Explain this to me!
 

A pagani zonda with 555 hp vs. XJ220 3.5l tt with 300 something HP that can go 217mph and smoke the zonda in a strait away

YouTube - Top Gear - Pagani Zonda gets humiliated by a Jaguar

I thought the XJ220 had 500+ hp???

xj220 had 542 hp from the factory

Aerodynamics. The Zonda is built for maximum speed on the track, which means lots of downforce, and lots of drag. Straight line speed is not the goal. The Jaguar was optimized for top speed, which means that they kept the drag as low as possible (but there's hardly any downforce)

It's like this article, where Edmunds took the Viper ACR to Bonneville:

2008 Dodge Viper ACR: Flat Out at Bonneville

The ACR is not designed for top speed, so it didn't even hit 200, despite having 600 hp. Design flaw? No - it's faster than a ZR1, a Porsche turbo, or a GT-R on the Nurburgring.

That's why people care about 'ring times, not top speed. Personally, I'd rather have a Caterham CSR 260 than either of those cars, and I'm not even sure it can get past 145...

I'll still take the Pagani, thanks.

Who wouldnt? Things are gorgeous...

Yea I would definitely take the pagani over the Jag. That car is fugly. I thought I heard something about 300 something but I'm sure i'm wrong about that.

Thanks that clears it up. I do have another question but this is regarding top speed. This was in one of the car magazines (motor trend or some other one) talking about what car can go the fastest to 200mph. I think the tt viper got it to something like 20seconds.
Now the koenigsegg, went to their website and the CCXR edition takes about 30 seconds to hit 200mph. Not saying that it slow but I would think it would be closer to 20 seconds. Just curious. I guess it's not a 1k hp powered car so it would seem to take a just bit longer to reach 200mph in 20sec. What ya'll think?

You'd be surprised how much difference that extra horsepower can make. Just look at the Veyron. If I remember right, it only needs a couple hundred horsepower to get to 130 or 140 MPH, but it needs the extra 800 horsepower required to get up past 200 MPH to overcome its own coefficient of drag.

Either way, its hard to give a solid answer when you arent really giving us specifics here lol. "...something like 20 seconds", and "about 30 seconds" is a very big difference lol. Find the exact numbers and it might be easier to go from there :)

Oh, and in a choice between exotics, I'd probably take one of these:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...t_Apollo_3.jpg

There was a great article in one of the car mags back in the 80s that really showed the difference downforce/drag makes in speed. It was an all-out speed test between an IMSA Porsche 962 and Tim Richmond's Monte Carlo Winston Cup car.

Both cars made about the same power, but back then NASCAR stock cars weren't really in the business of making downforce... it was all about reducing drag. His car was much, much faster than the Porsche as it didn't have all that added drag.

OH god that's one ugly car LOL. Isn't that called a gumpart or something.

I believe the tt viper did it in 20 seconds and the koenigsegg on their website stated 27 seconds.

Here's link and the ford gt tt did 0-200 in 18+ seconds. Crazy fast.

http://carvideos.caranddriver.com/?b...id=13585927001

Gumpert Apollo! Its f-ing amazing!