Gumpert Apollo news - Hit the ceiling - 2007

You know that old chestnut about F1 cars generating enough downforce to be able to drive on the ceiling?

Well, this theory so beguiled former Audi engineer Roland Gumpert that he used it as the guiding principle on which to build his supercar.

This is the daftly named Gumpert Apollo, the latest car to come knocking on the door of the exclusive supercar club.

A road-legal racer, the Apollo is designed with downforce in mind. Weighing in at just 1,100kg thanks to a carbon-fibre monocoque, the Apollo generates 1,500kg of downforce at 200mph - theoretically enabling it to drive upside down. We're not volunteering to test that theory though.

The speed comes from a twin-turbo version of the Audi RS4's 4.2-litre V8, producing 650bhp and 627lb ft of torque.

That's good for a top speed of 224mph, which would presumably be even higher if it wasn't for all the downforce.

There's more evidence of Audi's influence - though the German company didn't play a direct role in the Apollo's development, it does have subsequent patents on the car's development - in the gearbox: a six-speed sequential dual-clutch unit.

And although the cabin may look barer than a Page 3 model, Gumpert has found room for such creature comforts as satnav, air conditioning and a rear-mounted reversing camera.

Gumpert says the Apollo is production-ready, with starting prices in the region of £190,000. The only problem is that Tom Ford drove a pre-production Apollo almost two years ago, at which point Gumpert said the first models would be on the road by the end of 2005.

But although there are reports of a few Apollos knocking around Monaco and the like, we've still not been invited to drive one. It's enough to drive you up the wall... and onto the ceiling.

What do you think?

Want to comment on this?

JOHNNY_NITRO commented on this article

at 09:24 am on 04 March 2009

is this a better car than a bugatti veyron?

Link to this comment

Report this comment

You are about to report a comment for breaking our Code of Conduct.

Please note, we will not remove a post just because you disagree with what is being said.

This form can only be used for reporting a comment. If you want to contact us please go to our contact us page.

I want to report this comment for:

Defamation, copyright infringement, incitement to commit a crime

Abuse, offensive comments, attacks

Commercial misuse

Other (please specify below)

Use this box to give us any specific details:

krazeecain commented on this article

at 07:32 am on 10 May 2010

The thing that bothers me about this driving upside down theory is that, although there may be enough down force to lift the car up at 200 mph, there'll no longer be enough traction on the wheels to maintain such speed. Should this feat actually be attempted, the car would make it about half-way up the side of the tunnel, then start spinning the tires, which would probably result in quite an accident indeed. lol

Ska-Boom commented on this article

at 02:01 pm on 08 March 2011

The lose of traction due to the lose of downforce created by the weight of the car is a good point. But at 120 mph a F1 car's downforce to weight ratio is 2 to 1 and should increase with speed from there. So, is the overkill of down force enough to provide the required downforce for traction? I would think so. But, outlandish claims require outlandish evidence. Hence, I tripple-dog dare TG to prove the possibility of inverted driving, else refrain henceforth from ever uttering such non-sense again! (Please use a F1 Ferrari, model year 2011 for testing purposes.) Ska-Boom