As you guessed from the title i think the F40 is a better and was a more important supercar than the Veyron. The F40 was a no nonsense performance car. It had butt ugly carbonfibre interior, no door handles, uncomfortable but lightweight seats and the carbonfibre was visible under the single layer of paint all for the sake of performance. This is then compared to a leather interiored high speed lounge. All this hype about 252mph but the car is destined to be bought by 'old money' and used as a GT to travel to the south of France- no old snob would dare do that journey in F40, god forbid he might upset his upper class ass.

There 's just something bout a F40 that says drive me hard and drive me fast or F*** off, where as the Veyron says drive me fast...if you want to or we could go to the shops its up to you. Also i hate this VW safety in a supercar. F40 says lose focus for a second and they'll be idefinying you through dental records, a veyron has every single pansy safety feature, hell if it gets cold i wouldnt be suprised if it deployed an extra 'sweatter' just in case. They are meant to be raw, the risk is half the thrill.

In closing a interesting fact- the F40 used a 3litre V8 twin turbo compared to a 8litre quad turbo W16.

i think its getting silly !

Good point. I'm sure that when your driving an F40 it feels more like a race car and is more thrilling than a Veyron.

I know the veyron is faster thats not the point

I agree!!!!!!:D

The F40 is more Exotic and Hardcore

the type of ppl who can afford the veyron want leather seats air con and its the law to have a certain level of safety in modern cars

has anyone here driven either?
no response means no.

To me the Veyron isn't really a 'supercar'... it's just fast and expensive. The F40 is a street legal race car, plain and simple... Like I've said before, fast and expensive does not mean its a supercar

has anyone here driven either?
no response means no.
you don't have to have driven them to know.

the F40 weighs under 3,000 lbs, the interior is heald togehter by a green paste, it still has a 5 speed manual, and it was built as a race car.

the Veyron wighs well over 4,000 lbs, the interior is accented with diamonds, it has a 7 speed sequential, and it was built as a GT car. it just so happens that it has a high speed.

i don't need to drive wither one of them to begin to imagin the difference.

Is the F40 better than the Veyron?

No, and yes.

They're two completely different cars. Just like my car (1993 Ford Probe with 125,000 miles on it) is better than a McLaren F1.

My car get's better gas mileage, it's more comfortable, it's cheaper to run, insure and live with, I have more carrying space, and so on.

Is it better? No.

Is it cooler? Well that's up to each person to decide.

Given my money, I'd rather have an F50.

ive been wondering this.. how much does paint weigh? i mean for ferarri to put only one layer it must weigh enough for them to realise it.

Well, the Zonda, when ordered with bare carbon fibre, weighs about 11kg lighter thaan the comparative painted model.

2 completely diferent cars. Thats why there is no chance to say "I don't know". For me the F40 is really the supercar, Veyron is rubbish VW with big and powerfull engine and heavy coupe. The F40 is driven by normal engine and very light coupe and Veyron is driven by enormous engine who have to compensate the weight.

As you guessed from the title i think the F40 is a better and was a more important supercar than the Veyron. The F40 was a no nonsense performance car. It had butt ugly carbonfibre interior, no door handles, uncomfortable but lightweight seats and the carbonfibre was visible under the single layer of paint all for the sake of performance. This is then compared to a leather interiored high speed lounge. All this hype about 252mph but the car is destined to be bought by 'old money' and used as a GT to travel to the south of France- no old snob would dare do that journey in F40, god forbid he might upset his upper class ass.

There 's just something bout a F40 that says drive me hard and drive me fast or F*** off, where as the Veyron says drive me fast...if you want to or we could go to the shops its up to you. Also i hate this VW safety in a supercar. F40 says lose focus for a second and they'll be idefinying you through dental records, a veyron has every single pansy safety feature, hell if it gets cold i wouldnt be suprised if it deployed an extra 'sweatter' just in case. They are meant to be raw, the risk is half the thrill.

In closing a interesting fact- the F40 used a 3litre V8 twin turbo compared to a 8litre quad turbo W16.

what's your point with the last sentence of your post? so what if the F40 used a much smaller engine. it also performes about half as good.
Veyron and F40 are 2 totally different cars you really can't compare them as they were sorta built for 2 different purposes, luxury&performances vs. a raw racing car.

F40 better sportscar than Veyron, hell yeh

what's your point with the last sentence of your post? so what if the F40 used a much smaller engine. it also performes about half as good.
no, wayyy off. given a tight track, or accually, given any track, and i'm positive the F40 would eat the Veyron alive.

just because it has half the power, doesn't mean it performs half as well.

a lotus Elise has less than half the power of a Pontiac GTO, does that mean the Elise performas half as well?

i don't know if it is better but i'd rather have the F-40. i do know that it would distroy the Veyron on the track.

I don't think that the F40 would destory the Veyron on a track but it would most likly beat it.
But they are very different cars. The F40 is a uber super car while the Veyron is a fast GT car for rich people to brag about owning.

ive been wondering this.. how much does paint weigh? i mean for ferarri to put only one layer it must weigh enough for them to realise it.

Painting a car needs about a gallon of paint, right? So that would be like putting a gallon paint can in the trunk, I guess

New topic, but an old, old, old, old argument. I'm sorry guys, but this isn't going to go anywhere. Pieman, you stated your opinion, and that's all that's needed.

Blatant abuse of mod powers! *POOF!*

Just PM me or another mod and I'll open it again.

Ghalos's post summed it up. The F40 is a real supercar that would be great on a track, whereas the veyron is a super GT with creature comforts. They are not really comparable.

no, Ghalos's post states it, your post sums it up.

The F40 ain't that good round the track. The aerodynamics of that car and the brakes should be a bit dated in comparison to the modern cars and also more importantly the oversteer in cars back in 70's and 80's are more severe and harder to control. A video i saw seen a few test drivers having difficulty pushing the car to the limits without losing time and control.
Veyron weighs about twice the weight but has twice the power with AWD and i reckon it should beat the F40 round the track narrowly i think, in fact i don;t really have a clue about the Veyron round the track but i would take the F40 over any car in the world -ANYDAY!

yeah i think that this is pretty stupid. i bet you couldn't drive a f40 to its limit not to mention a fat billionair who has one just to look at. i dont really think its up to you to judge cars like this im pretty sure you have never been in an f40 let alone see a bugatti veyron in real life and you are already judging it because it has safety features?

No, we're judging it because it's a fat crap of a car which was developed for the wrong purposes.

New topic, but an old, old, old, old argument. I'm sorry guys, but this isn't going to go anywhere. Pieman, you stated your opinion, and that's all that's needed.

Blatant abuse of mod powers! *POOF!*

Just PM me or another mod and I'll open it again.

Mopar i think you forgot to close it. Two pages is enough, close it if you want, all i wanted to do is get a opinion across nd now its done

yeah i think that this is pretty stupid. i bet you couldn't drive a f40 to its limit not to mention a fat billionair who has one just to look at. i dont really think its up to you to judge cars like this im pretty sure you have never been in an f40 let alone see a bugatti veyron in real life and you are already judging it because it has safety features?

I've been in an F40 if that counts for anything.

Now purely based on the speculation but I take you on on that bet.
Get me an F40, you get to drive the Veyron for all I care. Hell, I'll drive it myself after you're done stunting down the track.

We're not speculating anything here, just estimating performance based on specifications offered over the internet. It's a silly way to spend your free time but I find it highly amusing and it pretty much kills part of my working day (not to mention I get paid for posting here, how's that for careers :p)

Statistically seen (hey, have you heard that there is a car that according to computer simulations based on the same specifications we use here for estimates beats the veyron in top speed?) the Veyron has a few specifications that hamper it's movement around curves.

Weight being one of them. Safety features add weight.
EDIT: oh yeah, I agree on that this topic can be closed now :p

Hey everybody check out the new times online article comparing Mclaren F1 and Bugatti Veyron Don't forget to watch the accompanying video and one more thing Is the car in the video a Mclaren F1 LM or a Mclaren F1 GTR?? I thought that the GTR was restricted to 600bhp thru air restrictors but they quote 680bhp same as that of the LM

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,26789-2056987,00.html

it's also rumoured that Bugatti Veyron produced its fastest ever Nürburgring Nordschleife lap time of 7:40 before engine overheated and it went into the 600bhp mode

http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?viewThread=y&gID=3&fID=0&tID=10073&bottom=0 - just scroll down the page

That was the lamest attempt at a face off I could imagine.

The Veyron promotional video doesn't show which car handled how well on whatever track.
Both cars were in different locations.
90% of the trailer is about the veyron and how insanely good it's suposed to be.

It's very nice of the times to compare the veyron to a landrover discovery when making a performance comparison. Really shows these people know what they're talking about :|

The V12 produced 627bhp, which may seem a far cry from the Veyron’s 1001bhp, but when you factor in weight a different picture emerges. The Bugatti provides 513bhp for every ton of car, the McLaren a touch more than 550bhp per ton. The Bugatti accelerates faster because it has four-wheel-drive traction.

This is the information you should be looking for in the articles. Just ignore the rest. It's publicity gibberish.

As from the lap times. The nordschleife is a track where cars can drive at top speed for prolonged periods of time.

To see that the donkervoort D8 was over 25 seconds per lap faster then the Veyron is quite interesting to see since Donkervoorts run cosworth engines not costing half as much as the Veyrons seatbelts.

it's also rumoured that Bugatti Veyron produced its fastest ever Nürburgring Nordschleife lap time of 7:40 before engine overheated and it went into the 600bhp mode
It has something like that?
What good is this vehicle, really. The more I find out the less I want to know.
If it weighs 2 tons (metric) and after 7 minutes the power is cut in half then that leaves a car that is lighter then a land rover discovery but offers the same performance as your average BMW. Then why spend over three quarters of a million dollars on a vehicle that can be outperformed in a 60 minute race by mostly all performance cars in the world?

I dont think F40 would take Veyron down on track. I m shure it s more fun to drive, it was best car of the time and it has true racer soul...but i think its aerodynamic and engine just arent enough...it is lighter but Veyron is AWD so there isnt so much diffrence in thight turns, in fast turns they should be equal but on streights 1000hp mean somethink....
Give me a F50GT and then it s a diffrent story...

I dont think F40 would take Veyron down on track. I m shure it s more fun to drive, it was best car of the time and it has true racer soul...but i think its aerodynamic and engine just arent enough...it is lighter but Veyron is AWD so there isnt so much diffrence in thight turns, in fast turns they should be equal but on streights 1000hp mean somethink....
Give me a F50GT and then it s a diffrent story...

Well F50 GT was an abandoned racing project so that's not a fair comparison Anyway Porsche Carrera GT RULZ. Bugatti Veyron is really a €300 million joke Ferdinand Piech played on Volkswagen so that Porsche could runaway with the greatest supercar ever title. No proper production supercar can best Carrera GT on a track and that's including that PHATSO VEYRON. Road legal sports protypes like Radicals are a different matter

aw, come on... 60 minutes.
It's more then the tire wear that will kill the Veyron.

The F40 feels more of a supercar and the veyron is more like a gas guzzling rocket that kicks you out of his world! the f40 you can drive but the veyron just sends you into china! to sum it all up the F40 is a supercar and the veyron is just a craze.