Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

topgear.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 302 posts

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#161

Post by dksbzmx »

hazeii wrote: post #158
bartread wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ride bikes and from a practical standpoint, along with small size and manoeuvrability, the acceleration (a result of torque) is one of the most useful attributes. Much moreso than top speed, or even speeds significantly in excess of the posted limits. Bikes don't tend to have high torque in general, but their light weight and gearing are designed to maximise what torque they do produce. This means there are quite a…

Bikes like Harleys and BMW twins have plenty of torque, where bikes like Kawasaki Ninja's major on power (peak torque at high revs). Hence Harleys and BMW's are first off the line at the lights (no need to build revs) but the Ninja's will come steaming past seconds later. There are some fun youtube videos demoing bike performance, e.g. Ninja H2's doing 0-250MPH in 26s [0], outdragging a Bugatti [1] and outpacing an F…

Just rev your engine before releasing the clutch and you’ll have as much (wheel) torque as you need (within power limits of the engine and tires).

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#162

Post by sniglom »

MrGilbert wrote: post #48

It's pretty impressive. In terms of a daily driver, I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce. My daily driver is a Mazda 3 / Mazda Axela, which comes with 200 Newtonmeter torque at 6400 rpm. It's ok, it's fun, but yeah. So the other day I drove a 2013 Nissan Leaf (BEV), which gives you ~250 Nm torque right at the beginning. This was so much fun to drive. So for me, a car does…

Engine torque is pretty much a useless number as a consumer (not a manufacturer/builder/tuner).

The interesting torque is the one at the wheels, after the transmission and adjusted for wheel size.

Comparing to CPUs it would be similar to obsessing over IPC, but not caring about that performance = IPC * Frequency.

Regardless, I understand your point. Having all the power from the start makes more sense for daily driving.

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#163

Post by sniglom »

hazeii wrote: post #158
bartread wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ride bikes and from a practical standpoint, along with small size and manoeuvrability, the acceleration (a result of torque) is one of the most useful attributes. Much moreso than top speed, or even speeds significantly in excess of the posted limits. Bikes don't tend to have high torque in general, but their light weight and gearing are designed to maximise what torque they do produce. This means there are quite a…

Bikes like Harleys and BMW twins have plenty of torque, where bikes like Kawasaki Ninja's major on power (peak torque at high revs). Hence Harleys and BMW's are first off the line at the lights (no need to build revs) but the Ninja's will come steaming past seconds later. There are some fun youtube videos demoing bike performance, e.g. Ninja H2's doing 0-250MPH in 26s [0], outdragging a Bugatti [1] and outpacing an F…

You cannot compare just engine torque numbers, without adjusting for gear ratios, wheel size and sprockets.

As another commenter said, you rev a Ninja (just like a sports car) and launch it using the clutch.

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#164

Post by amelius »

MrGilbert wrote: post #48

It's pretty impressive. In terms of a daily driver, I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce. My daily driver is a Mazda 3 / Mazda Axela, which comes with 200 Newtonmeter torque at 6400 rpm. It's ok, it's fun, but yeah. So the other day I drove a 2013 Nissan Leaf (BEV), which gives you ~250 Nm torque right at the beginning. This was so much fun to drive. So for me, a car does…

> I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce.

Roads don't like torque. If high-torque becomes a trend, expect to pay more vehicle-tax. Tires also don't like torque.

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#165

Post by sniglom »

killjoywashere wrote: post #96
fasicle wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would a Tesla's initial torque compare to the Bugatti? Would the Bugatti reach 30 mph much faster?

Top Gear actually did a road test of a Tesla S vs an Aston Martin starting at 30 MPH and the Tesla dusted the Aston Martin. Considering electric motors start with max torque, and the stats that are easily googlable, the Tesla would have no problem with the Bugatti. Never mind the Tesla is smaller, has a lower center of gravity, and costs 15x less and has more range. And it's probably worth noting that the Tesla is al…

The tesla is really fast to 70mph or so, after that it constantly lose power as it revs.

>And it's probably worth noting that the Tesla is almost certainly software limited. Most things are software limited in modern cars. The question is, if you improved the battery pack so it could deliver more power, would the motors handle it?

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#166

Post by lloeki »

MrGilbert wrote: post #48

It's pretty impressive. In terms of a daily driver, I think the fun comes from the acceleration, and thus the torque a car can produce. My daily driver is a Mazda 3 / Mazda Axela, which comes with 200 Newtonmeter torque at 6400 rpm. It's ok, it's fun, but yeah. So the other day I drove a 2013 Nissan Leaf (BEV), which gives you ~250 Nm torque right at the beginning. This was so much fun to drive. So for me, a car does…

I’m the complete opposite. I hate cars that have loads of torque on the low end then go down from there, it gives me the feeling that they get out of breath on the top half of the rev range.

My daily driver FN2 Civic Type-R (stock, except for brake lines and pads) and whatever preconceptions are had about Honda, this is an engineering marvel. Torque is mostly linear, slightly going up on the top half, with a slight drop just before the 8300rpm limiter, giving the feeling that the car keeps on giving - wanting to give, even -you more and more. As for the numbers, it does 0-100kph in 6.2-6.4s but that’s because there’s a 2-3 gearshift at 95 (it’s well under 6 to that): it’s just such a “screw the numbers game” mentality, “let’s get the most out of this in every possible way, whatever the benchmarks. Only fun matters.”, which I fully subscribe to.

Anyway, even acceleration is overrated, nice turns is what matters and gives Gs much more quickly than any acceleration, and this one delivers, with fantastic fast cornering and good tight cornering (if you set the car up correctly on entry to avoid understeer). As a tire manufacturer as said (I think it was Bridgestone), “fun is not a straight line”.

And although imperfect in many ways, this car is so much fun (and practical, to boot) I have than big stupid grin in minutes, on every ride. I’ve driven so many powerful cars on occasion yet after the initial oomph effect, none ever came close to that. On the lower power end I did enjoy that ‘06 Suzuki Swift, and the latest MX-5 is solid gold :)

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#167

Post by grecy »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #127

I'm sad that, on HN, I had to read thru 50+ comments about how impractical 300 mph is, before I found any discussion of the engineering challenges.

HN has become extremely negative in the last couple of years.

I came over here when I got sick of Reddit's negativity in ~2013. What's the next alternative?

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#168

Post by neohaven »

sokoloff wrote: post #121
erikig wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love acceleration but there’s also jerk - the rate at which acceleration builds up. It is is also a factor of the torque curve.

The next derivatives in the sequence of position, velocity, acceleration, and jerk are amusingly named “snap, crackle, and pop”, respectively.

Interestingly, they keep getting into "smaller" sounds. Snaps are kind of long-ish, potentially. Something can slowly snap (jerk primed) in two, it's not "as instantaneous a sound" as the two others. Compare to the pops (third) that are part of any crackle (second) you might hear. I always find it a little extra clever that they're ordered "like derivatives".

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#169

Post by mrleiter »

The milestone of reaching faster speeds with combustion engines seems to be a wrong goal in this day and age. Climate change is a fact, and the burning of material based on oil/coal is a major driver of this. The effects have been known for decades, but only now major impacts can be seen and felt.

In German, there is this phrase, which describes the time period after a certain success/enjoyment/well-being. Literally translated it meanss the fat years are over ("Die fetten Jahre sind vorbei."). It's usually used in the context of forced savings vs voluntariy expenditure, but it fits with the current state of our environment as well. The times of making faster cars and enjoying high speeds are over, if we don't want to demise as a species. Environmentally safer beahviour should become more fun.

Re: Bugatti has broken the 300mph barrier

#170

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

safgasCVS wrote: post #94
tialaramex wrote: post #13

It's futile to actually have road-legal cars that go this fast because you can't do very much useful with the speed. This is much too fast for the human operator (driver) to safely react to things outside the cockpit, which is why for example Britain owns trains capable of 140mph in service but deliberately limits them to 125mph. Tests suggested drivers couldn't be relied on to reliably observe and react to a linesid…

No one decides to marry their spouse based on how punctual they are. Cars like these (and just sports cars in general) are things you buy with your heart

> No one decides to marry their spouse based on how punctual they are

Anecdote to the contrary: I've broken off a relationship with someone who was habitually very late, for that reason (and the denial that it was a problem).

One of the things that I really like about my current partner is that they are habitually very punctual, or early.

Post reply on HN