Why am I even doing this? Hot Wheels Bugatti Chiron vs Veyron

Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s Father. Bruce Willis is actually dead. Tyler Durden and Brad Pitt are the same person. I am Keyser Soze. The Hot Wheels Chiron is better than the Hot Wheels Veyron.

Sorry to give the ending away before I even start, but I didn’t want to totally pull the rug out from under you.

But we are going to do full in-depth comparison of the Chiron, produced by Hot Wheels in 2019 and releasing just now in the N Case, with the Veyron, which was introduced in 2004 and retired 6 years later. We will discuss every angle, compare the craftsmanship and approach of each, and use a scientifically proven method to weigh the pros and cons to come up with a clear winner.

Let’s start this arduous and detail-driven comparison with a side-by-side photo:

Oh holy hell. Nevermind.

The Hot Wheels has a very interesting history, going from pegwarmer to must-have only after the casting was retired a few years ago. It is hard to pinpoint what exactly caused the run by collectors, but as more people saw others pursuing the model, they decided they needed to as well, and prices skyrocketed. The Walmart exclusive in satin red, pictures above, and the Speed Machines release became the two most sought-after.

What got lost in that frenzy was how bad the casting was. Yes, it is technically a Veyron Concept, but still all the lines were wrong. It was great that Hot Wheels did the Veyron, they just didn’t do it well.

I have no idea why the casting was retired, but it thankfully was. And while the Chiron is a totally different car, it is a welcome do-over. And boy, sitting is side-by-side with the Veyron just emphasizes that much more how off the Veyron really was.

So there is a your surprise ending. The Chiron wins.

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “Why am I even doing this? Hot Wheels Bugatti Chiron vs Veyron

  1. I have the same feelings for the Buick Grand National casting as I do for the veryron casting. After getting the Racing Champions Grand National the difference is night and day in terms of the quality of the castings. It is just the way it goes in the world of diecast.

  2. I’ve already expressed my opinion on the Chiron in yesterday’s post so I won’t repeat that. As for the Veyron, there’s no other way of saying it but it’s pretty horrible. Sits too high, proportions are off but the biggest issue is that the wheels sit way inside the well that it looks like a kit-car. Compared to that, the Chiron is in a different league.

    I think the Veyron should now be handed over to Matchbox. They have the ability to nail the casting. Mattel has the Bugatti license, Matchbox NEEDS to do a hypercar, the Veyron is old enough… it all adds up. Matchbox, are you listening?

  3. Also a perfect encapsulation of the real thing, too. About the only knock against the Chiron is the flat, truncated back end, which kinda breaks the flow of the car. Otherwise the Chiron has the clear, more focused vision, all thanks to that line at the side. It just looks so much better than the Veyron, in real life and toy life.

    That said, Siku did make a Chiron, too. That seems like a fairer comparison. I challenge you to find that and shoot it here.

  4. Keep in mind that the Veyron casting was designed in 2002. With advances in technology, the ability to refine a casting is undeniably better. Back then, the “first shot” was the first time a designer could see their casting in real life. These require tool setup and time/money to ship from Malaysia. Now, designers have access to the 3D Printer at the design center where I venture to guess (educated, of course) that they can print off their design and gain real perspective on how their design will look as a Hot Wheels car. They can then go back same/next day and refine those lines, edges, etc.. So its no knock on the designer of the Veyron, its just that Ryu did an amazing job utilizing his skills and the technology at hand.

    1. I am aware of that. Things have indeed got better and easier nowadays but then if Hot Wheels could get other cars right at that time (Ferrari F50, Enzo, Lamborghini Murcielago, Ford GT90, Lotus Esprit, Jaguar XJ220, Porsche GT1 etc) then why did the Veyron end up so bad? I am not complaining, just wondering.

      1. In my opinion, those cars you listed are not done with the precision we have today. The Murcielago casting sits high, has super thick a & b pillars, and the casting often has extra flashing in odd places. One of my favorites: the Jaguar XJ220 is a nice casting, but held to today’s standards, is a little rough. There was an attempt about a year or two ago to clean it (and the Viper RT/10) up by hardening some body lines and edges, and exaggerated the definition of some of the features, but it still falls short of the level of detail in say, this new Chiron.

      2. I know the cars I mentioned are not perfect but by they are good by that time’s standard and good enough even today. They’re definitely much better than the Veyron.

  5. Nice comparison congrats. 👍 to me both of them are winners.👍To me just about everything out there in hotwheels are winners.👍

  6. aahhh no
    I have the siku Veyron and it is better than the hot wheels but its a “1;55 scale” which when I ordered it I hoped the car being small would scale down no such luck.

  7. I’m a bit shocked by all the Veyron “hate”. It was and still is one of my favorite models from that era. The only problem I had at the time was it was a bit of a challenge to find an example that had a properly aligned grill. I do not dispute the 15-year newer Chiron casting is the better executed of the two, but I still feel the Veyron was a beautiful (grill alignment aside) casting for its time. Looking around the internet, I see some photos that show the Veyron with a narrow track and large wheel-well gap, but plenty of other photos where the stance looks fine. My early red & black example looks exceptionally good. It may be a matter of the particular release, wheels used, body color and viewing/photo angle.

Leave a Reply