fastest

[Mongrel]

what is the fastest PRODUCTION car ever made? i heard somewhere that it it the nissan skyline, but that didnt sound right...

[thepolarfoxqx]

the fastest "official" production car is the McLaren F1, at a little over 240mph, other cars may have gone faster, but they either A: did not meet the standards for "production car", or did not officially do the run. You would need to modify a skyline pretty far to press north of 240mph.

[Mongrel]

was the mclaren actually producted? other than for show? does the skyline even come close to the 200 mph marker?

[thepolarfoxqx]

Sure, i think they had a produciton run was between 60 and 100 units for the F1 and F1LM combined. The stock Skyline R34 GT-R (the fastest of the skylines) tops out at 158mph, which is 82mph slower.

[Mongrel]

what about the Bugatti 16/4 Veyron? i heard that might beat a mclaren.

The stock Skyline R34 GT-R (the fastest of the skylines) tops out at 158mph

then why are they so flippin' expensive? i could put $500 into a Lightning and make it do that 8)

[GIR]

Shut your mouth! Please not the Veyron! I wouldn't even say the Veyron is a supercar, it's a extreme car yes, but not a supercar. Comparing the Veyron to the F1 is just not done.

The KoenigsEgg might do it, but it doesn't qualify as a production car aswell yet. Unofficial specs say it can go faster and if you use your common sense you'll know it can, but we won't know untill it actually goes for the run.

Back in the days, before the F1 wen't for the official run, McLaren said it could do 230 something. Then it went for the record and did an amazing 242, I'm just hoping the same is true for te KoenigsEgg.

[Mongrel]

Shut your mouth! Please not the Veyron! I wouldn't even say the Veyron is a supercar, it's a extreme car yes, but not a supercar. Comparing the Veyron to the F1 is just not done.

well sooorry for popping your bubble buddy, i dont even know what the veyron is, i just heard it might beat it :x

[thepolarfoxqx]

the thing is. The veyron has a lot of issues still. It hasn't been made stable, the have not even built the FACTORY that will make the veyron, it is a ways out yet. It might be able to do it, it's projected top speed is 252, but it's yet to be tested or proven.

Koenigsegg could probably do it, they just have to get to doing it.

[Mongrel]

isnt the skyline gtr v-spec faster than the regular skyline?

[Rishy]

i remember seeing Top Gear video here...of yellow Skyline GT-R in britain..pushing out 1000 bhp...forget what the speeds were.....

i remember it was for sale for only 50,000 sterling...

[Kevin321]

Turbo charging is cheating, and that is what the veyron is,

a big w16 with four turbos. 127 Mclarens were made. 627hp-F1 668hp-LM, both BMW V12's

[Mongrel]

Turbo charging is cheating

why??

[LateNightCable]

I would agree that turbocharging is a bit like cheating in a way. It's like some kind of life support allowing the engine to perform in a manner that it would not be able to otherwise. The turbo afterall is not really an integral part of the engine, but rather an auxiliary.

An engine must be naturally asperated in order to be "pure". Any kind of assistance is simply a helpmate, or a "cheat ", albeit an entertaining one.

[djfux69]

dont look at it as cheating. look at it as the final step in tuning a car. after all you can take the most well built NA engine in the world, and make it faster with turbos. 2 identical engines fully tuned... one NA, one FI. the FI will always have more power.

[LateNightCable]

Not if the NA engine is developed to such a standard as to have absolutely no use for a turbo. Such as the M3 straight-six. That engine would not take a turbo anyway.

[bleh]

Turbo charging is cheating

i know my car is slow too.

[djfux69]

there is no way you can sit there and say that an NA m3 is faster than a supercharged M3. no way, never gonna happen. an m3 with FI will always be faster than an NA m3. and if its compression thats the issue with the M3 then just get lower compression piston to run higher boost. basically in order to make power you need high compression. so if you go the NA route you need high compression pistons. with FI its low compression pistons becuase the turbo gets the job done.

[iori_slk]

Dauer 962 LeMans can do 404,9 km/h, and it's street legal

Check it in www.962lm.com

[LateNightCable]

there is no way you can sit there and say that an NA m3 is faster than a supercharged M3. no way, never gonna happen.

When did this become a discussion of which is fastest? I only said that some engines have absolutely no need for a turbo, which is the truth. Besides, mere turbocharging does not make for a faster car. If that were the case than turbo cars would rule the road - they don't. NA and FI both have individual benefits, and which are more valuable is really just a matter of personal taste.

[Mongrel]

When did this become a discussion of which is fastest?

probably the same place that the Lightning tread turned into a civic tread

[djfux69]

yeah but what i was saying is that if you take an NA engine and put it against the turbo version of that same engine, the turbo one will always have more power.

[LateNightCable]

More power is good, but I think what matters the most ultimately is the flexibility of power.

[bleh]

probably the same place that the Lightning tread turned into a civic tread

:roll: at least this one isnt my fault.

[thepolarfoxqx]

ok, take the E36 M3, which can be turbocharged, slap a supercharger on it, it still isn't faster than the E46, which for a number of reasons can't be supercharged, both BMW 3.2L I6s, superchargers are not always faster.

[kleinefisch]

Are you crazy? Superchargers are always faster than the NA equivalent, which is what he was saying. Of course if you take an 330i, slap a blower on, it won't be as fast as a CSL. You can't make comparisons like that when there are so many different viriables involved.