Talk:Bugatti Veyron/Archive 2

message: For crying outloud, can these Bugatti fanboys get along with the facts and stop reverting important edits? *NEWSFLASH* SSC Ultimate Aero's tests results were confirmed by Guinness World Records on Oct 9th 2007. SSC Ultimate Aero TT is now the fastest car on the planet with a speed of 411.707 kmh and ~1183 horse power. Bugatti is currently second fastest with ~408.4 kmh and 1001 horse power.
:You're gonna need to cite it to say it... Gscshoyru 12:59, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Veyron fanboys are annoying, ignorant little things aren't they? 70.112.86.215 02:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: lol, finally thanks putting up the facts and keeping them there, some people are too in love with this car to listen to any right or reason! (Wiki332)  —Preceding comment was added at 13:24, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, Tomthehand was the worst, this fanboy was straight in denial and kept on changing the article despite indisputable facts. I blame him the most for doing his best at keeping Wikipedia inaccurate.  It's unbelieveable that someone would purposely make Wikipedia factually incorrect, especially in light of being presented with evidence which was done despite not necessary to satisfy 1 volunteer editor, and he kept on rejecting the facts because he did not want to believe his beloved Bugatti Veyron was no longer the fastest street-legal car in the world.  Can you believe that?!  What's he going to do next?  Because he supports Ferrari, he's going to change the results of the F1 Championship?!  This guy is dangerous.  He's like power-tripping because he's a volunteer or something, and that he somehow is this "lord" over Wiki and what are facts and real, and he alone sets the standard for burder of proof.  It's absolutely disgusting and these uneducated, unintelligent vandals like Tomthehand need to be kicked off Wikipedia ASAP!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.73.56.163 (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Technically, the Veyron was never the fastest,a s it still doesn't have an "official" top speed. However, the source does say that Guinness regards it as the world's fastest production car. Good enough for me to feel that we should keep it part of the article. —Mr Grim Reaper (talk • contribs • email), 00:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: This doesn't really make sense.  If the SSC Aero isn't a production car yet then how is the Veyron the second fastest production car in the world?  The Veyron in't  even close to being second fastest if we count non production race and tuner cars.  So it should read fastest most powerful and most expensive street-legal production car. --Daniel J. Leivick 22:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We seriously don't need all that cruft at the beginning of the lead section! Just put it in another paragraph, but keep the first one short and to the point. -- intgr [talk] 00:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

text: In conclusion we agree that it's pricier than and beats every other 'full production' car ;) And yeah I think we've come to a consensus over this.
Someone has changed the site again after a consensus was reached. If any change should be made, it should clarify that the Veyron is still the quickest car, with its' 0-100 kph and 0-150 kph times being considerably faster than the Aero.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.61.189.14 (talk) 16:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second fastest now! 

message: Where did this come from?
Each Veyron is being sold for £5,000,000 (net pay, without taxes), prices vary by exchange rates and local taxes (like value added taxes). As Bugatti, and therefore Volkswagen, are making such a loss, it has been likened by automotive journalist Jeremy Clarkson and his Top Gear programme team in their story on it to the Concorde, in that both were huge achievements, but the car will probably, like the plane before it, be discontinued after proving to be an economic failure.
I don't have much experience with wikipedia, but can someone fix this  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.160.161 (talk) 17:37, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  5,000,000 pound supercar? 

message: # ^ Cite error 8; No text given.
Djcater 02:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  # ^ Cite error 8; No text given. 

message: "This speed and power was very close to the SSC Ultimate Aero TT, which claimed the “Fastest Production Car” world record with a top speed of 257.45 mph and an average speed of 256.19 mph on September 13 2007, later verified by Guinness World Records on October 9, 2007.[1] The Bugatti Veyron reached full production in September 2005.Even though Veyron might not be the fastest, it is still your "average" car compared to its design, speed(power), and price. "
Does this read strangely to anyone else? It kinda seems unnecessary to say that they came close to the Aero, I would think it would be easier just to mention in passing that the Aero was the car the beat it and then maybe link to the Aero article. I notice that nowhere in the CCR article does it say "The CCR was almost as fast as the Bugatti Veyron, the car the beat it."
Also the "Not your average car" part seems extremely unnecessary. The first sentence is "The Bugatti Veyron 16.4 was the fastest and most powerful street-legal production car in the world between October 2005 to September 2007." so I think it's safe to assume that they realize it isn't an average car.--Stealthsloth22 22:32, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unneccesary? 

message: Keith Wood, a rabbit enthusiast from South Western Germany, has challenged Bugatti with the supposed use of rabbit hearts as a fuel additive. There is a 4.6 Million Euro lawsuit pending responses by Keith's father. Keith is extremely unorthadox and has resorted to recruiting an entire legal team which includes 3 minors and his eldest pet Rabbit. This Rabbit makes all the legal decisions for his counsel; the rabbit's language is deciphered by his eating habbits and eye contact.
This appears to be false. I have searched the internet for this, couldn't find anything. It was added yesterday at the middle of the night. I'm going to delete this, as it is most likely fraud. If someone finds evidence that it is true, they can add it back.
Dnlkk94 (talk) 05:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would had purged it immediately as this is nothing but nonsense dressed as vandalism. Willirennen (talk) 22:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Just wanted to post here though, to let everyone know. Hopefully, whoever did this won't try it again. "Rabbit hearts as a fuel additive?" Psh. Dnlkk94 (talk) 01:44, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as I hate vandals ruining this beautiful sea of information... this one was pretty funny.99.225.178.225 (talk) 17:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  False lawsuit! 

message: Someone keeps inserting the '987 horsepower' rating in the article. This is ancient andinaccurate, as clearly explained in the article as one keeps readin it. Please stop messing with the site!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.61.189.14 (talk) 14:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't respond, because you didn't post a link. And I don't think the information from the bugatti website needs further confirmation. Btw please stop starting new sections everytime you edit the talk page.--BSI (talk) 22:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: so what does it mean? are you drunk? you're lying down? Or am I getting you wrong? --BSI (talk) 18:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Hi. I wish to support BSI in the debate with this boorish and ill-mannered editor (207.61.189.14), who cannot even be bothered to post in the appropriate place or sign his comments. To him I say, proof, verifiable, reliable proof; this is what the article requires and what you're unable to come up with. When you do, if by any chance it differs from the current content, we'll be happy to add it to the article. In the meantime, I suggest you abstain from insulting good-faith editors. ↔ Dennywuh (talk) 16:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisions to article 

message: It is badly worded and makes a few fake claims, so I am going to have a whack at editing it, someone else should check my edits however.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.207.52.152 (talk) 11:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Performance Section 

message: The Hennessy Viper is not a production car, Hennessy is a tuner.  The Aero and Hennessy cannot even touch the Veyron's acceleration and deceleration numbers.  Not even close.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.116.238.69 (talk) 04:29, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hennessy Viper and SSC Aero 

message: Does anyone have a reliable source that proves that Bugatti plans to produce 300 Veyrons? —Mr Grim Reaper (talk • contribs • email), 23:44, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number to be produced 

message: I think it's worth mentioning that the first video game to license the Veyron was Need for Speed Pro Street (via the energizer lithium pack).  Before that, Volkswagen wouldn't license it to anyone.
Also, does anyone know why Volkswagen originally didn't want to license the Veyron (at least that's what they say on the Forza 2 forums every time someone asks for it as DLC)?  They pretty much gave the developers of Beetle Adventure Racing for the N64 free reign with the (then) new beetle and that was a flagship model as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.106.104.40 (talk) 05:23, 16 July, 2008 (UTC)
:I don't think a video game appearance is notable unless it has some sort of significant impact on the vehicle.  I'm certain no one will be buying a Veyron because they saw it in a video game. swaq 21:28, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  popular culture 

message: There is a quote from a Mexican magazine that's translated to English. It uses the word "stucked" ("it stucked in about 850 CV"). I don't know Spanish, can someone check what it should be? --Theeldest (talk) 19:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you offer the original word and its context, or a link to it, may be...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.86.163.88 (talk) 09:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this the right word? 

message: just thought that you all would like to know the at maximum moving velocity the kinetic energy of the vehicle is approximately 13M joules.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.177.92.49 (talk) 01:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  movement energy 

message: Can someone please check this statistic then include its unit of measurement (I assume its miles).
Also, just a reminder to maintain good faith and treat each other with respect when making edits to wikipedia articles and discussions. 203.45.1.54 (talk) 11:15, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Knowing that the Ultima GTR, with a similar power-to-weight ratio does 0-100-0 mph in ~9 seconds, it sounds reasonable that you're right and the units are miles per hour. Probably worth adding those units in, as "0-100" means 0-100kph to those in predominantly-metric countries.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.183.201 (talk) 00:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  0-100-0 Speed... Units of measurement? 

message: Bugatti Veyron is too short (only 4462mm) and too heavy (around 1888kg).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.210.152.57 (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  specs 

message: Jeremy Clarkson drove Bugatti Veyron illegal. Jeremy Clarkson was 6'5. Can't tall drivers drive Bugatti Veyron?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.210.152.57 (talk) 04:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jerermy Clarkson 

message: In the USA, Lamborghini Murcielago gets poorer milage than Bugatti Veyron, because the Murcielago is available in mountainous area (Idaho, Utah, Colorado, etc.) but the Veyron is not available in mountainous area.
Bugatti Veyron is too small and it has too much fuel consumption.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.210.152.57 (talk) 03:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuel consumption to size 

message: As the car is one of the most expensive and exclusive cars about, would it be apropriate to list the known crashes for this car? 2 have been crashed in the UK to my knowledge and I believe the first UK crash was the very first Veyron Crash. I a similar vein, does any one know of anyone in particula that owns one?(Morcus (talk) 01:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea but not encyclopedic.   A M M A R </span> 01:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Simon Cowell owns one  and another - unless its had a paint job  86.147.161.8 (talk) 12:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It wouldn't be notable until some celebrity totals one.  However, there has been a notable crash already.  The irony is in the link, but the video would make some car enthusiasts go into a corner and mutter to themselves for a while. --Hourick (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crashes. 

message: I'm not a regular editor of this page so I thought I'd leave this info here in case someone wants to add it to the article.
Conan O'Brien, to spite NBC, featured a Buggati Veyron on his show at the reported price of 1.5 million US dollars (an expensive Rolling Stones song was playing in the back ground to add to the price).
Ref: http://jalopnik.com/5453417/conan-obriens-15-million-bugatti-veyron-mouse
OlYellerTalktome 19:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, it's pretty significant.
The skit was epic, though.  This opinion from a guy who doesn't like Conan. LOL. --Hourick (talk) 21:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Though it was recent, I think if we can find actual significance to this that is citable, such as a reputable news source saying that this is the straw that broke the camel's back for NBC then I'd say include it. And OlYeller21, anyone can add to articles so if you find these sources feel free. I would take a look at WP:EVENT and then you can test it against these criteria to see if it passes the notability test. However I can tell you right now that the source you gavve from jalopnik would probably not be considered a verifiable enough reference. [User:Valley2city|Valley]]2city‽ 06:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conan O'Brien's use of the vehicle 

message: "Becky Kelly - expensive Prostitute" is this verifiable?
"Ranjit bagha - stole it" this does not seem to make sense, and be verifiable. Stole what? From Who?
I don’t think either of the listings are encyclopedic or responsible without clarification.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.156.194.53 (talk) 16:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Owners 

message: Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, measures engine displacement in gallons so I removed the unit conversion code. The exact cc/cubic inch conversion is included later in the paragraph so removal of the English units completely seemed best.Es330td (talk) 15:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Specifications 

message: The first Country mentioned in this article with regards to the cars origins is Germany, Yet it is a French car with a German parent company and it would surely make more sense to put it the other way around. Opel Articles don't start by mentioning GM and America.(90.219.214.188 (talk) 07:26, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, I will have a look at it. Greetings, Belgian man (talk) 20:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

text: I see you changed it already yourself :) Belgian man (talk) 20:56, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationality 

message: A model in a new color hardly warrants a new subheading, so I've re-org'd this area, and trimmed some breathless puffery (honoring the marque's precious heritage, refined volumes and surfaces and 
newly-developed Gaucho leather just don't belong in an encyclopedia, imho). Snori (talk) 19:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Trim variants

message: Has the Sport targa model replaced the original? Iff so, it deserves its own section.Snori (talk) 20:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Targa *replaces* std model?

message: He actually drove it twice on Top Gear.  First in series 10 episode 3 against a Eurofighter Typhoon manned by an RAF pilot in RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire, in a two mile horizontal vs. vertical race.
Can someone reword that and put it in the article. VEO15 (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Hammond 

message: It says that the car goes from 0-150mph in 9.8 seconds, then a few lines later it says the car reaches a speed of 143mph in 10.2 seconds in the quarter mile.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.190.127.174 (talk) 22:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article actually states that the 1/4 mile time is obviously faster than what that one source states. The times are from different sources, so there will be inconsistencies (altitude and weather heavily affect this)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theeldest (talk • contribs) 19:48, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Most likely you'll find the 0-150mph times were recorded by repeated attempts with a proper test-driver employed by Bugatti, on an optimal track. The quarter-mile times were most likely recorded in a few passes by a motoring journalist on the nearest drag-strip or runway. After the Bugatti PR guy told him "DON'T BREAK THE £1,000,000 CAR!!!"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.183.201 (talk) 00:25, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

text: I wrote to Bugatti SAS regarding this issue, and according to them, the correct 1/4 mile time is 9.8 seconds. I also have Bugatti veyron's brochure which says 9.8 seconds to 1/4 mile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rizwan.17 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The numbers don't match up 

message: I have added a confusing template as this article needs general cleanup. It currently switches between talking about the original 2005 Veyron and the latest Super Sport version without distinction, and some stats quoted are not clear as to which they might apply. There are also a few other format and naming discrepancies, such as the names of the two sounds in the first section, neither model is mentioned anywhere near. The sources and figures quoted for various speeds and others such as fuel economy come from a variety of sources - having spent some time sorting some of these into the original kph figures for speed (with assistance, see below) I'm running out of patience as the top ones then get changed. Some of the sources are not the best, as they quote several figures and some editors (myself included first time round) have been checking these and removing decimals, etc, etc. I've just corrected some parts when 'Super Sports' was used.. I could dig and find more but I have to go out and don't have time at the moment.. Can anyone assist?
I'm thinking a general cleanup of all these little things, and possibly a re-write to the change the style and tone may be required, as several sections seem to be quoting the press or other non-neutral viewpoints without clear reference - I'm undecided about that but would welcome some opinions. I've also inserted this at the top of this discussion page (not my normal practice) due to the large number of sections and the repeat of titles such as 'inconsistency' to avoid any further confusion. Bertcocaine (talk) 18:01, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We can add the acceleration stats to the list - the 1/4 mile time keeps being changed, and although someone added a ref (removed during vandalism cleanup) google indicates that this is another area where the sources all contradict - since Bugatti don't quote these in imperial. I'm getting to the point of taking a day off work just to research and clear up all these issues! Might go and test drive one (yeah right) just to see the manual.. Bertcocaine (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

text: And another - a number of reverts and edits over acceleration times in the performance table - comments only added in the summary notes and briefly in an old section above (numbers don't match up). Replies indicate source is personally held letter and brochure? Brochure is probably a valid source but not the letter. Is anyone reading this? Plenty of IP editing to various stats going on (and fair bit of vandalism) yet few editors seem to do anything but revert the vandalism.. Comments please!! Bertcocaine (talk) 22:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification and Cleanup required August 2010 

message: Drag is square law but the power needed to overcome it is a cube law and I have seen it stated in physics books but I have never understood the proof.
It is also true if you apply it to road cars.  Pick a car where the manufacturer fits a large ranges of engines - maybe BMW 5 series.  For example a 520d with 177bhp will do 140mph and a de-restricted M5 with 500bhp has been recorded at 205mph.  Now if we take the difference in power as a ratio 500/177 = 2.824 and take the cube root you get 1.41 and mutliply this by the 520d speed (140mph) you get 198mph which is close to the 205mph I have seen.  Apply a square law and you get a top speed of 235mph which is clearly incorrect. ====  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.16.207 (talk) 21:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors of Kinematics 

message: Based on the sources listed below, I believe something I suspected is true. Namely that the SS actually has over 1,200 bhp, but for marketing purposes is "rated" at 1,200 local horsepower for the target market. —MJBurrage(T•C) 04:51, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Super Sport horsepower

message: I’m a little confused as to why the Mansory Linea Vincerò is listed under “Special editions.” Isn’t it a third-party modified car (as per “German car tuner”) rather than a factory-made edition? If I’m not mistaken, then I wouldn’t think it’s appropriate to have it mentioned, or at the least, not to its own section. On top of that, the section doesn’t sound like it was written in an encyclopedic way. —Mr Grim Reaper 22:48, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would indeed not mention the Mansory version, as Mansory is simply a German tuner (tunes Bentley as well...) Greetings, Belgian man (talk) 15:31, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooooh no, you mustn't call him a "tuner".  According to the most recent issue of CAR magazine he really hates it. Mr Larrington (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the “Mansory Linea Vincerò” section relevant? 

message: I removed the section "accelerates from 0–60 in 2.4 seconds and " as it does not have units for the 0-60 part. Please find the units and add them.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozkidzez91 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of acceleration speed 

message: With all the vandalism in the past two weeks, I suggest that the article be protected to some extent to prevent further vandalism. I wanted to see what anyone else had to say about protecting the article. Md2 943 (talk) 04:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so.  We are averaging well under one vandal edit per day and this article is watched by a bunch of people, it hardly ever lasts very long.  You could take it to requests for protection if you disagree. --Leivick (talk) 08:28, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: What tyres does it use to go at 407km/h? 
Tyres are one of the most important parts of a car. In Formula 1 tyres are one of the most talked about things, along with engines and drivers.
Can somebody find out what tyres it uses and put that info in the specifications of this page? Tri400 (talk) 12:50, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe they're specially-made Bridgestone tires. —Mr. Grim Reaper at 04:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They are actually Michelin - they use the Michelin PAX run-flat system, and the tyres are the Pilot Sport PS2 tread patern.  HTH.  78.32.143.113 (talk) 18:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

text: They misspelled tires. And they used the British English spellingRacerx11 (talk) 04:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you mean they DIDN'T misspell tyres. British/Australian/American English have different spellings, your way isn't the only right way.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozkidzez91 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I know. But what I meant was to point out in the comment above mine by Brainiack16 that he misspelled the word "misspelled". So I was loosely quoting the incorrect statement above and at the same time correcting his own spelling mistake. I thought it was clear that I knew "Tyres" wasn't misspelled.  I did point out that they used the British spelling.  Sorry it was so confusing. Racerx11 (talk) 04:30, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Tyres