BMW M5 Forum and M6 Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
49,477 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
The Koenigsegg CC-R reached a higher top speed on Nardo than the McLaren F1 did, and after that the even mroe powerful Koenigsegg CCX was intorduced. This acheivement was not done when the Gordon Murray interview was made. Mr Murray have made an excellent job with the McLaren F1 but he have also made the McLaren Mercedes SLR.

The creator of the McLaren F1 Gordon Murray told this in an interview a few years back:

JB: What about the Edonis and Koenigsegg?

GM: You almost can’t count cars like the Edonis and Koenigsegg. With the Zonda you have to take the car seriously – the quality’s not bad, he’s selling the cars, people are driving them and using them and liking them. When there are 50 Edonises driving around and people are saying ‘This is good’, I’ll consider it a proper motorcar.

JB: The Koenigsegg is aiming for 250mph, too.

GM: People never learn lesson one, which is ‘don’t shout your mouth off before you’ve built the car’. Before the 1989 world crash there was an article in Road & Track, ’24 supercars you can buy’ and I think the only ones that actually arrived were us, the Jag and the Bugatti – three out of 24. With the Koenigsegg they’re talking about a horsepower figure and top speed for which you need a Cd of about 0.17 or something. It doesn’t add up. You shouldn’t do that. We didn’t say anything about our motorcar – nobody knew it was going to be middle seat until the launch – we just shut up and built it and then let people drive it.

Production of the McLaren F1 drew to a close in May 1998, with a total production of 100 cars, made up as follows:

F1
F1 LM
F1 GT
64
5
3
GTR 95
GTR 96
GTR 97
9
9
10




Street-registred for Sweden, with Swedish standard issue front plate. The McLaren top speed-text the McLaren had a "sticker" plate of plastics taped on the front and not of aluminum as the standard license plate is.




The McLaren F1 managed 386,7 km/h in top speed on a straight road, at the 9 km long Ehra Leissen test-track at the Volkswagen facilites. On the picture above with the 386,7 km/h top speed it is evident that McLaren have taped over the indicators, the area between the hood and the body as well as removed the wiper. Thus modificated the car at the time of testing at the Ehra-Leissen track test.



At Prototipo in Nardo the McLaren F1 reached a top speed of 372 km/h (compared to the CC-R 388 km/h) which is a 3,95% slower speed than it acheived on Ehra Leissen because of the banked track. Consequently, a rough extimate would lead to that the Koenigsegg CC-R can acheive a top speed of over 400 km/h on a straight track. However there are problems with this since Volswagen owns the Ehra Leissen test track and they have their own supercar in sight: the Bugatti Veyron. Also they have claimed that this 1000 HP car will reach over 400 km/h in top speed and I would be very surprsied if the would let Koenigsegg in to the facilites to claim the first price for production cars after the small-series Dauer 962. So sadly my guess is that we won't see any Ehra Leissen tests before VW launches their continously delayed Bugatti Veyron 16.4 which goal is to break the 400 km/h barrier on a non-oval track.
But the numbers speaks for Koengisegg:

Dauer EB110: 2.62 kg/HP
Koenigsegg CCR: 1,56 kg/HP
Veyron: 1,95 kg/HP
Some results from top-speed tests on Nardo from Auto Motor un Sport are:
  • Aston Martin DB9: 309 km/h
  • Alpina B7: 311 km/h
  • MTM Audi RS6 Avant Clubsport: 313 km/h
  • Bentley Continental GT: 323 km/h
  • BMW M5 E60 unrestricted: over 330 km/h
  • Ferrari Enzo: 355 km/h
  • Ferrari F40: 329 km/h
  • Lamborghini Diablo 6,0: 321 km/h
  • Lamborghini Murcieolago: 330 km/h
  • Brabus Mercedes S V-12: 310 km/h
  • Brabus Mercedes SL600 V-12 (2003): 327 km/h
  • Brabus Maybach S V12: 314 km/h
  • Mercedes SLR McLaren: 334 km/h
  • Mercedes SL65 AMG: 338 km/h
  • Porsche Carrera GT: 334 km/h
  • Porsche 911 (996) GT2: 315 km/h
  • Porsche 959: 339 km/h
  • Ruf 996 Turbo R (Ruf narrowbody with Ruf VIN#): 351 km/h
  • Techart porsche GT Street: 335 km/h
Full interview below:


Man of Vision


Gordon Murray, designer of the world's fastest production car, the McLaren F1, is not happy. He's passionate, he's a purist, and he's a bit narked. Not because the Bugatti might finally overtake the F1's top speed, but because, if it does, the general perception will be that the F1 has finally been bettered. Here he talks to John Barker.


JB: The F1’s long reign as the world’s fastest car is under threat from a couple of supercars, but chiefly, the Bugatti Veyron, which it’s claimed will get to 252mph

GM: The most pointless exercise on the planet has got to be this four-wheel-drive 1000 horsepower Bugatti. I think it’s incredibly childish this thing people have about just one element – top speed or standing kilometre or 0-60. It’s about as narrow minded as you can get as a car designer to pick on one element. It’s like saying we’re going to beat the original Mini because we’re going to make a car 10mph faster on its top speed – but its two foot longer and 200 kilos heavier. That’s not car designing – that just reeks of a company who are paranoid. It’s time we stopped saying ‘let’s try and beat this or that’. It just happens to be the McLaren in a lot of cases because it’s still considered to be the quickest, the best, the lightest, the stiffest, the whatever. If somebody came along, including Ferrari, but particularly, Bugatti, and said, ‘We’ve driven the McLaren, we’ve seen what makes a good car and we’re going to take all those elements and move it on a step – the technology, the weight, the safety, the size, that packaging, the luggage space, the torque, the way it delivers power,’ I would be going, ‘good for you. We’ve had our 10 year reign, take the crown.’ I know it’s going to cost millions to develop the Veyron, a monster thing that you can never see out of, can’t park anywhere, four-week drive, four turbos, 1000 horsepower. It may go faster but it won’t touch the F1 in any of the other important areas/ that’s what’s pathetic about it. I think it’s about time companies stopped doing that. I wouldn’t do it, I wouldn’t belittle myself to do that.

JB: what if they’d gone after all those other criteria and given it 1000 horsepower and 4wd?

GM: Four-wheel drive will never give you the experience that the McLaren gives you. It’s probably much safer when it’s wet and slippery, and more people could drive the car near its limits, but that wasn’t the aim with the F1. It’s absolutely true that 90 percent of the people, 90 percent of the time won’t drive the car at 90 percent of it’s capability. So why start with 4wd and carry all that weight and inefficiency? Ultimately for making the car easier to drive and getting a bit more grip, you’re losing out on the ultimate driving experience. Just 4wd is enough to say they’re never going to get an F1/ If you’re trying to build a car that more people can drive, more people can handle the power, 4wd is probably one of the easiest ways, but with the F1 we didn’t set out saying ‘we’re going to make the quickest car and we’re going to make it really easy to drive, so that 90 percent of the population can drive it’. No way. It was almost the opposite, it was, like this is probably going to be the last real car, without ABS, power steering or power brakes, and you’re going to have to push a bit harder on the brakes and to park it’s not going to be that easy but it’s not going to have anything getting in the way of the driving. It will probably be the last one like it. It’s a shame. I’d so much rather see that money and effort – sorry no, not the money, they can probably afford it – all those engineers and all that effort go into some new direction of sports car, maybe ultra lightweight or ultra nimble or ultra safe or something else rather than just trying to build the fastest car in the world.

JB: If you were making the F1 today, what power output do you think it could make?

GM: The same, because I still think – and the experts seem to agree – that the F1’s V12 is still the best road going, production, lasts-for-100,000-miles-type of engine ever made.

JB: Would you give the F1 any more power if you could?

GM: No. To put that into perspective, we did all the sums and my target was 450lb ft of torque with 550bhp, which we thought was about enough for 200mph – enough for a road car. But what we wanted was 1000 kilos, 450lb ft and a really square torque band, not a peaky engine and that what Paul Rosche (BMW Motorsport engine designer) delivered – with 627bhp for free – and although we missed the weight target by about 100 kilos, that the combination that gives you the instant buzz when you bang the throttle open. All horsepower gives you is top speed. Horsepower on its own is absolutely nothing.

JB: Presumably working on the SLR you’ve come to embrace the supercharger as a different way of gaining performance?

GM: No. Given a totally open choice I’d always go for normal aspiration, for everything: weight, complexity, efficiency, drivability. Supercharging is much better than turbocharging for all the obvious reasons but also has its drawbacks. If you want 500 horsepower, net, you’ve got to make 700 because 200 goes to driving the supercharger, and then you’ve got to cool that power. The small throttle response problem you can get over with bypass valves and things. It’ll never be normally aspirated, but it’s certainly a hell of a lot better than turbocharging.

JB: Do you think the Enzo moves things on?

GM: I think the brakes, probably, although I do hear that those aren’t working yet. Carbon brakes were something I desperately wanted on the F1, but we just couldn’t make them work. We’ve got them on the SLR

JB: What’s the problem?

GM: Temperature. In the early days with carbon/carbon, the problems were trying to get them to work when they were wet and cold. They were great when you got them warm. What we’ve managed to do is take the Mercedes-Benz carbon/ceramic programme, combined with electronic hydraulic braking, brake by wire and then the problem just becomes high temperature, because all carbon has exactly the same problem. Keep them cool enough and they’ll last the life of the car, but when you get over the oxidation temperature they disappear incredibly quickly. We used carbon brakes in F1 six or seven years before anyone else and for a long time had the piss taken out of us when they caught fire, but then when we got them to work we had a long period before anyone caught up. It was amazing when we were doing the tests – you could brake and brake and brake, then you’d get over I think it was 850 degC and they’d disappear in two laps, and the same is true now, to a lesser extent.

JB: How do you stop the user from overhearing them, what sort of constraints can you put on them?

GM: None. You just develop the car so that under any circumstance you can not generate that temperature, and that’s been the hard work and that’s what Porsche and Ferrari, I don’t think, can have done yet.

JB: The SLR must be quite a different project for you, being the first car you’ve done that isn’t mid-engined or mid-seated.

GM: It’s certainly mid-engined, very mid-engined, much more so that the Ferrari 575 or Aston Martin Vanquish. In a funny way it’s a bigger challenge than the F1 because the F1 wasn’t aimed at a market. I’m not saying it was easy but it was easier because when you’re aiming for a market you’ve got definitive things to aim for, and in our case it’s the 575 Maranello. Ferrari takes more than two-thirds of that world market and in that price sector, it’s a pretty good motorcar. We’ve driven it a lot, along with the Vanquish. It’s a nice challenge, a better challenge in a way to actually aim for something. To bring it right back to the Bugatti story, what we’re doing is we’re taking, with the Mercedes marketing requirements, a much more overall, rounded look at everything – quality, weight, safety, stiffness, luggage capacity, air-conditioning performance. We really did try to aim much higher in all areas. I have to say, I’ve driven the car a few times now and… well, the proof will be in the pudding, we’ll see what people will thing, but I think we’ve moved the game forward for front-engined supercars. We are aiming to build something that is world-beating, not just in performance but in all the other areas, and with a Mercedes-Benz star on it a lot of them are prerequisites – quality, serviceability, all that stuff.

JB: with around 550bhp and rear drive, traction and stability control are surely must-haves. Has it been interesting?

GM: It’s been interesting from a vehicle dynamics point of view to see how unobtrusive we can make it. The car has to be a Mercedes-Benz; above all it has to be able to be driven by anyone who is going to buy a Mercedes-Benz, so it’s got to have that stuff, but we’ve worked really hard with Mercedes-Benz people to make it as unobtrusive as possible so that it doesn’t wreck the car.

JB: Since the F1, have there been any supercars that have impressed or interested you?

GM: The only one in recent years which has tried to stick to the F1 formula is the Zonda. That’s come close. I saw that bloke [Horacio Pagani] when he first showed it. He saw me going by, dragged me onto the stand and said ‘I was really inspired by the F1. Look – it hasn’t got power this, it hasn’t got electronic that, it’s got a carbon central bit’. He was so enthusiastic and I thought at the time ‘God, I hope he makes it, because he deserves to’. Styling’s very subjective. I probably wouldn’t have styled it like that, but in recent years it’s the only supercar that is closest to what I would call the pure formula, without having aids and 4wd and therefore getting too heavy with all that stuff on. OK, it’s not superlight, but it’s pretty light. And it’s normally aspirated. As soon as you say 4wd or turbocharging you’re not even on the starting blocks. The old supercars, the EB110 and the Jag 220, on the track, when you can keep the turbos flying, you think ‘ah, it’s OK’, but on the road it’s a disaster. The Bugatti, if you were in a queue of four cars and waiting for the gap, you had to leave it in first gear at 6000 revs, in case you wanted to pass, which is crazy.

JB: What about the Edonis and Koenigsegg?

GM: You almost can’t count cars like the Edonis and Koenigsegg. With the Zonda you have to take the car seriously – the quality’s not bad, he’s selling the cars, people are driving them and using them and liking them. When there are 50 Edonises driving around and people are saying ‘This is good’, I’ll consider it a proper motorcar.

JB: The Koenigsegg is aiming for 250mph, too.

GM: People never learn lesson one, which is ‘don’t shout your mouth off before you’ve built the car’. Before the 1989 world crash there was an article in Road & Track, ’24 supercars you can buy’ and I think the only ones that actually arrived were us, the Jag and the Bugatti – three out of 24. With the Koenigsegg they’re talking about a horsepower figure and top speed for which you need a Cd of about 0.17 or something. It doesn’t add up. You shouldn’t do that. We didn’t say anything about our motorcar – nobody knew it was going to be middle seat until the launch – we just shut up and built it and then let people drive it.


Christians response:

Response here:

"Hush Gordon
I read with the greatest interest the
interview with Gordon Murray (issue
052). First of all I would like to say that I
agree with a lot of what Mr. Murray says
and, like everyone else, I have the
greatest respect for him. However, I
think he is slightly misinformed about
Koenigsegg.
First of all, we have already delivered
cars to England, Dubai and Korea and
are just about to deliver one to Germany.
So we are selling the cars, people are
driving and using them and, as far as we
hear, liking them!
Secondly, we started our development
programme in 1995 and built our first
prototype in 1996, which went through
an extensive testing programme,
including wind tunnel testing, crash
testing, emission testing, etc. All this
work was done before we revealed the
car, and we have always backed our
figures by scientific data.
Thirdly, we have already driven at
365km/h (227mph) at Nardo in
November 2002. According to our test
driver, Loris Bicocchi, there was plenty
left to give, but rain halted the rest
session. We will have another go soon!
Loris has two world speed records with
the EB110 and has driven at 400km/h
with a Dauer 962 at Nardo, so he should
know what he is talking about.
I agree that it would have been cooler to
say nothing until the day we have a
record, but no-one would have known
about us by now, and that would have
caused a different problem. It is much
easier to say nothing to promote your
car, or as Mr Murray puts it 'just shut
up', if you are McLaren, backed up with
Formula 1 as a marketing tool and
therefore automatically receiving high
media exposure.
We have always been forthright and
explained why we believe out car will go
as fast as 390km/h (242mph). One more
time I will present the measured data:
CD as measured full scale (real car in
the Volvo wind tunnel): 0.30
Frontal area M2: 1.82
Final Ratio: 3.364
6th gear ratio: 0.711
Measured drivetrain and tyre losses
(calibrated Busch chassis dyno): 13%
Measured rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm
(meaning at 390km/h): 601bhp
Required rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm in
order to obtain 390km/h: 595bhp
Of course there can always be
differences between theory and practice
- time will tell.
If we miss out on our targeted top
speed I think it would not be any
different than when Mr Murray missed
his weight target for the F1: sad but not
the end of the world. The Koenigsegg is
still right now the fastest production car
and, further, it is a good driver's car.
Finally my opinion is that one should
not shoot off one's mouth, period -
whether it is regarding top speed or
competitors. Therefore I hereby officially
invite Mr Murray for a rest drive so that
he can feel first-hand what a
Koenigsegg is made of, thereby
justifying his future comments.

Christian v. Koenigsegg."
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Great read, Gustav. Thanks. Gordon Murray is certainly an opinionated man, and he comes across as defending his "child" a bit too vigorously. However, I have to say that the F1 would be my dream car to own.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
E60 M5 unrestricted : 330 km/h
What a car..

Anyways, I always find myself subscribing to Murray's opinions, as I also think some cars get too much credit ( yes I know, you all know I am not fond of Veyrons or Spykers) and people shoot their mouth off too much before they actually have a working, selling (!!) car.

Wout
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
507 Posts
He has a point... the McLaren has been established as THE SUPERCAR to own...

However, doesn't the Ferrari Enzo outperform the McLaren F1?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49,477 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
None have been tested on the Nürburgring :confused:

Aasteriniaan said:
He has a point... the McLaren has been established as THE SUPERCAR to own...

However, doesn't the Ferrari Enzo outperform the McLaren F1?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
714 Posts
I am not a Gordon Murray fan, but the F1 has stood the test of time and even after all these years, still compares favourably if not bests what is currently available in the supercar class as a driver's car. All credit to him and his vision. Seeing that I also like cars like Caterham R500s, it is no surprise that a high power to weight ratio supercar devoid of electronic enhancements hold such appeal to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Anyone have Christian von Koenigseggs response?

Probably C.v.K. doesn't need to answer.
He may agree with Gordon for some things, for others he will be in total disagreement.
Murray defends his creature for sure, afterall it's the term of comparison for everyone who wants to produce a supercar.
Murray is more of an engineer, while Christian is much more similar, to make a comparison, to Horacio Pagani: they both had a dream, they both realized it. Both the Zonda and the CC are one man's dream which came to life. And the results are simply staggering! Not only in the looks and the performances, but also for the technical aspect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49,477 Posts
Discussion Starter #14

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,308 Posts
i wonder what the koenigsegg would be like if built to 1992 road worthy requirements without the superchargers

someone's gotta have an unused VIN they can lend :haha:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49,477 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Response here:

"Hush Gordon
I read with the greatest interest the
interview with Gordon Murray (issue
052). First of all I would like to say that I
agree with a lot of what Mr. Murray says
and, like everyone else, I have the
greatest respect for him. However, I
think he is slightly misinformed about
Koenigsegg.
First of all, we have already delivered
cars to England, Dubai and Korea and
are just about to deliver one to Germany.
So we are selling the cars, people are
driving and using them and, as far as we
hear, liking them!
Secondly, we started our development
programme in 1995 and built our first
prototype in 1996, which went through
an extensive testing programme,
including wind tunnel testing, crash
testing, emission testing, etc. All this
work was done before we revealed the
car, and we have always backed our
figures by scientific data.
Thirdly, we have already driven at
365km/h (227mph) at Nardo in
November 2002. According to our test
driver, Loris Bicocchi, there was plenty
left to give, but rain halted the rest
session. We will have another go soon!
Loris has two world speed records with
the EB110 and has driven at 400km/h
with a Dauer 962 at Nardo, so he should
know what he is talking about.
I agree that it would have been cooler to
say nothing until the day we have a
record, but no-one would have known
about us by now, and that would have
caused a different problem. It is much
easier to say nothing to promote your
car, or as Mr Murray puts it 'just shut
up', if you are McLaren, backed up with
Formula 1 as a marketing tool and
therefore automatically receiving high
media exposure.
We have always been forthright and
explained why we believe out car will go
as fast as 390km/h (242mph). One more
time I will present the measured data:
CD as measured full scale (real car in
the Volvo wind tunnel): 0.30
Frontal area M2: 1.82
Final Ratio: 3.364
6th gear ratio: 0.711
Measured drivetrain and tyre losses
(calibrated Busch chassis dyno): 13%
Measured rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm
(meaning at 390km/h): 601bhp
Required rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm in
order to obtain 390km/h: 595bhp
Of course there can always be
differences between theory and practice
- time will tell.
If we miss out on our targeted top
speed I think it would not be any
different than when Mr Murray missed
his weight target for the F1: sad but not
the end of the world. The Koenigsegg is
still right now the fastest production car
and, further, it is a good driver's car.
Finally my opinion is that one should
not shoot off one's mouth, period -
whether it is regarding top speed or
competitors. Therefore I hereby officially
invite Mr Murray for a rest drive so that
he can feel first-hand what a
Koenigsegg is made of, thereby
justifying his future comments.

Christian v. Koenigsegg."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49,477 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Response here:

"Hush Gordon
I read with the greatest interest the
interview with Gordon Murray (issue
052). First of all I would like to say that I
agree with a lot of what Mr. Murray says
and, like everyone else, I have the
greatest respect for him. However, I
think he is slightly misinformed about
Koenigsegg.
First of all, we have already delivered
cars to England, Dubai and Korea and
are just about to deliver one to Germany.
So we are selling the cars, people are
driving and using them and, as far as we
hear, liking them!
Secondly, we started our development
programme in 1995 and built our first
prototype in 1996, which went through
an extensive testing programme,
including wind tunnel testing, crash
testing, emission testing, etc. All this
work was done before we revealed the
car, and we have always backed our
figures by scientific data.
Thirdly, we have already driven at
365km/h (227mph) at Nardo in
November 2002. According to our test
driver, Loris Bicocchi, there was plenty
left to give, but rain halted the rest
session. We will have another go soon!
Loris has two world speed records with
the EB110 and has driven at 400km/h
with a Dauer 962 at Nardo, so he should
know what he is talking about.
I agree that it would have been cooler to
say nothing until the day we have a
record, but no-one would have known
about us by now, and that would have
caused a different problem. It is much
easier to say nothing to promote your
car, or as Mr Murray puts it 'just shut
up', if you are McLaren, backed up with
Formula 1 as a marketing tool and
therefore automatically receiving high
media exposure.
We have always been forthright and
explained why we believe out car will go
as fast as 390km/h (242mph). One more
time I will present the measured data:
CD as measured full scale (real car in
the Volvo wind tunnel): 0.30
Frontal area M2: 1.82
Final Ratio: 3.364
6th gear ratio: 0.711
Measured drivetrain and tyre losses
(calibrated Busch chassis dyno): 13%
Measured rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm
(meaning at 390km/h): 601bhp
Required rear-wheel bhp at 7000rpm in
order to obtain 390km/h: 595bhp
Of course there can always be
differences between theory and practice
- time will tell.
If we miss out on our targeted top
speed I think it would not be any
different than when Mr Murray missed
his weight target for the F1: sad but not
the end of the world. The Koenigsegg is
still right now the fastest production car
and, further, it is a good driver's car.
Finally my opinion is that one should
not shoot off one's mouth, period -
whether it is regarding top speed or
competitors. Therefore I hereby officially
invite Mr Murray for a rest drive so that
he can feel first-hand what a
Koenigsegg is made of, thereby
justifying his future comments.

Christian v. Koenigsegg."
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top