Larry Larson's 1966 Chevy Nova with twin-turbo 565" big-block runs 6.9 sec 211mph 1/4 mile and drives it on the street . I bet that same engine in a 2012 Corvette would have a top speed today of at least 275mph .
This was back in 1988 which was an unfathomable speed for a street legal car of the era. No supercar could even touch that speed for nearly two decades. Give credit where credit's due.
i seen how they made this cars ( they made them in canada quebec and they design by Paul deutchman the guys who creat the T REX ) they remove everyting make the cars larger , beter brake , beter engine , beter transmission , this things is not a corvette its someting way beter .
LOL at the "youtube experts" that think, that a W16 is two V8s welded/bolted/glued together :D Engine design isn't like that :D It has a unique crank case, 8 cylinders on each side in two rows, so total 4 rows... So it's not as long as V16, much shorter, similar to a V10. It has 1 crankshaft of course... And no, VW doesn't need a W16 engine for 1000 HP. They wanted a unique engine design, that nobody else has, so that's why a W16. Veyron is not only about speed, but standing out of the crpwd.
Now onto the stupid remark. Stupid would be committing to a statement when you don't have the facts , like this has 200hp less ( when in reality is has only 103 ) like it can't do that speed ( despite being timed by the TRC ) and it had no ' official ' timing devices ( again the ones used by the TRC ) and the 80s aerodynamics ( which were good enough to do a 240MPH run in a 1987 Monte Carlo )
almost everything you typed was ignorant and you have the audacity to call others stupid? lol
OK for everyone ranting about weight, weight has nothing to do with top speed. I guess you could take half a mile an hour away for the extra friction on the tyres but thats it.
It has something to do with top speed to say otherwise is ignorant and no one is claiming it's a major defining criterion and it was an explanation on how this car could be faster with less horsepower because it has less weight to haul around.
@ScottiDucati Please for the love of your God type into google something along the lines of 'does weight effect the top speed of a car' your calling me ignorant when your not even willing to do that. Please dont make yourself look even more stupid.
why do you insist on clinging to this notion? you asked how it could be faster despite not having as nearly as much HP I gave you the explanation , it wouldn't need as much h/p because it's lighter
And another fact you glossed over is Reeves Callaway said outright if the cat did 254mph and it weighed 3900lbs it would be even faster if they shaved 1000lbs off of it.
@ScottiDucati thats not an explanation. Thats just a collection of opinions. Yes F=MA but that doesn't effect top speed. Less weight means better acceleration, handling and breaking, but not top speed. Please give me some sort of physics or maths based evidence for your theory.
No it's an explanation for how the Corvette can be as fast or slightly faster despite not having as much h/p , it doesn't need 1001HP to get to the same speed because it's carrying less weight.
Stop harping on this weight issue , it's all you have when all your other ignorant points were dismantled. Let's say weight has nothing to do with top speed , no problem , all your other points are still ignorant.
@ScottiDucati Why was this car never tested by Guinness world records? Why did no one else manage to achieve this top speed? And please stop just stating th same point over and over again with ZERO evidence to back yourself up. If its a given fact weight effects top speed, then it must have at least some sources on the internet. But you fail to give any. BECAUSE THERE ARE NON.
They never cared about a Guinness record that was their test development , it was an exercise to showcase their abilities. And no one else did it ? they did 231MPH the year previous at a top speed shoot-out for Car and Driver magazine no one else did it before them and it took an eternity for someone else to come close.
And I don't care about the weight issue I already said keep that point it's meaningless , you won a cookie happy now? this car IS faster despite being lighter
@ScottiDucati Ok, in 2005 the Koenigsegg CCR did 242mph, it did that speed with a drag coefficient of 0.297, 827bhp and, even though it doesn't matter, a weight of 2600lbs. So less drag, a closer power to the Corvette than the Vette is to the Veyron and, once again it doesnt matter, less wieght all equals 12mph slower... Try explaining that.
I don't have to explain anything , the weight issue is all you're clinging to because your other points were corrected.
The Corvette is still faster than the base Veyron and the Konigsegg regardless of the stats. and it's almost as fast as the Veyron Supersport ( which has 1200HP ) which is electronically limited to 258MPH despite only having 898HP
@ScottiDucati I have no melicious intent against Callaway, or you. Theres no doubt that this car was bloody awesome in its day and probably would have been the fastest in the world at that point, but given everything Ive seen and given every other example of cars that are almost identicle, I do not see how it could achieve that speed. Based on other cars that power and that drag coefficient puts it around high 230s to low 240s. Its good but i dbout it can break the laws of physics.
How about the Winston Cup 1987 Monte Carlo that weighed 3700lbs and with ONLY 640BHP did 240MPH? just because you can't figure it out doesn't mean it didn't happen.
@ScottiDucati The maximum speed I could find for any NASCAR was around 210mph, no where did it mention 240mph. Where are you getting that figure from?
It's from a Road & Track article from January 1987 ( I have the magazine ) they wanted to see who was fastest between the Winston-cup ( Nascar ) and a Porsche 962-C and it was about this very track ( TRC ) the Porsche did just 227
@ScottiDucati Ok Ive seen the source and belive it actually exists, granted ive not read it, but I also found various sites claiming the top speed of the Porsche to be over 240. Dont forget as well the drag coefficient of those cars would be insanely low. In out rigth speed configuration that NASCAR could go as low as 0.22 or something silly like that, same with the Porsche.
If I recall correctly they said the Porsche would have done a higher speed depending on the gearing , because they were doing 240MPH down the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans back in the 80s
@ScottiDucati Doesnt that hold the lap record still? Anyway shall just leave it at this? Where as the top speed of the Vette may be dubious and illogical based off of similar cars, a miriad of things could have effected the out come of the top speed, even something as silly as a warm day could give a couple of mph, or the dyno they used could have been miscalabrated or anything you can think of. Regardless I still look at those figures and think something doesn't add up but neither of....
I believe their top speed , I get your point though lots of claims are made and even few are proven ( Vector comes to mind ) but it's fun going tit-for-tat on here discussing cars you raise some valid points and I like getting other points of view .
us can prove or disprove our theories so the debate cant be settled. Hey, a whole Youtube argument that remained remotly civilised. Ohh and have you seen that blue moon tonight?
Urrrrrm guys? This car has 200bhp less than a Veyron. It has a drag coeficient of 0.34 and a veyron has 0.36 in top speed mode. Regardless of gearing, tyers or anything else, this car can not do that speed. And with no official timing devices and no outside authorities to confirm it, something seems fishy to me. let alone how unstable it would be at that speed with 80s aerodynamics.
The official timing devices were the ones used at the track , The Transportation Research Center in East Liberty Ohio , Goggle it it's a full service research facility with two 2.0 mile straights.
And ' 80's aerodynamics ' ? how about late sixties early seventies aerodynamics when NASCAR Superbirds and Daytona Chargers were running 200MPH ? these cars had CD of just .28
Sledgehammer wouldn't need more HP to run that speed because it's lighter 1K lbs lighter in fact.
This actually had 898HP so if we're talking compared to a regular Veyron it's only down 103HP but like I touched on it's 1000 lbs lighter to boot and Tim Good was hired to do the aerodynamics for the car which helped over the stock Corvette.
@ScottiDucati Weight has nothing to do with top speed and aerodynamics doesn't just mean reducing drag, at those speeds the front wheels are pretty much useless for keeping the car stable so its down to the air flow over the car, and 900hp sounds more reasonable but I still have doubts, I'd beleive 240 but not 254
Weight has nothing to do with top speed? says you. you asked how could this be faster despite being down 200HP ( which it's not ) and I explained its weighs considerably less it wouldn't need as much HP to go the same speed or better. And Reeves Callaway actually said this car with reduced weight would go even faster.
And I already explained to you the results came from the TRS own timing so what you believe what you want it doesn't change the facts.
@ScottiDucati Since your so keep on facts, try actually looking up if weight has anything to do with top speed. Maths doesnt lie. the equation is driving force=friction=0 or in other words, the driving force is equal to all other frictional forces. Mass simply does not come into it.
Ironic you're speaking of facts , seeing you glossed right over the ones I typed. and how about those 80s aerodynamics? ;-)
it requires more h/p to get a heavier car to equal the same top speed , which was my point on how the Vette can be faster despite not having as much h/p
weight is NOT the end-all-be-all defining factor but it's the explanation for how the Vette is faster despite your claims to the contrary.
@ScottiDucati As I stated, aerodynamics does not just mean making something streamlined. Cars in the 1930s went 200+mph, aerodynamics on cars was very much in its infancy in the 80s, so the air flow over the car would unstablise the car instead of pin it to the ground like modern cars. At anything over 230+ the wheels are pretty much useless for stabalizing the car, so its up to the aero to compensate. And weight has NOTING to so with top speed. Please explain to me how it does.
And did you miss the part where I said Callaway hired an aerodynamicist? and again you keep harping on this weight issue , It was explained to you multiple times already , the Sledgehammer can be faster than the Veyron with less h/p because it weighs less and doesn't need equal the h/p to get it there.
Weight alone isn't the defining factor , lots of variables but it was offered as an explanation why it could be slightly faster despite not having more h/p
@ScottiDucati Any form of physics to back up your opinion?You can disprove your self at home. Take a penny and something heavy and drop them from the same height. You'll notice they hit the ground at roughly the same time. Assume the driving force is gravity and the resistive forces are the same, air resistance. This model is exactly the same as the 2 cars. Mass doesn't effect the overall top speed.
Again you're missing the point. The Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette can get to equal or slightly better top speed WITH LESS HORSEPOWER because it's much lighter which means it has less weight to carry around.
you claimed it couldn't do it with only 800hp ( which was wrong because it had 898 ) it did it regardless of what you think . It went 254.76MPH and was timed using the TRC's equipment.
@ScottiDucati Once again the same statement. Weight does not effect top speed. 'Less weight to carry around' would only effect acceleration, handling and breaking. It wouldnt change either the driving force or the resistive force, so how would speed be effected? And if it was officially timed? Why no world record?
Again it has less weight to move around so ( pay attention ) it doesn't need equal or more h/p to reach the top speed.
I AM NOT saying it's faster because it's lighter I am saying it could reach equal or slightly better top speed with less horsepower because it's lighter. You claimed it was down 200hp and couldn't do it just based on that.
@ScottiDucati And Im still waiting on why top speed is related to weight. 'Doesn't need as much power to move it around' does not prove anything, just your misunderstanding of the physics at work. Top speed depends on the power of the car and resistance. Not power to weight, thats acceleration. At top speed, the pushing force, the power of the car, is equal to the resistance of the air. So the acceleration is 0. So power to weight doesnt come into it.
You're still waiting? either you're trolling or trying to save face with the one saving grace question.
I DO NOT care about the weight issue you're clinging to. I'll say you are correct and I am wrong , this doesn't change the Callaway is still faster or the multiple other points you were completely wrong on.
@ScottiDucati But how? how can it be faster? it has 100bhp less and virtually the same drag coefficient. Gearing could play a part but One has to assume both cars were geared for absolute speed.
How? gearing is one of them which is why the 0-60 of this Vette is 3.9 sec and the 1/4 mile is 10.6@146MPH , which is slower than then Veyron , lots of reasons why I don't pretend to know all of them but it doesn't change what transpired.
@ScottiDucati the Veyrons 0-60 and 1/4 mile time has more to do with 4 wheel drive and the extra power/tourque. And given both cars were made specifically to break speed records (official or not) you have to assume both companies geared their cars to go as fast as possible. Also, Dont you find it strange that the test drivers could only get about 220/230 out of it but as soon as someone from Callaway jumped in it did 254?
I agree about the all-wheel drive but look at the differences in trap speeds in the 1/4 mile 146MPH for the Vette compared to 140MPH for the Veyron seems like they are geared differently
And they got 220/230 out of it due to a mis-fire in the injection system and if you look at around 4.39 mark you'll see duct tape on the front end they noticed either a low or high pressure area around this part of the car taped it up and then after that the car went 254MPH
@ScottiDucati Well yes they will be geared differently, the Veyron has a 7 speed box and the Callaway has 6 speeds. and hold on... "The folks at the test track said 'gee, the car seems to be working fine, how fast do you expect it to go?'" Direct quote. Something tells me the test drivers would notice a mis-fire with the engine at almost full revs
This particular car was only a 5 speed. If I recall correctly . Google Callawayownersgroup and the word Sledgehammer and you can read all about the problems with the car.
It's faster for a host of reasons NOT because it's lighter. ( although it doesn't need as much H/P as the Veyron to do it because it is lighter. )
Who said they wanted the record ? the involves Guinness and a two way run in opposite directions and then then totals averaged out. Again this was a company exercise they didn't care about any official records if they did then they would have had it because back in 89 there was nothing remotely close.
How about this for 80s aerodynamics. R&T magazine in 87 top speed tested a Porsche 962C against a Winston Cup ( NASCAR ) Monte Carlo at the same track as this video and guess which had a higher top speed?
The Porsche did 227MPH and the Monte did 240MPH despite being down 80HP and weighing 1630lbs more !! never mind being N/A OHV V8 vs twin turbo flat 6
@Innocuoustroll it's not just drag coefficient,it's also frontal area.that's how bikes can have a horrific CD but still go 180 with 190hp.they have a small frontal area.IIRC the "aerodynamic" hayabusa has like a .56 CD
@Bamananatic A Callaway collector bought it along with 3 or 4 other Vettes at the Barrett Jackson auction a few years back. And no matter what Callaway said John Lingenfelter built this motor.
Wow just incredible, I am from the UK and I hope the Top Gear team see this they are always slagging American cars, I personally have a Corvette 40th aniversary and have have drove a C5 and I love them. What makes me angry they say that they cannot handle corners and say they can only drive in a straight line. But the speed of the Sledgehammer alll of those years ago is simply amazing.
This car was actually the byproduct of another Callaway Corvette which did 235MPH in a Road & Track top speed shoot-out. The car had some rough mannerisms which Reeves asked himself if he could make a more refined user friendly car and the end result was the Sledgehammer
Quite a remarkable achievement considering the size of the company and this was back in 1988 ! it took a long time for someone to equal that type of performance.
Ahmmm... let's see... A guy in a big shed with money can get a 5.7 litre engine from the 80's to get huge amounts of horsepower, and manage to get a fairly cheap car to go 254MPH. German scientists with millions need an 8 litre V16 engien and 4 turbos to get "only" 1000 hp that will go AS fast after 30 years. Ahmmmm... That corvette kicks ass...
@CC8sX06 Yeah, i made a mistake. Anyways, a W16 needs a different transmission, just like an H shaped engine, and that kind of transmission that gets the power from both parts of the engine is really inefficient in comparasion with the normal transmission... They could've done a lot better for way less with the veyron.
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch The veyron is a very fast comfortable not really efficient luxury car, while that
corvette is desined for speed and racing purposes. The 'vette is faster and that's a fact. Now, i'll think about what santa has to do with this, unless it was a sarcasm trial with not much sense, and what makes me a jerk in my first comment...
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch Never mentioned this as the fastest car in the world... Before the supersport, there was the shelby that went 2 km/h faster than the corvette. What i say is that with almost 2.5 litres less, less than 4 turbos and much less money, this car did more than a 2 million euro bugatti made by scientists from VW, and this was made, remember, 22 years ago. With a car design that is almost 30 years old. Read and re read my comment, i dont mention the fastest car in the world.
Neither did I. But you said, the Corvette is faster than the Veyron, that is just false. Cause the Bugatti VEYRON Super Sport IS a Veyron, and it IS faster than the Corvette.
You're right, it's impressive what this guy has done with this Corvette years ago, but you cannot compare it to the Veyron with a whole Company behind it, as you mentioned.
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch I didn't say faster, i said AS fast. Meaning a bit over 400 km/h. the Veyron SS is limited to 415, but it can reach even a bit more. Still, they all go a bit over 400. And for the veyron it takes 4 turbos, 8000cc carbon fiber and kevlar and millions of €. And to get a bit over 400, the corvette, 20 years before, needs 5700cc, two turbos, fiberglass, and not nearly as much money. Plus the 'vette was much more advanced for it's time than the SS is. That's what i said.
Yeah thanks, you don't have to write every single fact about both cars engines again, I got it.
And what you said in your previous comment was: "The 'vette is faster and that's a fact." Reading this sentence I'm pretty positive you DIDN'T say AS fast as...
"254MPH. German scientists with millions need an 8 litre V16 engien and 4 turbos to get "only" 1000 hp that will go AS fast after 30 years. Ahmmmm... That corvette kicks ass..." -that's copied from my first comment. the only one of which i've talked about, my only reference, and the only point i want to make. I already explained it, so i doubt i have to write it once again.
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch To cars do the same, for different amounts of money, resources and the technology of their time. I compare them, and to me, the 'vette is the winner. It doesn't sound stupid or unfair to me, but it's okay. I keep seeing my comparasion as fair, but if you have a superior mind to mine, it's ok. I can't keep up. If my comments don't match well between each other, it's because yours don't have to do with anything i say.
@machone7I You'd be surprised.You never know who you're talking to,and,what the deficit level/depth is.I never knew about this Vette.Very impressive street car.
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch Well, don't bother answer me repeating myself and a conversation that you can read. Maybe i'm not right. So tell me, a young stupid guy, why what i say is idiotic and completely nonsense?
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch I talk about a standard veyron, you pop in with a veyron supersports. I say that a car that goes 408 km/h is fasters than one that goes 402. Obvious. You answer that the veyron SS is faster, i say that i wasn't talking about the SS. I reference my first comment and you find holes in other comments. You say too that i can't compare two supercars that reach similar speeds and the companies behind them. I make myself, in my opinion, clear enough. Then i'm entirely stupid.
@1994Jearbear I think i already answered to that... I know. It was a fairly irrelevant mistake. Anyways, making a transmission for a W16 is much more difficult than for a V16. That means a lot of power is lost... And they are two normal Audi V 8s together... Wouldn't pay over 1 million $ for a car made out of audi pieces.
@machone7I I thought like you until I actually watched the car being built , it is a master piece , people saying I would have 3 of this and 2 of that for the price need not apply the car is for those that WANT to pay that price for the exclusivity of saying We normal people will never have one. If you are super rich you could buy a Veyron with the interest from one investment no one buys a veyron that doesnt get that. watch the vid showing the w16built, furthest thing from 2 v8's it is w16
@toob247 I have seen the car being built... And i think it's bullshit. I would ever have one. It's not pretty, and really overprized. It's kind of soul less too. I haven't got a veyron, i hate it also, but i have a '09 dodge challenger. It's fast, but not the fastest, won't handle as good as a lotus, it's not bad quality but there's plenty of plastic inside it. But i wouldn't change it for a veyron. It's fun, beautiful, sounds great and has a lot of personality. The veyron lacks that.
@machone7I i'm sure if you did the same thing with a dodge viper, you could make it go 260-270. I think it would be a waste to build a car that only goes fast in a straight line though, no offense to drag racing people.
@KrazyKuul111 Well, the viper is one of the best handling cars out there with a big engine and no electronic aids and no computer controlling it at all... Remember that the Viper ACR had the fastes time for a production car round the nurburgring for a long time. And the Corvette C4 handled really well along with contemporary prosches, mid ferraris and the countach. And a car that goes 254MPH HAS to handle well or it would be a death trap, so i don't see straight lines anywhere.
at top speed the Veryon burns a set of tires off in 15 min and that is the slower veryon and the price to keep rolling down the road is equal to a brand new Z06 carbon fiber and they are supposed to last a long time wonder how many Zo6's that equates to the life time up keep that is I would have to say a brand new Zo6 will last longer than 15 min probably months if you open the gas tank but money is no object and who wants to sniff gas fumes so just leave it and have another delivered
@VeinAST: And I'd still rather not crash in either of them ;-) If you ram head on at, say 100mph, you might as well be driving a tank that'll survive it largely intact, you inside will simply disintegrate into pulp...
Clearly the Callaway Sledgehammer was a mighty fine effort in its day and I won't argue with the brilliance of it; however, it seems that quite a number of people in this forum are attacking the Bugatti Veyron as if it's pure existence is a threat to the Callaway. Get over it guys, the Bugatti is fast, desirable and it deserves every award it gets because it's a damn fine piece of engineering. Let's drop these comparisons and enjoy the cars for what they are.
@Azz1883 See I'm the exact opposite of you. I believe the Veyron is a piece of terrible engineering. They have 16 cylinders and 4 turbos that only bring it up to a little over 1000hp. Look at the Aero its only got 8cyls and 2 turbos and outputs a few hundred more horse than the Veryon.
@bphockey23 I can see your point, and I have previously considered the fact that the Veyron isn't as powerful as one might expect. However, having read countless reviews and stories about its development, it appears there're other goals in mind. The Veyron is not only a very powerful and extremely fast (in acceleration and top speed) production car, but it's also refined, reliable and usable in everyday driving situations. How many cars do you know of that can tick all these boxes?
@sirlonghair The Callaway Sledgehammer wasn't a production car for a start, but I also find it hard to believe that a small-project 1980s 5.7 litre V8 could deliver its power and torque as seamlessly as a state-of-the-art modern 8.0 litre W16. C'mon guys, let's look at the facts without the patriotism.
@Azz1883 well the video above is all the proof I need it is a street legal nearly 1000Hp pump gas car that can be serviced and fixed at any competent garage driven by any driver on normal streets and do 254.76MPH with the air-conditioning running jamming the sound system buy parts from a thousand aftermarket co.at any parts store WHAT ARE YOUR FACTS took 20 years for Germany to answer with a Veryon and still it was overpriced under speed and the up keep is just unheard of 30G for tires 70G M&B
@Azz1883 ok I looked at the video again and didn't sing the anthem at all and I saw a car driven on the road in the rain to and from a closed race track wear it ran lap after lap at 254.76MPH if you go to NRE you can watch videos of twin turbo small and big blocks with a couple thousand Hp.run smoothly in traffic on public streets that w 16 @1100Hp is probably really making 1600Hp but it takes 500Hp just to turn all those moving parts making huge heat from friction not to mention weight
@Azz1883 Come on dude. Its time for people to come to reality and see that the Bugatti Veyron isn't the all time greatest car people make it out to be. Its just simply overpriced, overrated and worshiped by fanboys all around the world, because they just clicked in fastest car in the world on google and the Veyron happen to pop up. Chevy motors are some of the strongest motors in the world. Why do you think people put LS1's in cars from RX7s to Beamers and etc etc. And thats a FACT.
@dankebuddha I can think of something that's faster than the Veyron too, it's called a bullet. We can all think of cars that might get off the line faster, but the idea here is that a machine can do it with such refinement and style. The Venom GT is a rip off of a Lotus Elise/Exige. I'd like to see Hennessey build a car from scratch that can match the Veyron in terms of performance, refinement and style. And btw, the SSC Aero is not as fast as the Veyron SS.
@Azz1883 i said the new aero not the old one and ask anybody they have driven it and it's just as refined a road car as the gayron and the venom gt only share some body panels with the lotus every thing in the car is one off from suspension to drive train you cant stretch a car over 1 foot and expect it to be the same lotus u jackass your just a fan boy that doesn't do any research and post's cliff notes as facts and don't know what your talking about
You know people who hate one way or another are ignorant jack asses. It's an amazing feat that this Corvette did the speed. I don't know how long it can maintain that speed however and perhaps the difference between the Bughatti that can maintain that speed until it runs out of gas and this Corvette.
Also, anyone who tries to compare this to a Supra doesn't realize the amount of aerodynamic engineering that goes into accomplishing that top speed. Or the weight difference of a fiberglass car vs
254mph in the 1980's with a Corvette. Fuck all your 2GayZ Supra's and Bugatti Gayron's. both Dyno queens!. This car did it with only 810hp, those fucking cars need well over a 1000hp.
The Veyron never beat this for the fastest top speed of a road legal car until the SS came out, the Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette reached 254.7 mph, the Veyron has officially a top speed of 253 mph. The Callaway Sledgehammer Corvettes were made to order if you wanted one, so maybe not a true production car, but I wouldn't really call the Veyron a production car either.
@fleetwoodsucks ummm did u not watch the video? the car went around a curve, well maybe in ur "gay arse" whatever u wanna call it dont call those "half circle" things at the end of a streight stretch curves, i gues what im tryin to say is i dont like the whole "gay arse american muscle car" comment if u dont like american muscle cars dont watch em
The car was by callaway . Lingenfelter built a 350 chevy for the car . Twin turbo . Pump gas . 1012 horses . Detuned for better idle . 254 mph at 880 horse tune . 19 mpg . 2 wheel drive . In reality , just a tuner . Still a corvette .
thank you Jhon for this masterpiece ...22 years ahead of its time and still and your creations are still being built as some of the most formidible forcees ever created..thanks Jhon ..R.I.P
the 80s are so under rated as far as cars go, this is the decade that brought, the mr2, 300z, amc eagle s/x4, delorean, all of the insane group B rally cars, and so many more.
I really don't understand the veyron hate in this video. Not to disgrace the corvette in this video, that's amazing, but the veyron was engineered to stay at 1k HP for years and years without ever breaking down, engineered with aerodynamics in mind, and a stable engine. Yeah, you can pin 50 turbochargers onto a V8, but it won't be any where near as reliable or engineer orgasmic as the guys at Bugatti did.
Mclaren F1 killer! and its 5 years older!
Jamieboi5 5 days ago
It is cool but i'd hardly call that factory production. I'd call it a modified Corvette.
DrBIeed 1 week ago
I always loved the corvette sledgehammer
flickLowks310 1 month ago
Larry Larson's 1966 Chevy Nova with twin-turbo 565" big-block runs 6.9 sec 211mph 1/4 mile and drives it on the street . I bet that same engine in a 2012 Corvette would have a top speed today of at least 275mph .
jogibajr 1 month ago
I agree. While today's Veyron is fast, this was over 20 YEARS AGO, and it didn't cost anywhere near as much. Go Chevy, Go Corvette.
Roy111644 1 month ago 2
back in 1988 is pretty epic
laurence265 2 months ago
tuned scrap. Veyron is jewel. Tuned Skoda Octavia 2,0L turbo can eat it (Boneville record is 367km/h)
tvojootec 3 months ago
@tvojootec Veyron is crap. 1001BHP out of a SIXTEEN cylinder engine and FOUR tubos.....crap
07Z06ss 3 months ago 6
@07Z06ss ...the Veyron is a beautiful luxury vehicle. I love Callaway's conversions, but there's no need to denigrate other cars. :)
Lastman0nEarth 3 months ago
@07Z06ss not to mention veyron uses VW V8's...corvette 1 v8 twin trubo and tons of fun
raworawr 1 month ago
@raworawr So true, the Vette uses half the Turbos and half the cylinders and beats the Veyron top speed.
07Z06ss 1 month ago
@tvojootec Eat what? 367km/h=228mph
Sledgehammer: 254.7mph=410km/h
This was back in 1988 which was an unfathomable speed for a street legal car of the era. No supercar could even touch that speed for nearly two decades. Give credit where credit's due.
keepitUG 1 week ago
i miss ole john. i wonder what he would have come with , with the technology available today i remember buying the magazine just for this article
red6847 3 months ago
i miss ole john. i wonder what he would have come with , with the technology available today
red6847 3 months ago
dis car is AWESOME
sixfeetmonsta 3 months ago
It sounds hungry,
Feed it a Veyron!
seinfeldfan7898 3 months ago 13
SO why is the Veyron considered the fastest car? This goes faster and I have just heard about it.
xpiecemealx 4 months ago
@xpiecemealx Where have you been?? Callaway has been doing vettes since i was a kid!! God bless Reeves Callaway!!!
nickthastick 3 months ago
Five Stars. Callaway is the way to go in a real American Super Car!!!!
kikelambs 4 months ago
i like how engineers of that era talk like engineers and not salesmen
OsmiumVIII 4 months ago 2
1001 comments oh the irony
rate it up if you are sick and tired hearing about veyrons
stig422 5 months ago 37
i seen how they made this cars ( they made them in canada quebec and they design by Paul deutchman the guys who creat the T REX ) they remove everyting make the cars larger , beter brake , beter engine , beter transmission , this things is not a corvette its someting way beter .
bobilator1 5 months ago
LOL at the "youtube experts" that think, that a W16 is two V8s welded/bolted/glued together :D Engine design isn't like that :D It has a unique crank case, 8 cylinders on each side in two rows, so total 4 rows... So it's not as long as V16, much shorter, similar to a V10. It has 1 crankshaft of course... And no, VW doesn't need a W16 engine for 1000 HP. They wanted a unique engine design, that nobody else has, so that's why a W16. Veyron is not only about speed, but standing out of the crpwd.
Banderius79 5 months ago
amazing this car speed 408 Km/h!
danNYx86 5 months ago
bugatti GAYRON
noshabibis 5 months ago
Callaway Corvette > Bugatti Veyron
tiopaul 6 months ago 3
why wasnt this car named one fo the fastest production cars?
cipkid9 6 months ago
@cipkid9
It's a customized car.
Oh, and it's faster than the bugatti veyron.
Vaicurious 6 months ago
holly sh*t 254 mph thats faster than todays corvette zr1
tylerdbrown20 6 months ago
Now onto the stupid remark. Stupid would be committing to a statement when you don't have the facts , like this has 200hp less ( when in reality is has only 103 ) like it can't do that speed ( despite being timed by the TRC ) and it had no ' official ' timing devices ( again the ones used by the TRC ) and the 80s aerodynamics ( which were good enough to do a 240MPH run in a 1987 Monte Carlo )
almost everything you typed was ignorant and you have the audacity to call others stupid? lol
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
OK for everyone ranting about weight, weight has nothing to do with top speed. I guess you could take half a mile an hour away for the extra friction on the tyres but thats it.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
It has something to do with top speed to say otherwise is ignorant and no one is claiming it's a major defining criterion and it was an explanation on how this car could be faster with less horsepower because it has less weight to haul around.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Please for the love of your God type into google something along the lines of 'does weight effect the top speed of a car' your calling me ignorant when your not even willing to do that. Please dont make yourself look even more stupid.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
why do you insist on clinging to this notion? you asked how it could be faster despite not having as nearly as much HP I gave you the explanation , it wouldn't need as much h/p because it's lighter
And another fact you glossed over is Reeves Callaway said outright if the cat did 254mph and it weighed 3900lbs it would be even faster if they shaved 1000lbs off of it.
and stupid? reduced to attacks already?
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati thats not an explanation. Thats just a collection of opinions. Yes F=MA but that doesn't effect top speed. Less weight means better acceleration, handling and breaking, but not top speed. Please give me some sort of physics or maths based evidence for your theory.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
No it's an explanation for how the Corvette can be as fast or slightly faster despite not having as much h/p , it doesn't need 1001HP to get to the same speed because it's carrying less weight.
Stop harping on this weight issue , it's all you have when all your other ignorant points were dismantled. Let's say weight has nothing to do with top speed , no problem , all your other points are still ignorant.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Why was this car never tested by Guinness world records? Why did no one else manage to achieve this top speed? And please stop just stating th same point over and over again with ZERO evidence to back yourself up. If its a given fact weight effects top speed, then it must have at least some sources on the internet. But you fail to give any. BECAUSE THERE ARE NON.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
They never cared about a Guinness record that was their test development , it was an exercise to showcase their abilities. And no one else did it ? they did 231MPH the year previous at a top speed shoot-out for Car and Driver magazine no one else did it before them and it took an eternity for someone else to come close.
And I don't care about the weight issue I already said keep that point it's meaningless , you won a cookie happy now? this car IS faster despite being lighter
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Ok, in 2005 the Koenigsegg CCR did 242mph, it did that speed with a drag coefficient of 0.297, 827bhp and, even though it doesn't matter, a weight of 2600lbs. So less drag, a closer power to the Corvette than the Vette is to the Veyron and, once again it doesnt matter, less wieght all equals 12mph slower... Try explaining that.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
I don't have to explain anything , the weight issue is all you're clinging to because your other points were corrected.
The Corvette is still faster than the base Veyron and the Konigsegg regardless of the stats. and it's almost as fast as the Veyron Supersport ( which has 1200HP ) which is electronically limited to 258MPH despite only having 898HP
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Thats just flat out rediculous, thats like me saying 'I can run faster than Usain Bolt, despite my best 100m time being 12.98 seconds'
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
Okay they didn't actually do that speed , you uncovered their scheme on YouTube 22 years latter , congrats.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati I have no melicious intent against Callaway, or you. Theres no doubt that this car was bloody awesome in its day and probably would have been the fastest in the world at that point, but given everything Ive seen and given every other example of cars that are almost identicle, I do not see how it could achieve that speed. Based on other cars that power and that drag coefficient puts it around high 230s to low 240s. Its good but i dbout it can break the laws of physics.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
How about the Winston Cup 1987 Monte Carlo that weighed 3700lbs and with ONLY 640BHP did 240MPH? just because you can't figure it out doesn't mean it didn't happen.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati The maximum speed I could find for any NASCAR was around 210mph, no where did it mention 240mph. Where are you getting that figure from?
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
It's from a Road & Track article from January 1987 ( I have the magazine ) they wanted to see who was fastest between the Winston-cup ( Nascar ) and a Porsche 962-C and it was about this very track ( TRC ) the Porsche did just 227
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Ok Ive seen the source and belive it actually exists, granted ive not read it, but I also found various sites claiming the top speed of the Porsche to be over 240. Dont forget as well the drag coefficient of those cars would be insanely low. In out rigth speed configuration that NASCAR could go as low as 0.22 or something silly like that, same with the Porsche.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
If I recall correctly they said the Porsche would have done a higher speed depending on the gearing , because they were doing 240MPH down the Mulsanne straight at Le Mans back in the 80s
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Doesnt that hold the lap record still? Anyway shall just leave it at this? Where as the top speed of the Vette may be dubious and illogical based off of similar cars, a miriad of things could have effected the out come of the top speed, even something as silly as a warm day could give a couple of mph, or the dyno they used could have been miscalabrated or anything you can think of. Regardless I still look at those figures and think something doesn't add up but neither of....
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
I believe their top speed , I get your point though lots of claims are made and even few are proven ( Vector comes to mind ) but it's fun going tit-for-tat on here discussing cars you raise some valid points and I like getting other points of view .
take care.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
us can prove or disprove our theories so the debate cant be settled. Hey, a whole Youtube argument that remained remotly civilised. Ohh and have you seen that blue moon tonight?
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati And yes ok sorry for the 'attack'
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
Urrrrrm guys? This car has 200bhp less than a Veyron. It has a drag coeficient of 0.34 and a veyron has 0.36 in top speed mode. Regardless of gearing, tyers or anything else, this car can not do that speed. And with no official timing devices and no outside authorities to confirm it, something seems fishy to me. let alone how unstable it would be at that speed with 80s aerodynamics.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
The official timing devices were the ones used at the track , The Transportation Research Center in East Liberty Ohio , Goggle it it's a full service research facility with two 2.0 mile straights.
And ' 80's aerodynamics ' ? how about late sixties early seventies aerodynamics when NASCAR Superbirds and Daytona Chargers were running 200MPH ? these cars had CD of just .28
Sledgehammer wouldn't need more HP to run that speed because it's lighter 1K lbs lighter in fact.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
This actually had 898HP so if we're talking compared to a regular Veyron it's only down 103HP but like I touched on it's 1000 lbs lighter to boot and Tim Good was hired to do the aerodynamics for the car which helped over the stock Corvette.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Weight has nothing to do with top speed and aerodynamics doesn't just mean reducing drag, at those speeds the front wheels are pretty much useless for keeping the car stable so its down to the air flow over the car, and 900hp sounds more reasonable but I still have doubts, I'd beleive 240 but not 254
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
Weight has nothing to do with top speed? says you. you asked how could this be faster despite being down 200HP ( which it's not ) and I explained its weighs considerably less it wouldn't need as much HP to go the same speed or better. And Reeves Callaway actually said this car with reduced weight would go even faster.
And I already explained to you the results came from the TRS own timing so what you believe what you want it doesn't change the facts.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Since your so keep on facts, try actually looking up if weight has anything to do with top speed. Maths doesnt lie. the equation is driving force=friction=0 or in other words, the driving force is equal to all other frictional forces. Mass simply does not come into it.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
Ironic you're speaking of facts , seeing you glossed right over the ones I typed. and how about those 80s aerodynamics? ;-)
it requires more h/p to get a heavier car to equal the same top speed , which was my point on how the Vette can be faster despite not having as much h/p
weight is NOT the end-all-be-all defining factor but it's the explanation for how the Vette is faster despite your claims to the contrary.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati As I stated, aerodynamics does not just mean making something streamlined. Cars in the 1930s went 200+mph, aerodynamics on cars was very much in its infancy in the 80s, so the air flow over the car would unstablise the car instead of pin it to the ground like modern cars. At anything over 230+ the wheels are pretty much useless for stabalizing the car, so its up to the aero to compensate. And weight has NOTING to so with top speed. Please explain to me how it does.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
And did you miss the part where I said Callaway hired an aerodynamicist? and again you keep harping on this weight issue , It was explained to you multiple times already , the Sledgehammer can be faster than the Veyron with less h/p because it weighs less and doesn't need equal the h/p to get it there.
Weight alone isn't the defining factor , lots of variables but it was offered as an explanation why it could be slightly faster despite not having more h/p
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Any form of physics to back up your opinion?You can disprove your self at home. Take a penny and something heavy and drop them from the same height. You'll notice they hit the ground at roughly the same time. Assume the driving force is gravity and the resistive forces are the same, air resistance. This model is exactly the same as the 2 cars. Mass doesn't effect the overall top speed.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
Again you're missing the point. The Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette can get to equal or slightly better top speed WITH LESS HORSEPOWER because it's much lighter which means it has less weight to carry around.
you claimed it couldn't do it with only 800hp ( which was wrong because it had 898 ) it did it regardless of what you think . It went 254.76MPH and was timed using the TRC's equipment.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Once again the same statement. Weight does not effect top speed. 'Less weight to carry around' would only effect acceleration, handling and breaking. It wouldnt change either the driving force or the resistive force, so how would speed be effected? And if it was officially timed? Why no world record?
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
Again it has less weight to move around so ( pay attention ) it doesn't need equal or more h/p to reach the top speed.
I AM NOT saying it's faster because it's lighter I am saying it could reach equal or slightly better top speed with less horsepower because it's lighter. You claimed it was down 200hp and couldn't do it just based on that.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati And Im still waiting on why top speed is related to weight. 'Doesn't need as much power to move it around' does not prove anything, just your misunderstanding of the physics at work. Top speed depends on the power of the car and resistance. Not power to weight, thats acceleration. At top speed, the pushing force, the power of the car, is equal to the resistance of the air. So the acceleration is 0. So power to weight doesnt come into it.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
You're still waiting? either you're trolling or trying to save face with the one saving grace question.
I DO NOT care about the weight issue you're clinging to. I'll say you are correct and I am wrong , this doesn't change the Callaway is still faster or the multiple other points you were completely wrong on.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati But how? how can it be faster? it has 100bhp less and virtually the same drag coefficient. Gearing could play a part but One has to assume both cars were geared for absolute speed.
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
How? gearing is one of them which is why the 0-60 of this Vette is 3.9 sec and the 1/4 mile is 10.6@146MPH , which is slower than then Veyron , lots of reasons why I don't pretend to know all of them but it doesn't change what transpired.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati the Veyrons 0-60 and 1/4 mile time has more to do with 4 wheel drive and the extra power/tourque. And given both cars were made specifically to break speed records (official or not) you have to assume both companies geared their cars to go as fast as possible. Also, Dont you find it strange that the test drivers could only get about 220/230 out of it but as soon as someone from Callaway jumped in it did 254?
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
I agree about the all-wheel drive but look at the differences in trap speeds in the 1/4 mile 146MPH for the Vette compared to 140MPH for the Veyron seems like they are geared differently
And they got 220/230 out of it due to a mis-fire in the injection system and if you look at around 4.39 mark you'll see duct tape on the front end they noticed either a low or high pressure area around this part of the car taped it up and then after that the car went 254MPH
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@ScottiDucati Well yes they will be geared differently, the Veyron has a 7 speed box and the Callaway has 6 speeds. and hold on... "The folks at the test track said 'gee, the car seems to be working fine, how fast do you expect it to go?'" Direct quote. Something tells me the test drivers would notice a mis-fire with the engine at almost full revs
Innocuoustroll 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
This particular car was only a 5 speed. If I recall correctly . Google Callawayownersgroup and the word Sledgehammer and you can read all about the problems with the car.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
It's faster for a host of reasons NOT because it's lighter. ( although it doesn't need as much H/P as the Veyron to do it because it is lighter. )
Who said they wanted the record ? the involves Guinness and a two way run in opposite directions and then then totals averaged out. Again this was a company exercise they didn't care about any official records if they did then they would have had it because back in 89 there was nothing remotely close.
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll
How about this for 80s aerodynamics. R&T magazine in 87 top speed tested a Porsche 962C against a Winston Cup ( NASCAR ) Monte Carlo at the same track as this video and guess which had a higher top speed?
The Porsche did 227MPH and the Monte did 240MPH despite being down 80HP and weighing 1630lbs more !! never mind being N/A OHV V8 vs twin turbo flat 6
ScottiDucati 6 months ago
@Innocuoustroll it's not just drag coefficient,it's also frontal area.that's how bikes can have a horrific CD but still go 180 with 190hp.they have a small frontal area.IIRC the "aerodynamic" hayabusa has like a .56 CD
osp80 3 months ago
@osp80 Bikes also always have a great power to weight ratio. :-)
ekbusdriver 2 months ago
I don't understand all the Veyron hate here. The Veyron is an amazing car, and so is this. Are there any laws saying you can't like both?
Btw, does anyone know where this car is today?
Bamananatic 6 months ago
@Bamananatic A Callaway collector bought it along with 3 or 4 other Vettes at the Barrett Jackson auction a few years back. And no matter what Callaway said John Lingenfelter built this motor.
TheBarrett1971 6 months ago
Yeah except the handling is shit guys> This car is completely inpractical
stretch798 7 months ago
@stretch798 The handling is shit but it goes 254 mph. that doesn't sound right
luvscience44 6 months ago
This is enough to get the Bugatti and SSC a little nervous...and this was made 20 years ago! Imagine if GM did this kinda thing with a ZR1!
F0rM0th3rRussi4 7 months ago
@F0rM0th3rRussi4 already the Sledgehammer its a moded c4 ZR1
clkgrt 7 months ago
@clkgrt The C4 ZR-1 didn't come out until 1990, two years after this car.
chunkylover197 6 months ago
The best part? This was 1988 and they could legally drive the car back to the shop on public roads. Astounding achievement, gents.
FraAngelico729 7 months ago
Wow just incredible, I am from the UK and I hope the Top Gear team see this they are always slagging American cars, I personally have a Corvette 40th aniversary and have have drove a C5 and I love them. What makes me angry they say that they cannot handle corners and say they can only drive in a straight line. But the speed of the Sledgehammer alll of those years ago is simply amazing.
oliverjadech 7 months ago
Fastest Corvette.
ForNachos 7 months ago
Show this video to Veyron owners...i just wanna see their faces ;)
jonas240z 8 months ago
@jonas240z Yep! Callaway and Lingenfelter accomplished this 23 years ago! :D
FraAngelico729 7 months ago
Wow nerds and cars, he explains the pipe work like were all stupid, silly nerds lol
hypercordz 8 months ago
This car was actually the byproduct of another Callaway Corvette which did 235MPH in a Road & Track top speed shoot-out. The car had some rough mannerisms which Reeves asked himself if he could make a more refined user friendly car and the end result was the Sledgehammer
Quite a remarkable achievement considering the size of the company and this was back in 1988 ! it took a long time for someone to equal that type of performance.
ScottiDucati 8 months ago
Ahmmm... let's see... A guy in a big shed with money can get a 5.7 litre engine from the 80's to get huge amounts of horsepower, and manage to get a fairly cheap car to go 254MPH. German scientists with millions need an 8 litre V16 engien and 4 turbos to get "only" 1000 hp that will go AS fast after 30 years. Ahmmmm... That corvette kicks ass...
machone7I 8 months ago 41
@machone7I worst is a W16 not V
CC8sX06 7 months ago
@CC8sX06 Yeah, i made a mistake. Anyways, a W16 needs a different transmission, just like an H shaped engine, and that kind of transmission that gets the power from both parts of the engine is really inefficient in comparasion with the normal transmission... They could've done a lot better for way less with the veyron.
machone7I 7 months ago
@machone7I
Scientist? lol no Santa Claus did it
Jerk
YesIAmThatCoolBitch 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch The veyron is a very fast comfortable not really efficient luxury car, while that
corvette is desined for speed and racing purposes. The 'vette is faster and that's a fact. Now, i'll think about what santa has to do with this, unless it was a sarcasm trial with not much sense, and what makes me a jerk in my first comment...
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I
Bugatti Veyron Super Sport limited to 415 km per hour. That's more than 254 mph, right? That makes you a jerk :)
YesIAmThatCoolBitch 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch Never mentioned this as the fastest car in the world... Before the supersport, there was the shelby that went 2 km/h faster than the corvette. What i say is that with almost 2.5 litres less, less than 4 turbos and much less money, this car did more than a 2 million euro bugatti made by scientists from VW, and this was made, remember, 22 years ago. With a car design that is almost 30 years old. Read and re read my comment, i dont mention the fastest car in the world.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I
Neither did I. But you said, the Corvette is faster than the Veyron, that is just false. Cause the Bugatti VEYRON Super Sport IS a Veyron, and it IS faster than the Corvette.
You're right, it's impressive what this guy has done with this Corvette years ago, but you cannot compare it to the Veyron with a whole Company behind it, as you mentioned.
YesIAmThatCoolBitch 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch I didn't say faster, i said AS fast. Meaning a bit over 400 km/h. the Veyron SS is limited to 415, but it can reach even a bit more. Still, they all go a bit over 400. And for the veyron it takes 4 turbos, 8000cc carbon fiber and kevlar and millions of €. And to get a bit over 400, the corvette, 20 years before, needs 5700cc, two turbos, fiberglass, and not nearly as much money. Plus the 'vette was much more advanced for it's time than the SS is. That's what i said.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I
Yeah thanks, you don't have to write every single fact about both cars engines again, I got it.
And what you said in your previous comment was: "The 'vette is faster and that's a fact." Reading this sentence I'm pretty positive you DIDN'T say AS fast as...
YesIAmThatCoolBitch 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch Nice to see that...
"254MPH. German scientists with millions need an 8 litre V16 engien and 4 turbos to get "only" 1000 hp that will go AS fast after 30 years. Ahmmmm... That corvette kicks ass..." -that's copied from my first comment. the only one of which i've talked about, my only reference, and the only point i want to make. I already explained it, so i doubt i have to write it once again.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I
That's just bullshit. Think about it. That's just so stupid I'm strugling to find words for it. GOD thats dumb
enough said nice life idiot
YesIAmThatCoolBitch 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch To cars do the same, for different amounts of money, resources and the technology of their time. I compare them, and to me, the 'vette is the winner. It doesn't sound stupid or unfair to me, but it's okay. I keep seeing my comparasion as fair, but if you have a superior mind to mine, it's ok. I can't keep up. If my comments don't match well between each other, it's because yours don't have to do with anything i say.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I You just might be arguing with a complete idiot.
MrJohnnyDistortion 4 months ago
@MrJohnnyDistortion You can't expect much more from a kid called "yesiamthatcoolbitch" that googled Bugatti Veyron.
machone7I 4 months ago
@machone7I You'd be surprised.You never know who you're talking to,and,what the deficit level/depth is.I never knew about this Vette.Very impressive street car.
MrJohnnyDistortion 4 months ago
@MrJohnnyDistortion Yeah, my comment was kind of stupid... I totally agree with what you said.
machone7I 4 months ago
@machone7I LOL. ;-)
MrJohnnyDistortion 4 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch Well, don't bother answer me repeating myself and a conversation that you can read. Maybe i'm not right. So tell me, a young stupid guy, why what i say is idiotic and completely nonsense?
machone7I 5 months ago
@YesIAmThatCoolBitch I talk about a standard veyron, you pop in with a veyron supersports. I say that a car that goes 408 km/h is fasters than one that goes 402. Obvious. You answer that the veyron SS is faster, i say that i wasn't talking about the SS. I reference my first comment and you find holes in other comments. You say too that i can't compare two supercars that reach similar speeds and the companies behind them. I make myself, in my opinion, clear enough. Then i'm entirely stupid.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I Veyron has a 8 litre W16 not a V
1994Jearbear 5 months ago
@1994Jearbear I think i already answered to that... I know. It was a fairly irrelevant mistake. Anyways, making a transmission for a W16 is much more difficult than for a V16. That means a lot of power is lost... And they are two normal Audi V 8s together... Wouldn't pay over 1 million $ for a car made out of audi pieces.
machone7I 5 months ago
@machone7I I thought like you until I actually watched the car being built , it is a master piece , people saying I would have 3 of this and 2 of that for the price need not apply the car is for those that WANT to pay that price for the exclusivity of saying We normal people will never have one. If you are super rich you could buy a Veyron with the interest from one investment no one buys a veyron that doesnt get that. watch the vid showing the w16built, furthest thing from 2 v8's it is w16
toob247 4 months ago
@toob247 I have seen the car being built... And i think it's bullshit. I would ever have one. It's not pretty, and really overprized. It's kind of soul less too. I haven't got a veyron, i hate it also, but i have a '09 dodge challenger. It's fast, but not the fastest, won't handle as good as a lotus, it's not bad quality but there's plenty of plastic inside it. But i wouldn't change it for a veyron. It's fun, beautiful, sounds great and has a lot of personality. The veyron lacks that.
machone7I 4 months ago
@machone7I i'm sure if you did the same thing with a dodge viper, you could make it go 260-270. I think it would be a waste to build a car that only goes fast in a straight line though, no offense to drag racing people.
KrazyKuul111 4 months ago
@KrazyKuul111 Well, the viper is one of the best handling cars out there with a big engine and no electronic aids and no computer controlling it at all... Remember that the Viper ACR had the fastes time for a production car round the nurburgring for a long time. And the Corvette C4 handled really well along with contemporary prosches, mid ferraris and the countach. And a car that goes 254MPH HAS to handle well or it would be a death trap, so i don't see straight lines anywhere.
machone7I 4 months ago
holy shit, this thing sounds like death!
The23Jman 8 months ago
@noshabibis lol I agree the Veyron is fugly
stealthsurfer21 8 months ago 6
Who cares about the Veyron this is spectacular speed for its time...
stealthsurfer21 8 months ago
this looks more BEAUTIFUL than the Bugatti GAYron even thought it more than 20 yrs old!!!!!!!!
noshabibis 9 months ago
Sounds like an angry beast. Stay far away.
queasyeasy 9 months ago
I have been dreaming about this car since I was 14...
I'm now 37
LanceCampeau 10 months ago 14
@LanceCampeau find one. buy it. fuck money, its your dream.
danelio 7 months ago
@LanceCampeau me too 20...I'm 43!!
jdsmith16 5 months ago
@LanceCampeau 9 now 27 ;)
thatoneguyjosh 5 months ago
@LanceCampeau since I was 8... 35 now
EliteLX 4 months ago
if there wear not one person that could afford a Veryon then a lot more of us could drive cars like this
sirlonghair 10 months ago
Before I purchased a Veryon I would buy 50 zo6's and save money you have to look at upkeep not just initial price
sirlonghair 10 months ago 3
at top speed the Veryon burns a set of tires off in 15 min and that is the slower veryon and the price to keep rolling down the road is equal to a brand new Z06 carbon fiber and they are supposed to last a long time wonder how many Zo6's that equates to the life time up keep that is I would have to say a brand new Zo6 will last longer than 15 min probably months if you open the gas tank but money is no object and who wants to sniff gas fumes so just leave it and have another delivered
sirlonghair 10 months ago 2
Yeah and measured with GPS 200mph!!
Aliver87 10 months ago
@Aliver87 they used beams in time traps on a closed race track the timing was more accurate than GPS
sirlonghair 10 months ago
@VeinAST: And I'd still rather not crash in either of them ;-) If you ram head on at, say 100mph, you might as well be driving a tank that'll survive it largely intact, you inside will simply disintegrate into pulp...
80286 10 months ago
I'd still rather crash in a Veyron than in a Corvette.
All I wanted to see was it going round a track with a bit of exhaust noise rather than this cheesy American video.
VeinAST 10 months ago
I love playing pgr4 with this beast, it really rocks
enIightenment 11 months ago
I want porshe owners to watch this and cry
JoaquinSerrapio 11 months ago
Clearly the Callaway Sledgehammer was a mighty fine effort in its day and I won't argue with the brilliance of it; however, it seems that quite a number of people in this forum are attacking the Bugatti Veyron as if it's pure existence is a threat to the Callaway. Get over it guys, the Bugatti is fast, desirable and it deserves every award it gets because it's a damn fine piece of engineering. Let's drop these comparisons and enjoy the cars for what they are.
Azz1883 11 months ago 3
@Azz1883 See I'm the exact opposite of you. I believe the Veyron is a piece of terrible engineering. They have 16 cylinders and 4 turbos that only bring it up to a little over 1000hp. Look at the Aero its only got 8cyls and 2 turbos and outputs a few hundred more horse than the Veryon.
bphockey23 10 months ago
@bphockey23 I can see your point, and I have previously considered the fact that the Veyron isn't as powerful as one might expect. However, having read countless reviews and stories about its development, it appears there're other goals in mind. The Veyron is not only a very powerful and extremely fast (in acceleration and top speed) production car, but it's also refined, reliable and usable in everyday driving situations. How many cars do you know of that can tick all these boxes?
Azz1883 10 months ago
@Azz1883 I can name one and it was built in America 20 years ago
sirlonghair 10 months ago 3
@sirlonghair The Callaway Sledgehammer wasn't a production car for a start, but I also find it hard to believe that a small-project 1980s 5.7 litre V8 could deliver its power and torque as seamlessly as a state-of-the-art modern 8.0 litre W16. C'mon guys, let's look at the facts without the patriotism.
Azz1883 10 months ago
@Azz1883 well the video above is all the proof I need it is a street legal nearly 1000Hp pump gas car that can be serviced and fixed at any competent garage driven by any driver on normal streets and do 254.76MPH with the air-conditioning running jamming the sound system buy parts from a thousand aftermarket co.at any parts store WHAT ARE YOUR FACTS took 20 years for Germany to answer with a Veryon and still it was overpriced under speed and the up keep is just unheard of 30G for tires 70G M&B
sirlonghair 10 months ago
Comment removed
sirlonghair 10 months ago
@Azz1883 ok I looked at the video again and didn't sing the anthem at all and I saw a car driven on the road in the rain to and from a closed race track wear it ran lap after lap at 254.76MPH if you go to NRE you can watch videos of twin turbo small and big blocks with a couple thousand Hp.run smoothly in traffic on public streets that w 16 @1100Hp is probably really making 1600Hp but it takes 500Hp just to turn all those moving parts making huge heat from friction not to mention weight
sirlonghair 10 months ago
@Azz1883 Come on dude. Its time for people to come to reality and see that the Bugatti Veyron isn't the all time greatest car people make it out to be. Its just simply overpriced, overrated and worshiped by fanboys all around the world, because they just clicked in fastest car in the world on google and the Veyron happen to pop up. Chevy motors are some of the strongest motors in the world. Why do you think people put LS1's in cars from RX7s to Beamers and etc etc. And thats a FACT.
krocialblack 8 months ago 2
@Azz1883 i can name 2 more that cost a fraction of the veyron and are faster the venom gt and new ssc aero both american cars
dankebuddha 7 months ago
@dankebuddha I can think of something that's faster than the Veyron too, it's called a bullet. We can all think of cars that might get off the line faster, but the idea here is that a machine can do it with such refinement and style. The Venom GT is a rip off of a Lotus Elise/Exige. I'd like to see Hennessey build a car from scratch that can match the Veyron in terms of performance, refinement and style. And btw, the SSC Aero is not as fast as the Veyron SS.
Azz1883 7 months ago
@Azz1883 i said the new aero not the old one and ask anybody they have driven it and it's just as refined a road car as the gayron and the venom gt only share some body panels with the lotus every thing in the car is one off from suspension to drive train you cant stretch a car over 1 foot and expect it to be the same lotus u jackass your just a fan boy that doesn't do any research and post's cliff notes as facts and don't know what your talking about
dankebuddha 7 months ago
You know people who hate one way or another are ignorant jack asses. It's an amazing feat that this Corvette did the speed. I don't know how long it can maintain that speed however and perhaps the difference between the Bughatti that can maintain that speed until it runs out of gas and this Corvette.
Also, anyone who tries to compare this to a Supra doesn't realize the amount of aerodynamic engineering that goes into accomplishing that top speed. Or the weight difference of a fiberglass car vs
LordToxygene 11 months ago
Im sorry but how did Bugatti even get compared to this car? seriously... no comparison...
jesidawn13 11 months ago
254mph in the 1980's with a Corvette. Fuck all your 2GayZ Supra's and Bugatti Gayron's. both Dyno queens!. This car did it with only 810hp, those fucking cars need well over a 1000hp.
vfIskullangel 11 months ago
Great car of a great era,thanks for the video
Ansharzetec1 11 months ago
It is time that the host of tv show TOP GEAR was educated on this history. Who can help me get this forwarded?
covett1 11 months ago
Comment removed
Fleetfox10 11 months ago
The Veyron never beat this for the fastest top speed of a road legal car until the SS came out, the Callaway Sledgehammer Corvette reached 254.7 mph, the Veyron has officially a top speed of 253 mph. The Callaway Sledgehammer Corvettes were made to order if you wanted one, so maybe not a true production car, but I wouldn't really call the Veyron a production car either.
HomerTheTortoise 11 months ago
gay arse american muscle car. I'd like to see it go round a corner at speed. LOLOLOL
fleetwoodsucks 11 months ago
@fleetwoodsucks Id like to see any car that can hit those speeds and corner....
vfIskullangel 11 months ago
@fleetwoodsucks ummm did u not watch the video? the car went around a curve, well maybe in ur "gay arse" whatever u wanna call it dont call those "half circle" things at the end of a streight stretch curves, i gues what im tryin to say is i dont like the whole "gay arse american muscle car" comment if u dont like american muscle cars dont watch em
jesidawn13 11 months ago
The car was by callaway . Lingenfelter built a 350 chevy for the car . Twin turbo . Pump gas . 1012 horses . Detuned for better idle . 254 mph at 880 horse tune . 19 mpg . 2 wheel drive . In reality , just a tuner . Still a corvette .
ognomdrol 11 months ago
the bugatti gayron looks like a stretched out Volkswagen beetle. While the Callaway like a REAL MANS CAR.
noshabibis 11 months ago
thank you Jhon for this masterpiece ...22 years ahead of its time and still and your creations are still being built as some of the most formidible forcees ever created..thanks Jhon ..R.I.P
YellowCamaro85 1 year ago
thank you Jhon R.I.P for this masterpiece..i hope you know that your creations still stand as some of the most formidible forces ever created.
YellowCamaro85 1 year ago
fastest car on earth ain't a street car
mark4tk 1 year ago
they should get an offical speedtest for this so it can make the fastest production car list at number 3
GunsNRosesFan87 1 year ago
@GunsNRosesFan87 this aint a production car so it wouldn't go on that list
dankebuddha 11 months ago
bugatti=double the turbos, double the cylinders. double the shit to break. quadruple the price. man, fuck the veyron.
motostud08 1 year ago
@motostud08 typical yank comment right there lol
Fleetfox10 1 year ago
Do they ever state the hp of the Sledgehammer??
toddk911 1 year ago
@toddk911 890hp
redhot916spd 11 months ago
@toddk911 yes!
RacingRocks12 11 months ago
the 80s are so under rated as far as cars go, this is the decade that brought, the mr2, 300z, amc eagle s/x4, delorean, all of the insane group B rally cars, and so many more.
Troph2 1 year ago
I really don't understand the veyron hate in this video. Not to disgrace the corvette in this video, that's amazing, but the veyron was engineered to stay at 1k HP for years and years without ever breaking down, engineered with aerodynamics in mind, and a stable engine. Yeah, you can pin 50 turbochargers onto a V8, but it won't be any where near as reliable or engineer orgasmic as the guys at Bugatti did.
rex3453 1 year ago