Remember the Lamborghini Indomable concept? It was a supercar project designed by Daniel Chinchilla Ochoa and Alberto Fernandez Albilares under a Masters Program sponsored by Lamborghini. Well, guess what? The study will be built, albeit not by Lamborghini.
A US company called 215 Racing has bought the exclusive rights for the design and will have the car built by its subsidiary Mostro Di-Potenza (Italian for “Monster of Power”). The sleek coupe will be renamed to SF22, as a tribute to the influence that the F22 fighter jet had on the car's design. In addition, SF stands for Street Fighter.
The company plans to build only 50 units of this supercar, and they want to attract customers with a mind-blowing package. "We knew that entering a market as a new supercar company has become a rarely successful trend. We hope to make our niche by offering the customers something they could never imagine," said Anthony Crudup, CEO of 215 Racing.
Now hold on to your seats: they want to equip the car with a…2,000HP 9.4-liter twin-turbo V8 572 GM engine! The monstrous powerhouse is said to develop an equally-colossal 2,000 lb-ft (2,710 Nm) of torque. Linked to a six-speed sequential transmission, the V8 would allow for wild performance: 0 to 60 mph (96 km/h) in 2.5 seconds and a top speed of 265 mph (426 km/h). In addition, 215 Racing claims the car could do the quarter mile in 9.5 seconds.
The company added that the SF22 will have a carbon-fiber and Kevlar blend composite body, Airspeed adjustable intercoolers and wing / speed brakes. The American firm plans to build 2 cars per month and is already accepting orders, with first deliveries scheduled for mid-2012. The price? An eyebrow raising $950,000 (€668,000)...
By Dan Mihalascu
17 Comments:
Stylized along the new Lotus lineup. GM engine? So much for the exotic portion of this automobile. Good luck producing and actually selling this at their proposed price point...they'll need it.
I have been a fan of the Indomable...Im happy for Daniel that his idea has become reality...
The design is phenomenal and he has refined and fine touched it, it seems... Ooohh.. those tail light is sexy!
But the price tag... Hmmmzz... i wonder how much it gets it's mpg...
Wellz, it is about time someone rivaled Lamborghini...
an american musle lamborghini nice!!! but have 2 lower o - 60 sec., like 2.0 @least
Not a good move. It makes sense as a Gallardo replacement style wise. But a 200ohp hyper car with those performance numbers is senseless. The 2012 GT-R's numbers a very close for less than 10% of the cost. I am a yank fan and all, but a Lambo with a GM engine disgusts me. Ferruccio must be turning in his grave yelling "porca miseria"!
Cue the bitching because it's a "archaic" pushrod. BTW I'm a little surprised they plan to use a big block and not an LSX.
I'm already questioning the engine's reliability. Not because it's a GM block, but because it's a V8 pushed to its limits and that typically does not equate well to street usage. Take a look at how McLaren handles it's V8 in the new MP4-12C: usability and performance in one highly desirable package.
I'm more confused at how they plan to put that sort of power down. The Veyron only works because it weighs 5000 pounds, if it had any more power & torque it'd probably destroy too many clutches and torque-steer the damn thing into too many trees.
If you know your info, the current gm v8s can handle massive amounts of power without breaking in stock trim. The LS series of motors have plenty of daily driven 1000hp+ running around here and there. But 2000hp is a little much, they should shoot for 1200hp with a twin turbo with the motor stroked to 9.4l. The LS2-3 6-6.2 liters of displacement should be able to handle 1200hp easy with a strengthened bottom end. That is all the power should need to exceed those performance numbers
"but because it's a V8 pushed to its limits and that typically does not equate well to street usage."
Says who? You shouldn't be racing on the streets anyway, ya goof.
If the 'world of V8's' was to be taken as a whole, there would be two schools of thought; Oversquare and undersquare. By and large, the yanks have been in the latter camp to the misunderstanding of the rest of the world.
But I'll be brief. An undersquare engine generally has lots of low-end torque; useable torque at much, MUCH lower rpms.
If you're worried that an undersquare V8 engine wouldn't be able to be abused within it's powerband, you'd be wrong. There simply wouldn't be a need to rev as high because all the torque you need is available at much lower rpms.
Again, don't be a dick and race on the streets.
"Says who? You shouldn't be racing on the streets anyway, ya goof.
"Again, don't be a dick and race on the streets."
Dear idiot child, no one mentioned racing whatsoever. What was referenced is manageability of said horsepower on the streets. McLaren was referenced as having done this successfully with far less horsepower, and essentially the proper engineering to make a desirable enthusiast automobile that's not overdone for the sake of being bigger than others. This proposed vehicle has yet to pass any rigorous tests; actually make production; undergo all that which entails a supercar. Note, to idiot child: voluminous amounts of horsepower do not alone make a supercar.
"What was referenced is manageability of said horsepower on the streets. McLaren was referenced as having done this successfully with far less horsepower, and essentially the proper engineering to make a desirable enthusiast automobile that's not overdone for the sake of being bigger than others."
This was never an issues of 'being bigger for the sake' so whatever case you were trying to make was moot.
This was, as you had correctly identified (what lovely reading skills you have) a matter of efficiency. So I ask, what, exactly, is to be had in terms of efficiency of having horsepower accessable only at higher RPM's? How about in the context of street use as I belive that was the crux of this ordeal.
When, EVER, does anyone ever get to 7K+ rpm on public roads and not met with traffic, speed cameras, police, one-way chicances, roundabouts, etc.?
Furthermore, on what basis is it even correct to say that the McLaren approach was 'proper engineering'? Having less horsepower with a smaller, over square mill, and two turbochargers only to fart out 600hp @7000 rpm doesn't exaclty astound when you cannot use that power on the street because of the shortcomings in wanting to play the numbers game.
After all, you're the one who thinks horsepower doesn't make a supercar. Not only is there no such thing as a supercar (there's only sports cars and varrying prices and performacne figures) than what exactly is the Veyron for?
The Veyron has an abysmal interior and it weighs 1800kg. It's ONLY selling point is it's horsepower...yet there are more than people out there willing to call it a supercar on that mear fact of it's horsepower rating.
If you want to be the idiot and tell me horsepower doesn't sell, do it.
2000 HP, 0-60, 2.5 sec, I think that's drag racing teritory. Lambo'd better be careful, don't wanna mess with dragster.
"If you want to be the idiot and tell me horsepower doesn't sell, do it."
First off, yes, horsepower does sell to a faction of the automotive world, but not to all. This automobile will not be a Lamborghini, and it certainly is not nor does it remotely have the heritage of Bugatti. This is a concept by two students whose rights (owned by Lamborghini) were sold to a third-party ex-military personnel US company. (I wouldn’t doubt that you are one of those members.)
For a concept it sure has a lot of big talk for an automobile whose only viability to date is on paper and a half-baked website. In other words, I'll believe it when I see it, and the specs have been tested in the real-world—not on paper. In the world of supercars it is a matter of refinement, heritage, and skill—none of which have been exhibited yet regarding this paper tiger automobile.
"refinement, heritage, and skill"
There is no such thing as 'heritage'. Not in humans and most certainly not in cars. The word you're looking for and thinking of is 'track record', a lifespan of a obejct or person used as a meterstick with which to gauge and compare against others.
In Bugatti's case, the brand was revived in 1986 having made their last car in 1940; 46 years of complete and total inactivty because bankruptcy. Where the fuck was their 'heritage' then? Where was their racing efforts? Where was their sales data? Where was their fucking showrooms?
As for skill, the skilled trades are dead and have been dead when one nation moves from a skilled trade economy to a service based economy.
I mean if you're going to tell me that a human assembling a part for a car is better than a machine, than you've got no chance. Humans routinely make mistakes and CANNOT be trusted to have assembled a product accurately and properly. Spurn cars that tout being 'hand-made' as they will be rife with mistakes and serve as an excuse to needlessly markup the product's price.
Robots are far and away better suited for the task of assembly; a question of skill need not even be considered as it is not skill that makes a proper, upmarket car.
Quality is what sells an upmarket car; you cannot get quality from the hands of a human.
I like strong cars and this the Wold the best expensiv cars! I like :-)
Bunch of fast-talking snake oil salesmen. There is no car here folks...move along.
It looks like the McLaren MP4-12C.
Post a Comment