F1technical.net

I know AMG prepares the engine and that it is a Mercedes engine at the beginning but still. Lamborghini, Ferrari, they have all gone the V12 atmo for their greatest model, while Pagani has gone the turbocharged route. Ok why not. But then please ask AMG to get more from the engine. If Ferrari and Lamborghini can get the same power without turbochargers, there must be something wrong with Mercedes.

Exotic ok but if you say that a V12-twinturbo is exotic, then what is the W16 from Bugatti ? THIS is exotic ! Not a tea-pot-type engine. I have nothing against turbocharging, I'm myself a boost-addict. I agree the Zonda R sounds good, but you are comparing a car which is NOT homologated on the road. Please then listen to this in the same league of non street-legal cars :

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLD67lnB2DE&feature=fvst[/youtube]

Sorry but FXX > Zonda R and by a big margin !

And EDO-Competition has homologated a FXX also, just remembering this now. But back to the topic of this Zonda, I still say that using a V12 twinturbo on this car is shows no finesse at all. Well, it goes with the design of the car anyway.

I'm also fan of the Zonda R, don't misunderstand me also.

Environmental Legislation dictates the use of turbos. It will probably use half the fuel and emissions that the current 7.3 litre does, thereby making it far more attractive for a smaller company to use.
You dont see anyone questioning Mclaren Porsche or Bugatti for using Turbos, why should AMG be held to task?

The same as Honda always went for higher reving engines with natural aspiration, but now are actively considering turbos. They have to.
And as impressive as the Ferrari sound is, in my opinion the AMG V12 is just too spine tingling to be second best.

I love egg or chicken threads =D>




BTW, I was being sarcastical there.

Belatti wrote:I love egg or chicken threads =D>




BTW, I was being sarcastical there.

What's your opinion about this car anyway ?

MadMatt wrote:

Belatti wrote:I love egg or chicken threads =D>




BTW, I was being sarcastical there.

What's your opinion about this car anyway ?

+1

My car is still better than yours matt! (yes, sarcasm.....)

Both Fantastic cars no doubt, but with regard to Huayra, I think it has somthing most Ferrari's lack...presence. The only ferrari I can think of with anything like the presence of the Pagani is probably the 599GTB(far more than the contrived enzo). Which I also think to be the most achingly beautiful creation I have slapped my sore eyes on.
But, between beauty and sheer presence I still take Presence.

The Pagani is unashamedly, different. At the levels of cash these guys want for a car, to chose a Ferrari(and its age old competitors) is a natural almost default choice. Pagani only sell 20-30 cars a year! They cater to a braver clientele, people that want more than just automated response when buying a car. I think we(petrolheads) can all agree the world is abetter place for having Pagani in it, regardless of what styles they create.

MadMatt wrote:

Belatti wrote:I love egg or chicken threads =D>




BTW, I was being sarcastical there.

What's your opinion about this car anyway ?

I let the beauty contest for every day cars.

In these kind of cars, form follows function. I could never say an Enzo, a 911 or even a Veyron are ugly. I would kill for owning those cars!

My opinion will be the one dictated by the Nurburgring stopwatch.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqWKWJ7jiCw[/youtube]

Thanks for the Video Panda

Retains the Zondas sound with a hint of forced induction. All the Pagani traits still intact. Squat proportions, Dramatic rear, Beautiful interiors and epic sound.

The colour scheme looks pretty cool too, not my personal choice though. In Silver with Red interior....please?

I'm no style critic, but I like the car. There is function over form in that front, yes, but there is also a statement that this is not a lambo, so it has to look different. And it doesn't look like a aerodynamic lego construction, like the Enzo or many of the ferraris around.

The side and rear are very clean. And the way that the cockpit ends in those exhausts is quite catchy.

P.S. Poor dog got a fright!

It looks so much better in those pics than in the 'scoop' shots earlier.

From the rear 3/4 it has a certain Koenigsegg feel to it.

I like it.

It definitely looks a lot better in daylight. Dark-ish red would make it gorgeous.

JohnsonsEvilTwin wrote:

There is more than a hint of a Fiat Coupe in the side panels. The front is far too stubby, the wing mirrors have been inspired by ants feelers and the front gril has a remarkable resemblance to a Grouper.

Of course you could compare it to Maranello's latest creation....The FF.

In which case andrew, you would be criticising the Mona Lisa...

Fiat Coupe in the side lines? nope dont see that, I do see a hint of Murcielago around the rear wheel arch and intake panel just ahead of the rear wheel. The rest could only have come from Pagani.

You clearly have no idea what the Mona Lisa is then.

These cars, like most cars now are bland, unimaginative, spongy and all look pretty much the same. There is nothing to make you give it a second, third, fourth etc etc glance and there is nothing to make you go "WOW!".

Now a couple proper cars are:

Ferrari F40 & Ferrari Enzo - looks aggressive and is a simple design.
Ford Mustang mk2 fastback - that's a real looker of a car plus a V8!

This 4 wheeled wooly jumper is just waek and has no class about it.