FUCK TONY STEWART. He can rot in jail for this shit.

This situation does not look like it will stand the test of time. Needs better hose fit.

M3. Orange. 6MT. CLOTH INTERIOR (ZOMG WTF?). Adaptive suspension. Harmon Kardon. Nothing else...save wheel money for actual race wheels/tires and save the stock wheels for snows... $66k out the door.

Sorry...but if I've got THREE MILLION DOLLARS to spend on a car, I'm getting something bespoke from Ferrari, Koenigsegg or McLaren. This Bugatti, to the casual observer of expensive cars, looks exactly like all the other Bugattis...which isn't much of a compliment in the first place. Good to know the interior is…

The problems are riiiiiiiight.....about.......here...... CP.

Yes, the doors are a benefit, but my kids can work the Suburban doors just fine. They're not as hard to deal with as the doors on a sedan because they are shaped like a rectangle...tall and short. The real party trick with the Suburban is squeezing into normal parking spots...it's a joke. The thing is huge. But…

So do you have a minivan then? Or are you just supporting them because your rational mind says that they are the better vehicle? I agreed with that stance until I actually went out to buy one...drove both...and that was that.

Say what now? Please do educate me, as this is the first I've ever heard of this. They have flat load floors, and car suspension components. Are you talking about Sprinter-type vans? I don't think that's what we're comparing here....

I agree that the Suburban isn't really more *useful* than the T&C...my in-laws have one, and we have the other, actually. But imagining driving the T&C just doesn't make me grin. That said, I smile every time I see the Suburban in my driveway...even thought it's my wife's car.

So true. And if you try a REAL SUV before buying the minivan, it's nearly impossible to go back. I'm talking about one on a truck chassis. It's not the same "jump" to go from a minivan to a crossover...those are just as sucktastic in my opinion. Go big or go home.

I'm aware of that...but in fairness, it's NOT entirely an Exige. It's modified to fit the motor/suspension and achieve Hennessey's aero needs. So in that sense, they had an opportunity to make changes, and didn't. In this case, they are using either Viper or Corvette headlights right out of the box...like an RV.

This car is a seriously derivative design. It's not quite the robbery from Lotus the last one was, but I see Corvette, P1, LF-A, and Viper at just a quick glance. Why? Get your own designers Hennessey and take a page out of Gordon Murray's playbook!

I like everything EXCEPT the flying pillars. Maybe it's just from that front angle...they are distracting.

HOW is there not a lockout for driving with the bucket UP at anything more than maybe 2 mph? I realize that you need to be able to move forward to dump the load, but you don't do that at 60 mph...this is insane and so avoidable, one would think.

Holy shit that thing is tiny!!! I've seen them in pictures for years, but never driving around other cars for scale...

Our model of Suburban (2012) had an option to have a backup camera with a screen inset into the rear view mirror. It was awful, completely useless, and distracting. It took up valuable space on the mirror, and the resolution was completely unhelpful. If you were checking to see if there was a kid's bike behind the…

Nope - going to need to Google what that is....

I actually like the design. They just need to put a large V8 under the hood. LSX.

OK - I agree. Same with the Fisker Karma. But why so tall with a huge space for an inline 8? I have no issue with the length, or general "cab backward" design, but just don't see the point in aesthetic quotation like this.

I get that. But I think that truly elegant designs succeed on both levels. Functional efficacy only magnifies the aesthetic beauty.