Ferrari Mailing List: Re: [Chat] NFC: new supercar produced in WA State?

[Hans E. Hansen (hans]

It *almost* sounds like you unburied an article on the Vector........

On 8/15/07, Dave Handa <dave [at] davehanda.com> wrote:
>
>  Anyone heard of these guys?  Apparently based in Richland, WA...a place
> not exactly known for being the hub of supercar production/development.
>
>
> http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fSetId=371&fSectionId=751&fArticleId=3982995
>
>
> SHELBY'S AERO TT - WHO NEEDS A VEYRON?
>
> *We drive the world's most powerful car*
>  [ See related 
> stories<http://www.motoring.co.za/index.php?fSetId=371&fSectionId=751&fArticleId=3982995#related>
>  ]
>
> August 15, 2007
>
> By Tom Stewart
>
> If you want to drive seriously fast you're spoilt for choice at present –
> at least in terms of the machinery available, if not the roads to do it
> on....
>
> There's the 404km/h Bugatti Veyron, the 400km/h-plus Koenigsegg CCXR and
> the forthcoming 430km/h Bristol Fighter T, which will be restricted to
> 360km/h. There's also the Hennessey Venom Viper with a claimed but
> unverified top speed of 408mph.
>
> Choices, choices, choices... and that's without considering the SSC
> Ultimate Aero TT, the world's most powerful production car yet.
>
> Boasting a gargantuan 882kW, the small, little-known Washington
> State-based company Shelby Supercars claims a top speed capability of
> 437km/h
> *Design, fit, finish and detailing falls far short of the current supercar
> norm*.
>
> In tests earlier this year, on a closed section of a Nevada desert
> highway, the SSC managed 370km/h in the 3.2km available but had the
> originally intended 20km site not been hit by snow, the Veyron could have
> been humbled.
>
> With strikingly rich paint, its all-carbon-composite bodywork looks like
> something from the mid-1990's, with noticeable variances in some panel gaps.
> There are echoes of Pagani Zonda at the front and Lamborghini Diablo at the
> sides, while at the rear function has priority over form.
>
> There's little impressive inside as design, fit, finish and detailing
> falls far short of the current supercar norm. On the plus side it's easy
> enough to climb in and out of, the leather seats are supportive, it's
> reasonably spacious with ample headroom, and the driving position is fine
> apart from the front wheel arch intruding into the footwell,
>
> *Hit the red button*
>
> By now you may be wondering just how the TT's not insignificant price of
> $550 000 ex-factory (about R4
> *The SSC grips tenaciously and its nose goes precisely where you point 
> it*.07-million))
> can be justified but in the small roof console there's a large red button
> and when you press it this car's purpose becomes immediately apparent.
>
> Something resembling a controlled nuclear explosion takes place as the
> modified, twin-turbo, 6348cc Corvette pushrod V8 bursts into life. This
> start-up extravaganza only lasts a second or three before the engine settles
> into a loud, off-beat V8 burble.
>
> Despite the TT's huge torque, it's eager either to set off like a
> dragster, or stall. (I understand that this particular car is to soon
> receive a replacement clutch, which might help.) And, despite SSC's brochure
> claiming the TT's rack-and-pinion steering is assisted, I didn't feel the
> slightest hint of help.
>
> Manoeuvring at walking speed requires strong arms and a firm grip on the
> wheel but, once rolling, the SSC is easy enough to drive and has a precise
> gearchange and direct, accurate steering.
>
> The SSC grips tenaciously and its nose goes precisely where you point it.
> The steel-tube chassis feels suitably rigid but I can only guess how the car
> might behave when driven hard on a track.
>
> With so much power, rear-wheel drive and no electronic traction aids,
> driving the car needs considerable expertise - and prudence. Straight-ahead
> visibility is fine but the SSC's huge A-pillars can be a hindrance.
>
> Rearward vision is effectively zero, save for the door mirrors and a
> rear-facing camera with its screen that pops out of the radio/stereo/satnav
> unit.
>
> *Unforgiving ride*
>
> The adjustable suspension was set somewhere between firm and rock-hard and
> so the ride was correspondingly unforgiving. Driving one or more of those
> super-wide Michelins over cats' eyes sent loud, staccato bangs and solid
> thumps directly into the cabin.
>
> The exhaust is quiet enough at legal speeds to allow conversation, but
> lifting off the throttle causes an almighty cacophony.
>
> And then there's the car's throttle response, which is like nothing I've
> experienced before. With just the slightest pressure on the pedal the car
> accelerates briskly.
>
> With just a tiny bit more it surges forward with near-terrifying urgency,
> and all the while there's a sense of the immense, almost infinite, power
> lying in reserve.
>
> Prod the throttle with anything less than caution and those huge rear
> Michelins will spin. Fortunately, despite the monstrous urge available at
> any speed in almost any gear, the TT can potter along in fifth or even sixth
> without drivetrain snatch.
>
> *Where's the brakes?*
>
> While it's no surprise that the TT can serve up salt-flats-shrinking
> speed, the brakes on this particular car are something of a mystery.
>
> The brochure states that eight-piston callipers should be fitted at the
> front, but this one had four-piston units. Pedal pressure required was
> inordinately high, with almost no feel or power (I'm still waiting for an
> official explanation).
>
> This all leads to the ultimate question concerning the Ultimate Aero TT.
> Who would want one?
>
> You could argue that $550 000 is a ludicrous sum of money for a left-hand
> drive car with no heritage, a slightly dated appearance, zero luggage space,
> build quality on a par with a 1980's TVR, all the luxury of a small
> Malaysian hatchback and nothing to indicate that it won't depreciate faster
> than you could burn it.
>
> Conversely, it's more powerful, more exclusive and potentially faster than
> a Veyron, while costing less than half as much. And since when did
> all-American muscle have to dress up like European aristocracy?
>
> Some loud paint, serious wheels and an even louder V8 is all it really
> needs, and that's what it's got, in unprecedented abundance.
>
> Neither argument is wrong, so I guess owners will be few, and keener to
> drive at almost four times the national speed limit than most of us. - The
> Independent, London
>
> *Specifications
> Engine type:* All-alloy 16-valve V8 twin turbo.
> *Displacement:* 6348cc.
> *Power:* 882kW at 6950rpm (7200rpm redline).
> *Torque:* 1484 Nm at 6150 rpm.
> *Transmission:* Six-speed manual, rear wheel drive.
> *0-100km/h:* 2.78sec.
> *Standing 400m:* 9.9sec at 230km/h, 100-0km/h: 31.4m.
> *Top speed:* 437km/h (calculated, see text).
> *Chassis:* Steel tube space frame.
> *Body:* Carbon-fibre composite, flat undertray with venturi tunnels.
> *Drag coefficient:* 0.357
> *Brakes:* 355mm vented, cross-drilled discs, eight-piston* calipers
> (front), six-piston* (rear), (*see text).
> *Suspension:* Double wishbone (front), upper rocker arm, lower wishbone
> (rear) remote reservoir, adjustable Penske dampers, coil-over springs,
> anti-roll bar.
> *Rims:*: Forged, three-piece alloy, 19 x 9.5" (front), 20 x 13" (rear)
> *Tyres:* Michelin Pilot Sport PS2, 235/35 - 19 (front), 335/30 - 20
> (rear).
> *Price:* $550 000 (about R4-million) ex-factory.
>
> **********************************************************************
>  To unsubscribe go to http://list.nwrfca.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
>  Edit your replies; nobody likes to read things that are written over and
> over again.
>  Northwest Region Ferrari Club of America Members Only
> **********************************************************************
>
>