SSC Ultimate Aero TT set to smoke Bugatti's top speed record.

[sandertheshark]

SSC Sets Date for Top Speed Record Attempt



Source: SSC press release

SSC, manufacturer of exclusive super cars, announced that testing to set the world production speed record will commence on March 21st, 2007. In conjunction with MKM Racing, SSC has closed down a 12-mile stretch of Highway 93 in Elko County, Nevada to attempt to break the 253 mph record currently held by the Bugatti Veyron. MKM Racing has been hired to oversee safety and provide laser traps to verify speeds to an accuracy of .01 mph.


Led by founder/lead designer Jerod Shelby, the SSC design team has spent the past 7 years creating the ultimate super car. Boasting 1183 bhp and 1094 ft-lbs of torque from a proprietary twin-turbo V8 power plant, the Ultimate Aero TT produces more emissions-legal horsepower than any other production automobile in the world. Wind tunnel testing at NASA?s Langley, Virginia facility revealed a coefficient of drag of just .357 and showed the 2,750 lb Ultimate Aero TT capable of speeds up to 273 mph.



No news yet on whether they actually broke the record today.  Will update.

[Raghavan]

Wow, this car looks awesome, plus it's super lightweight.

[goldenlover1101]

I love it. Still would take a Saleen S7, but this thing is awesome. man, thats a lot of horsepower. i personally would kill myself with that much power on tap. I wonder what the 0-60 is on this monster. That kind of power is scary and you should have to pass some kind of test before being allowed to handle on. Its like a loaded weapon

[Raza]

She ain't pretty, but she's got a nice personality.

[Raghavan]

Any car is like a loaded weapon for that matter.

[the Teuton]

Is this the same SSC as in the Thrust SSC?

[Tave]

They're an American company aren't they? Very cool.

Man that thing is low. It looks like it could cut the grass it's parked on with it's chin spoiler.

I wonder how you get this car from your home to the place you want to drive it without ruining the paint job. Maybe it has an adjutable ride height.

[Nethead]

If the Ultimate Aero TT manufacturer wants real recognition, they need to come up with the bucks to take the vehicle to Nardo, Italy--an instrumented loop track with FIA certification. 

Why? 

1. Straight tracks, and straight public highways, can establish what speeds a vehicle can attain, but aren't considered sufficient to establish what speeds a vehicle can sustain.

2. Nardo's staff go to great lengths to establish that your vehicle meets the specs for its class--so you don't try to claim it's a genuine production vehicle but the engine turns out to be bored and stroked and your vehicle weighs 188 pounds less than the lowest weight of those vehicles you have in your showrooms.

3. So far, no vehicle that has set a world's record on a straight track has been able to sustain its straight track speed on the Nardo loop.  Example:  The McLaren F1 that attained a previous record for production cars of 240 MPH set at Volkswagen's nine kilometer straight track in Wolfsburg, Germany, was 13 km/hr slower around Nardo's loop.  McLaren's staff aren't posers, so they made sure they went to Nardo, too, even though a slower sustained speed was inevitable.  No harm done--the F1's sustained speed around Nardo was 13 km/hr slower, but that slower speed was still the production car sustained speed record at that time.

Whether a speed higher than the Veyron's 252 MPH at Nardo set on a straight section of public highway would be recognized if the Ultimate Aero TT can do it is just something the Nethead here does not know, but if the Aero folks really want the record, why take the chance that it wouldn't be recognized??  Of course, if the Ultimate Aero TT can attain more than 252 MPH but can't sustain more than 252 MPH, that would explain it...They'd better hurry--several other makes are thinking of going to Nardo before the year is out!

[SVT666]

If the Ultimate Aero TT manufacturer wants real recognition, they need to come up with the bucks to take the vehicle to Nardo, Italy--an instrumented loop track with FIA certification.?

Why??

1. Straight tracks, and straight public highways, can establish what speeds a vehicle can attain, but aren't considered sufficient to establish what speeds a vehicle can sustain.

2. Nardo's staff go to great lengths to establish that your vehicle meets the specs for its class--so you don't try to claim it's a genuine production vehicle but the engine turns out to be bored and stroked and your vehicle weighs 188 pounds less than the lowest weight of those vehicles you have in your showrooms.

3. So far, no vehicle that has set a world's record on a straight track has been able to sustain its straight track speed on the Nardo loop.? Example:? The McLaren F1 that attained a previous record for production cars of 240 MPH set at Volkswagen's nine kilometer straight track in Wolfsburg, Germany, was 13 km/hr slower around Nardo's loop.? McLaren's staff aren't posers, so they made sure they went to Nardo, too, even though a slower sustained speed was inevitable.? No harm done--the F1's sustained speed around Nardo was 13 km/hr slower, but that slower speed was still the production car sustained speed record at that time.

Whether a speed higher than the Veyron's 252 MPH at Nardo set on a straight section of public highway would be recognized if the Ultimate Aero TT can do it is just something the Nethead here does not know, but if the Aero folks really want the record, why take the chance that it wouldn't be recognized??? Of course, if the Ultimate Aero TT can attain more than 252 MPH but can't sustain more than 252 MPH, that would explain it...They'd better hurry--several other makes are thinking of going to Nardo before the year is out!

I really don't care what the car can sustain because it will never sustain those speeds on public roads anyway.  I don't even really care that they can attain those speeds either, but if it can attain 253+mph then I will still be equally impressed.  I just find it kind of sad that 13 years after the McLaren F1 attained 242 mph, modern cars are requiring over 1000 hp (373 more hp then the McLaren F1) to attain a speed only 10 mph higher then the McLaren.  Imagine what a McLaren could do with another 373 hp.

[omicron]

I really don't care what the car can sustain because it will never sustain those speeds on public roads anyway. I don't even really care that they can attain those speeds either, but if it can attain 253+mph then I will still be equally impressed. I just find it kind of sad that 13 years after the McLaren F1 attained 242 mph, modern cars are requiring over 1000 hp (373 more hp then the McLaren F1) to attain a speed only 10 mph higher then the McLaren. Imagine what a McLaren could do with another 373 hp.

Spear sideways and crash into walls at 300mph.

[TheIntrepid]

Whoa... although I'd still buy a Veyron. It's a better all-around car, and more refined at high speeds than this brute would be.

[SVT666]

Spear sideways and crash into walls at 300mph.

But it would still go 300 mph.

[Raza]

But it would still go 300 mph.

From what I've read, Mclarens were rather rubbish at anything but high speeds.  They go like stink, but the suspension was soft, the brakes were soft, and the aerodynamics had no real concept of downforce.  I'm also told they are great to drive, though.

[Raza]

Whoa... although I'd still buy a Veyron. It's a better all-around car, and more refined at high speeds than this brute would be.

They're working on a 250mph+ Town Car with autopilot.  You should get your name on that list.

[Tave]

From what I've read, Mclarens were rather rubbish at anything but high speeds.? They go like stink, but the suspension was soft, the brakes were soft, and the aerodynamics had no real concept of downforce.? I'm also told they are great to drive, though.

I think McLaren was one of the first supercars to use carbon-ceramic brakes. We watched a video discussing the technological innovations of the car for a science class in high school. At the time, I believe its brakes were superior to anything else available.

[Nethead]

I really don't care what the car can sustain because it will never sustain those speeds on public roads anyway.? I don't even really care that they can attain those speeds either, but if it can attain 253+mph then I will still be equally impressed.? I just find it kind of sad that 13 years after the McLaren F1 attained 242 mph, modern cars are requiring over 1000 hp (373 more hp then the McLaren F1) to attain a speed only 10 mph higher then the McLaren.? Imagine what a McLaren could do with another 373 hp.

HEMI666:? The F1's record was 240 MPH set on a straight strip in Germany, broken by a Koenigsegg CCR which sustained 241 MPH at Nardo.? Convert 13 km/hr to MPH and subtract that from 240 MPH to see what the F1's max sustained speed was at Nardo? (I think a km is about 0.62 mile).? If you google well, there's a website that has the Nardo speeds in km/hr--the official lingo of production car speed records, apparently...

It doesn't take a lot of extra horsepower to increase speed from 50 MPH to 60 MPH, but it takes a bunch of it to increase speed from 250 MPH to 260 MPH.? There's probably a differential equation formula that could produce a value for the horsepower needed to reach every speed a given car can attain.? Label a graph in 10 MPH increments horizontally and 10 HP increments vertically and you'd plot something sorta half-parabolic, I suppose.? A line connecting the readings of the HP required to gain the next 10 MPH increment would begin to get steep by 150 MPH and fairly precipitous by 230 MPH.?

Adding 373 HP to a McLaren F1 would surely be faster, but not nearly as much faster as such a huge percentage increase in horsepower might imply.? Aerodynamics/drag coefficient/frontal area type stuff is probably the central issue--a heavily-modified Ford flathead has pushed a tiny Bonneville streamliner to 302 MPH, but that same heavily-modified flathead couldn't push a McLaren F1 to 302 MPH because of these barreling-through-the-atmosphere issues.? If I remember correctly, a 2000 Mustang Cobra R could reach 176 MPH with its rear wing and front splitter in place, but could reach around 185 MPH with them removed (which removed drag, but also removed lots of the downforce that gave the 2000 Cobra R a cornering G greater than 1.0). The production car speed record might go up fairly regularly if all the cars that could set a new record show up at Nardo this year.? This Ultima Aero, the Saleen S7R twin-turbo, the ethanol Koenigsegg CCXR, the extra-200-HP Veyron (Veyron GT, is it?), and I've heard that Porsche is thinking about taking a shot at it--and how about that Canadian car you posted a month or so ago?? The Brawl at Nardo...

[Raza]

I think McLaren was one of the first supercars to use carbon-ceramic brakes. We watched a video discussing the technological innovations of the car for a science class in high school. At the time, I believe its brakes were superior to anything else available.

Not according to its owners.  I'll see if I can dig up the Evo where the owner gives advice to the writer driving it. 

[SVT666]

...and the aerodynamics had no real concept of downforce.?

It creates 2200 lbs of downforce at 130 mph and it only weighs 2200 lbs itself.

Many people in "the know" still consider it the greatest driver's car ever built.

[Raza]

It creates 2200 lbs of downforce at 130 mph and it only weighs 2200 lbs itself.

Many people in "the know" still consider it the greatest driver's car ever built.

Wow, that is an impressive number.  I'm just going on an owner's impression.  Like I said, I'll try and dig up what they said. 

Fifth Gear did name it the best supercar of all time (though Jeremy Clarkson deemed it too tricky to drive, which is echoed by many professional reviewers.).

[SVT666]

Wow, that is an impressive number.? I'm just going on an owner's impression.? Like I said, I'll try and dig up what they said.?

Fifth Gear did name it the best supercar of all time (though Jeremy Clarkson deemed it too tricky to drive, which is echoed by many professional reviewers.).

Fifth Gear has Tiff Needle who is a professional race car driver, and Top Gear has Jeremy Clarkson who is just a professional prick.  I trust Tiff Needle's opinion.

[Raza]

Fifth Gear has Tiff Needle who is a professional race car driver, and Top Gear has Jeremy Clarkson who is just a professional prick.  I trust Tiff Needle's opinion.

I would too.

But here's the owner, Flemke:

"A man of sharp wit and rare comedic timing, as the driver?s door is pushed shut, Flemke decides to give me his unique brand of pre-flight briefing. ?Err, I think this is a good time to remind you that the chassis stinks, there?s no downforce and the brakes are terrible. But it?s got a great engine!? Err, thanks, you?ve been a big help."

And Meaden's impressions:

"During the three laps that follow I make many major discoveries. The first is that the brakes are indeed terrible. In fact, they?re shite. The second is that the absence of a rear anti-roll bar means you?re always chasing the F1?s tail, be it under power through a corner or under braking into a corner. The third is that the steering really is as heavy as contemporary road tests would have you believe, the fourth that BMW built the finest, sharpest, most beautifully responsive engine ever to grace a road car. The fifth, and frankly unexpected revelation is that despite the obvious and at times unnerving flaws, the F1 remains an intoxicating challenge, a car you could dedicate your whole life to learning."

So yes, obviously a great car.  But not entirely perfect.  I'd take one over a Veyron, though.  Not much of an accomplishment, however, since I'd take a GTI over a Veyron (probably; the Veyron does seem to have a pussy magnet )

[SVT666]

I would too.

But here's the owner, Flemke:

"A man of sharp wit and rare comedic timing, as the driver?s door is pushed shut, Flemke decides to give me his unique brand of pre-flight briefing. ?Err, I think this is a good time to remind you that the chassis stinks, there?s no downforce and the brakes are terrible. But it?s got a great engine!? Err, thanks, you?ve been a big help."

And Meaden's impressions:

"During the three laps that follow I make many major discoveries. The first is that the brakes are indeed terrible. In fact, they?re shite. The second is that the absence of a rear anti-roll bar means you?re always chasing the F1?s tail, be it under power through a corner or under braking into a corner. The third is that the steering really is as heavy as contemporary road tests would have you believe, the fourth that BMW built the finest, sharpest, most beautifully responsive engine ever to grace a road car. The fifth, and frankly unexpected revelation is that despite the obvious and at times unnerving flaws, the F1 remains an intoxicating challenge, a car you could dedicate your whole life to learning."

So yes, obviously a great car.? But not entirely perfect.? I'd take one over a Veyron, though.? Not much of an accomplishment, however, since I'd take a GTI over a Veyron (probably; the Veyron does seem to have a pussy magnet )

Interesting.  I've never heard anyone refer to the chassis that way.  Considering that chassis won the 1994 24 hours of Lemans outright without modifications.  I would still take an F1 over any car ever produced.  In my office at work here I have on the wall: A framed picture of the F1, another framed picture of the F1, a framed picture of an orange LM, and a framed picture of the engine from the F1...and a frames picture of a 1969 Boss 302 (it looks a little out of place).

[HeyThatsNick]

Whether or not this ugly-ass piece of low volume shit can take the Veyron's top speed is one thing, but the Veyron has VW money backing it up.  With all that money they were able to test the car like no low-volume maker could, and you could probably let go of the steering wheel of the Bugatti at 253mph and it would still be going straight.  It is ridiculously calm inside the cabin, hasn't anyone seen the Top Gear episode where James May drives it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdcvBOxeBHg

[Raghavan]

Jeremy Clarkson said the F1 was too easy to drive...

[SVT_Power]

So did this thing set a new record or what

[sportyaccordy]

I believe power has a cubic relation to speed...

I.e. if you want to go twice as fast in a car, you will need 8 times the power to overcome the higher drag force.

In any case, the F1, like the F40 and the 959, is amongst the best pieces of automotive engineering to date. It's also pretty good looking too. I'm not too moved by this 'after the fact' kit car

[SVT666]

I believe power has a cubic relation to speed...

I.e. if you want to go twice as fast in a car, you will need 8 times the power to overcome the higher drag force.

In any case, the F1, like the F40 and the 959, is amongst the best pieces of automotive engineering to date. It's also pretty good looking too. I'm not too moved by this 'after the fact' kit car

The SSC is no kit car and it has been around a few years.  Why are you so hostile toward it?

[850CSi]

I just find it kind of sad that 13 years after the McLaren F1 attained 242 mph, modern cars are requiring over 1000 hp (373 more hp then the McLaren F1) to attain a speed only 10 mph higher then the McLaren.

I don't think it's "sad" as much as it shows how ridiculously well-engineered the F1 was.

[850CSi]

From what I've read, Mclarens were rather rubbish at anything but high speeds.? They go like stink, but the suspension was soft, the brakes were soft, and the aerodynamics had no real concept of downforce.? I'm also told they are great to drive, though.

I've also read a lot of conflicting opinions about it.

[850CSi]

Whoa... although I'd still buy a Veyron. It's a better all-around car, and more refined at high speeds than this brute would be.

Ah yes, a "supercar" that weighs as much as a 5-Series.


I cannot properly describe my hate for the Veyron. And that's why I want SCC to break the record - because this thing is everything the Veyron is not.