Bugatti EB 110
The Bugatti EB 110 is a mid-engine sports car initially conceived by Paolo Stanzani in the mid 1980s and produced by Bugatti Automobili S.p.A. from 1991 until 1995, when the company was liquidated. The model restarted the brand's presence in the automobile industry after a hiatus of nearly 40 years.
In the period from 1992 to 1995, the EB 110 competed against cars such as the Lamborghini Diablo, Jaguar XJ220, Ferrari F40, Ferrari F50, and the McLaren F1.
139 examples were built, plus a small number of post-production cars which were completed after the bankruptcy. The last one was built by Dauer Sportwagen in 2002 and one additional unfinished example was completed in 2019. It was the only production model made by Romano Artioli's Italian incarnation of Bugatti.
History
Discussions of a new supercar had taken place between Ferruccio Lamborghini and Paolo Stanzani at the end of 1984 during telephone calls and at the Turin Auto Show.Stanzani warned Lamborghini that developing a new car was increasingly tough financially and that the engine development was a possible task but the bodywork would be resource intensive. He suggested that Nuccio Bertone could provide help with the bodywork design and manufacture. Bertone was involved in early talks for a collaboration on the exterior design but declined to continue the discussions after noting the conflict of interest that the potential majority investor, Autoexpo, had in its distribution contracts of Ferrari cars in Germany. Jean-Marc Borel established the holding companies together with Artioli's lawyer. On 11 May 1987 Autoexpo paid 7,500,00 French Francs to Messier Hispano Bugatti for the purchase of the Bugatti brand and on 14 October 1987 Bugatti Automobili S.p.A. was founded.
Stanzani, minority shareholder in Bugatti Automobili was chosen as company Technical Director and sole Managing Director thanks to his career experience with Lamborghini vehicles including the Miura, Countach, Espada, Urraco, Jarama, Jalpa.
Initial development
Stanzani had given the new supercar the code FL12, shorthand notation for 'Ferruccio Lamborghini 12-cylinder' and its development started in 1986 on the engine and chassis, with work being led by Stanzani and design/development carried out by Oliviero Pedrazzi and the engineers/draughtsmen at Tecnostile. The trio of Oliviero Pedrazzi, Achille Bevini and Tiziano Benedetti had worked on the Lamborghini Miura chassis and engine development as well as the Lamborghini Urraco and Lamborghini Countach, a successful Stanzani-conceived car that had carried Lamborghini through times of financial ups and down in the worldwide economies. Benedetti, Bevini and Pedrazzi had subsequently established their own company which was known to Ferruccio Lamborghini and Paolo Stanzani who were involved in early talks with Romano Artioli. Tecnostile was involved in several projects, including the transversely mounted V16 engine of the Cizeta for Claudio Zampolli.During the early phases of the project, development was entirely carried out by Tecnostile at their workshops in via Don Milani #102, Modena. Pedrazzi focused on engine and chassis design, Bevini on bodywork and Benedetti on relations with suppliers. Amongst the employees was Maurizio Reggiani who had previously worked as engine designer in Maserati.
Several employees from Lamborghini joined the newborn Bugatti project on the basis of their trust in Stanzani. One of these was Lamborghini test driver Loris Bicocchi who was employee #7 in Campogalliano. He would patiently wait one year before beginning early testing of the EB 110 prototype.
Engine and chassis
Engine and chassis development was led by Stanzani and design/drawing was done by Pedrazzi as leader of the engineers and draughtsmen in Tecnostile. Pedrazzi had experience of engine design since his work in Ferrari under the supervision of Bizzarrini and in Lamborghini.The power would come from a 'small' displacement V12 engine, with a 3500 cc swept volume that mirrored the requirements of the Formula 1 rules of 1987. The naturally aspirated form did not produce sufficient torque and power for a supercar and Stanzani had envisaged the usage of turbocharging. The choice of engine configuration, size and turbocharging was for technical, marketing and strategic reasons. The choice of four turbochargers was primarily due to the expected lag that two larger turbochargers might have had.
The chassis utilised a planar material made by two aluminium skins separated by aluminium honeycomb, all bonded by epoxy glue. The sheets were cut to dimension and then glued and riveted to form a 3-dimensional shape for the chassis. The choice of carbon skins sandwiching aluminium or Nomex honeycomb was not adopted by Stanzani due to the lack of experience in manufacture and repair in Italy. Furthermore the aluminium-aluminium material was more cost-effective.
Styling and early prototype testing
Several designers received copies of the chassis drawings in order to propose styling for the bodywork: Paolo Martin, Giorgetto Giugiaro, Bertone and Marcello Gandini. Bertone proposed a design prepared by Marc Deschamps but soon after lost interest in the project. That same design would be presented again as Bertone Lotus Emotion.Giugiaro's Bugatti ID90 prototype was presented some time later at the 1990 Turin Car Show.
Martin's proposal was avantgarde but rejected by the Bugatti management.
Gandini gained wider acceptance by being well known to Stanzani and having worked on the styling of many successful performance cars: Lamborghini Miura, Lancia Stratos Zero and the production Lancia Stratos, Alfa Romeo Carabo, Alfa Romeo Montreal, Cizeta-Moroder V16T. He would design the Lamborghini Diablo soon after.
Initial prototypes based on Gandini's design were bodied by carrozzeria Ilas; these began testing in 1991.
Restyling
Bugatti's President was not happy with Gandini's angular design language incorporating a shovel nose and flared rear wheel arches. According to Gandini, Trucco and Stanzani, Artioli did not formally state his rejection of the original styling because he had in fact approved the 1:1 scale model. Later interviews with Giampaolo Benedini revealed more detail on the fact that Artioli had asked him to propose some alternative design ideas for the car to go into production.Artioli did not favour the aluminium honeycomb chassis proposed by Stanzani. Stanzani defended the choice of the aluminium-aluminium honeycomb chassis on the basis of being sufficiently stiff while being cost-effective and repairable. Artioli pushed for a carbon-aluminium chassis on the basis of his concern with safety and due to the likely popularity of carbon composite in cutting edge supercars of the future.
Gandini made a second iteration of the design with softer lines, revised front and rear lights, and subtly different proportions for the rear wheel arches – styling cues also visible in the Maserati Chubasco of 1990. The second Gandini design replaced the network of cooling ducts on the bonnet with ducts in the front bumper and at the outer flanks of the two large fixed headlamps which replaced the early prototype's pop-up units. The scissor doors, the large windshield, and the side window design were retained. This design was only possible for a Bugatti once Maserati had decided not to construct a supercar and therefore declined to take on the Chubasco proposal. The first Gandini prototype styling and the restyling were separated by approximately 2 years. Artioli, however, still was not fully convinced of the exterior design and wanted further detail design changes which Gandini refused to make because they would alter its DNA: for example the shape of the front intake and the placement of the Bugatti 'shoe-horse'. Artioli thus tasked Gianpaolo Benedini to make the requested changes. Benedini made small changes by placing a very small 'shoe-horse' at the front air intake and took responsibility of the interior design together with Laurens van den Acker of Design System.
Change of chassis material
Artioli had from the beginning been against the use of the aluminium and aluminium honeycomb chassis material. He based his decision on the fact that racing drivers had lost their life with such a chassis ; he was also concerned that the material was soft and the skins and honeycomb would separate on slow speed impacts of the chassis against kerbs and other road objects.Stanzani asked quotes from Aerospatiale for the supply of carbon-composite material to understand the benefits versus costs. He discussed at length with Aerospatiale the technical details and critical aspects of the chassis. The French company presented proposals for aluminium skins with aluminium honeycomb core and an alternative with carbon-fibre skins and honeycomb core. Stanzani viewed the carbon-aluminium quote as financially not viable for Bugatti Automobili and reported this to Artioli. After Stanzani's departure, further meetings were held between Dario Trucco and Oliviero Pedrazzi and the staff from Aerospatiale in the period of 4-5 September 1990, where Aerospatiale discussed the usage of the composite material in aircraft and certain details pertaining to manufacturing and crash impact resistance.
At a later stage tests were done on the torsional stiffness of the chassis in their two respective materials. The composite material proved stiffer but according to Trucco and Pedrazzi also heavier and significantly more expensive.
The carbon fibre chassis kept the same dimensions and panel split lines as designed by Pedrazzi in the original aluminium and aluminium honeycomb design, giving the car improved stiffness which allowed it to better achieve its targets of ride and handling. The chassis consisted of separate panels that were bonded and riveted together to remove the need for very large autoclaves.