New Bristol Fighter T To Be Added To Fighter And Fighter S Range

with one of these.

Anyone actually seen a Bristol on the roads, fighter or not?

Heard they are now "around"

i'll take one please..........

Interesting that they are naming their cars after famous Bristol Aircraft - (Beaufighter - Blenheim WW2 and Bristol Fighter WW1) wonder if we'll see a Brabazon ?

I've said it before and I'll say it again - Fighter is my dream car You can keep your Ferraris etc I'd take one every time.

Oh and yes I have seen one or two on the road - used to work round the corner from the factory and used to come across factory test drivers out having a play. All I'll say is, if you think of having a pop you'll come away with a new ar5sehole! They are bleedin' quick and with a factory"pilot" at the helm they are just stupidly fast!

Yip , one would be on my list as well.

Although the 1000BHP "T" is a bit Jensen Interceptor. Not sure if thats a bad thing

Are you seriously suggesting that thing is capable of 270mph!!!!, not a cat in hells chance.

Considering the ammount of time, money, rescources and investment that VW ploughed into developing the Veyron to achieve the holy grail of 1,000bhp and along comes Bristol with a car made in a fortnight in a backstreet garage, nailed together from a bit of tin, a few rivets and some blutack and make a claim like that is laughable. Pile of crap imho :thumbdwn:

it's not like its that hard.jap tuners have been doing 1000 bhp motors for a few years now.and then there's hot rodding V8.s chucking out as much on road petrol

looks very jensen intercpeter,not just me thinking this then.and its a good thing.

i think VW had a few M(b)ILLION to write off to the tax man

I suppose the same could be said of Konigseigg and Pagani. Independant ish manufacturers pushing the limits as much as the mighty VAG group. Maybe it doesnt take endless resources and money ( but probably the same amount of time and effort ) to produce something capable of these speeds.

And yes I too doubt its 270mph claim. Just what tyres are they doing this speed on?

But as long as its NOT a ferrari or lambo etc then i think it gets my vote.

The reason it cost VW so much to develop, is because they were trying to develop the W engine configuration, develop a dsg box to cope with the torque, etc and then make it reliable.

Bristol already had a base car, they just had to run a simulation to see what has to be bolted on and modifed on the existing set up, quick bit of stress analysis, build, try.

There are a lot of drag rracer that have been putting 3000bhp plus in a car for a long time, its just their engines only last 1/4 mile at a time, not reliable but easilly possible.

Are you seriously suggesting that thing is capable of 270mph!!!!, not a cat in hells chance.

Considering the ammount of time, money, rescources and investment that VW ploughed into developing the Veyron to achieve the holy grail of 1,000bhp and along comes Bristol with a car made in a fortnight in a backstreet garage, nailed together from a bit of tin, a few rivets and some blutack and make a claim like that is laughable. Pile of crap imho :thumbdwn:

Sheer ignorance.

The Veyron was crippled by the insistence that the basic shape be as it is - hence it needs a pop-out wing for normal use, and drops the suspension and hides the wing to hit top speed.

The Fighter was designed by engineers without aesthetic handicaps. It's far more aerodynamic - no drag-producing wing, for a start. Bristol have huge experience in building aircraft and cars and didn't start out with a list of numbers to achieve and a shape it had to be. Much less drag means much more speed from a given amount of power.

The simple contrast is that the Veyron is an exercise in marketing -

The simple contrast is that the Veyron is an exercise in marketing - £4500 for an indicator stalk - whereas the Fighter is an exercise in engineering. If you really think that marketers produce better cars than engineers then you're deluded.

let me see........................................ :rubchin:

or............

Tough decision!!!!

One could certainly argue that the Veyron is better looking, though I rather like the Fighter aesthetically, and it can go across speedbumps and between bollards and everything... Plus the turning circle is much tighter - you'd have a fighting chance of using the Fighter as an everyday car.

One could certainly argue that the Veyron is better looking, though I rather like the Fighter aesthetically, and it can go across speedbumps and between bollards and everything... Plus the turning circle is much tighter - you'd have a fighting chance of using the Fighter as an everyday car.

That may be so but it ain't a 270mph hypercar and nor I suspect a 200mph+ car either.

Anyone considering the Bristol over virtually anything else needs their head examined.................imho

That may be so but it ain't a 270mph hypercar and nor I suspect a 200mph+ car either.

Where's your evidence?

The Fighter T has more torque, more BHP and a lower drag coefficient. It's also nearly 1000lb lighter than the Veyron and would have lower transmission losses.

Where's your evidence?

The Fighter T has more torque, more BHP and a lower drag coefficient. It's also nearly 1000lb lighter than the Veyron and would have lower transmission losses.

More to the point, where is their evidence to back the claims they are making?. Any independent test's we can refer to......................I think not!.

The figures just don't stack up imho.

So you're saying that more power, less weight and less drag doesn't equal higher top speed?

So you're saying that more power, less weight and less drag doesn't equal higher top speed?

Look at it....................are you telling me that thing would be stable at anything over 160mph let alone 270mph?.

Any car can be built so that it can thoretically do 200mph +. Even our humble skodas, all it would take is the appropriate gear ratios, final drive, etc. The only reason that they dont is becasue they dont have the power that would be requred, to turn the gear that would be required to overcome the forces due to drag, etc.

Ie it would be possible to have the wheel spinning at a rate fast enough to propel the car over 200, when the wheels are in the air.

It has already been proven that 1000 BHP is more than enough to propel the car to 252, (the veyron supposedly can go faster and is electrinocally limited IIRC, but becomes dangerously unstable much after this point). So why is it so hard to belive that a lighter, more powerful, car that has a lower drag co-efficent is also able to do this?

I could knock up a top fuel dragster in my garage using an american V8, with a supercharger, and lots of fuel injectors, (44 IIRC) that is capable of producing way in excess of 2500 BHP, it just doesnt last long.

Simple calculation used to estimate top speed, works on (assuming the engine has enough torque at the required RPM) Max RPM, gear ratios, drag co-efficent, Frictional losses and not a lot else, this can calculate the top speed reasonably accurately.

Try looking Here It explains about 1/2 way down how the aro package works. The rear diffuser will work wonders to suck it to the road it is huge.

The Bristol to me sounds like a very good piece of kit, though personally i think i would go for the Kionsegg (can spell that) if i had the money and it were mine to spend. Although after some testing my mind may change.

You're right, Steve. It's limited to 225mph apparently.

How much do you know about Bristol Cars as a whole?

Look at it....................are you telling me that thing would be stable at anything over 160mph let alone 270mph?.

I'm not an aerodynamics engineer. Are you?

How much do you know about Bristol Cars as a whole?

Not a great deal, in fact it's only stuff I can remember as a school lad and did'nt like 'em then and I'm extremley dubious about them now particularly when a 'tin pot' company are claiming they are making the fastest production car in the world with no factual or independent evidence to back it up :rubchin:

My take on it is that it probably has enough power/little enough drag to theoretically hit 270mph but I doubt it's chassis/driver has the ability to cope with that speed; assuming it could reach it in practice. Hence limiting it to 225mph.

Most manufacturers limit their 'supercars' now both for this and for political reasons.

The thing is, assuming that the Bristol can actually do as it claims (as yet unproven I believe) it'd probably only do it once before falling apart.

The Veyron would do it over and over, then take the driver home and his missus would use it to pop down the shops.

The huge cost of the engineering is in making that engineering reliable and drivable, we all know there are Supras and Skylines and American V8's pumping out over 1000bhp, and yes they have been doing it for years, but sadly the cars are almost undrivable on public highways and really aren't going to last very long.

I also think with Bristol being the way they are you wont see them at Nardo or something with the worlds press trying to prove their claims. They are more than happy with their opinion on their own car and wont try to justify it.

I am supprised they even have a website.

I saw a fighter on the road in bracknell of all places! It was a blue one.

I think the 270mph claimed is a theoretical value on paper but i dont doubt it could top 200mph or more, probably limited to 225 due to the speed rating of the tyres or something.

The engine used is that out of a viper and if Hennessey can tune that to do 250mph with 1000bhp then theres no reason why bristol can't, they've been using chrysler V8's for decades.clicky

Bristol are a strange one, how they are still in business i really dont know! I guess there's still enough wealthy eccentrics out there buying the cars. Its almost like they're stuck in a timewarp, back in the days when engineers ruled without accountants looking over thier shoulder all the time.

I imagine the design office to be a man in a tweed jacket with a drawing board!