The design for the Chiron that Bugatti rejected

We are saying nothing new if, once again, we state that the Bugatti Chiron is a spectacular car. And it is so for its design, its engineering, its exclusivity and, in part, for coming from the brand it comes from and replacing the model it replaces, the Bugatti Veyron.

We first saw it at the Geneva Motor Show and since then we have been able to see it at various events such as the Goodwood Festival of Speed and the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Without a doubt, it is one of the most anticipated cars of recent years.

Bugatti and its designers have a tough act to follow. With the Veyron they created a car as special as it was spectacular in mechanical and aesthetic terms. This has its pros and cons, because if you create a car that everyone desires, it means you have hit the bullseye, but will you achieve it again a few years later? If it fails to surpass, or at least match, its predecessor, most people will consider it a failure and a disappointment.

The 1,500 horsepower emanating from its W16 engine also doesn’t go unnoticed The cover that concealed the latest supercar from the French marque belonging to VAG was removed, and we were able to see, in person, the final lines of the car that had kept the motoring press talking for so many months.

The main lines were not very evolutionary compared with those of its predecessor, the Veyron, keeping also the central air intake at the front that so characterises the French brand, and much of the side profile. But, despite keeping the main lines, the features have changed. For instance, the front headlights give a completely new look, enhancing the sense of width of the track, while the rear design exercise is something never seen before, with that very thin horizontal line that houses the rear lighting.

Now, several months after its first unveiling, an image has emerged of how the front of the luxurious Chiron could have looked. We are talking about the image in the header, where a much more aggressive front end appears than the one that was finally unveiled. Poorer aerodynamic penetration and, perhaps, a fear of being too aggressive led the designers to ultimately choose not to take as many risks at the front, which is always the main image, as at the rear. The lighting elements are barely visible, and everything is summed up in three large air intakes.

Too risky, or does the current one strike you as somewhat bland? Tastes differ, but from here we believe that, at least aesthetically, the one that finally arrived in Geneva was the more successful of the two designs.

Source | Motor1