Bugatti's Latest Veyron, Most Ridiculous Car on the Planet? 790
Wired has an amusing writeup that accurately captures the most recent ridiculous addition to Bugatti's automobile catalog. The $2.1 million Veyron sports over 1,000 horsepower, a 16-cylinder engine, and a top speed of 245 mph. The guilty conscience comes for free. "That same cash-filled briefcase could buy seven Ferrari 599s or every single 2009 model Mercedes. You could snap up a top-shelf Maybach and employ a chauffeur until well past the apocalypse. Hell, in this economy, $2.1 million is probably enough to make you a one-man special-interest group with some serious Washington clout."
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you parked it on the street without an armed guard, you'd deserve it.
Friend of mine has a Ferrari.. it goes from the garage to the track and back again, and that's it. (Oh ok, sometimes it goes down the highway and gets him speeding tickets.)
Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why? The Veyron is an incredible piece of engineering. Bugatti sell them at a LOSS if I recall. The workmanship is astounding.
I ever caught you keying ANY car, I'd break your fucking legs. People who key cars are UNIVERSALLY assholes.
But then you're too big of a pussy to post with your real account, so clearly you ARE an asshole.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
Not to mention the fuel duty you'll be paying. "Oh noes! Think of the planet!"
The irony of course is the Veyron is probably better emissions wise than any 15 year old piece of shit the whining hippies drive. And you'd certainly do more damage ecologically in a Prius. (Whose toxic manufacturing processes make it an ecological disaster.)
Just bugs me to see such smug arrogance from people on here when I would have expected them to marvel at the engineering. This car is technically impossible. Bugatti sat down and the engineers just couldn't figure out how to do it. It's an incredible achievement.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
I doubt one is able to amass a fortune of over a billion dollars, without first learning how to exploit the U.S. Internal Revenue Code.
Re:A bit overblown (Score:2, Insightful)
First off, they don't go zero to sixty in 2.5 seconds. Those forces cause huge stresses on the cars frame. Secondly, you can't go using whatever materials you want. Weight is an important factor when dealing with cars. "Normal aluminum" is light, but not nearly light enough. And keep in mind, the impressive part was designing a topless vehicle that can withstand the stresses involved with traveling at 217mph.
Re:"Guilty conscience" (Score:3, Insightful)
They are rarely jealous of someone who has less.
My guess is that ScuttleMonkey belongs to the former, and his rant is nothing more than sour grapes. I'll just admit that I could never afford to even own one, let alone buy one and move on.
But I sure would love to take a look at one....or a ride.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
Still, the sales tax alone on it is $155,500 at 5.5% which I'd pay if I bought this thing here in Wisconsin*, unless you're somehow going to smuggle it into the country to not pay sales tax, which would prevent you from properly registering it.. what good is a $2,100,000 car if you can't drive it anywhere?
* Hah -- like a Bugatti dealer would ever set up shop in Wisconsin. :)
I'm awfully tired of this jealous-of-people-with-money attitude. They probably earned it. More than likely they contribute vast sums to charitable causes so they don't have to pay taxes on those sums come death or tax day. If you want the cool stuff they get to have and experiences they get to have, earn it; don't get your jollies off telling THEM what to do with it.
Amateurs (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh yeah, sure, it's very easy for amateurs to make cars go 400mph. I see it all the time with funny cars/etc.
Of course, they only go that fast for a couple brief seconds. Then, after about 2 runs down the track, they have to completely rebuild the engines. And the tires have to be replaced after each race. And the engines can't pass smog tests. And the cars aren't street legal.
Everyone knows lots of things that go this fast. What makes this car amazing is that it goes this fast and it's a god damn daily driver. If you can afford it.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many things wrong with spending 2 million dollars on a car, whether fairly earned or not (considering the target audience, the latter is far more likely, but - innocent until proven guilty).
However, the core tenet of our society is the protection of property. Your money, your call. I will call it stupid if it is (buying such a car definitely qualifies), but the freedom to spend/waste money you own is sacrosanct.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm awfully tired of this jealous-of-people-with-money attitude.
And *I'm* tired of any criticism of things like the Veyron always being chalked up to some sort of jealousy. For my part, I wonder what the engineering expended on a Veyron could have produced if turned toward more widely applicable efforts. I don't give a shit what rich people buy. In fact, as a free market person, I encourage them buying all the toys they like and keeping the money churning and working. But the those toys are not above criticism from a practical and pragmatic standpoint, and doing so does not a reveal oneself to be some wide eyed, class-hating bolshevik.
They probably earned it.
Maybe. They could also have been born into it. There's a lot of *old* money out there, more than most think.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
They probably didn't. First, most people have at least one significant other who shares their riches. This fact alone means about 50% of the people with super spending power did not earn it. And that doesn't even include their heirs.
Re:Top Gear Veyron goodness (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Top Gear Veyron goodness (Score:5, Insightful)
I can testify to that. My car is right around 4 seconds 0-60. I can jump ahead of just about anyone up through about 120mph. Pushing through 140, it's pushing. I've only accelerated just through 150, but ran out of road. A lot of the high speed numbers are worthless, because they'll never be reached.
They say in the article, "...you can outrun not only the 5-0's cruisers, but their helicopters, too. If they wanna catch you, they're gonna have to dust off Airwolf...", but that's sensationalized journalism. Like I said, I've been up through 150mph, or 220 feet per second. Driving along at a mile every 24 seconds has it's drawbacks, like a 5 mile stretch takes 118 seconds to cross. What was a nice long straight stretch of road suddenly becomes very very short. What should take 5 minutes to drive at the speed limit is gone less than 2 minutes. God forbid that you're driving on land, where animals may wander across the road, or a car may come out of a side street. It's not like you're going to swerve without some serious side effects.
I ran across a neat video on YouTube where a motorcycle driver was running from the police. Sure, they couldn't keep up, because he'd zip away in no time. Max air speed for an good unladen police helicopter (no extra equipment, seats, and minimal fuel) is 150mph. If they're carrying their normal equipment and enough fuel to follow with, that drops. He was doing over 150mph, and the helicopter kept up pretty nicely. Why? Because despite the fact that he was able to pull away from the helicopter at points, the helicopter didn't have to follow the road, encounter traffic, nor slow down for intersections. He was driving fast, he wasn't suicidal. A bend in the road creates a shorter intercept route for the helicopter to follow.
If they're really after you, it doesn't matter how fast you're going. They may radio ahead and say to set up a roadblock, which sometimes can be avoided, but it's hard to avoid a shoulder to shoulder nail strip. 4 flat tires will keep you from getting away, no matter how fast your car was. That nail strip can mean a fatality when you hit it, if you're going way too fast.
Do I speed as a daily thing? Nope. I cruise right about the speed limit, depending on conditions. My high speeds have been on tracks, where they belong. I know my car is really fast, so I don't have to prove it to anyone. Even if it's a kid with a Honda Civic and a coffee can for a muffler. :) I'm at the "why bother" phase of my life. Do I need to burn up extra fuel just to prove that I can go faster than him? Not really. It's not worth wasting my fuel, and potentially getting a ticket (or worse).
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a lopsided equation where the design cost is very high and the production number is very low. If you take them exactly at their word then yes they will never, ever make money on it. I highly doubt that the statement of "every Veyron is sold at a loss" comes with zero marketing spin. My point being that most of the built in cost of the car is the R&D. If you plan to sell 50 of them (@ $2 mil each) and it cost 200 million to design then yes it's being sold at a loss. You don't even make back what you spent on R&D, let along parts and labor. If you sell 100 at the same price you're selling them at cost - minus materials and labor. If materials and labor are anywhere near 3/4 million then somewhere around the 150 vehicle mark is the break even point. In reality I would wager they probably are losing no more than 40-60K per car, or VW would have canned the project long ago. 30-40K per car is an easy write-off for productive R&D that can be applied to the various brands VW owns (VW, Porsche, etc)
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
Imagine yourself stepping out of your $2.1M toy and saying that to someone whose children have died of starvation. Does that give you a slight moral twinge?
Yes, because it was clearly the responsibility of the $2.1M toy owner to feed those children. How dare he/she not feed every child brought into this world by those unfit to be parents.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can say that to everyone who owns a car.
Article Quality and Wired (Score:5, Insightful)
The days are certainly gone when Wired used to have people like Neal Stephenson write for them.
Wired used to be cool and had decent writers. Wired used to be something to /read/.
Now? We have this. A fluff advertisement column, but not only that, nothing about the tech end at all. Nothing about the engineering or anything really interesting except that it's a fast car and costs a lot of money. It's also written in the style of a high-school newspaper or Slashdot summary. Wired has become Maxim, but without the girls.
--
BMO
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:2, Insightful)
How does the possession of money equate to deserving a keyed car?
Idea for you: get off Slashdot, finish your high school diploma, and get a job. You can buy nice things with the money you earn. Maybe you'll lose the desire to destroy other people's things too :)
Re:Deserve? (Score:3, Insightful)
Speaking from a "flaunt your wealth in the face the starving and you'll get a dagger" class warfare perspective of course.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:2, Insightful)
> For my part, I wonder what the engineering expended on a Veyron could have produced if turned toward more widely applicable efforts.
But by building the Veyron, the engineers found problems that they wouldn't have found by building small hatchbacks. Ideas then are refined, and trickles down to normal roadcars.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
So is EVERY new car on the road. Lower (smog-forming) emissions are one of the great success stories of the ecological movement. And it would never have happened if California hadn't been pressured to impose tougher standards. You can thank the "whining hippies" for that.
All manufacturing produces waste, much of it toxic. Where do you think the rubber, plastics, and metal that your vehicle are made out of came from?
Unless you have specific claims about how the Prius produces additional waste compared to a similar new vehicle, I can't really refute them. Which is exactly what you want. By calling the Prius "toxic", you cast doubt without making any real assertions. That's exactly the kind of cheap tactics I'd expect from someone trashing "whining hippies".
We're not arrogant. We're angry. Angry that such engineering talent went into solving a problem that didn't need to be solved instead of the very real problems that do need to be solved. Show me a car that's lighter and stronger than today's cars yet still cheap to manufacture. That's the kind of "impossible" problem that needs to be solved. Not how to engineer a convertible supercar.
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:5, Insightful)
Then again they have different target markets. The guy on the bike got to demonstrate his incredible ballsiness, whereas the guy in the Porsche put some tunes on the stereo, flipped on the aircon and went to pick up his girlfriend.
Play on player (Score:5, Insightful)
As a younger man I used to get very upset about the gap between rich and poor, pointing to this type of excess as an example. But having accepted it as an adult, the world is not fair, I actually enjoy seeing this kind of insanity. If the rich want to blow their money on what amounts to "fluff" then so be it. We should be encouraging them every chance we can. It's when they horde it away that truly screws the poor. There's a sucker born every minute, at least with the Bugatti you get a truly well crafted machine that will be rare for the rest of your life and on and on. This machine will also appreciate in value, because like I said, there's one born every minute. If you want to piss your hard earned (or not) money, then who am I to stop you. Play on player. But bear in mind, it's still just a car. One awesome fucking car.
Re:Top Gear Veyron goodness (Score:5, Insightful)
The ones they've had on Top Gear were the hard-top - this is the new convertible, not that you'd know it from the summary. Despite the massive engineering difficulties of slicing the roof off and having it stay rigid and roll-safe, they've managed to keep it as quick as the hard-top. Seriously impressive engineering, even if as a car it's completely insane.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm sorry but it's simply not possible to make a moral argument.
It's quite possible to make a moral argument. Of course, "just think of the poor!" isn't a moral argument - it's argument from emotions.
The moral argument is this. Money indirectly represent resources. Buying expensive toys is wasting disproportionate amount of said resources on yourself, excluding the others. We have words for that - egoism, and egotism.
Note that proper application of resources needs not have the form of "giving to the poor" - a much more useful way to spend money that's good for yourself as well as society as whole, in a capitalist society, is to invest them. Even better if you invest long term.
Now there's a line to draw, obviously. Where you draw that is subjective - some people believe that buying an iPhone is highly immoral when there are e.g. starving people in Africa. I don't buy into that, among other things, because I don't believe in non-starving Africa in foreseeable future no matter the resources spent on that (I won't go into the reasons in detail here, but looking closely at SAR is sufficient to reach that conclusion). I don't feel responsible for the plight of those who have repeatedly shown to be beyond help.
At the same time, an iPhone is actually quite obtainable in many parts of the world, including many third-world countries. So owning one doesn't really set you apart that much. There's no dividing wall there that cannot be crossed.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
And again, this is without considering heirs at all. The two richest women in America, for instance, are Wal Mart heirs [bloggingstocks.com] who had nothing to do with the business.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
those unfit to be parents
Ummm ... so you are saying that all of those poor people suffering from famine, war and disease in Africa are unfit to be parents?
Actually yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.
The #1 job for any parent is to take care of their child. If a person cannot provide basic necessities such as food for their child, then they should not be reproducing. Why that person cannot provide is an entirely different argument and may or may not be their fault. But until they can care for a child, they do not need to have one.
To answer your other question, I do not feel guilty for someone else's poor choices.
Motorcycle vs Helicopter (Score:3, Insightful)
While I believe this story about the motorcycle is true, you saw this on YouTube BECAUSE a helicopter was close by. There's plenty of guys who never make the news because they just gunned it and got away.
A lot of cops will openly acknowledge that if a sportbike blows past them, pursuit can be futile without air support. This jives with my experience because in my youth and stupidity, I blew past manned speed traps and most of the time, it seems the cops never bothered. The one time I did see lights and pulled over, I was sorely tempted to just gun it and go. I'm utterly confident that there's no way I would have been caught if I didn't have to pretend to be a somewhat law abiding citizen.
Re:It's the ultimate halo car (Score:3, Insightful)
It wouldn't surprise me if Bugatti make a big move into a (obviously lower) luxury market very soon, cashing in on the recognition they've earned.
The Bugatti brand has historically been known for exclusive and mostly very high performance automobiles in relatively the same market as other boutique Italian manufacturers such as Ferrari and Lamborghini or the British Aston Martin. The halo effect is well known in mass market brands, but Bugatti and other boutiques like it are NOT mass market brands and cannot be made into mass market brands without losing their boutique pedigree and exclusivity. I would be surprised if Volkswagen attempted to mass market the Bugatti name by producing luxury cars which compete for an entirely different market than supercars. The Mercedes "S-Class" buyer or perhaps the Rolls Royce or Bentley in the really high end is not looking for a supercar, but rather a smooth ride with the most luxurious features and the highest possible quality construction. They generally want a large sedan-like car, not a formula-one racer with leather seats.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:3, Insightful)
And how do you feel when you read about people who build browsers for the Commodore 64 [armory.com]? Or build a RAID'ed floppy setup [mac-guild.org]? Turn buildings into low res displays [blinkenlights.net]?
Each of those things are completely ridiculous, gain us nothing of value (outside of entertainment) and waste time and energy that could be drected at "the very real problems that do need to be solved".
Whatever happened to "because we can" as a mantra for why we build things that are completely unneeded? I'm not talking about making a catapult that launches criminals into a strong piano wire mesh, cutting them into tiny pieces that will then rain down into the crocodile cage at the local zoo. Building the Veyron didn't hurt you. Didn't hurt anyone (well, I did hear that one of the mechanics dropped a wheel onto his bad toe). Why so angry?
Why so serious?
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:5, Insightful)
The recent financial problems, caused mainly by people belonging to the group you just descibed, tell me that ... let's say it conservatively, not all really "earned" it.
'til recently, high wages were justified with the insane responsibility managers have. Now we know, they have less responsibility to bear than the average plumber.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:3, Insightful)
Because in this time and economy, I question the way he "earned" those 5 millions. Chances are that he didn't "earn" them at all.
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:2, Insightful)
Probably not for long.
Re:WTF were they thinking? (Score:3, Insightful)
No cup holder? I'll pass.
They likely looked at the kind of engineering problems a cup holder would present and decided it was too hard.
Think about it: 0-60 in 2.5 seconds == 10.72m/s^2. This car accelerates at _over 1G_. The cup holder would have to automatically swivel through 45 degrees to prevent it spilling your drink when you put your foot to the floor.
Re:If I ever see.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You deserve it at the very least.
Why is it that people with the wherewithal who simply live their lives are branded as cunts who deserve to be robbed, killed, sneered at and have there decent piece of engineering keyed by pimply-faced have-nots?
I suggest to you, Anonymous Coward, that you are indeed an anonymous coward ashamed of your own simmering mediocrity. You are, furthermore, a fucking communist who bites the very hand that feeds it. Go join Osama bin fucking Laden and his bearded closet gays who enjoy destroying instead of building. You don't deserve to be part of a civilised society which aspires to build, improve, learn, live a productive and long life raising beautiful children and leave a legacy.
I'd like to thank you for reminding me that the world is full of little shits like you who do not deserve to be gainfully employed (I filter out your kind all the time when employing - your thin veneer of civility does not hide the pus in your soul). I enjoy superior engineering, the same way you enjoy your decently engineered notebook. Linus drives an old German merc (remember, these things are all relative) who, by your reasoning, has the money for it, and therefore deserves to have his beautiful piece of human engineering keyed, because hey, you can't afford one.
And please, don't blather about how you cannot compare an old merc to a Bugatti. If you do, then I'm sure you won't even hear the whoosh.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I have a base level of altruism - like I don't think people should thirst or starve to death or die from easily curable illnesses and such. But past a certain point I don't have any altruism at all. If you make 100k$/year and I make 200k$/year (wish I did) I don't see any reason whatsoever why we should share it and get 150k$ each. I worked for it, I earned it, I enjoy the fruits of that labor. If you can't afford the same, well tough but you have really no reason to complain about your economy. I can go a long way towards social programs, but when that difference is being presented as a problem in and by itself I get mighty angry. Seriously, what kind of signal is it that every slacker should get the same pay and same benefits? If that was true, I'd find the laziest job possible and do even less.
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:0, Insightful)
Whoop-de-do. At the speeds the Veyron is happy at, a single pebble on a turn would send a motorcycle flying and its owner into the organ donor parts bin. People talk about motorcycle top speed, but they can only reach it safely if the road is perfectly straight and it has absolutely zero debris on it. Otherwise, its just a cooler way than a firearm for heading to the next life.
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:5, Insightful)
As a wise police officer once told me: "You can't outrun radio waves, son"
Re:At 400 km the fuel runs out in only 12 minutes (Score:2, Insightful)
You don't own money (Score:1, Insightful)
Money is owned by the organisation which produces it. It is distributed with complex rules defining who can receive it and in what circumstances. Those rules are designed by people who already have money to ensure that the system favours them over those who do not already have it. Without money your access to the essentials of life will be severely limited.
Ability, hard work, and chance are all factors in the creation of personal wealth, but let's not forget the skewed set of rules which make it harder for the poor to accumulate money compared with the relative ease with which the already rich accumulate it.
Missing the Pont (Score:4, Insightful)
They are also all sold at a considerable loss - they cost much more to build than they sell for. It's a final swansong excercise in ultimate car technology. Sure, they'll be cool and funky stuff along later but for this sort of vehicle, it's the top dog. As such, I admire it as an excercise is engineering and beauty.
However, it is also (to my mind) an obscene way to spend your money.
Re:Top Gear Veyron goodness (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't buy a $2.1m car that can go 245MPH to actually go 245MPH. You buy it to brag that you can buy a $2.1m car that can go 245MPH.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:3, Insightful)
I fully agree with you. A high-mpg car that is non-hybrid (like the 155 HP Cobalt XFE which gets 37 mpg) is a better solution to a hybrid in most cases.
37 MPG is not even remotely impressive. A 1989 CRX HF got 50 MPG freeway. A fucking Passat TDI Wagon gets over 40 if you put your foot in it constantly, and it's pretty peppy to boot. Try again! In addition, The recycling infrastructure for electric car batteries does not exist... unless you're talking about one that runs on traditional lead-plate batteries, like most people's VW conversions etc. NiMH batteries are not recycled in quantity, and most of them are just landfilled.
Aside from the might-have-beens, it absolutely takes more energy to produce a Prius than a TDI Golf or Passat, both of which get better mileage. Clearly a TDI has a superior lifetime energy consumption than a Hybrid at this point.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
Furthermore, when are you geeks going to learn that your envy doesn't translate into my guilt?
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:3, Insightful)
Ummm ... so you are saying that all of those poor people suffering from famine, war and disease in Africa are unfit to be parents?
Yes. If you can't support children, you shouldn't have them. Having children to feed your own Hubris is creating a situation of child abuse before you even pop them out. As a sentient being you have a responsibility to control your own reproductive system.
My question is whether you would feel the slightest guilty if you were in that situation.
I would feel guilty and stupid. The people telling lies about condoms in Africa, though, are some of the most evil people on the planet. There are few people here I think deserve death, but they're on the list.
Re:Yeah but.... 1/4 the price alternative (Score:4, Insightful)
You're not allowed to jam them, but you're under no obligation to return them.
Re:Guilty conscience? (Score:1, Insightful)
Do something with big risk? Gambling doesn't count as "earning", to my mind.
Once you get into the super-rich range, your wealth has bugger all correlation to effort.
Re:Top Gear Veyron goodness (Score:3, Insightful)