Faster than a Speeding Ferrari: Montezemolo invests in Italian TGV
Luca di Montezemolo is already president of Ferrari and chairman of the entire Fiat group, but he isn't about to stop there. Together with Diego della Valle from the famous driving-shoemaker Tod's, the hereditary Marquis di Montezemolo is investing in a new company called Nuovo Transporto Viaggiatori (NTV) that plans to start a new high-speed rail service across Italy with a new train design that could put the final nail in Alitalia's coffin.
Called the Automotrice à Grande Vitesse (AGV –French for "high-speed self-propelled carriage"), the new bullet train is being built by Alstom, the same company that built the French TGV. But the newer Italian version will use even more efficient engines, located right in the train cars, eliminating the need for a separate locomotive. The AGV is anticipated to reach speeds of 225 mph, which could rival the Enzo and the F2008 for the fastest vehicle Montezemolo has ever thrown his weight behind.
[Source: NYT Wheels]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Michael 3:56PM (11/22/2008)
Only 225?
Reply
Mobius_1 4:09PM (11/22/2008)
Because the next Ferrari hypercar will do exactly 226, and Montezemolo didn't want to affect Ferrari sales :P
Temple 6:46PM (11/22/2008)
If speeds his thing, Montezemolo should have invested in making a jet like Honda. The Honda jet does 483mph :P
Michael 10:39PM (11/22/2008)
Yeah, but it wouldn't have VTEC! Just imagine the kick of that jet when VTEC kicks in.
Yo.
Mobius_1 4:08PM (11/22/2008)
Time for a Top Gear race!
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 4:41PM (11/22/2008)
They already raced the TGV to Nice. But since it's Top Gear and it's rigged, the car won.
Matthew 6:18AM (11/23/2008)
@why not the LS2LS7?
Depends on where your departure point and final destination are, and how long you have to commute before and after riding the train. I think high speed rail has no sense without a policy of efficient means of transportation within the cities connected (be it simply a big parking lot or taxi pickup points if the streets around the station aren't that congested).
For the Paris-Nice thing, one should know that the train doesn't go high speed on the whole way : Paris-Marseille is 300-320 kph but Marseille-Nice is about 120-140 kph (beautiful views on the Mediterranean sea, tho). As a result you spend almost as much time on both sections even if the last one is much shorter than the first (250 km vs. 700+).
AkulaX1 4:27PM (11/22/2008)
TGV is still the S I-I I T !
574.8 km/h (357 mph) on 3 April 2007
Reply
homunculus 5:07PM (11/22/2008)
paging dr. freud.
Reply
RLQ 3:48AM (11/23/2008)
I hope California will get a train like this.
Reply
Matthew 5:02AM (11/23/2008)
It's right on track since 52% of Californians voted for Prop 1A.
RLQ 4:06AM (11/24/2008)
I just hope its operated properly.
Jared 5:54PM (11/22/2008)
And this makes me wonder more why America does not have an efficient high speed rail crossing the country. With our resources and technology, we could build a magnetic levetated (Maglev) train rail that crossed the country, powered on Alt. energy like Wind mills and solar farms. It would be a cheaper alternative to flying and trucking loads across the country and could also double as a people mover.
I realize there are rails already that cross the country, but none of which are high speed. I also know i'm talking big in times of economic depression... but it never hurt to dream. Remeber the great highway act and other gov't sponsored projects that helped our country durring it's last economic downfall. (hoover dam, etc.)
Reply
Ivan 7:27PM (11/22/2008)
And on board the wind powered bullet train a crack team of scientists will come up with a cure for cancer using toothpicks and sticky tape.
DesiAuto 10:42PM (11/22/2008)
United states of America is incomplete without high-speed train.
tekd 5:44AM (11/23/2008)
Umm guys, GM is the reason why we don't have a modern train based public transportation system that links the country. They weren't selling enough cars-in fact, they were losing money back in 1921. So GM, Standard Oil, Philips Petroleum, and pretty much every company that would make money if more cars were sold (glass companies, rubber companies, whatever), started a consortium to kill any rail competition and mass transit in as many cities as possible.
So that's why all our shipping is done by trucks instead of trains like many other countries, and our railroad system is a total joke compared to countries that are supposedly less advanced than us. It's kind of depressing when you realize that you can pick any random developed European, Latin American, or Asian country and it'll be guaranteed to have better and much faster trains than us.
Personally I wanna see us build some mag-lev trains...I rode one and it was pretty amazing looking at the info display and realizing I was going 240MPH on land.
Mobius_1 8:06AM (11/23/2008)
Because the gov't would somehow rather spend 700bn bailing out them bankers than spend much less on a cross-country maglev.
Randy915 2:48PM (11/23/2008)
O.P. - if you can explain why AmTrak has been losing money for over 2 straight decades then you've basically answered your own question.
America's habit and accessibility to driving + lower gas prices makes it, dare I say, inefficient to travel cross country on rail. It works in other parts of the globe because people need it... America doesn't need better trains we need better roads.
exkart 6:45PM (11/23/2008)
costs are way to high
but as far as high speed trains the US does have at least one I know of, but it doesn't go far
Ven 3:14PM (11/30/2008)
@Randy915
Upgrading roads is the dumbest idea ever. The reason why Amtrak is losing money is because they hardly get any funding. The NE Corridor itself is doing good though. The Acela train which goes up to only 150mph on 18miles of track holds 40% of the travel market between Boston & NY. It takes 2 hours and 55 minutes for it to make the trip. Paris to Brussels (the same distance) takes 1 hour 22 minutes with TGV trains running about 186mph. Imagine how much that travel market percentage would rise if Amtrak could offers such times.