If you have some spare cash on hand and are hunting for a vehicle with a little pop in the accelerator, then Koenigsegg Automotive AB may have the car for you.
The Swedish automaker’s 2014 Agera S “hypercar” will take you from 0 to 62 mph in a scant 2.9 seconds and will hit a top speed of 260 mph if you have a long straightaway in your backyard. It also offers a V-8 engine that peaks at 1,030 hp and 811 lb-ft of torque, a max lateral acceleration of 1.6 g’s, and a braking package that enables it to decelerate from 62 mph down to zero in just 100 ft. All for a starting price of $1.46 million.
As dazzling as those numbers are, however, the Agera’s most amazing stat may be the size of its engineering staff. “We have between 15 and 20 engineers at any given time, and all of them have to do more than one thing,” Jens Sverdrup, regional director for Koenigsegg Automotive AB, told Design News. “Our software engineers do hardware. We have one engineer who designs our carbon wheels and our electronics. You can’t be a one-trick pony around here.”
Indeed, the engineers at Koenigsegg have a full plate. They designed the vehicle’s 5.0-liter, V-8 aluminum engine, front and rear suspensions, carbon-fiber monocoque, carbon-fiber leather-clad interior, and one-of-a-kind carbon-fiber wheels. And along with creating those performance systems, they also configured the car to include all the normal street-legal vehicle amenities, such as airbags, emission components, antilock brakes, electronic stability controls, and countless other necessary sub-systems. ”It’s brutal yet refined,” Sverdrup told us. “It’s an old-school supercar combined with new technology.”
From its 1,000-hp engine and Triplex rear suspension to its carbon-fiber wheels and custom-designed electronics, here’s a peek at the hottest hypercar around. (Click on the image below to start the slideshow.)
Koenigsegg’s Agera S accelerates from 0 to 62 mph in 2.9 seconds and has a top speed of 260 mph. The Swedish automaker has built 30 of them, with some selling in excess of $4 million. Starting price is $1.46 million.
(Source: Koenigsegg Automotive AB)
Chuck, first things first. I WANT ONE!! I just planning to build a shed so that I can clear out the third bay in the garage. This would fit nicely there.
Actually, one of my sons and I were watching this documentary on Koenigsegg on-line. It was great. There was a guy whose job it was to test the cars. I am not sure of what else he does. The camera was mounted inside the car aand pointed at the driver and passenger (the documentary film maker). The expressions were priceless. Koenigsegg's factory is at an old air base. They use the runways to test. The test driver was in pure heaven, smiling all the time, while driving this car, hard. I think he was 22 years old. The film maker was in sheer terror the whole time.
I am a little dissiapointed though. I thought it might be a V-12. Oh, well.
I could be wrong, naperlou, but I believe the Corvette ZR1 from 1990-'95 had similar speed. I recall a Lotus engineer telling me that theoretically, he believed he could get the ZR1 to 300 mph with a few changes.
Given sufficient HP and a decent aero package, a lot of cars can hit those speeds but often by sacrificing low end peerformance. Imagine the ratio range in the gearbox necessary to allow a 7000 RPM engine achieve 0-60 in 2.9 seconds AND run a top end of 265. A 7 speed gearbox with a final ratio of 0.7 or less to 1 that could handle 1000HP is a major engineering achievement! Riding a motorcycle that can do 0-60 in 3.1 seconds is a pretty good rush, I can't imagine what it'd feel like in a car.
This may have been a triumph of engineering skill, but to what purpose? You can't use the "hyper" performance on any public road, and it you are interested in the racetrack, why have the weight and cost of the street legal features?
As for "outrunning the cops" they don't have to chase you. Just radio ahead for a roadblock, or just wait til you eventually stop and bust you at rest.
There was one flaw in your logic. If you are going 260 MPH, the cop would only see a motion blur. He could not possibly identify the make, model, or probably even the color of the blur. The only way they could accurately track you is from the air, and even that would be difficult. Now, the thing about 260 MPH is that you need a long, straight stretch of road to do it, and that means you must live in the Southwestern US in order to drive the car full-out. Those of us in the real part of the country could never open the car up. Oh, we might get to 62, or 85 if we aren't paying attention, but the curves in the roads will shut down our speed sessions.
Phantasyconcepts, You are correct. A cop standing beside the road would not be able, with the naked eye, to identify the car at 260 mph. He could still radio ahead, "There is an unidentified maniac speeding in your direction. Set a roadblock." If these cars become a real problem, there are lots of techological ways to catch the nuts driving them at such speeds. Or perhaps we should just let nature take its course and give the driver his posthumous Darwin Award.
jallenn, folks with mindsets like yours are the reason we have so many stupid regulations. Just because a car is able to perform does not mean that the driver will drive that fast. Look at the high performance cars that have been available for a lot of years, and they are generally driven in a reasonable manner.
And one very important reality is that just because you would not be able to drive a car like that safely does not mean that there aren't a lot of folks who could drive it very well. Please don't assume that everybody else has no more skills than you do.
It's always fun to push the performance envelope. And the thing is, stuff you learn in pushing that envelope often has application for the boring every day world most of us live in. We won't need 260 mph, nor the incredible acceleration, but there's useful technology in there. It may take a while for it to trickle down to your local auto dealer (or jet sale representative), but there is probably new stuff in this machine that has some practical application.
You only need at most the first two gears to get to 62 mph. Heck, my 92 Mazda MX-3 with a 1.8L V6 redlined in 1st at 30 and in 2nd at 60mph. At least in that one you could push it to the max thru the fist two gears and part way into 3rd before hitting the freeway speed limit. It was fun to drive for over 200,000 miles.
Any company whose product combines human beings with 1000hp would have at least that number of engineers working full time on quality control alone. This vehicle probably goes from 0-fault-indicator-illuminated in 2.8 seconds.
Although the article notes the Koenigsegg engineers designed the engine, this is somewhat misleading. The good ole' engineers at Ford Racing actually produce the engine for Koenigsegg. The powerful 5.0 engine is a slight derivation of what Ford brands the "Aluminator 5.0 Mustang crate engine" factory modified with a dry sump oil system for a lower CG, titanium rods for reduced rotating mass, and I believe it was mentioned that the compression ratio was lowered a half point to 9.0:1 to deter pre-ignition induced by the 1.4bar positive intake manifold pressure, voila, 1000hp of American engine V8 power! I have always found it wonderful that Koenigsegg has built such a strong relationship with Ford powertrain over the years, and we continue to see benefits in production vehicles and processes on both sides of the ocean. Cheers!
If what you say is true, the engine definitely has real-world uses. First of all, if it provides enough torque, that 1000 horsepower could actually move a small pickup truck or minivan. That would be useful for those who have limited budgets and still need to haul light but bulky loads, like smaller contractors who might be hired to build decks or homeowners who are looking to finish a room in the basement or go camping at a medieval event at Cooper's Lake Campground in Slippery Rock, PA some time in July or August. Hmm... when is such a truck going to be on sale?
Charles; You come up with some excellent articles - fun reading! A thousand HP is almost inconceivable and 800+ Ft/Lbs of torque should be enough to lift the left front wheel off the ground in most circumstances. This and other truly Super cars stretch the bounds of what's possible. The fact that there is actually a market for these leaps of fantasy makes them possible, though one wonders what their business plan must look like. Many years ago Road and Track magazine road-tested the FIRST production automobile that was able to exceed 1.0G of lateral acceleration on their skid-pad; it was the Porsche 356 - the predecessor to the 911. Since then there have been relatively few cars that reach or exceed 1.0G. In looking through their tests column I didn't find any that were able to stop from 60 MPH in less than 100'. The previous post indicating boost was only 1.4 bar seems low if they are using a 5.0 liter engine though. I wonder what the MTBF is if that engine is run at a measurable percentage of its capacity.
Thanks, bob from maine. I, too, am amazed by the 1.6 G's on the skid pad. It's great to get to 1.0 g's -- 1.6 is off the scales. I actually think that figure is far more impressive than the speed, but the speed makes better headlines.
While this cr is certainbly an engineering marvel with it's fuel-dragster performance, it certainly does not come acrross to me as a very good return for the price. But I suppose that for anybody able to afford such a vehicle as this one that practicality would not be much of a consideration.
I have to admit, William K, I wouldn't want it. In the past decade, I've had two snowblowers stolen from my garage (I live in the Chicago area). I also had the airbag module removed from my '96 Olds Cierra. If I put this car in my garage, I'd need a 24-hour security guard. They'd probably steal the security guard, too.
I am disappointed that you did not cover the Hennessey Venom GT. I am a bit prejudiced since Hennessey is just a few miles down the road. It is a bit quicker... It is always nice to take a gander at the rich folk's toys - I just ignore the comments of the 'hand wringers'.
There was a nice write-up by a chap from across the pond - Richard Meaden
The question of whether engineers could have foreseen the shortcut maintenance procedures that led to the crash of American Airlines Flight 191 in 1979 will probably linger for as long as there is an engineering profession.
More than 35 years later, the post-mortem on one of the country’s worst engineering disasters appears to be simple. A contractor asked for a change in an original design. The change was approved by engineers, later resulting in a mammoth structural collapse that killed 114 people and injured 216 more.
If you’re an embedded systems engineer whose analog capabilities are getting a little bit rusty, then you’ll want to take note of an upcoming Design News Continuing Education Center class, “Analog Design for the Digital World,” running Monday, Nov. 17 through Friday, Nov. 21.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.