Filed under: Videos, Supercars, Bugatti, Ferrari
VIDEO: Bugatti Veyron and Ferrari F40
As far as supercars go, the Bugatti Veyron and Ferrari F40 share little in common. Both have engines mounted amidship, two seats, and one turbocharger for each cylinder bank. Both sat at the absolute pinnacle of performance in their respective times. But that's where the similarities end.
While the heavy Veyron powers all four wheels with a 1000-hp quad-turbo W16 engine through a 7-speed dual-clutch semi-automatic gearbox, the super-light F40 was driven through a conventional 6-speed manual by a twin-turbo 3-liter V8 to the rear wheels. The Veyron is one of the most complicated cars ever devised, let alone produced, while the F40 was a straight-forward and brutally simple instrument.
Which would you rather have, the cruise missile or the bullet? The video after the jump might not answer the hypothetical question for you, but it does make for an entertaining view with a soundtrack of pure engine sounds unadulterated by the usual techno soundtrack.
[Source: EVO magazine]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
jj 8:11PM (4/25/2007)
The veyron remains one of the most monumental wastes on the planet. It may accelerate like a dragster, but so does a sport bike.
I'd rather carve canyon corners in, hell, a Miata - so OF COURSE i'd take the f40.
Reply
Reuben 8:14PM (4/25/2007)
F40 all the way! Does anyone else think the Veyron sounds like hell? Way too much turbo not enough engine, besides, the best cars don't need turbos (McLaren F1).
Reply
Bob-o 8:17PM (4/25/2007)
Wow, worst video ever.
Reply
ruggels 8:30PM (4/25/2007)
Anyone know how long it takes a sport bike to hit 200mph? I'm just curious if we're drawing a comparison here (in the comment section), I know the veyron will hit 200mph before the McLaren F1 after the F1 is given a head start and the chance to reach 120mph? I'm just curious how much slower the panicles of the road going supercar are then a sportbike, especially when considering their primary amazing attributes (in the veyron's case, it's not the 0-60, it's the 0-200, etc, the way in which the car sustains it's acceleration all the way to 253mph)... at least according to the reviews I’ve read.
per the topic, i’d rather have the veyron, I like going fast, very fast, and after watching auction officials attempt to start a F40 GT for two hours... I’m thinking the veyron’s a safer bet (i’m one of those magical unicorn vw owners who’s had no issues with their MKIV and MKV cars)
Reply
Paul Y 8:45PM (4/25/2007)
The F40 has a charming simplicity about it (and Clarkson thinks so too!), and that's a big part of it's charm.
Reply
Paul Y 8:45PM (4/25/2007)
Man, I sound stupid. ugh. beer.
Reply
Tyler 8:58PM (4/25/2007)
The F40 makes its speed through tuning and the essence of Ferrari's Formula One learnings. The Veyron is fast no doubt. But, it makes speed the same way everybody else does -- Cylinders, then forced induction. The only amazing thing and mind bottling thing about it is: they could make a 7 speed transmission that didn't tard out with 1000 BHP same thing with the AWD. I would rather have a machine that has a spirt and pride put into it, than an engineering exercise.
Reply
Drew 9:10PM (4/25/2007)
Easy choice....Veyron all the way baby.
The Veyron is all about refinement and comfort while the F40 wouldn't be comfortable to tool around in all day long. If you're looking for a car that would be a great cruiser, you're better off with the Veyron than the Ferrari.
Of course, a 612 Scag would be a better comparison to the Veyron, in terms of function.
Reply
Dr Dan 9:19PM (4/25/2007)
The Veyron makes me say wow with excitement...
...but the F40 makes me want to cry with joy.
Reply
Kit 9:23PM (4/25/2007)
The latest Cycleworld has a car/bike article. It sets a DTM spec MB against a MV Agusta. The MB does 0-200kph in 13 sec, while the bike does it in 8.7. Most bikes won't top 180ish (the Japanese had an agreement to limit top speed). I suppose there are tuned/turbo'd Hyabusas out there that will do the double ton, but the consequences of component failure are a bit too much for me to think about.
Don't forget that while bikes have a better power to weight ration than even these supercars, they have horrid aerodynamics. This means better acceleration but lower top speeds.
Reply
Kit 9:30PM (4/25/2007)
Along the lines of the topic...
I'd take the Veyron. While neither of these is the best looking of the supercars, the amazing superlatives of the Bugatti would sway my choice. I never cared for the F40s lines - I much prefer the 288GTO. The interior of the Bugatti is like sitting in bespoke jewelry.
And to those who say that the German offering was created without pride...do you seriously believe that those engineers don't go home every day glowing with the knowledge that they have created the most extraordinary car ever built?
Reply
zach 9:56PM (4/25/2007)
I have an ENORMOUS amount of respect for the engineering sophistication that allows the Veyron to even exist...
However, the F40 just seems to have a certain passion within it... That, and its engine/exhaust sounds are close to perfect - at least to me.
Reply
LowFuel 10:12PM (4/25/2007)
Honestly I think I'd rather have a Pagani and a Konnigsegg in my driveway than a Bugatti.
Never been a big fan of the F40, for the same reason I dont really like the Elise - too spartan, too simple. I respect the purity of them, and the purists who love them, but thats just not my cup of tea.
The Bugatti though, seems too far to the other end of the spectrum, to me. Seems like all the passion has been engineered out of it.
Reply
Durandal 10:44PM (4/25/2007)
I would gladly take either car, on the topic.
Reply
davewo55 11:07PM (4/25/2007)
The Bugatti. What a awsome piece of engineering. And the effortless production of seed. Very nice.
Reply
big L 11:14PM (4/25/2007)
Freak show. who cares about these two goofballs? I know, I know...
Reply
Alex 11:22PM (4/25/2007)
F40. That car has soul, it's almost like a living being.
Reply
jj 11:30PM (4/25/2007)
#20 davewo -
"And the effortless production of seed."
Effortless?!
Try to say that to VW execs. What was the cost of that project? The final figure read more like a Bush request for war funding than R&D for a car.
Reply
Bob 11:58PM (4/25/2007)
Can I have the Carrera GT please?
Reply
Jason 12:05AM (4/26/2007)
The point of this comparison is that the cars aren't really comparable at all, so stop comparing them. :P
Reply