Lotus has an excellent philosophy but to be a major player they need to expand their market which I believe they’ve started to realise when they made the Lotus Evora. Overall Lotus makes fantastic cars, but I can’t see it competing in any way with the market of any one of BMWs vehicles, and vice versa.

If you want a light-weight N/A car for carving up corners, buy an Elise/Exige. BMW doesn’t seem to have that market in mind.

As a car guy, I would love to see a new purely-BMW supercar. As a BMW fan, though, meh. I’m not overly excited about it. BMW ≠ Lamborghini. It’s not their role in the automotive world and anything they produce is likely to be “just another supercar”. It’s doubtful that it will be the technological marvel of the Veyron, the raw aggression of the Mercielago or the glamor (horrible interior) of the SLR. It will, most likely, be a compromise of these things but probably won’t do any one thing especially well. As far as I’m concerned, I’d rather not see BMW waste their time/resources.

However, it is advisable to read the text in depth before making a negative statement because there might be something that you have missed.

Alex, I am completely aware of all differences between two cars, but obviously you haven’t got the point of the text. Even from the title you could have predicted the starting point of this post; to show that the F1 and Veyron are really incomparable.
The question is, who had compared them at all in the first place? Well, I haven’t for sure, it was the automotive press and public. My intention was to prove that those two are indeed apples and oranges.
Also, where do you see a suggestion that the F1 could or should be supercharged to be faster than Veyron?
If you are referring to the bit of text starting with “The Veyron because of its high CDA figure…” -> those words were said by Gordon Murray himself. And he didn’t mention supercharging either.

The only suggestion was to add a seventh gear because the engine could cope with it.

Regarding my personal opinion; this site is obviously BMW oriented so it’s natural for the authors to be a bit biased towards BMW. Still, I am trying to give actual facts and just in the end (as a conclusion) my personal opinion with right words and expressions to distinguish it from the rest of the text.

Little to say the comparison is apples to oranges, it’s a shame the author doesn’t get the difference between the two cars. Pure-bred and designed racer Vs ostentatious GrandTourer easy to drive and easy to live with … it’s like comparing the F360 Challenge Stradale to the Bentely Continental GT and arguing the Ferrari would have a bigger top speed if turbocharged .. and then for good measure slamming the Continental GT for not being the track car it was never meant to be.

The factual and insider info on the F1 was great in this article but the uniformed personal conjectures were disappointing.

PS: English isn’t my first language, please ignore my spelling

That is a pretty lame statement sincerely, on what is that actually bassed, technical calculations that an hypotetichal McLaren F1 developing 740 hp would be better for a top speed race ? Well maybe it would but then again there isn’t one is there, so the Veyron actually does best what it was supposed to do top speed. The F1 and the Veyron are marvellous pieces of engineering with totally diferent purposes … no comparison should be tried unless for the entertainment value.

More hp from the BMW N/A engine implies a form of supercharging wich in turn adds more weight and cooling drag… so your numbers might be a little off …

I’ll have never driven a Veyron, but I bet it is a comfortable car. I think the Veyron is like a GT car.

And yes, this is only my opinion, it may not be right really