As you likely saw, Bugatti just unveiled their new Toyota GR Yaris-killer, the 1,775 horsepower, V16 Tourbillon, and it’s an impressive tour-de-farts of advanced tech and stunning Bugatti-heritage designs. I’m sure you’ll be seeing these in every TJ Maxx parking lot from Lansing to Arlen, so you’ll be familiar with these new Bugattis soon enough. As you have likely inferred by the name (tourbillon is a horological term for the mechanism in a watch made from compressed fairy scat that gives a watch its monetary value) the new Bugatti has a sort of fancy watch theme, which is perhaps most noticeable in its novel, watch-like instrument cluster. That instrument cluster was also lauded as being revolutionary, with some outlets even proclaiming it a reinvention of “the (steering) wheel.” Here’s the only problem with that idea, though: Maserati did it half a century ago.
So, let’s go over what the big deal here is: the instrument cluster of the Tourbillon, which Bugatti describes like this:
“ANALOGUE ELEGANCE
Inspired by the timeless elegance of watchmaking craft, the TOURBILLON prioritizes an analogue design. The instrument cluster is constructed by Swiss horologists, built to precise watchmaking tolerances featuring over 600 components.”
… is not just watch-inspired, but actually made by Swiss watchmakers, it seems. And, yeah, it’s pretty incredible-looking, with all sorts of gears and escapements and bezels and needles and only one small digital display screen. I mean, look:
So, yeah, it’s a visual treat. But, even more exciting is how it’s set into the center of the steering wheel, and how that wheel moves around it while the instrument cluster stays still. That’s the real punctum of the whole thing, as its mechanically interesting and keeps all those gauges clear and unblocked so you can really see if you’re at 1/8 of a tank or more like 2/17 of a tank while you’re taking a long sweeping turn at 178 mph. Look, you can see it here:
That’s a hell of a party trick, and I get why everyone is so turgid about it. But, I think it’s worth noting that this car was doing just that back in 1971:
That striking wedge-shaped spaceship is the Maserati Boomerang, designed by Italdesign and first shown at the 1971 Turin Auto Show, where it became the platonic ideal of the wedge-shaped sports car design of the 1970s.
The exterior is pretty striking and revolutionary, but we’re here to talk about the instruments and the steering wheel, which had this setup:
Look familiar? While I don’t think any Swiss watch craftsmen were involved with any of this, the concept is the same: instruments remain stationary in the middle, the steering wheel rotates around them. There were at least two versions of the instrument cluster, too; one with the multiple small round gauges, and off-the-shelf switches, and one that was custom-made for the Boomerang:
I’m not even certain the Boomerang was the first car to try this, either; I believe there were earlier examples of this, but I think this Maserati concept car is likely the best known, and likely the best realized.
I guess we could also the 1978 Lancia Siblio, though it didn’t exactly have instruments, just a small display screen and some buttons/warning lights:
That one is deeply weird. And brown, so very very brown.
Anyway, with everyone primed and ready to heap effusive praise onto Bugatti’s latest creation, I wanted to just make sure that those who came before, who paved the way for center-wheel instruments so that the Tourbillon could do its thing and go on tour with billionaires, got their due.
Yes, it’s cool, but Bugatti did not do it first. So there.
Your mom’s a Swiss horologist.
…I didn’t mean that. I’m sure she’s a very nice lady. Sorry Mrs. Torchinsky.
But does it have a tourbillon?
But does it have a tourbillon?
That name, sheesh. Could they be any less subtle about telling us this is a car for billionaires?
That name, sheesh. Could they be any less subtle about telling us this is a car for billionaires?
100% not impressed. Torch nailed it the other day a la being unimpressed with blank check engineering efforts. It’s not clever if all you have to do is throw money at it.
What makes it outright repulsive is the hyperbolic marketing wank… “dihedral doors ELEGANTLY rise to preserve AERODYNAMIC INTEGRITY” (caps words said in Lovey Howell’s voice)… K. Lambo doors. Like the Camry at SEMA. Got it.
I’ve said this before: anyone can achieve engineering brilliance with a big budget. Throw engineers and money at it until it’s as rarified as you want.
I’m far more impressed by the mundane vehicles whose high performance is miles per penny, sales per development dollar, market satisfaction per construction man-hour. That is where the impact happens. Moonshots get moonshot money and, just like moonshots, you only need to deliver a few of them to get people excited about them. Corollas also get moonshot money but deliver millions of examples and, on the whole, are far more exciting in general. While essentially none of us will ever even clap eyes on a Tourbillon in the flesh let alone own one, everyone has the opportunity to be impressed by how satisfying a new, well engineered economy car can really be when you get right down to it. As interesting as the Tourbillon is as an exercise, it is ultimately pointless and its impact on the automotive world merits nothing more than a footnote.
Hence “Yaris killer.”
PS “fiddliest” is a great descriptor.
I don’t care about the ultra-wealthy, nor their toys, tastes or anything else.
Having said that, I disagree that this is unimpressive. Yes, it takes gobs of money to make this happen. However now that it has happened, it is a very beautiful happening. I refuse to hate on something like this just because I can never afford anything like it. This is art that just also happens to be a car. This thing is entirely absurd in every possible way. You can never drive it as intended, few race tracks in the world would be suitable to actualize the potential of something like this. I don’t care.
This is an exercise in beauty, passion and a stand against the current trends that brought us nonsense like a Hummer EV, Cybertruck and anything Ineos makes. It’s low, it’s sleek, there are no infotainment screens. It isn’t trying to be manly or butch. Taking a hard left against all of that nonsense is enough for me. The fact that it looks a spectacular as it does, makes it all the better.
For any of us who can never buy this thing, it matters so little what it cost, nobody here will buy one. Who cares that it costs 4m, it’s stunning to see. To me it keeps the dream alive that sports/super/hyper cars are the pinnacle of the automotive world, not overpriced faux-offroad things that engage in a continual escalation of size, weight and insecurity.
I am happy to just see the pictures and a few videos not because I believe I will ever own one or even see one, but because it’s beautiful. Hopefully this will spark a passion with some young person and create an impression that beauty and art have meaning.
There’s an ass for every seat. If someone with one of these wanted to join the car club, I wouldn’t say boo. There’s a ceiling to capture any interest though. It’s not really about affordability so much as the why of it. Mostly my disdain is for the marketers. I hate superlative marketing with a passion. Idiocy like “precious resin” (seen in Mont Blanc pen materials referring to the black plastic they make their pens of) and exclaiming that something costs millions to <blank> (I can write a check to someone for a million dollars to flush my toilet, doesn’t make it an especially great flush) just rings my stupid bell hard and turns me off like a hooker without a nose.
I remember Gordan Murray’s T.25 city car and him saying how truly hard it was to do it and make it remotely affordable. Yes, making cars is hard.
I also like to extend this concept to cooking 🙂
While I really enjoy cooking, one of my main criteria for judging a recipe is efficiency: if you have to spend an inordinate amount of time on it, I’m not interested. Anyone can cook something amazing if given an infinite amount of time, manpower and money for the finest ingredients
<cough>*french cuisine, developed for rich aristocrats with infinite resources*<cough>
100% not impressed. Torch nailed it the other day a la being unimpressed with blank check engineering efforts. It’s not clever if all you have to do is throw money at it.
What makes it outright repulsive is the hyperbolic marketing wank… “dihedral doors ELEGANTLY rise to preserve AERODYNAMIC INTEGRITY” (caps words said in Lovey Howell’s voice)… K. Lambo doors. Like the Camry at SEMA. Got it.
I’ve said this before: anyone can achieve engineering brilliance with a big budget. Throw engineers and money at it until it’s as rarified as you want.
I’m far more impressed by the mundane vehicles whose high performance is miles per penny, sales per development dollar, market satisfaction per construction man-hour. That is where the impact happens. Moonshots get moonshot money and, just like moonshots, you only need to deliver a few of them to get people excited about them. Corollas also get moonshot money but deliver millions of examples and, on the whole, are far more exciting in general. While essentially none of us will ever even clap eyes on a Tourbillon in the flesh let alone own one, everyone has the opportunity to be impressed by how satisfying a new, well engineered economy car can really be when you get right down to it. As interesting as the Tourbillon is as an exercise, it is ultimately pointless and its impact on the automotive world merits nothing more than a footnote.
Hence “Yaris killer.”
PS “fiddliest” is a great descriptor.
I don’t care about the ultra-wealthy, nor their toys, tastes or anything else.
Having said that, I disagree that this is unimpressive. Yes, it takes gobs of money to make this happen. However now that it has happened, it is a very beautiful happening. I refuse to hate on something like this just because I can never afford anything like it. This is art that just also happens to be a car. This thing is entirely absurd in every possible way. You can never drive it as intended, few race tracks in the world would be suitable to actualize the potential of something like this. I don’t care.
This is an exercise in beauty, passion and a stand against the current trends that brought us nonsense like a Hummer EV, Cybertruck and anything Ineos makes. It’s low, it’s sleek, there are no infotainment screens. It isn’t trying to be manly or butch. Taking a hard left against all of that nonsense is enough for me. The fact that it looks a spectacular as it does, makes it all the better.
For any of us who can never buy this thing, it matters so little what it cost, nobody here will buy one. Who cares that it costs 4m, it’s stunning to see. To me it keeps the dream alive that sports/super/hyper cars are the pinnacle of the automotive world, not overpriced faux-offroad things that engage in a continual escalation of size, weight and insecurity.
I am happy to just see the pictures and a few videos not because I believe I will ever own one or even see one, but because it’s beautiful. Hopefully this will spark a passion with some young person and create an impression that beauty and art have meaning.
I remember Gordan Murray’s T.25 city car and him saying how truly hard it was to do it and make it remotely affordable. Yes, making cars is hard.
“tourbillon is a horological term for the mechanism in a watch made from compressed fairy scat that gives a watch its monetary value”
Watchmaker here, trying to sop coffee out of my keyboard…
IT director here, no use, unless you drink your joe black. All the sugars are just going to gum up your keys
“tourbillon is a horological term for the mechanism in a watch made from compressed fairy scat that gives a watch its monetary value”
Watchmaker here, trying to sop coffee out of my keyboard…
IT director here, no use, unless you drink your joe black. All the sugars are just going to gum up your keys
I’d be more interested in a Bugatti Swatch than the Tourbillon. Or how about a Bugatti Swatch SISTEM51, made from only 51 parts and held together with a single screw. That would be seriously impressive!
The people’s Bugatti.
I can just imagine trying to put it all back together while holding a magnifying glass after the mishap where that single screw comes loose and falls out.
I’d be more interested in a Bugatti Swatch than the Tourbillon. Or how about a Bugatti Swatch SISTEM51, made from only 51 parts and held together with a single screw. That would be seriously impressive!
The people’s Bugatti.
I can just imagine trying to put it all back together while holding a magnifying glass after the mishap where that single screw comes loose and falls out.
Citroën kind of also did it before and actually put into production with the first gen C4. The steering wheel center stayed put and there was a row of dash lights and the rev counter on top of it, although it was more Casio than Patek Philippe.
1980 Citroen Karin was sort of similar as well.
Citroën kind of also did it before and actually put into production with the first gen C4. The steering wheel center stayed put and there was a row of dash lights and the rev counter on top of it, although it was more Casio than Patek Philippe.
1980 Citroen Karin was sort of similar as well.
Historical takedown! Preach, Jason!
Historical takedown! Preach, Jason!
Tourbillon is French for tornado aka things going round very quickly, I am wearing an old posh watch with a movement like this as I type,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUTXVl2B7dY
The best way to find stuff like this out it to choose ones grandparents very carefully
I’m almost out of grandparents, can I get a ~Cullinan~ mulligan?
Gorgeous, complicated movements.
There is a downside, I have worn this one for more than forty years and it still delights, ” what’s the time ?”
“sorry I was watching my watch, what was it you asked?”
Still happens. and I do get my hand held by some rather obsessional people, most of whom are not sexy young ladies, in fact I cannot ever remember an occasion when wearing the thing has added to my sex appeal, do not believe the adverts!
Watches, cars, and guitars. Three things naive men think adds to their physical attractiveness, but are mistaken as to the afflicted gender…
Add Axe body spray and decades ago, in Canada, GWG jeans, and beer…
Tourbillon is French for tornado aka things going round very quickly, I am wearing an old posh watch with a movement like this as I type,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUTXVl2B7dY
The best way to find stuff like this out it to choose ones grandparents very carefully
I’m almost out of grandparents, can I get a ~Cullinan~ mulligan?
Gorgeous, complicated movements.
There is a downside, I have worn this one for more than forty years and it still delights, ” what’s the time ?”
“sorry I was watching my watch, what was it you asked?”
Still happens. and I do get my hand held by some rather obsessional people, most of whom are not sexy young ladies, in fact I cannot ever remember an occasion when wearing the thing has added to my sex appeal, do not believe the adverts!
Watches, cars, and guitars. Three things naive men think adds to their physical attractiveness, but are mistaken as to the afflicted gender…
Add Axe body spray and decades ago, in Canada, GWG jeans, and beer…
I thought Speed Racer’s Mach 5 did it first…
FWIU that’s just a stock 1958 Edsel steering wheel with the Teletouch buttons repurposed.
I thought Speed Racer’s Mach 5 did it first…
FWIU that’s just a stock 1958 Edsel steering wheel with the Teletouch buttons repurposed.
The shifter-and-boot combo in the bespoke Boomerang interior looks a lot like a potted mushroom. Seventies fabulous!
And apropos to absolutely nothing: Someone should tell Bugatti that, yes, it’s cool that the “[s]elf-opening dihedral doors elegantly rise to preserve [the] aerodynamic integrity of the silhouette and canopy, while ensuring easy entry and exit,” such aerodynamic integrity isn’t all that important when the car is stationary, as it would be in almost all cases when someone is attempting to enter and/or exit it with ease.
I think that dihederal doors have a lower failure rate at high speed, essentially at high speed they are less likely to get sucked off. It is to do with stuff.
There’s a joke here about how nobody wants a car that decreases the likelihood of being sucked off, but I’m about as capable of landing that joke as I am affording this extremely nice Volkswagen.
Pointing out that it’s a Volkswagen helps explain why Torch is commenting on it.
I guess, but that makes far too much sense for me to consider.
The shifter-and-boot combo in the bespoke Boomerang interior looks a lot like a potted mushroom. Seventies fabulous!
And apropos to absolutely nothing: Someone should tell Bugatti that, yes, it’s cool that the “[s]elf-opening dihedral doors elegantly rise to preserve [the] aerodynamic integrity of the silhouette and canopy, while ensuring easy entry and exit,” such aerodynamic integrity isn’t all that important when the car is stationary, as it would be in almost all cases when someone is attempting to enter and/or exit it with ease.
I think that dihederal doors have a lower failure rate at high speed, essentially at high speed they are less likely to get sucked off. It is to do with stuff.
There’s a joke here about how nobody wants a car that decreases the likelihood of being sucked off, but I’m about as capable of landing that joke as I am affording this extremely nice Volkswagen.
Pointing out that it’s a Volkswagen helps explain why Torch is commenting on it.
I guess, but that makes far too much sense for me to consider.
What’s wild is that I made like 20 of those stick shift “boots” on that Maserati in 10th grade ceramics class. I should sue.
What’s wild is that I made like 20 of those stick shift “boots” on that Maserati in 10th grade ceramics class. I should sue.
I love everything about all of them!
I love everything about all of them!