Added: 5 years ago
From: zachary27
Views: 640,987
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (808)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Sex inside a Mac F1..

  • Comment removed

  • Holy fuck!!! WHAT A CAR!!!

  • 240p... We meet again.

  • @XLStress

    This video appears to be a relic from the old, renegade, largely ad-free days of YouTube (2005 and 6).

  • Ahh, you'd say that, you lucky bas...

  • Please, thumb DOWN the guy below me.

  • the end was so funny "you can say that you lucky bastard" XD totally agreed!!!

  • Who agrees with me that there should be a McLaren F1 go kart.

  • @TheManmek ... no one

  • This is a legendary car, gorgeous is the only word for it. It looks way better than a Veyron, sounds better, and it has got a proper stick shift, not that stupid flappy paddles in the Veyron.

  • F1>Friends

  • was that the top gear track?

  • LOL... If you'll remember you high school physics, on a level surface *overall* weight has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with top speed... Coefficient of drag and power and to a much lesser extent rolling (unsprung) weight (that's the weigh to the wheels and brake discs) are the only things that effect top speed. The overall weight of a vehicle only affects acceleration (lateral and longitudinal)...

  • @alksdjhfiuealhf Well the weight doest affect the speed in case that the contact with the surface is perfect (like air pillow). and weight doest affects how the car deals with the ground. but since the contact between wheels and the ground is far from being perfect ! yeah weight doest affect weight ^^

  • All you need to do is find a place with no speed limit.

    <=== GERMANY IS HERE

    xD

  • nobody ever gives BMW credit for designing the F1's V12 its fucking bullshit. They made it especially for McLaren and I think they deserve some fucking press!

  • This is 1000 times better than the bugfatti. And ATLEAST 100000 times better looking.

    The bugatti looks fuckin gross compared to this.

    And this is 15 years older!

  • @SICKJ0KER and the mclaren is naturally aspirated and has no ABS, traction control, stability control, etc..the bugatti has 4 turbos plus all the new high tech things that assist you in driving which makes it a less immersive of a drive. The mclaren is also i think 600 kg less than the buggatti and has a v12 instead of the buggattis w16 and the mclaren is only 15-20mph slower. if mclaren was to make another super car like the mclaren....it would dominate the buggatti

  • @MRcandyshorts Fuck, all the Mclaren would need is maybe 2 turbochargers and it would overcome the speed of the Veyron. It doesn't need to have all the high tech to be one of the greatest cars ever made. With the veyron only going about 20 miles per hour faster with almost 400 more Horse power, the mclaren could easily beat that with a little extra juice.

  • @PintSizedSlasherJr true. but still, the mclaren f1 is the grand daddy of all super cars. it shouldnt be modified at all. the veyron is just a terrible car. its kind of unappealing

  • @harveer97 but how is it a gay choice? ._. the mclaren isn't as fast or as comfortable or as high tech or as modern as the veyron. Plus the veyron actually has a very nice interior where the mclaren is all stripped out... dont get me wrong i love the mclaren but srsly... they stopped producing it in 1998 just because it was getting old... the mclaren f1 is the bugatti veyron of the 90s.... although the mclaren is a better heart-starter thats for sure :D

  • @radar3699 The McLaren dominates on the race track. The veyron won't.

  • "Of Course You Would Say That. You Lucky Bastard" LOL

  • bugatti took its place so fuk all u who dont agree

  • Miss the time before all these environmentally friendly and considering supercars...

  • hahaha did he said at the end, U Lucky Bastard? :D

  • @hassan590 Yes he did :)

  • Haahaa u would say that u luck bastard lol!!

  • not as good as the Veyron but close :)

  • @radar3699 It would be, if it had an 8 liter W16 quad-turbocharged engine instead of the 6.1 liter V12 engine...Besides, as Top Gear demonstrated in one of their shows, the McLaren still manged to accelerate faster than the Bugatti (until it was finally defeated towards the end of a 1 mile drag race)...For such a modern "engineering genius" car like the Bugatti, this is quite an embarrassing performance..considering that the 19 year old McLaren was still fast enough to put on a good fight.

  • @playloud247

    i agree mate!

  • If you want an idea of how expensive this car is... I could service a McLaren F1 once or buy an Aston Martin DB7 Vantage and have some money to service that.

  • Couldn't design their own door mirrors' they used ones from the Vw Corrado!

  • great handing car too. I did some tests on Forza on this car, see video (long description in the video):

    /watch?v=aFIdceRpGsQ

  • i like my taxi compare this mclaren......

  • Tossers

  • don't care wat anyone says the 911 and skylne hvave had a much bigger impact on motorsports than this overrated shit

  • @dojOdRiFTeR jealous?

  • dudeee sexyy carrr

  • is that the top gear test tack??

  • @wakojako49 yes it is

  • "Next, you keep the weight low."

    Yeah except the vehicle's weight has nothing to do with its top speed...

  • @Corbon440 it actually does cause a heavier car will need more hp to the same speed as a ligther car F-MA, see force is equal to massxaccelearation! physics,

  • thats it...im gonna work my ass off and buy this car! and if that doesn't work, then plan B. beat up that santa claus looking guy and steal his F1 :D

  • Which Means This Car Is Faster Then Lamborghini Should I Say?

  • Back in 1994 this car was from the future.

    Back then the Jaguar XJ220 and Bugatti EB110 were on the top. The F1 made them both look archaic.

    Ferrari's top model back in 1994 was the 512TR (essentially a facelifted Testarossa), Lamborghini had their old Diablo. Porsches 959 had long gone out of production as had the Ferrari F40.

  • well it's not the ultimate anymore (bugatti veyron SS) but let's be honest it's more beautiful 1000 times more car than a technologi filled ugly bugatti

  • @TheLightMyFire True I'd rather(if I had the money) buy the Mclaren F1 just for it's ultimate fun factor and if you want to have annoying people call you just place phone in car and rev engine.

  • most fun you can have with your clothes on LOL priceless

  • @MOODYSCOOBY Yeah most fun without Sex

  • they'll never let a woman drive one of these

  • lol yeah Santa bring me one too

  • True Free energy devices exist,But the Oil companies want these technologies unknown to the masses,Get the blueprints for a free energy motor at LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM ,Big change is comming soon!

  • ooh man .... I would do anything to get this car..... even if i have 2 sell my balls...8D

  • my #1 car. with the Pagani Zonda R being my 2nd :) and so on..

  • definitely one of my most favorite cars ever!!!

  • Dear Santa...

  • @macuss87 i want a mclaren f1 down my chimney...

  • i think this list was very good but for me i wud put the porsche 911 1st as it has the greatest racing preigree it won lemans twice not only that it won some many other races

  • most fun with your clothes on LOL

  • "ah you would say that, you lucky bas-"

    lol +1

  • Pure masterpiece and still the fastest naturally aspirated production car to date (Veyron has 4 turbochargers...)

  • I'd take this over the lard arsed Veyron any day!

  • BEST CAR EVER MADE.

  • Cause I got that kinda money....

  • A GTO can top 167....

    Totally buy this before a veyron

  • It is indeed a marvelous car! But! Times Change ad so does technology and now we have better things... Like the veyron or....the Dagger GT

  • @mkai4492

    The Dagger GT will NEVER see production. Mark my word. It is an engineering nightmare.

  • you're a moron, the reason the veyron has a W16 is bcuz it's built to last. the F1 has a great engine too but all these other cars that squeeze 1000hp out of an 8 cylinder are a joke bcuz they'll be breaking down constantly. the F1 is so much lighter bcuz it's so basic. technology is the future of supercars & the Veyron has truly set the benchmark. respect it or not it's faster around a track despite weighing twice as much

  • They are actually wrong the fastest production car is the Scc Areo by Shelby. Price tag of $650,000 and a top speed of 270+ MPH. So McLaren can take their F1 and shove up their arses and make way for the Areo an American Super Car

  • @Ratkill9000 actually the bugatti veyron super sport currently holds the top speed record @ 167 mph GOOGLE IT

  • @mellowdalyricist 167 or 267? Cause 167 a Dodge Viper, Corvette, Mustangs all can top 167mph.

  • @mellowdalyricist but they put turbo on veyron and f1 dont have turbo, it means that ur veyron will break in some years if u ride to fast and mclaren dont, in german there is a guy that drives f1 every day from his job to his house over 350 km/h and still

  • 30 grand for a valve job that's practical?

  • All these years later - the F1 is still my favorite car. How many people am I gonna have to screw to get one of these? I hate that F1 owner. That lucky bast...

  • The Veyron's engine is kept at a manageable 1000bhp by engineer's choice.

    It's designed to cope with 2000+.

    Considering what you can get from a 3 litre straight six Supra...

    I imagine you could pull enough power from a Veyron to start a small solar system.

  • Still the fastest Naturally Aspirated car ever made. All the others who have gone faster all have either turbos or superchargers.

    And have those that gone faster actually won any racing series? McLaren F1 won the 24 hours of LeMans in 1995 and the BPR GT racing series in 1995 and 1996.

  • debes colgar el ultime cars de volkswagen beetle y cual es la cancion del programa ultime cars

  • debes colgar el ultime cars de volkswagen beetle y cual es la cancion del programa ultime cars

  • acually the mclaren look a lot more fun to drive than a veyron

  • @lamborghini0947 I guess it is. The Veyron (I heard) is totally idiot proof. All the electronics and 4wd will keep it in place, no matter how stupid you are with the throttle. With the McLaren F1 it is just that more interesting, because you don't have this electronic nanny that will save you every time.

  • @dude2106 kool

  • The F1 reached a limit and blew a hole through that. Fast, quick in corners, comfortable practical. The veyron may have beat it at top speed, but it won't beat the F1 in the practical aspects. The F1 bring back to the days of day-to-day car which performed like race cars on track days. A racing car for daily use.

  • Gordon Murray is a genius. He designed truly innovative racewinning racecars in Formula 1 long before he designed the F1 roadcar.

    Check out the 1978 Brabham Fan-car. The totally dominant McLaren MP4/4 from 1988 was Murray's design too.

  • nice channel

  • there seems to be some guys here with negative comments on this car, the engine is nothing in terms of today lambo ferrari zonda make much more but cant achive anything like this monster. and its very old this car, like the aero simular idea twice horses thats the reason it wins not due to ssc enginerring

  • Lol i once went shoping in it.

  • @cheezoncrack Does it have a boot!?

  • el padre de todoooos los superdeportivos

  • thats an lm for sure 5 lms 3 orange papaya 2 black

  • this show is nearly 10 years old.....

  • ahany nice guys out there who want to chat and talk on the phone

  • huhi really need some cure to my loneliness

  • well the inside of this car is a joke. not even the reliability of the engine is a big joke.

  • do you own one? prove is not reliable

  • I remember when it was new back in 1994. Back then nothing came close. It was way ahead of the opposition.

    Let's hope McLaren builds a modern successor to the F1. Apparently one is on the planning stages. And people, get it through your head that the new MP4-12C is an ENTRY model for a all new line-up of McLaren cars. The new MP4-12C is NOT the successor to the F1. For starters it is a lot cheaper.

  • is that the LM version? since it got the spoiler... correct me if im wrong.

  • yes your right the lm version has the spoiler

  • Correct. They also made another version, think it was called the "GTR" or something, which also had a spoiler, but that was for racing only. That's an LM for sure, such an amazing car, i love it. Although the LM was actually slower than the normal F1, since the spoiler creates downforce=) That was more of a track car.=)

  • yea the one called gtr is the long tail one

  • @cappew22 Actually that's not correct. The one in this video is a regular F1 that has had the front splitter and rear wing and wheels from the LM put on it. But only 5 LMs exist and they are all papaya orange. You can tell it isn't the LM because the interior doesn't have the orange shell seats or carbon lining.

  • Oh i see, didn't know about the interior, and i actually did know they only made it in orange, so i figured someone repainted it=) But thanks for point out that=)

  • top gear raced standard f1 against the veyron, if they used this one on the show, the gt i think it had something like 715bhp

    and it was lighter and more aerodynamic, veyron would get wasted with the right gearing.

  • no chipchurra, the V 12's engine bay is lined with gold..to reflect the heat. The V 12 itself is not made of gold...

    damn these idiots don't pay attention to the documentaries.

  • v12 in gold?

  • thats the top gear test track

  • which is faster buggati veyron or keonigsegg or mclaren f1?

  • This is the best car in the world.

    The only problem is, how did Koeniggsegg reach the same top speed with a V8?

  • supercharging? cylinders mean very little in the world of insane performance. BMW got 1500BHP out of a 1.5 litre for pot.

  • Köeninggsegg sucks, it has longer gear ratio and not as good acceleration + the F1 can turn

  • Gearing?= )

  • because they knew how to build a good

    v8. really it dosen't matter how many cylinders it has. besides a v8 is a very good engine for building fast cars.

  • how about using a SUPERCHARGER?? Without that huge supercharger it wouldn't have half that power.

    the V12 of the McLaren has no turbos or superchargers

  • top of my dream cars list since I first laid eyes on it.(I'm sure many of you too) And it will stay there in many, many years to come.

  • Top of my dream car list too and until eternity busts!!!

  • So if this thing is so badass n/a then why don't they throw some turbos on it? Would that screw with all that fine engine work?

    Titanium tool kit? Niiiiiiiiiiice.

  • @mrbones410. turbos cause unreliable performance. Even though the veyron has a higher top speed it did it with a bizillion turbos and enough bhp to send it to the moon. The F1 is still the fastest naturally aspirated road car and even faster than the veyron in the 1/4 mi. Also the veyron sucks at putting it's power down in the turns. Also the veyron is not very pretty. Also i hate the veyron.

  • Damn, the F1 looks really sexy in that aero kit.

    The McLaren is a product of such genius packaging. Not only the most brilliant all around supercar, but it holds three people, and their luggage too. Ferrari makes a business of trying to catch up to this 14 year old car.

  • I don't care much about what people say... This, personally, is the sexiest car ever. Gold over the body... Over 380km/h... This is the best... Built in 1994, is one o the fastest cars, even it is old... Respect this car

  • At the end of the day the Veyron and SSC Ultimate Aero are designed to go in a straight line. The McLaren F1 (especially the LM) is a real racing road car, fantastic at going around corners with an awesome top speed. No other car even comes close to its performance, sound or beauty

  • @1987LOZ1987

    the ssc can turn turn as well. It's a very light car. very ugly but very light

    i would still take the f1 over the ssc cause it's beautiful

  • When you really think about the goal of getting the highest top speed.. The primary key factor for that achievement is the aerodynamics of the car. After those done, then you can think about the power you need to achieve the speed.

    I mean, look closely at the Veyron and F1. Which one do you think is capable to higher top speed if both cars are tuned to exactly the same power?

  • All things good, normally aspirated or not, 11 mph difference or a million bhp, someone notice that the track used for this video is the same used by Top Gear today?

  • yes it is the top gear track

  • you lucky bast...

  • actually i hate the veyrons engineering....they had to work really hard to get 1000hp out of a W16 and 4 turbos and a top speed of 252.....mclaren did it with a n/a v12 and 627hp and had a top speed of 241....thats engineering

  • #1: the veyron is designated a luxury car, it's got alot of extra stuff in it and weighs ALOT more than the mclaren

    #2: the amount of horsepower and torque needed to go 252mph compared to 241mph is almost doubled....it's simple physics, it's really nothing to do with engineering because these people could've stuck a jet engine in the back of the car if they wanted to, the amount of force needed to go that fast is incredible....to go another 50mph takes another 1500+ hp at those speeds

  • what physics class did you ever go to??

    the power needed increases squarely, hence it takes 4 times the power to go twice as fast, 9 times to go 3 times as fast and 16 times the power to go 4 times as fast.

    252/241=1,0456 then square that and you get 1,09337, which is roughly 1,1 times more power.

    weight isn't even an issue to reach a top speed, merely the time it takes to get there. what really matters is aerodynamic drag, and a small amount of friction from the road

  • in the vacuum of space you don't need ANY power to achieve a constant speed, after the rocket has accelerated to that speed it stays that speed forever in theory

    on earth there is an atmoshere however and that creates drag, so much in fact that it burns up most meteorites from the insame amount of friction heat before they reach the ground.

    you seem to think power alone dictates what speed a car will achieve, sadly you seem unaware aerodynamics make ALL the difference

  • "to go another 50mph takes another 1500+hp at those speeds"

    you FAIL in basic physics class. that statement alone reeks of ignorance

    again you seem to think speed in itself requires some sort of power to achieve when in theory you could reach 250mph with only 200hp if you had advanced aerodynamics. Fact is Mercedes had a streamliner in 1938 that reached 269mph in January 28'th that year driven by Rudolf Carraciola. That car had only 736hp. But a Cd value of 0,157 which is increbly slippery

  • Explain 269mph on the German autobahn in January 1938 with only 736hp from the DAB V12 engine from Mercedes.

    google the Autobahn 1938 record week.

    Fact is Bernd Rosemeyer died driving the Auto Union streamliner at over 275mph, when sidewinds made him loose control of the car killing him. That Auto Union also only had around 700hp.

    The story is. With shite aerodynamics you're going to need a heck of a lot power to reach a certain speed than extreme streamlining. you fail to realize this.

  • @McLarenMercedes The car was a land speed record car, not a road or street, that is street legal, car. The McLaren F1 has "only" 627hp and tops 240mph. Bump it to 700hp and 260mph is possible. The F1 isn't the shape of an elongated disc, but it's hardly a brick either. Aerodynamic theory and practice have advanced quite a bit in 60+ years. Nevermind mechanical the advancements.

  • @specopdude Exactly why i love it... Veyron is full of computers and crap like that... Mclaren is pure engineering... No computer bullsh*t.. Just raw power which is delivered to the wheels

  • @specopdude damn straight man... i would like to see any other car company to try to put up figures like that

  • @specopdude they made such a big engine cause they wanted a car to last long, you could get 1000 horsepower from a 4 potter to but it would only last half an hour.

  • @specopdude don't forget that the F1 don't have any turbo at all...unlike the veyron

  • people are missing the point of the veyron. They didnt build it for hp figures. If they wanted, they could turn up the boost & screw 1000s of hp out of it. Any1 can do that. they put turbos on it to give it particular power charicteristics. A linear torque curve with no spikes & no lag. It was built for a different purpose than the F1 & it broke all the rules. Just like the F1 in the day, Just cos it has 16 cyl & 4 turbos doesnt mean they wanted max hp. Its irrellivent.

  • @slickstrings

    What you don't under stand is that Veyron's target was speed over 250 mph and 1001 hp . But they wanted the engine to work for years not months so they created the engine with a huge size and 4 turbos . But they could'nt because the car was too heavy and only reached 227 mph . One more thing bugatti never re wrote the rules of anything i mean it is only fast in a straight line .

  • @TheTornado4000 youve just proved my point again. Firstly, weight does not affect top speed. 2nd, the veyron is electronically limited. 3rdly, think about design. Concept - to make a 250mph car which is luxurious, easy and safe to drive with a different drive. Reality, 1001 hp and loads of torque. then run that power reliably through a trans which is strong but light. Increasing strength = added weight. Reducing weight = exotic design & matherials which increases cost which reduces market.

  • @slickstrings

    Weight does effect top speed and these are not my words these are Gordon Murray's so i know they are true . But tell me one thing it is way to heavy ok and has all saftey items in it but the Mp4-12c also has all saftey items and still is very light .One more thing increasing the weight is no problem but decreasing the weight is a challenge and in the Veyron i don't think they did that.

  • @TheTornado4000 Weight does not affect top speed. It changes how fast it can get there. All objects regardless of weight fall at exactly the same speed. A feather drops at the same speed as a brick if you remove the air. you can try that at home. resistance is what decides the top speed. Power to weight ratio's determine accelleration. Without resistance or another force acting on a body, it will continue consistantly forever.

  • @TheTornado4000 also, the mp4-12c doesnt have half the tech in it the veyron does. The veryron was a showcase car. The designers could have squeezed 1000hp out of a 4cyl motor if they wanted. They wanted to show the world what could be done. They went with a w16. They have suspension that alters the ride height. A hydrolic wing that doubles as an air brake. twin clutch trans & 4wd, just mind blowing stuff. Think of the problems they overcome.

  • @slickstrings

    Well they encouraged the world that what could be done with car but the Veyron just can't take the place of the mclaren F1 after what it did 17 years ago.The MP4-12c is what i believe is a car done right i mean it has all the exotic material Carbon fiber titanium aluminium magnesium etc and it costs around 175000 ponds and it has Pro active chassis control,Break steer,a lightning quick F1 SSG gear box and Pre cog system and many more that bugatti Lacks .

  • Its not meant to be a track car. Bugatti has a racing history of more than 100 years. If they wanted to build a race car, they would have. The bugatti wasnt meant to do what the F1 did. Thats what is wrong with your statement. Calling the bugatti poor engineering because it doesnt do what YOU like, isnt even remotely correct. Its just highlighting your misunderstanding of the process of design. Im not saying that to offend. Its not something that most people know about.

  • @slickstrings

    You are absolutely right about that Bugatti has a Century of racing History they could have done a racing car.But in any way i like both the cars The F1 and The Veyron both are great cars if i had enough money i would buy both of them .

  • @slickstrings

    And one more thing I have to say gentleman that you actually know how to talk to people and i am not joking. Thumbs up for you and you would make a great engineer by the way .

  • @TheTornado4000 they are definately both great cars beyond their time. If i had the money i would buy the F1 first simpy because its a pure driving machine from the get go. Its the opposite of the veyron. Its pure and focused while the veyron is like a statement of excess and techno wizardry. Stuff it. if i had the money to buy one, you would probably have the money to buy both lol needless to say, if you have to ask how much, you cant afford it.

  • Then, add luxury = +weight, safety, + weight, and then after all that they had to design it so it was no harder to drive than a mazda 3. You have NO concept of design and engineering. i am actually in the engineering buisness which means i know what it takes to make such a car and im telling you, that to achieve what this car does is a big fucking deal. No one else to date has done it. Its easy to make a car go that fast. to make it comfy, stable, full of tech & fast & cheap as poss? hard.

  • @slickstrings

    You know what would impress me is that if the veyron could keep all that technology but also keep the weight low now that would be real engineering marvel .And it isn't that practicle either.

  • @TheTornado4000 well, your missing the point again. they COULD keep the weight down further than they did already. But when you reduce weight, you reduce strength. So you need to use expensive exotic materials and composites. Which in turn increases cost exponentially. You need to draw the line somewhere. The veyron achieved its goals. There would be no point building it if no one could afford it.

  • @slickstrings

    Ok Ok it might impress you but it still doesn't work for me . You see any one could prove what could be done with a car and they proved that a car could go faster . But the problem is that despite being a great technology shocase it still can't perform with the cars that are inferior to it around a track .

  • @specopdude You probably dont properly understand the designers purpose or the involvement required in the design of the veyron. The capacity/turbo's and hp figures are a requirement of what was set out to achieve. It wasnt a numbers chaser. Anyone can get 1000hp from an engine. They achieved a car which breaks all the rules, yet is perfectly civil & comfortable to drive. hp was not the goal. You have missed the point.

  • @specopdude Mclaren F1 - The greatest super car ever built. to this day nothing touches it for pure engineering and brutal performance. Amazing how it destroyed the Veryron all the way to 200 Mph... thats a win for me, since who the hell is going to drive around at 240-250 MpH?

    Long live the F1 !

  • @riaadhoosain ha ha yeah, it's seems 99% of people didn't pick up on the fact that if ever the situation should occur that a Mclaren F1 pulled up alongside a Veyron at a traffic light it's the Veyron owner that would be embarassed!

  • @specopdude no truer words have e'er been said

  • @specopdude Mclaren f1 is epic. But, dont compare it with a veyron. These are two completely different beasts...

  • @specopdude the reason why bugatti engineers end up with "only" 1000 bhp from that huuge engine is that Veyron supposed to be usefull for years and years of using it. They build it for speed and comfort, so its need to be reliable as well. For example F1 engines are pushed to the limit, monstrous V10 engines had close to a 1000 hp from N/A 3 litre, but it can only run for about 1000 km.

  • @specopdude exactly, while 1000hp is an impressive figure on it's own, it's not so impressive when it takes 8 litres AND turbochargers to get there! That's only 125hp per litre, less than your average Evo or Scooby. Plus the weight of the thing at almost twice the weight of the F1...that showed it's face as soon as they took it round the Top Gear track. Would like to see an Mclaren F1 lap time there!

  • actually the SSC holds the record for fastest production car at 257mph. they did it on some highway in washington or something. its 4 mph faster than the Bug, but i would have the Veyron over it anyday. seriously check on wikipedia.

  • Comment removed

  • "Well you would say that you lucky bas.."

    Gotta love the cut off.

  • i dont think that a caparo t1 can beat a veyron . .

    because there are so many reasons example the handling is nightmare..from 4th gear to 5th the gears jammed so how can you say that it can beat a veyron? think again

  • As far as track cars go, it's still up there with the best of them. I love how people who don't know jack jump on the 'Bugatti bandwagon' as soon as speed is mentioned. Look up Caparo T1, would smash a Veyron on any track ANY DAY.

  • bugatti veyron is the fastest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Not when this program was made, the fastest was the F1

  • your wrong