold exclusively under the Acura brand, the new model is scheduled to arrive in 2010 for the 2011 model year and availability is expected to be scarce.

Acura is determined that its new NSX is will be truly “extreme” and that its image must be one of high-performance and luxury. Integral in this approach is the NSX's V10 engine, which some Acura staff questioned as being unnecessary, the company’s executive vice president Koichi Kondo revealed during a recent interview with Automotive News.

Kondo also told reporters that the car will be priced higher than the Nissan GT-R but it will have better performance. The new NSX will also be a low volume model, with expected sales of just 1,000 units a year in the U.S. market.

In an earlier interview, Honda was adamant that the NSX would not be sold as anything but an Acura in order to prevent diluting the car’s high-performance, luxury image. This includes the U.S., Canada, Hong Kong, Mexico, China and soon, Russia, however leaves out other major markets such as Australia, the UK, and most other European countries.

[welshie]

Man thats harsh!

That is. That makes absolutely no sense to have a feature on a car, that if you use it, you'll void the warranty. I think Nissan are just over-hyping their own car.


Also, after doing more reseach, I found this.

Honda is pulling out all the stops for its replacement for the Acura NSX supercar, confirming it will be powered by a new V10 engine and boasting that it will be faster than Nissan’s GT-R. Expected to be sold exclusively under the Acura brand, the new model is scheduled to arrive in 2010 for the 2011 model year and availability is expected to be scarce.

Acura is determined that its new NSX is will be truly “extreme” and that its image must be one of high-performance and luxury. Integral in this approach is the NSX's V10 engine, which some Acura staff questioned as being unnecessary, the company’s executive vice president Koichi Kondo revealed during a recent interview with Automotive News.

Kondo also told reporters that the car will be priced higher than the Nissan GT-R but it will have better performance. The new NSX will also be a low volume model, with expected sales of just 1,000 units a year in the U.S. market.

In an earlier interview, Honda was adamant that the NSX would not be sold as anything but an Acura in order to prevent diluting the car’s high-performance, luxury image. This includes the U.S., Canada, Hong Kong, Mexico, China and soon, Russia, however leaves out other major markets such as Australia, the UK, and most other European countries.

I seem to remember that the older Aston Martins couldn't do a full bore 0-60 without blowing the clutch. They did cover it under the warranty, but said it was not recommended!

On the NSX front I'm both elated and bitterly disappointed. I've always loved the NSX but to brand it under acura and leave out half of the global market is a shot in their own foot!

[Rivelution]

Amen to that. I also dont find the 'new' nsx an attractive car either. If I were to choose between the GTR and NSX I would pick an old NSX