Earlier this week, Ron Dennis, CEO of McLaren Automotive, was quoted as saying "The Bugatti Veyron is a complete piece of junk. I think it is. I believe I can look at a range of women and I can see beauty in most of them, but I can look at a Bugatti and I think it is pig ugly." He continues, "The Veyron doesn’t do anything for me. I’ve been looking at it for years, and I don’t see one single thing that makes me feel good.”
That's a pretty bold statement about what many consider to be the Holy Grail of Super Cars, but is he really that far off? From a design perspective, there isn't really anything wrong with the Veyron. It's not an unattractive car by any means, so how can it be ugly?
To answer that question, let's compare it to a product from Mr. Dennis's own company, the McLaren F1. Both began life as cost-no-object showcases of each company's technological prowess. From there, their paths diverge. The Bugatti is a blend of the VW Group's best bits, tweaked to the Nth degree to make an obscenely fast and expensive car, many of which will quite probably end up as boulevard cruisers for the fabulous and famous. Yes it's pretty, and yes it's very, very, VERY fast, but it's also ugly. There, I agreed with Mr. Dennis.
The McLaren F1, on the other hand is a challenging driver's car, created essentially from scratch, and exhibits a simple, pure nature that the Bugatti can't even imagine. The F1 is lighter, simpler, and, though I can't personally verify this, is regarded as the more rewarding drive. It is both pretty and fast, like the Veyron, but without being so overtly over-the-top, like the Veyron.
And that's what makes the Bugatti ugly. While the Veyron and the F1 both have performed the heroic task of redefining what it means to be a supercar, they have done it in remarkably different styles. Maybe it's a stretch to consider the McLaren F1 to be subtle, but compared to the Veyron, it definitely seems so. The only special edition of the F1 was built to commemorate racing victories, while the Bugatti has come in Hermes and Pur Sang variants so that a few fabulously wealthy clients could stand apart from the owners of 'lesser' Veyrons. Can anyone tell me what Hermes has to do with supercars? Are Bugatti's client base more interested in the Veyron as a fashion accessory? I don't believe that was ever a concern for Gordon Murray.
I have begun to think of owning and driving a Bugatti Veyron as the automotive equivalent of wearing a diamond covered Rolex. It's a fine timepiece, sure, but does it really need to be so ugly? I'll stick to dreaming about owning and driving a McLaren F1, and since I'm dreaming, I'll be wearing a Rolex Cosmograph Daytona while I drive it.
That's a pretty bold statement about what many consider to be the Holy Grail of Super Cars, but is he really that far off? From a design perspective, there isn't really anything wrong with the Veyron. It's not an unattractive car by any means, so how can it be ugly?
To answer that question, let's compare it to a product from Mr. Dennis's own company, the McLaren F1. Both began life as cost-no-object showcases of each company's technological prowess. From there, their paths diverge. The Bugatti is a blend of the VW Group's best bits, tweaked to the Nth degree to make an obscenely fast and expensive car, many of which will quite probably end up as boulevard cruisers for the fabulous and famous. Yes it's pretty, and yes it's very, very, VERY fast, but it's also ugly. There, I agreed with Mr. Dennis.
The McLaren F1, on the other hand is a challenging driver's car, created essentially from scratch, and exhibits a simple, pure nature that the Bugatti can't even imagine. The F1 is lighter, simpler, and, though I can't personally verify this, is regarded as the more rewarding drive. It is both pretty and fast, like the Veyron, but without being so overtly over-the-top, like the Veyron.
And that's what makes the Bugatti ugly. While the Veyron and the F1 both have performed the heroic task of redefining what it means to be a supercar, they have done it in remarkably different styles. Maybe it's a stretch to consider the McLaren F1 to be subtle, but compared to the Veyron, it definitely seems so. The only special edition of the F1 was built to commemorate racing victories, while the Bugatti has come in Hermes and Pur Sang variants so that a few fabulously wealthy clients could stand apart from the owners of 'lesser' Veyrons. Can anyone tell me what Hermes has to do with supercars? Are Bugatti's client base more interested in the Veyron as a fashion accessory? I don't believe that was ever a concern for Gordon Murray.
I have begun to think of owning and driving a Bugatti Veyron as the automotive equivalent of wearing a diamond covered Rolex. It's a fine timepiece, sure, but does it really need to be so ugly? I'll stick to dreaming about owning and driving a McLaren F1, and since I'm dreaming, I'll be wearing a Rolex Cosmograph Daytona while I drive it.
Comments
Post a Comment