ThrustSSC vehicle is a jet-powered. It has two turbojets intended for combat aircraft. These engines produced by Rolls-Royce for the British version of the fighter F-4 Phantom II. Jet engines together provide approximately 110,000 horsepower.

ThrustSSC vehicle reached a speed of up to 1,227.986 kilometers per hour and so set current world record.

The vehicle is operated by the British Royal Air Force pilot (RAF) Andy Green, who has the rank of warrant officer, “Wing Commander.”

ThrustSSC was actually a British project, led by the Scottish entrepreneur Richard Noble. He previously developed jet vehicles Thrust1 and Thrust2.

Check more on http://www.thrustssc.com/thrustssc.html

Mention that the Thrust2 held the world speed record from 1983 to 1997 year. Today, the British developed even faster car – Bloodhound SSC – which should reach a speed of up to 1,000 miles per hour (1,609 kilometers per hour).

Bloodhound SSC will be powered by a jet engine from the Eurofighter fighter jet, rocket engine and one extra V8 Formula 1 engine.

The post The First Supersonic Car in History – ThrustSSC appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

Now supercars reach that figure with ease, and some go way above that. The Bugatti Veyron set the tone some eight years ago, when it was (for a time) the fastest production car on Earth with a hefty 736 kilowatts (1,000 brake horsepower) helping to produce a Jaw- dropping top speed of 408 kilometres (335 miles) per hour.

Not only are these top-end road machines reaching unprecedented speeds, they’re also reaching them in less time too. In early-2013, the Hennessey Venom GT broke the record for the quickest dash to 300 kilometres (186 miles) per hour, taking just 13.63 seconds to do so.

A glut of ultra-lightweight chassis and body panels are now used to help keep the overall weight of these cars at large to a minimum, greatly increasing a car’s power-to-weight ratio – essential for extracting maximum power.

For supercars to reach these unworldly speeds, it’s not all about sheer power and weight ratios though. Hyper cars need to be low to the ground for maximum traction, as poor grip makes for bad handling and, more importantly, no acceleration. They also need to be very aerodynamic with as little drag on the body as possible, to enable the car to slip through the air with minimal resistance.

For this reason most supercars now use active aerodynamics to reach such crazy figures, with the bodywork and even chassis automatically adjusting to best manage the flow of air and pressures on the car when travelling at certain speeds.

Mechanical efficiency has also vastly improved in the quest for high speed, with some engines now enjoying much higher rev limits in which to exert their power, while dual-clutch gearboxes pre-select the next gear to ensure only a minuscule amount of acceleration time is lost to gear changing.

However, there are still obstacles to overcome. Great evolutions in technology, such as Porsche’s active rear wheel steering (which changes the direction of the rear axle by a few millimetres to allow corners to be taken more directly and at greater speed) only provide tiny improvements to 0-60 times and top speeds.

Similarly, while cars are being stripped of every non-essential element, with all remaining parts made from extremely light composites, car scientists are already having to ‘weigh up’ just how much they can take away without being detrimental to performance. Indeed, finding that next step to go even faster may take a new technology altogether, rather than tweaks to current components.

Another important obstacle is an environmental one. Our planet will run dry of a car enthusiast’s favourite liquid in the not-too-distant future, and with hyper cars famed for guzzling up gallons of precious fuel on every journey, the lifestyle needs to change.

Already, three 322-kilometre (200-mile)-per-hour cars released this year now deploy hybrid engines to bring down their fuel consumption and carbon footprint, and even Formula One cars will have hybrid engines from next year where the electric motor will be fully engaged the moment the car enters the pit lane. It’s certainly a good start, but when fuel does run out, we’ll need supercars that run on zero fuel, or all the technology to date will go to waste.

The world of the supercar then has never been more advanced, and here’s how some of the market’s leading supercar companies are doing all they can to go that extra mile…

See Top Supercars:

Rimac Concept One

McLaren P1 Supercar

Porsche 918 Spyder Hybrid

Koenigsegg Agera R Compact Supercar

The post Electric Supercars Of The Future appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

This soon-for-mass-production supercar is powered by electric motors delivering 811kW (1,088bhp) to each wheel independently. With no need for an engine or gearbox, this could be the future of motoring.

Although many supercars of the modern era are embracing hybrid technology in a bid to cut down emissions, the Rimac Concept One is the first to claim fully electric status, eliminating physical boundaries set by combustion engines including rev limits and turbo lag.

Instead of a traditional combustion engine, this car’s powertrain is divided into four electrical subsystems consisting of a motor, inverter and reduction gearbox with each subsystem powering one wheel independently.

This self-styled All Wheel Torque Vectoring (R-AWTV) generates a staggering 811 kilowatts (1,088 brake horsepower), and in the absence of an engine limited by revs, provides the driver with the added benefit of extremely fast accelerator response across an extremely wide power band.

Even better, the 92-kilowatt battery has a decent range too, powering the Concept one supercar for up to 600 kilometres (373 miles) of driving with precisely zero emissions.

The low mounting position of the battery and powertrains ensures a good, low centre of gravity for the Concept One (a must-have for any supercar), and an engineless car does move the goalposts somewhat when it comes to the limitations of a traditional engine.

However, the weight of the Concept One’s electrical gizmos mean performance is not limitless: of our magnificent lineup in this feature, Rimac’s is the heaviest candidate. Max speed is 304 km/h (189 mph), acceleration 0-100 km/h is 2.8 sec.

The post Rimac Concept One Electric Supercar appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

Fresh from its international debut at the Geneva Motor Show, the McLaren P1 is considered the latest pioneer to the enhancement of motoring physics. Form is unquestionably sacrificed for function here: the P1 is certainly not a looker in comparison to other exotic cars, but its aerodynamic finesse helps to make it one of the quickest in the industry.

Body panels appear tightly moulded around its powerful internals in homage to a modern Formula One car.

The P1’s parallels with the premier motorsporting discipline don’t stop there either as McLaren has unleashed much of its in-house F1 tech on this road-going hypercar – particularly in terms of aerodynamics.

One such trait is the recycling of energy thanks to the Instant Power Assist System (IPAS), which catches kinetic energy when braking and converts it into electrical energy that can be used to add a burst of power.

The car also features highly adjustable active damping: indeed, in Race mode, the spring rates stiffen by 300 percent, so the McLaren P1 can corner at more than two g. Inside is as primitive as possible to shed weight, and extensive aerodynamic tweaks ensure almost unprecedented levels of downforce for a road car, so the P1 can both cut cleanly through the air and yet stay firmly on the ground.

Main parts:

Gearbox – A dual-clutch, seven-speed gearbox makes for a smooth transition from 0-350km/h (0-217mph).

Body vents – As well as generating downforce and reducing drag, vents in the body also aid the cooling of the powertrain – essential to keep the car performing under immense stress.

Rear diffuser – Large rear diffuser outlets at the back of the car accelerate airflow via the Venturi effect and produce downforce.

Engine – The petrol engine in the McLaren P1 is a monstrous 3.8l twin-turbo V8.

Electric motor – A 131kW (176bhp) electric motor is integrated into the engine via a specially cast, lightweight aluminium block.

Battery – A high power density battery pack supplies electricity to the P1’s electric motor.

The post McLaren P1 Supercar appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

As if the original 2011 Koenigsegg Agera wasn’t quick enough, the new 2013 Agera R has upped the ante, producing 850 kilowatts (1,140 horsepower) from the same 5.0-litre, twin-turbocharged V8 powertrain. Key differences come in that hallowed power-to-weight ratio: while the power in the Agera R has gone up, the bulk over the original has come down, thanks to some clever weight-saving measures.

Take in the new 48.3-centimetre (19-inch) wheels; not only are they made from carbon fibre (what else!), but they’re hollow-spoked too, providing a net save of 40 per cent over similar alloy wheels.

While other hypercars manage downforce via an active rear wing that changes height according to speed, the Agera R changes its angle of wing to literally target downforce upon the rear.

Further, the angle is not determined by heavy hydraulics, but by the pressure of the wind itself. With the angle of the wing dictated by wind resistance, this compensates for headwind or tailwind at the same given speed.

Likewise, the new Aero Exhaust is shaped to improve underbody air release, ensuring this latest Koenigsegg of continued aerodynamic evolution and greater speed.

The post Koenigsegg Agera R Compact Supercar appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

They sold good numbers (13,739 to date) and kept their offering fresh by revamping it in 2006. However, in the last decade, there have been many more additions to this segment in the market. The CR-V had no less than 11 competitors at the last count and it was neither the biggest nor the most powerful one and, being a CBU import from Japan, certainly not the cheapest of the lot either. To cut a long story short, the CR-V did not enjoy a clear advantage any longer.

Honda hope to change that with the fourth-generation CR-V that was launched in Europe last month. The 2013 CR-V can be easily recognized as a successor of the outgoing model. It is based on the same platform and the design is evolutionary. The front end has Honda’s current family look resembling a bird’s spread wings which appears imposing and sharp. The top two variants get HID headlamps with lens washers and chrome finish door handles. Electric sunroof has also been added and the 17-inch alloys wheels have 10 spokes.

If you think the new CR-V is taller and longer, then you are right and wrong, respectively. The ground clearance has been lowered by 15 mm compared to the older model, but the overall height has increased by 5mm so the cabin feels more spacious and has more headroom. However, Honda have shortened the overall length. The perceived increase in length is due to the larger, triangular design of the third section of the windows and the pulled-back tailgate inspired by Volvo’s XC 60 SUV with the shape of the tail-lamps confirming this notion. Also, it is not the only feature that looks inspired. The shark-fin antenna near the rear end of the roof has been a BMW characteristic for quite some time.

The new CR-V gets five colour options and two accessory packages, named ‘Inspire’ and ‘Elegance’. The cabin has leather upholstery with beige coloured seats while the gear-shift lever and steering wheel are in black coloured hides. The rest of the interior is in shades of grey. Honda have designed the fascia with a minimalistic approach as there are very few buttons, which looks tidy. It has a six-inch touch-screen on the fascia for the music system while the top variant of the car also has a GPS system featuring Navtech maps backed by voice-guided navigation and Bluetooth connectivity for music player and phone, both of which are also displayed on the screen. There is a secondary screen located in the centre of the dashboard.

This five-inch TFT screen displays other information such as audio, real time fuel consumption, rear-view camera feed and a clock. The steering wheel has a dedicated button for this screen along with the ones for the primary screen and cruise control. The information panel has a digital pod in the centre of the large, analogue tachometer and it displays the odometer, trip meter, range, realtime and average fuel economy along with ambient temperature. The analogue fuel gauge and engine temperature gauge are located on the right of the tachometer while on its left are all the standard indicators and lights along with the gear indicator in the automatic variants. Controls for the electric ORVM and windows are on the driver’s door. The gear-shift lever is part of the fascia, which leaves an empty space between the front seats. Honda have provided a 12-volt charging point and three cup-holders here. There is also a deep pocket below the armrest between the front seats which has one more mobile charger and a USB port. The rear seat armrest is collapsible and has two cup-holders. The car has many pockets and cubbyholes, which are useful for storing small items and bottles.

The CR-V has a seating capacity of five and the driver’s seat is eight-way adjustable. The front seat-belts are adjustable for height and the steering wheel has telescopic and tilt movements. This ensures comfortable seating in the front and both the rows have great leg space too, but the seats don’t have adequate under-thigh support. However, the best feature about the seats is that the second row back-rest collapses automatically when you pull on the levers located in the luggage area behind. What’s more, the rear bench is split in a 1:2 ratio, so you can either collapse the wider or the narrower section of the back-rest or both together. This enhances the luggage space substantially and it must be mentioned that it is big enough even without folding the second row of seats.

Coming to the options under the bonnet, the fourth-generation CR-V has the same two in-line four petrol engine seen in the previous model. However, both the engines are now in a higher state of tune. The 2.0-litre engine has a power output of 156 PS at 6,500 revolutions per minute and peak torque of 190 Nm at 4,300 RPM. There is an option between a six-speed manual transmission, which is the base variant and a five-speed automatic. Both the variants with this engine are front-wheel driven while the other two ones are powered by the 2.4-litre i-VTEC mill featuring Honda’s adaptive all-wheel-drive system that powers the front wheels when there is enough traction, but switches to the 4×4 mode automatically in sticky situations. This 2.4-litre engine produces 190 PS of power at 7,000 RPM and 226 Nm of torque at 4,400 RPM.

Efficiency is one of the key areas Honda have focused on while making the new CR-V. The company claims a fuel efficiency of 13.7 km/l from the 2.0-litre engine and 12 km/l from the bigger one, irrespective of the transmission. However, during our drive we noticed that the 2.0-litre engine returned a fuel efficiency of about 10.5 km/l while the 2.4-litre gave us around nine km/l. But then, we weren’t exactly driving it efficiently on the wide open highway of Rajasthan, so wait for a full road test for the actual figures. The car also comes with an ECO mode where the engine mapping changes to improve efficiency.

The 2.4-litre engine certainly feels powerful, but the response from the auto transmission isn’t very prompt. The auto box also features a sport mode, indicated by an ‘S’ near its slot of the shifter. In the sport mode, the engine revs till 7,000 RPM before shifting up and if that is not enough, you have the paddle-shifters behind the steering wheel for manual control over the shifts and for engine braking. The manual transmission has the advantage of an overdrive gear and the power delivery is linear, but shifts times are slow and it feels sluggish throughout the range.

The folk from Honda had stressed the improvement in ride quality and NVH levels during the product presentation. So we were quite surprised to find that the ride was bumpier compared to the older model’s and tyre noise could be heard distinctly inside the cabin. However, when we switched to the car with manual transmission, the ride quality was certainly better. There is a chance that the cars we drove were pre-production roll-outs and that the issue will be resolved in series production. So at present we have a hung jury over the issue.

The car feels composed even at speeds in excess of 150 km/h and is packed with safety features like ABS with EBD, G-CON, ACE body structure, six airbags, motion adaptive EPS, stability assist and hill climb assist that are standard across the range. The electric power steering is a shift from the hydraulic one used in the previous model and it is light and responsive. The CR-V has sedan-like handling that allows high-speed lane changes swiftly and there is little body-roll, which is unavoidable in a vehicle with that structure. The disc brakes on all four wheels provide good stopping power and it also has a foot operated parking brake.

The post 2013 Honda CR-V Review appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

The Boxster has retained its mid-engine layout, with the base powerplant being a 265-hp, 2.7-liter flat six-cylinder engine, paired with either a six-speed manual or seven-speed automated manual transmission.

Prices start at USD 49,500, and our base model with a manual transmission and a few options rang in at USD 59,600. If you want more grunt, you can opt for a 315-hp, 3.4-liter six, with prices starting at USD 64,100.

Driving impression

This Boxster retains the original’s core qualities, making every break-in mile enjoyable for our testers.

With virtually no body lean in corners and responsive, direct steering, the Boxster is a treat on a twisty road. Unfortunately, the switch from hydraulic to electric steering has meant the loss of some feedback compared with the last Boxster. The ride is very firm but not punishing, even with 20-inch wheels.

Under the hood

The base engine is not particularly brawny, but it revs freely, sounds great, and delivers immediate response.

The six-speed manual shifts easily, helped by a smoothly operating clutch. The automated manual transmission also works impressively.

Inside the cabin

The interior is beautifully finished with leather and brushed aluminum. The touch screen is easy to read and use. But the center console is cluttered with buttons, and the lack of steering-wheel-mounted audio controls is a obvious omission in a USD 60,000 car.

Two trunks add a measure of practicality, and the easy-to-use soft top can be raised or lowered at speeds up to 35 mph.

The Boxster is exceptionally fun to drive, with agile handling, ample thrust, and a nicely finished cabin. But at these prices it shouldn’t be anything less.

The post Porsche Boxster Review 2013-2014 appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

Our test car, with the 1LT trim and an automatic transmission, cost USD 15,420. It adds a seven-inch touch screen, Bluetooth connectivity, keyless entry, power locks and mirrors, cruise control, a free subscription to navigation services, and Chevrolet’s MyLink infotainment system, which can connect to a compatible smart phone.

Driving impressions

Urban-ites will appreciate the Spark’s tiny footprint and parking lot maneuverability, but a car this size comes with some typical budget-car trade-offs.

Road and engine noise are notable, especially when the tiny engine is pushed, which ends up being quite often. But considering the car’s size, the ride isn’t bad overall and it absorbs bumps pretty well.

While not sporty, the Spark handles responsively. On the highway, the ride is composed enough, but it can get quite stiff on broken pavement. Road and wind noise are quite prominent but not offensive.

Under the hood

Power comes from a hard-working 84-hp, 1.2-liter four-cylinder engine. Paired with the four-speed automatic transmission in our test car, the Spark delivers adequate acceleration around town, but hills pose a challenge. The transmission shifts smoothly enough, but it’s constantly hunting for the right gear to compensate for the engine’s limited power. So far, we’ve been seeing close to the EPA rating of 33 mpg overall as we pile on the break-in miles.

Inside the cabin

The Chevrolet Spark cockpit is economy-car basic, with a Spartan appearance but decent equipment levels. Six-foot drivers will find sufficient head and legroom. While adjustable for height, the steering wheel doesn’t telescope in and out. The seats are narrow and become spongy on long drives. The snug cabin provides seating for four people, with a somewhat usable rear seat. If you need more cargo space, the 60/40-split rear bench folds down.

Our car has a number of features that are nice for the price, such as a trip computer, tachometer, and external temperature gauge. But the digital displays in the instrument cluster are small, and scrolling through them is cumbersome.

The Spark also has one of the most annoying and distracting audio-system interfaces we’ve experienced. It has no normal knobs, and navigating through the touch screen and flush buttons can be frustrating.

The Spark’s small size makes it easy to park and maneuver, its tiny engine gets good gas mileage, and it has a great deal of space for its small footprint. But early impressions are that it may be too tiny and stripped down compared with the more substantial-and not much more expensive-Fit and Hyundai Accent.

The post 2013-2014 Chevrolet Spark Review appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

Our USD 40,995 Focus includes the only available option-USD 995 for leather seats. Consumers are eligible for a USD 7,500 electric-vehicle tax credit.

Driving impressions: The Focus Electric drives a lot like the conventional version, only quicker and quieter. It rides comfortably and handles with agility.

The electric motor delivers 143 hp at peak and a strong 184 ft.-lbs. of torque from a standstill. Compared with the gas Focus, the car feels snappy-perhaps too much for maximum frugality. This combination of responsiveness, smoothness, and quietness delivers a distinct and effortless driving experience.

Under the hood

The Focus Electric is EPA-rated at the equivalent of 105 miles per gallon (MPGe). But so far, we’ve been doing even better, getting about 3.65 miles on every kilo-watt-hour of electricity, which is the equivalent of 123 mpg. This is excellent even for an EV. We’ve also been averaging 81 miles on a charge, which is about 6 miles longer than we got in our Nissan Leaf.

The 23-kWh lithium-ion battery pack has two parts: one located under the rear seat where the fuel tank would normally be, and the other occupying a fair amount of the cargo space.

The car uses a 6.6-kW onboard charger, and on average it has been taking us about four hours to charge the car on a 240-volt, Level 2 charger.

Inside the cabin

To help drivers get the most out of the car, Ford has put a lot into the electronic gauges and displays. Once you program a route in the standard navigation system, for example, it will calculate your trip buffer, letting you know how much extra energy you have to make a detour during your trip.

A regenerative braking gauge shows how much energy you’ve recaptured after every brake application. Butterflies collect on the right-hand screen of the instrument cluster to rate your driving from an environmental perspective.

But the multiple displays and buttons to control them can be overwhelming.

Apps are available for Android and Apple devices that allow drivers to preheat or cool the car and set charge times remotely. The apps also include games to encourage competition among different Focus drivers through social media.

So far, the Focus Electric is the most refined and sophisticated EV we’ve driven. It provides the most range and has relatively quick charge times. We’ll see if these impressions hold up as we complete our tests.

The post Ford Focus Electric 2013 Review appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.

So far, EyeSight seems to be doing its job in our car, but we would have liked to also have blind-spot monitoring, a feature that isn’t available.

Driving impressions

One of our criticisms of the 2010-12 Outback was that handling was rather sloppy when the car was pushed to its limits. For 2013, the suspension has been dramatically firmed up and has effectively quelled some of the body lean. Unfortunately, this also compromised the Outback’s previously excellent ride comfort.

Under the hood

The new 2.5-liter “boxer” four-cylinder engine sounds the same, but it gained three more horsepower. But the Outback feels sluggish and the CVT exacerbates engine noise. We got 24 mpg overall, which is very good for a car with this much space and standard all-wheel drive. You can opt for a six-speed manual transmission with the base version. A 3.6-liter six-cylinder, with a five-speed automatic, is also available.

Inside the cabin

One of the Outback’s best attributes is its spacious cabin. It has a roomy and supportive rear seat, even for three adults. There’s also a generous and flexible cargo area. But the optional navigation-equipped radio-a necessary option for EyeSight-is badly designed. The touchscreen has tiny icons and the navigation isn’t as intuitive as most built-in systems. Although EyeSight is touted as affordable at USD 1,295, you can only get it by choosing a USD 29,890 Outback Limited and getting an additional USD 3,940 option package.

The Outback remains a very functional wagon, and EyeSight is a welcome addition. But the sluggishness and degradation in ride comfort seem like a step backward and are less appreciated.

The post 2013 Subaru Outback Review appeared first on Some Interesting Facts.