Could I trade the '05 RL for a set of lugnuts on one wheel?

http://www.foxnews.com/slideshow/lei...=faces#slide=1

It's wild that the tires can't contain the horses...

 

As neat as that speed is, I suppose...if I were to get a supercar, I could care less about the 300mph barrier.



McLaren F1 or Pagani Zonda...forever!

 

Too much friction on the tires at those speeds.

Just like the jet cars that can go supersonic for land speed records, they use wound carbon composite wheels (no tires). The rubber compounds just can't hold up at those speeds.....and nearing 300 mph will really impact a tire....it's pushing the limit of tires.

 

What's the point? I agree with Yumcha

 

Good point, but what's the point of buying car with a 160mph speedo when 70mph is the limit?

But of course, I like the torque of going 70mph in 2.5 seconds with some sexy styling.

 

^ Then you don't need any of the 4 cars in that article.



Again, McLaren F1...Pagani Zonda...FTW.

 

Aston Martin Vantage/DBS/DB9/One-77 too.

 

^^^What's the point of buying a Mega yacht's that comes with a staff of nearly 100, a mega manison with over 10 kitchens, or supercars that have the capability of going 300mph? If you got the $$$, why not?

 

If you're saying whats the point, then why do you care about the mclaren F1 or the pagani zonda.

They are building those cars just cause they can. And to take the title of fastest supercar in the world.

But yumcha, I do agree that the Mclaren F1 is better than those, although I wouldnt put the pagani zonda, looks so weird to me haha.
I can't wait till ferrari comes out with a successor for the enzo, I dont car if it doesnt go above 240mph as long as it can destroy anything put up against it.

 

That's not the thing. I'm saying that the 300mph benchmark is not, IMHO, the all-encompassing milestone for a supercar.

The Pagani Zonda and McLaren F1 do other things really well. And going to 300 bazillion miles per hour at top speed is not one of them. And honestly, to fell the thrill of an exotic, I question if that is really that big of deal or more like how the car comes out of an apex of goes through twisties...

 

Cause as long as you dont get caught laws were meant to be broken

 

The point of having a car that does 200mph, versus 250mph.....275mph.....160 mph....or +300 mph.......

in the end it's all about measuring your d*ck with your other supercar owner friends.

 

That last car is all numbers, won't be anything more.
SSC, might have a chance. They'll probably break 270Mph, & then go right back to development though.
Koenigsegg may do it as long as they actually get the car out on the track. Their last "records" were either by est. (240+Mph w/ the CCR) or by rumor (CCR in Tx.).

I'm betting VAG/Porsche will be the first. They're the only ones I can see having the available funds to develop the car properly.

 

I'd bet michelin would be up to the challenge with some concorde technology, those redesigned ones could stand running over metal strips at 230 mph, reaching 280 or 290 with some of that tech doesn't seem impossible. Then again, tires would then stretch into the $200,000 or $300,000 range!

 

the veyron's tires already cost 20k Each!! The supersport even more!!

 

If you're getting a 300 mph supercar, I hope you live near the Nevada desert.

 

If you can afford a 300mph supercar, you can make frequent trips to the autobahn.

With cars that are coming closer to toping the 300mph range, I wonder when the autobahn will get a speed limit in the unrestricted zones. I'm thinking 200mph? Or around there?

 

I don't think it's very smart to go that fast on public roads.

 

It would be completely stupid to go above 200mph on a public road, but once someone does it and crashes, then I believe something will change.

 

^I bet the pictures of that will be better than that slideshow of the Audi that hit the tree in Germany at some ridiculous speed.


As much as I hate to say it, I'm in the "What's the point?" camp. I like the Veyron and Shelby from the link. I like the new McLaren. They all look great, but they go much faster than necessary for pretty much anything (unless you're running at the salt flats). If having a car that goes 250 is pointless, that makes one that goes 300 beyond pointless. Yes, it gives the rich folk a way to measure their wee willies, but that's it. Oh well, let 'em have it and enjoy it. I'll just wait for the carnage pics.

 

given the unavailability of roads to go at top speed on, it would be so much more fun to have a lot of torque and accelleration rather than top speed

 

 

I can't fathom a more pointless exercise. First of all, the horsepower required to achieve 300 mph would indeed have to be at least 1500, probably much more. Second, that much power would make the car virtually undriveable at lower speeds; you'd just wheelspin around everywhere at anything more than half-throttle. Third, where in the hell would you actually do it? Forget Nevada, those roads are no-where near as flat and debris-free as they would need to be for such an escapade. Forget the autobahn too, Bernd Rosemayer tried that in an Auto Union in 1938 and the result was FAIL.

http://www.kolumbus.fi/leif.snellman/rose.htm