UCP Awards 2009: Car of the Decade [Preliminary Voting 1]

[wwgkd]

The SSC is a tuner car, essentially. It's not a completely clean sheet design.

And because of that, one could rightly presume there would be a lot of room for tinkering and requirement for maintenance upkeep.

The SSC might be more efficient in terms of aerodynamics, But I feel as though the "more" approach you see applied to the Veyron is with purpose - it's a sure footed thing by all accounts that get's it's job done without too much fuss.

That and it's a car you could theoretically use daily - it's small enough to navigate around town, and relatively comfortable. I guess not things generally considered when outright speed is the main goal.

It's very much two different approaches to the design of each car. the SSC is a what you could consider a backyard operation compared to the big budget challenge Bugatti has behind it. It's also considerably safer (having been crash tested etc) and available globally, something the SSC is not, to my understanding.

So the SSC, when measured against the criteria of outright speed, is indeed victorious. However, the Veyron is a better all rounder, and a remarkable acheivement for a car of it's capability. Sure, there are compromises, but it does a lot of things right.

What does it share? Headlights? Lots of manufacturers (lamborghini for one)are sharing bits and pieces, people don't say they're not cars because of that. Do you respect the Koenigsegg that much less for using a ford based engine? If the headlights work well, why not use them? They'd be cheaper and easier to replace when they burn out.

I understand the skepticism of the design, but you're assuming that because it's a small american manufacturer it's going to need more maintinance and upkeep. I've never heard that to be true, though, and don't want to jump to conclusions just because the company is what it is.

I've actually read a couple of tests that said the Veyron in top speed mode (the whole point of the car) didn't track very well, and that little cross breezes induced a bit of drifting. Never heard anything similar about the SSC. Despite the fact that everyone assumes that any body which reaches those speeds without a wing rising out of the back will generate lift (such as they vetyron which was not originally designed for those speeds) the SSC does generate downforce and actually has a phenominal suspension setup which allows it to handle very well. Which is part of my problem with assumptions in such matters.

I don't see how a Veyron would be easier to drive around town than the SSC. There's not a ton of size difference, and they both have similar clearance, so if you're willing to drive a veyron somewhere, why would the SSC pose a problem? It also comes with a nav system, if you require that sort of thing in your super car.

Since the SSC is not being sold as a kit car, it does have to meet the same crash saftey and emissions standards as any other car on the road in the US.

The Veyron is a remarkable achievment. But the SSC does everything the Veyron can do, albiet with less flash, for a fraction of the price. Which makes it just as, if not more, remarkable. The only problems I see with the SSC come down to snob appeal, which it doesn't have. I'm not sure that any car built in the US will have that appeal, to be honest. The Saleen S7 had similar problems, bit it too is a very remarkable super car.

I'm not saying the SSC is my favorite supercar, but it does ddeserve more respect than it gets. And certainly the Veyron is not the greatest supercar ever or even of the decade just because it's more useable than an racecar (just about everything is) and has the second highest top speed.

[csl177]

It is what Ferdinand Piech wanted his dick to look like. (maybe also performance-wise)

Perhaps the most concise single sentence ever written about the Veyron. Pure lulz, but likely with some truth.

There is no question the Bugatti is impressive, but why on earth would this poll also include the pedestrian Panda?
Not a bad car, but these lists of such disparate autos are silly. The groupings within these preliminary polls are seriously flawed.

Group supercars together, Bugatti with Zonda, SSC, Enzo, et. al.

Ditto 300C, C6, etc. Each within a distinct class... THEN throw the winners into COTD, COTY.

And if this audience is so clueless of the criteria (other than thinking the "coolest" car should prevail) well, there's a microcosm psychographic portrait of UCP users. Not a bad thing, just perhaps dissappointing for some of us. If it really is just another popularity contest, no prelim polling was needed.

[LTSmash]

Ranked by price; high to low in USD. Conversions were made for GBP and EUR (I know it's not the best way to calculate price given the current FX market but the numbers are pretty close). I was going to model one by car type (supercar, sedan, etc) also but I didn't so here you go.***

EDIT: Also, take into account that some of the numbers may be off. I did not look specifically for 09 prices but original MSRP; even that may be off... I'm not getting paid to do this shit so you get half-assed research.


Bugatti Veyron ___ 1700000
Pagani Zonda F ___ 740000
Lamborghini Murcialago ___ 400000
Ferrari 430 Scuderia ___ 280000
Alfa Romeo 8C ___ 230000
Lamborghini LP560-4 ___ 200000 25000 GBP
Aston Martin DB9 ___ 190000
Tesla Roadster ___ 130000
Maserati Quattroporte ___ 120000
Porsche GT3 (997) ___ 105000
VW Phaeton ___ 94000 10000 GBP
Nissan GTR (R35) ___ 80000
Noble M12 ___ 76000
Corvette (C6) 74000 40000 GBP
Hummer H2 ___ 63000 28360 EUR
TVR Tuscan S ___ 61000
Citroen C6 ___ 46000
BMW 3 Series (E90-E92) ___ 40000
Cadillac CTS (5th Generation) ___ 39000 50000 GBP
Alfa Romeo 159 ___ 38000
Lotus Elise (Series 2) ___ 38000
Chrysler 300 ___ 29000
VW Golf Gti (MkV) ___ 26000
Toyota Prius (2nd Generation) ___ 23000
Honda FCX Clarity ___ 21000
Mini Cooper (R53) ___ 21000
Toyot a Camry (7th Generation) ___ 21000 17000 GBP
Mazda MX-5 (3rd Generation) ___ 19000
Toyota IQ ___ 15000
Fiat Panda (100 hp) ___ 11000 30000 GBP
Tata Nano ___ 2500


EDIT: EDIT: Boredom struck, you get one by type. "Super Car" is anything with two doors and track worthy, which is why the Lotus and Veyron are in the same grouping; these can be grouped by price above. "Sedan" is anything that is daily driver friendly. "Sport Sedan" is a sedan but sporty. "SUV" is the Hummer.... Whether it's a literal sedan or super car is not the point (I didn't want to make a hundred variables for "4-door hybrid" and "2-door sports car low price," etc.); they can be compared by similar category and purpose.

Citroen C6 ___ Sedan
VW Golf Gti (MkV)___ Sedan
Toyota Prius (2nd Generation)___ Sedan
Honda FCX Clarity___ Sedan
Mini Cooper (R53)___ Sedan
Toyota Camery (7th Generation)___ Sedan
Toyota IQ___ Sedan
Fiat Panda (100 hp)___ Sedan
Tata Nano ___Sedan

Maserati Quattroporte ___Sport Sedan
VW Phaeton___ Sport Sedan
BMW 3 Series (E90-E92)___ Sport Sedan
Caddilac CTS (5th Generation) ___Sport Sedan
Chrysler 300___ Sport Sedan
Alfa Romeo 159___ Sport Sedan

Bugatti Veyron___ Super Car
Pagani Zonda F___ Super Car
Lamborghini Murcialago ___Super Car
Ferrari 430 Scuderia ___Super Car
Alfa Romeo 8C ___Super Car
Lambroghini LP560-4___ Super Car
Aston Martin DB9 ___Super Car
Tesla Roadster ___Super Car
Porsche GT3 (997) ___Super Car
Nissan GTR (R35) ___Super Car
Noble M12 ___Super Car
Corvette (C6) ___Super Car
TVR Tuscan S___ Super Car
Lotus Elise (Series 2)___ Super Car
Mazda MX-5 (3rd Generation) ___Super Car

Hummer H2___ SUV

[Ferrer]

There is no question the Bugatti is impressive, but why on earth would this poll also include the pedestrian Panda?

Why not? A worthy car is a worth car, regardless of pricetag or purpose.

And if this audience is so clueless of the criteria (other than thinking the "coolest" car should prevail) well, there's a microcosm psychographic portrait of UCP users. Not a bad thing, just perhaps dissappointing for some of us. If it really is just another popularity contest, no prelim polling was needed.

That's indeed a problem. But as you point out, more a problem of the voters than the groupings itselves.

EDIT And please LT, edit your post include the 159 as a sports saloon.

[LTSmash]

EDIT And please LT, edit your post include the 159 as a sports saloon.

Done.

[henk4]

There is no question the Bugatti is impressive, but why on earth would this poll also include the pedestrian Panda?

Perhaps because the pedestrian 100 HP is sort of what the first mini cooper was...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

What does it share? Headlights? Lots of manufacturers (lamborghini for one)are sharing bits and pieces, people don't say they're not cars because of that. Do you respect the Koenigsegg that much less for using a ford based engine? If the headlights work well, why not use them? They'd be cheaper and easier to replace when they burn out.

The Bits you touch in a Koenigsegg - and the bits you view - are at least bespoke.

And it doesn't look like a kit car.

I understand the skepticism of the design, but you're assuming that because it's a small american manufacturer it's going to need more maintinance and upkeep. I've never heard that to be true, though, and don't want to jump to conclusions just because the company is what it is.

It's not a stretch to imagine a vehicle that has not had the millions of dollars spent on it's R&D as a Veyron to have a few issues with durability, is it?

I've actually read a couple of tests that said the Veyron in top speed mode (the whole point of the car) didn't track very well, and that little cross breezes induced a bit of drifting. Never heard anything similar about the SSC. Despite the fact that everyone assumes that any body which reaches those speeds without a wing rising out of the back will generate lift (such as they vetyron which was not originally designed for those speeds) the SSC does generate downforce and actually has a phenominal suspension setup which allows it to handle very well. Which is part of my problem with assumptions in such matters.

And I've seen a few tests which says the Veyron is in fact ridiculously calm at maximum attack - or at least relatively to the manic nature of a McLaren F1 (or SSC).

It's a fairly subjective thing to argue either way.

I don't see how a Veyron would be easier to drive around town than the SSC. There's not a ton of size difference, and they both have similar clearance, so if you're willing to drive a veyron somewhere, why would the SSC pose a problem? It also comes with a nav system, if you require that sort of thing in your super car.

I've seen dimensions of a Veyron, are there some Dimension comparisons available for the SSC to compare?

Is the suspension on the SSC adjustable?

Since the SSC is not being sold as a kit car, it does have to meet the same crash saftey and emissions standards as any other car on the road in the US.

But does it? aren't there limitations to that in terms of what is classed as a safe vehicle? Are computer simulations acceptable for a small scale operation such as this?

The Veyron is a remarkable achievment. But the SSC does everything the Veyron can do, albiet with less flash, for a fraction of the price.

I don't think it matches the prestige, at all.

Regardless of the price, the impression left is that your buying the Skoda instead of purchasing the Audi, no pun intended.

Which makes it just as, if not more, remarkable. The only problems I see with the SSC come down to snob appeal, which it doesn't have. I'm not sure that any car built in the US will have that appeal, to be honest. The Saleen S7 had similar problems, bit it too is a very remarkable super car.

With some remarkable issues - as all supercars of it's type have. That extra 10% that you pay the extra $400,000 for might just be worthwhile.

I'm not saying the SSC is my favorite supercar, but it does ddeserve more respect than it gets. And certainly the Veyron is not the greatest supercar ever or even of the decade just because it's more useable than an racecar (just about everything is) and has the second highest top speed.

The SSC is a capable car, no doubt.

But I rate the Veyron over it simply because it's a more capable car over most fields of comparison. While the SSC is quicker, the Veyron does it with greater distinction.

Snobbery? maybe, but if you can't be a snob when you pay $1 million for a car, when can you?

[wwgkd]

The Bits you touch in a Koenigsegg - and the bits you view - are at least bespoke.

And it doesn't look like a kit car.

I can understand that. So does it bother you when somewhat lesser cars (lambo, audi, etc.) share bits, like the nav system? I personally care more about how a part works than where it comes from, so the fact the Zonda, Koenigsegg, and even the F1 used borrowed parts doesn't bother me.

I won't argue the looks of the SSC, though. It's really not that impressive styling wise. However the Veyron may look impressive, I think it's butt fugly. It's impressive in the same way that a working bulldog is.

It's not a stretch to imagine a vehicle that has not had the millions of dollars spent on it's R&D as a Veyron to have a few issues with durability, is it?

And I've seen a few tests which says the Veyron is in fact ridiculously calm at maximum attack - or at least relatively to the manic nature of a McLaren F1 (or SSC).

It's a fairly subjective thing to argue either way.

You could imagine that. But the same thing could be said of a car making 1,000hp with a complex 16 cylinder engine, 4 turbos and 11 radiators. Quite a few people have made ridiculous power out of the Corvette engines, so I'm not so inclined to question it's reliability unless I hear something to the contrary, same as with the veyron.

I've only seen top speed runs at Ehra-Lessein where everyone comented on how stable it was. When people made high speed runs in "top speed mode" other places was where I saw the comments about tracking. Thus I mentioned wind and a less than perfect track (for instance NASCAR ovals are often almost as rough as streets.)

I've seen dimensions of a Veyron, are there some Dimension comparisons available for the SSC to compare?

Is the suspension on the SSC adjustable?

Dimensions for the SSC (which also manages to weigh 1,400lbs less.)
Length 4,475.5 millimetres (176.20 in)
Width 2,095.5 millimetres (82.50 in)
Height 1,092.2 millimetres (43.00 in)

So .5 inches longer, 3.8 inches wider, and 2.6 inches shorter in height than the veyron. Not a huge difference aside from weight.

Are you reffering to adjustable shocks? I haven't heard but I imagine you could order it with anything you wanted.

But does it? aren't there limitations to that in terms of what is classed as a safe vehicle? Are computer simulations acceptable for a small scale operation such as this?

No, it's the same testing as anything else sold as a new (non-kit) vehicle. And we do have annoyingly strict crash and emissions standards.

I don't think it matches the prestige, at all.

Regardless of the price, the impression left is that your buying the Skoda instead of purchasing the Audi, no pun intended.

It doesn't. The (bought) name of Bugatti backed by VW money is always going to have more prestige than a little american company. Same goes for Koenigsegg and Pagani. They just sound more exotic and faster. But I think the ZR1 has shown that a car without a lot of prestige can still be a good car. Often on these forums I hear complaints about paying for the name, not the performance, why doesn't that apply (in part at least) here?

If I'd bought an Audi and got beat at the one thing I was trying to do well by a Skoda, I'd feel pretty damn embarassed. If I was driving the Skoda that beat the Audi, I'd feel pretty smug.

With some remarkable issues - as all supercars of it's type have. That extra 10% that you pay the extra $400,000 for might just be worthwhile.

It's not just $400,000 for 10% though. It's 4 times as much, another $1,500,000 for the image.

The SSC is a capable car, no doubt.

But I rate the Veyron over it simply because it's a more capable car over most fields of comparison. While the SSC is quicker, the Veyron does it with greater distinction.

Snobbery? maybe, but if you can't be a snob when you pay $1 million for a car, when can you?

The veyron is sold as "the fastest car in the world" on their website, by thier salesmen, and by their owners. They don't say "most prestigous car in the world," they don't say that it makes a great city car, they say fastest. They say most powerful. It's not. It's remarkable that the thing runs despite all the complexity, but it's not the one thing they claim it to be.

When can you be a snob? When you buy the actual fastest car in the world for 1/4 the price.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I can understand that. So does it bother you when somewhat lesser cars (lambo, audi, etc.) share bits, like the nav system? I personally care more about how a part works than where it comes from, so the fact the Zonda, Koenigsegg, and even the F1 used borrowed parts doesn't bother me.

I'm a bit of a believer that if you are paying that much for a car, then you should expect at least some form of bespoke accoutremont.

I guess thats how they justify the price of the SSC though.

I won't argue the looks of the SSC, though. It's really not that impressive styling wise. However the Veyron may look impressive, I think it's butt fugly. It's impressive in the same way that a working bulldog is.

I think the Veyron has actually aged quite well, and is certainly well contained for size, if not weight.

You could imagine that. But the same thing could be said of a car making 1,000hp with a complex 16 cylinder engine, 4 turbos and 11 radiators. Quite a few people have made ridiculous power out of the Corvette engines, so I'm not so inclined to question it's reliability unless I hear something to the contrary, same as with the veyron.

4 Turbos and 11 radiators are complex in plumbing, but the W16 is fairly stable and well engineered. Thats why you pay for the development costs - so that the complexity is countered by reliability.

The SSC is a simpler package, certainly. But it's still a car that is tuned to an extreme level of usability and reliability.

I've only seen top speed runs at Ehra-Lessein where everyone comented on how stable it was. When people made high speed runs in "top speed mode" other places was where I saw the comments about tracking. Thus I mentioned wind and a less than perfect track (for instance NASCAR ovals are often almost as rough as streets.)

A NASCAR oval might not be the best place to make a high speed run.

On the other hand, a place like Nardo might be a better test for both cars. Certainly both had home field advantage.

Dimensions for the SSC (which also manages to weigh 1,400lbs less.)
Length 4,475.5 millimetres (176.20 in)
Width 2,095.5 millimetres (82.50 in)
Height 1,092.2 millimetres (43.00 in)

I guess thats what 4 turbos and 11 radiators weigh

So .5 inches longer, 3.8 inches wider, and 2.6 inches shorter in height than the veyron. Not a huge difference aside from weight.

Certainly smaller than I thought. Except for the width. Which raises questions about the frontal area of the car - which may restrict it's top speed. which could be countered by it's shorter height.

Are you reffering to adjustable shocks? I haven't heard but I imagine you could order it with anything you wanted.

Air Adjustible suspension in particular, but if it's orderable, or changeable on the fly, that could be good.

No, it's the same testing as anything else sold as a new (non-kit) vehicle. And we do have annoyingly strict crash and emissions standards.

So they sacrificed one for a crash test then? interesting. Do we have sales figures available that would make this worthwhile?

It doesn't. The (bought) name of Bugatti backed by VW money is always going to have more prestige than a little american company. Same goes for Koenigsegg and Pagani. They just sound more exotic and faster. But I think the ZR1 has shown that a car without a lot of prestige can still be a good car. Often on these forums I hear complaints about paying for the name, not the performance, why doesn't that apply (in part at least) here?

Because we're not talking about the lower echelons where good value is a considered aspect of the equation. We're talking about the highest ranges of automotive excess and prestige. There is nothing worse for the owner of these cars to have a car sneered upon as a lower rent version, when you can buy the real thing.

thats not to say the SSC is not the real thing - it plainly has the numbers. But the impression is there.

If I'd bought an Audi and got beat at the one thing I was trying to do well by a Skoda, I'd feel pretty damn embarassed. If I was driving the Skoda that beat the Audi, I'd feel pretty smug.

But what gets the girl?

Hey baby, I drive the lesser brand but i'm more capable?

And the Veyron might have been built to be the fastest, but it was also to be the most technological, the most expensive, the best hypercar ever.

And it's only not the fastest.

It's not just $400,000 for 10% though. It's 4 times as much, another $1,500,000 for the image.

What money when you've got $1,500,000 to spend on a car?

The veyron is sold as "the fastest car in the world" on their website, by thier salesmen, and by their owners. They don't say "most prestigous car in the world," they don't say that it makes a great city car, they say fastest. They say most powerful. It's not. It's remarkable that the thing runs despite all the complexity, but it's not the one thing they claim it to be.

So you've spoken to a dealer and understand their sales strategy?

It's claimed to be many things - the argument it's been built to be just one is fairly ridiculous.

When can you be a snob? When you buy the actual fastest car in the world for 1/4 the price.

Because it's not about buying the fastest car. It's about buying the best hypercar ever, with the broadest range of capability.

And the Veyron is that.

[Ferrer]

Yes. And it's a Corrado on steroids and it's useless and it's an afront to a name like Bugatti and so on and so forth.

But that doesn't change the fact that, like others, it's quite a car, this.

[Ferrer]

Thanks.

[Kitdy]

Veyron wins this poll, I will be setting up the finals shortly.

[Ferrer]

...

...

Also, can I point out, the Veyron was the first to do it. And that's got to count for something.

[wwgkd]

Also, can I point out, the Veyron was the first to do it. And that's got to count for something.

The Veyron came out a little earlier. The McLaren F1 was a lot earlier, and a much better super car, IMO.