OK, that is just mad! That "ghost" has just gone too far (is it the Chrysler commercials, or am I thinking of something else?). 850 ft-lbs of torque going to 335 wide rear tires?! "1st gear" would be utterly pointless. I'm surprised they didn't go AWD with this. A 3000 lbs AWD car of this caliber would make more sense than a 2800 lbs RWD car. I mean, this is a 6.0 L V12 with quad-turbocharging?!? Fricken insane!
Peak hp at 5750 rpms, too! You won't have to rev the piss out of it to get it to scream. It will just pull like a mighty bull, right off the line!
The video doesn't work for me. What's the deal with the Safari and embedded video? fooking Apple.
...
When did Apple start making Windows Media Player Anyway I think you have the same problem I did. There's an old version of Media Player on MS's web site. You have to make sure you have 9. Go to macdownload and find the correct link. HTH.
Anyway that car is insane. I hope to see one on 94 soon
Hmm, it seems to me that instead of challenging Porsche and Ferrari, that these car companies could make decent "normal" cars instead of horsepower monsters that fetch above 100 G's. The R&D money they must spend on some of these cars could be put towards much better use in other places. Cadillac produces some amazing prototypes, and sometimes actual vehicles come from it. The Evoq became the XLR roadster, and the Vizon became the SRX. Some concepts like the Cadillac Sixteen produce soo much public reaction that they pay for themselves in brand image alone. I think the Sixteen set the platinum standard for concept cars. It wasn't a speed demon, but it had a heck of a lot of power (1000 HP, 1000 ft. lb. of torque). It was a great example of the Grandest Grand Tourer of them all. Unlike some other cars which seem to be driven by the "My Ford/Chrysler/Volkswagen is sooo much better than your stupid Ferrari" pissing contest mentality that car executives seem to be adapting. My question is: Who cares if your GT can waste a Ferrari? At the end of the day, you are driving a FORD, and he's the one driving the friggin Ferrari.
Well...I'll say what we're all thinking. The guy who designed this car must be compensating for something. Who even needs a car like that. I'm quite happy with my $900 USD Dodge Caravan. It's all I need, and the chicks dig it (you think I'm kidding, but for some reason mini-vans have major sex appeal).
... The R&D money they must spend on some of these cars could be put towards much better use in other places...
Think marketing budget instead. A car like this enhances the status of the brand and if one's in the showroom everyone comes down to look at it. Maybe some of those people end up driving home something they can afford instead.
As for R&D on a car like this, I'm sure it's considerable but it's probably easier to design a supercar than it is to build a minivan. Basically, a supercar is about no compromises. That's it. You almost can't be too radical in your thinking. You're going to make extensive use of CF? No problem. The cost will be passed on to the customer. On the other hand, a minivan requires a zillion compromises and a successfully designed minivan is about the RIGHT compromises. Not an easy thing to do.
Overall, the vehicle?s structure ? consisting of multiple materials - achieves an ultra lightweight design with outstanding vehicle rigidity and complies with all US federal regulations related to impact testing.
Well...I'll say what we're all thinking. The guy who designed this car must be compensating for something. Who even needs a car like that. I'm quite happy with my $900 USD Dodge Caravan. It's all I need, and the chicks dig it (you think I'm kidding, but for some reason mini-vans have major sex appeal).
When you're 18 years old, things are different, yes.
Anyway, I'm not super-impressed. An Ultima GTR is lighter (sub 2000 pounds), and makes 530hp through a highly modified Chevy 350 LS-1. Replacing the V8 with a blown Mazda 20B yeilds about 600hp and brings the weight down to the 1700 lb range.
So if you want a super car purely for performance, there are much better solutions out there. If you want a supercar that looks really sweet, there are also better solutions out there. Case in point: Ferrari 360.
Comments
Peak hp at 5750 rpms, too! You won't have to rev the piss out of it to get it to scream. It will just pull like a mighty bull, right off the line!
Anyway, Mercedes took what coulda been a good looking car and fvcked it up with the SLR.
Edit: The video works for me in Safari.
Originally posted by Matsu
The video doesn't work for me. What's the deal with the Safari and embedded video? fooking Apple.
...
When did Apple start making Windows Media Player
Anyway that car is insane. I hope to see one on 94 soon
Are cars that powerful actually driveable?
Originally posted by Matsu
Where do you get your safari plug-ins?
all over the place. Macdownload is a good place to start.
ummmm...
wmp at microsoft.com
real at real.com
qt at quicktime.com
shockwave and flash at macromedia.com
pdf and word at schubert-it.com
what else are you looking for?
qt codecs can be found at lordofthecows.com (check the tutorials)
sorry
Yes, I have plug-ins enabled, and pop up blocking disabled.
iDunno?
Originally posted by Crusader
... The R&D money they must spend on some of these cars could be put towards much better use in other places...
Think marketing budget instead. A car like this enhances the status of the brand and if one's in the showroom everyone comes down to look at it. Maybe some of those people end up driving home something they can afford instead.
As for R&D on a car like this, I'm sure it's considerable but it's probably easier to design a supercar than it is to build a minivan. Basically, a supercar is about no compromises. That's it. You almost can't be too radical in your thinking. You're going to make extensive use of CF? No problem. The cost will be passed on to the customer. On the other hand, a minivan requires a zillion compromises and a successfully designed minivan is about the RIGHT compromises. Not an easy thing to do.
A relevant quote from that page:
Originally posted by Fast-Autos.net
Overall, the vehicle?s structure ? consisting of multiple materials - achieves an ultra lightweight design with outstanding vehicle rigidity and complies with all US federal regulations related to impact testing.
Originally posted by DMBand0026
Well...I'll say what we're all thinking. The guy who designed this car must be compensating for something. Who even needs a car like that. I'm quite happy with my $900 USD Dodge Caravan. It's all I need, and the chicks dig it (you think I'm kidding, but for some reason mini-vans have major sex appeal).
When you're 18 years old, things are different, yes.
Anyway, I'm not super-impressed. An Ultima GTR is lighter (sub 2000 pounds), and makes 530hp through a highly modified Chevy 350 LS-1. Replacing the V8 with a blown Mazda 20B yeilds about 600hp and brings the weight down to the 1700 lb range.
So if you want a super car purely for performance, there are much better solutions out there. If you want a supercar that looks really sweet, there are also better solutions out there. Case in point: Ferrari 360.