Sic Transit Gloria Mundi

We recall the ill-fated 1987 revival of Bugatti and celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of the one car it produced, the extraordinary EB110 hypercar.

1991 Bugatti EB110 GT. Image: tcct.com

Bugatti is undoubtedly one of the most revered names in the automotive firmament. The company’s heyday was its first era, under the ownership of Ettore Bugatti, its eponymous founder. Bugatti was born in Milan in 1881, the son of a successful Art Nouveau furniture designer. Although he chose engineering as his profession, an innate understanding and appreciation of fine art was very much part of both his genetic inheritance and upbringing, with renowned sculptors, painters and architects in his extended family. This would manifest itself in a series of cars that were not only technically accomplished, but things of great beauty that are still held in the highest regard today.

Tragically, Bugatti’s eldest son and likely heir, Jean, died in 1939 at the age of just 30 in an automobile accident while testing a Bugatti Type 57 racing car. Bugatti’s wife, Barbara, died in 1944 and, although he remarried in 1946, Bugatti died just a year later. Without a capable successor at the helm, the company foundered and was eventually purchased for its aircraft parts business in 1963.

The Bugatti name was bought by Italian businessman and entrepreneur, Romano Artioli(1), in 1987. Artioli formed a new company, Bugatti Automobili S.p.A. and built a factory in Campogalliano, a small town located 8km (5 miles) to the north-west of Modena(2) in Northern Italy. He wanted to revive the storied marque with a new flagship and hired automotive engineer Paolo Stanzani as Technical Director to lead the project. Stanzani had worked for Lamborghini from 1963 to 1975 and had been closely involved in the development of a succession of models from the Miura to the Countach, so was highly experienced in the type of car Artioli envisaged for Bugatti.

Artioli’s vision was not a supercar merely to compete with the flagship models from Ferrari and Lamborghini, but one that would comprehensively outperform them in power and torque, acceleration and maximum speed. It would be a hypercar and feature a rear mid-engine layout, a bespoke V12 engine, six-speed manual transmission and four-wheel-drive.

1992 Bugatti EB110 Super Sport. Image: robbreport.com

Artioli invited styling proposals for the new model, to be called the EB110, from Italdesign, Bertone, former Pininfarina designer Paolo Martin and former Bertone designer Marcello Gandini. The latter’s earlier work for Carrozzeria Bertone included the Lamborghini models engineered by Stanzani, so the two already had a good working relationship and it appeared that they might be the ideal pairing to lead the EB110 project.

Unfortunately, Artioli’s relationship with both Stanzani and Gandini became strained when Artioli disapproved of Stanzini’s design for a honeycomb aluminium chassis and disliked Gandini’s first styling proposal, which he regarded as rather brutal. The aluminium chassis was heavier than specified and hard-driven prototypes began to lose torsional rigidity, which had an adverse effect on handling.

Gandini refined the styling to a degree but, when Artioli insisted upon further changes, he demurred and quit the project. He was replaced, not by an automotive designer, but by an architect, Gianpaolo Benedini, whom Artioli had previously commissioned to design the new Bugatti factory in Campogalliano. Benedini retained Gandini’s overall design but rationalised the engine cooling ducts in the front end and replaced pop-up headlights with fixed units. The resulting design might not be conventionally beautiful, but it was certainly purposeful and even intimidating.

1991 Bugatti EB110 GT interior. Image: Bonhams.com

Fundamental disagreements over the chassis and other technical issues ultimately led to Stanzini’s departure from the project. He was replaced by Nicola Materazzi, who engaged French aeronautical company Aérospatiale to design and build a new carbon-fibre monocoque chassis which could achieve the required weight and torsional stiffness targets. Materazzi, working with engineers Oliviero Pedrazzi and Achille Bevini, developed and refined the engine design into something quite without precedent in the automotive industry.

The 3.5 litre engine had five valves per cylinder, four turbochargers and produced a maximum of 560bhp (418kW) of power at 8,000 rpm and 450 lb ft (610Nm) of torque at 4,200 rpm. These figures were enough to give the EB110 a claimed 0 to 62mph (100km/h) time of 3.5 seconds and a top speed of 212mph (342km/h). Despite these extraordinary performance figures, the car was intended for road use and came with the full complement of creature comforts that would be expected. It weighed 1,620kg (3,571 lbs) and sat on a wheelbase of 2,550mm (100½”). Overall length and width were 4,400mm (173¼”) and 1,940mm (76½”).

The EB110 GT was unveiled in Paris on 15th September 1991, exactly 110 years to the day after the birth of Ettore Bugatti, which explains the rather clinical and unevocative name chosen for the relaunch model. Six months later a more powerful and lighter SuperSport derivative was introduced. Carbon-fibre body panels reduced weight by 200kg (440lbs). Maximum power and torque were increased to 611bhp (456kW) at 8,250 rpm and 480 lb ft (651Nm) at 4,200 rpm. This reduced the claimed 0 to 62mph (100km/h) time to 3.3 seconds and increased top speed to 221mph (355km/h).

1992 Bugatti EB110 Super Sport. Image: supercars.net

Autocar magazine road-tested the EB110 GT in March 1994 in left-hand-drive form(3). The UK list price at that time was £285,500(4). The reviewer found the car to be surprisingly well suited to everyday driving, with a flexible engine that would pull cleanly from under 1,000rpm in top gear and “a driveline as tight as a drum and a [gear]shift, though meaty, that is cleaner and quicker than you could ever wish. Even the clutch isn’t viciously heavy”. Moreover, it was relatively economical, achieving around 20mpg (14.1 L/100km) on test, which was “5-10mpg more frugal than any other supercar” and “one of the few with a genuine 500-mile-plus range”.

The EB110 GT had very well-sorted suspension, and such good body control that “you end up wondering whether there is any corner of earth that the Bugatti can’t negotiate at 80mph”. Stopping was not an issue, thanks to “unbeatable race-spec 332mm brakes”. The ride quality was the best of any supercar the reviewer had driven.

The car’s only serious drawback was a relatively cramped cabin, and no luggage space other than a bespoke suitcase that fitted behind the seats. If installed, this caused legroom issues for taller drivers. In summary, the EB110 was praised for “setting spanking new standards for ride and agility among supercars and offering similarly delicious rewards for the ultimate enthusiast”. It was also the most “friendly and easy thing this side of the Honda NSX”.

High praise indeed, but buyers were still hard to find in the early 1990’s and Artioli had stretched Bugatti’s finances to breaking point with his money no object approach to developing the EB110. A second model, the EB112 luxury saloon, was shown in concept form at the Geneva motor show in March 1993. In August of the same year, having failed to find a larger automotive industry partner, Artioli bought Lotus Cars from General Motors in a futile attempt at diversification.

1993 Bugatti EB112 Concept. Image: supercars.net

Just two years later, it was all over. In September 1995, Bugatti filed for bankruptcy and shuttered the Campogalliano factory. A total of just 128 EB110 production cars had been completed, 96 GT and 32 SS models, while the EB112 was stillborn.

Bugatti would, of course, rise again, this time in the safe and hugely well-resourced hands of the Volkswagen Group, which bought the marque in 1998. The EB110 defined the useable hypercar template for the Veyron and its successor, the Chiron. Given the limited resources at Artioli’s disposal, the EB110 should be remembered as an extraordinary technical and engineering tour de force, if not a sales and financial success.

 

(1) Artioli was the official importer and distributor for General Motors vehicles in Italy.

(2) The area around Modena was home to Ferrari, Lamborghini, Maserati and DeTomaso. It attracted a workforce highly skilled in the design and construction of supercars, so was an ideal location for the new Bugatti operation.

(3) The EB110 was never produced in RHD form.

(4) Around £488k (US $678k) in today’s money

 

 

Author: Daniel O'Callaghan

Shut-line obsessive...Hates rudeness, loves biscuits.

26 thoughts on “Sic Transit Gloria Mundi”

  1. Good morning to all our readers and apologies for the lateness in publishing today’s piece, which resulted from a technical hitch. Hope you enjoy the piece.

  2. Bertone was involved in the project since the beginning, along with Lamborghini and Stanzani. The lines of his proposal were recycled quite unchanged for the (1995?) concept Lotus Emotion, while the Giugiaros’one, the ID90 had the typical Italdesign Nazca_esque lines of the nineties. At the time the press said that the coachbuilders proposal were too far from the Bugatti’s visual identity, so I always found quite strange they finally choose the Gandini proposal, which was screaming Lamborghini from every angle.

  3. I just know that at least two DTW stalwarts will tell me all that is wrong with that EB112 but I don’t care – I love it!

  4. The EB110’s face is ugly in a good way – very distinct and memorable.

    The EB112 looks pretty good from above, but very disjointed and unharmonious from any other angle.
    Notice also the hated “Lexus” rear door shutline…

  5. Hi Daniel,
    Yet another excellent piece. Thanks!
    What I want to say about Artioli’s venture is “Well tried.” But…
    Yet I always found the EB110 design extremely awkward, lacking any class.
    OTOH I loved at first sight the EB112 and the EB118. I would love to read a piece on them because my information is very small. Quite a while ago I saw a TV programme about a man living in Monaco who owns (or owned) an EB112 and uses it (or used it) as a daily driver. The little detail I don’t like though is the horseshoe that seems to be added just for branding but makes no sense.
    Nick

    1. That man is Gildo Pastor Pallanca, who raced with the EB110 in the IMSA championship and established the world record on ice at the wheel of a regular EB110 SS in 1995.

  6. A clergyman who runs an EB112 and has a home in Monaco?

    He’ll be telling us the Lourdes money was “just resting in his account”…

    1. Haha! Another memorable quote from one of DTW’s favourite points of reference.

      I would, however, assume that in this case ‘Pastor’ was/is his given name rather than his occupation, as in Pastor Maldonado, the one-time Venezuelian Formula 1 driver who mainly crashed his way through five seasons, winning one race in 2012.

    2. Dougal: A Formula 1 driver? Was Pastor Maldonado a racing driver?
      John: Emm, he was yes. Why do you think he wore the uniform?
      Dougal: Oh I thought he was just having a laugh.

  7. Good morning, Daniel. Another excellent read. I can’t make up my mind on the EB110. Obviously I’ve never driven one, but judging by the Autocar’s test it really seems like a truly excellent machine. I never liked the way it looked, though. For me it always had a whiff of a kit car about it. Harsh words I know. I wonder if anyone else here has the same reservation about it looks?

    1. Hi Freerk. I know what you mean about the EB110’s appearance and had similar reservations. However, the sheer competence of the engineering and Artioli’s achievement makes it easy for me to excuse its slightly ‘homespun’ appearance. The Veyron, despite looking much more ‘professional’, is still brutish rather than beautiful and its silhouette is very similar to the EB110, indicating how ground-breaking the latter was.

  8. Four proposals:

    1. Paolo Martin 2. Giorgetto Giugiaro 3. Nuccio Bertone 4. Marcello Gandini

    1. gooddog: Given the unlikelihood that Nuccio Bertone ever actively ‘styled’ a car in his life, I think we can safely rule him out of the equation. Not that this means he had zero input, he may well have had a practiced eye and is likely to have been a significant decision maker when it came to which designs would be chosen to go forward to a client. But on balance, I think Deschamps a more likely candidate for the Bertone proposal.

      Regarding Paolo Martins’ proposed scheme; this from the man who brought us the Modulo (and the 130 Coupé!), it seems a mystifyingly ill-conceived design – especially for a putative Bugatti.

    2. Interesting proposals. Number 4 looks a bit too ‘normal’ for me, like a mix of Corvette and Honda NSX. Number 3 is quite interesting proportion-wise, and I’m not sure if there’s actualy a gap behind the front bumper. Don’t know if I like that, but it’s interesting at least. Number 2 looks like it was taken for the final model, but brutally disfigured in the productionizing process. Number 1… well, I don’t know what to make with it. I like the idea that they show a modern interpretation of the typical Bugatti 8-spoke wheels, but the execution looks rather cheap. The wheels of Nr. 3 play this reminiscence in a much less obvious, but better accomplished way.

    3. In terms of the four original proposals, what ended up going into production is actually a wonderful piece of car – it could have been worse.

      It is a great pity that the EB 112 never went into series production. In the right colour, it would be a nice alternative to our Lancia Y as a daliy driver – well, we wouldn’t have our own flat and nothing to eat, but there’s always something…

    4. Not 100% into the roof though find the Second proposal by Giugiaro, followed by the Four from Gandini and Third from Bertone.

  9. Here’s a twenty minute video showing some enigmatic shots of the factory, cars and some of the leading players. It’s in Italian but has legible subtitles.

  10. Ah, the EB110… such a great car. Part of a bit of a flurry of supercars developed in the late ‘eighties following the success of the Ferrari F40 and others, and introduced in the early ‘nineties… right after a recession hit (the XJ220 is another example). None of these were very succesful, but they did produce some interesting models. Cizeta, anyone?

    The EB110 certainly isn’t conventionally beautiful, but as a piece of engineering from a newly established company, it is hugely impressive. As I understand it, Artioli’s Bugatti tried increasingly complicated financial structures to keep afloat in the aforementioned recession and finally succumbed, like so many before and since. Interesting tidbit (or am I pre-empting something here?): when Artioli bought Lotus, he gave them the funds and opportunity to develop a completely new car: type 111, or as it is better known, the Elise… named after Artioli’s granddaughter. Derivatives of this car have kept Lotus afloat since then, so that’s another legacy of the man.

  11. Find the Bugatti EB112 prototype very attractive except for the front grille that spoils it, the later Bugatti EB118 prototype corrects the front yet loses something from the different rear tail-lights.

  12. Thank you for this article Daniel.

    At the time I never took an interest in this car – crazy price, and looks were not to my taste.

    Today the price seems reasonable in the context of several million pound hypercars on the market, and the looks have weathered well.

    My prejudice blinded me to the shear competence of the car, the performance (I’m very much including the relative economy here) stands up very well today so this really was an very impressive first offering from Artoli.

    Not sure where the wooden dashboard landed from though!

    1. Good morning Rick, and thank you for your kind words. Like you, I paid little attention to the EB110 af the time it was launched, unimpressed by its rather blunt appearance. It was only when I started to research this piece that I realised what a towering achievement it was, especially given the limited resources of Artioli and his colleagues. It was 90% of the Veyron for, who knows, 5% of the latter’s development budget?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: