Koenigsegg Joins Teamspeed
May 29, 2013 | 08:39 AM
#181
Teamspeed Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 51
I prefer Bugatti so that moron got it right there. You can't compare a Veyron with a Agera because they are on different planets in backing and refinement. Who cares if one is faster because that is besides the point. The same is true for Pagani, they are still mom and pops. This should not have been news to this bozo though when he opted to have a customized car made for him from a small maker. His fabrication and embellishment of facts to cover his unreasonable expectations are plain stupidity, underlined by his eagerness to call a black man posing with his car a "****ing monkey". A stupidity you feverishly support just to get at Koenigsegg!!!
http://www.****************/supercar...nco-idiot.html
Sincerely, GTFO.
May 29, 2013 | 08:43 AM
#182
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,406
Man.... Do i have to draw everything for you??? You need to seriously become more smart and aware of things! Personal life=girlfriend! Did you understand or do you want me to start doing the drawings?
May 29, 2013 | 08:51 AM
#183
McLaren Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,578
From: California, USA
I am not a Koenigsegg hater - I only take issue with their poor management of the delivery of this car. Outside of this situation you would struggle to find one instance of me saying anything bad about the company or its products.
>8^)
ER
PS: Quit changing the subject.
PPS: exRockstar - I do not require a drawing of an ugly girl, but thank you for your offer.
>8^)
ER
PS: Quit changing the subject.
PPS: exRockstar - I do not require a drawing of an ugly girl, but thank you for your offer.
Last edited by Peloton25; May 29, 2013 at 08:56 AM.
May 29, 2013 | 11:47 AM
#184
Teamspeed Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 527
I'm going to preface these comments by saying I'm an unabashed Koenigsegg fan, a fact I have never hidden from.
Given what little I know about automotive paint, the most likely source of the bubbling as pictured is contaminants on the base layer. Grease or in particular silicone residue will cause paint to lift in this manner. It's highly unlikely that heat of any natural temperature you will find on earth would cause paint bubbling. Such a flaw on any factory-delivered car is unacceptable, much less at this price point.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
The big issue here apparently was that the car was not certified to be U.S.-legal in the stated timeframe. As far as I can tell, this is the only real misstep on Koenigsegg's part. On the thread in question Jens acknowledged that this work is still ongoing.
Given the complexities of U.S. regulations, it's difficult enough even for a small manufacturer such as Ferrari to achieve certification, much less a builder of what amounts to a series of one-offs. The certification being undertaken for the MY2013 Agera series will apply to a whopping two cars. It's much easier for Bugatti or Lamborghini to accomplish this type of work, backed as they are by the resources of Volkswagen. Koenigsegg operates much more leanly because they have to in order to survive.
It's a lot easier for Bugatti to certify the 2013 Veyron because it's largely unchanged from the 2006 Veyron that first achieved compliance. For another example, Lamborghini will have had a much easier go at certifying the two U.S. Venenos and Ralph Lauren's lone U.S.-spec Reventon Roadster, as they can simply piggyback on the certifications of the Aventador and Murcielago upon which they are both respectively based.
Koenigsegg has not certified a car for U.S. sale since the CCX series of MY2008. There were 11 of those U.S.-spec cars built, not all of which ended up making it to these shores. That certification will be of little help for the Agera, since the engines are quite different. Add in the now mandatory stability control systems and it's a bit easier to understand why it's taking little Koenigsegg longer than expected to certify these two U.S.-spec cars.
For comparison, U.S. customers still await the first U.S.-legal Huyara, nearly a year and a half after its debut here, despite Pagani working directly with AMG for the Huayra's engines. It took Mosler two years to certify the 2004 MT900S, and that used and off-the-shelf GM LS6. So these things are hard for independent, boutique manufacturers.
Should Koenigsegg have known better? Maybe. Should BC have expected such? Possibly. But he was told it would be ready, and it wasn't. This certainly is an error in judgement on the part of Koenigsegg, but I'm not entirely sure it's worthy of the vitriol BC has expressed. To me, given all of the above, it should have been a foreseeable possibility.
Really, I'm not sure how much better Koenigsegg could have handled it. They took the car back from him, and then some. None of us are privy to the arrangement made there. But I've read the whole thread, and what really sets BC off is that Jens makes a statment regarding the Agera's U.S.-legal status. BC takes this as a break in the agreed-upon silence regarding the situation, but it was BC who sets the ball rolling on page 1.
A member asks why there are so many Koenigseggs for sale at the moment, in a thread that has nothing to do with the car in question. BC chimes in that "there are probably lots of reasons" and finishes it off with a little whistling smilie. If ever there was a post designed to deliberately elicit a repsonse under the veil of not saying anything, that was it. Everyone on the forum had followed the build of his car, and could clearly see that it no longer appears on his signature as an owned car. Questions about what happened were inevitable.
You can argue that Koenigsegg's reply overstepped the bounds of acceptability in this case, and I would hear that. Certainly Jens might have been better served by not saying BC was happy with the car if he was not. But I for one do not think that the attack that BC commences was warranted. As I read it his main issue is that the car was not ready when promised; but then he goes on and on about the quality of the build and how it drives and such. All of these things might very well be true, I don't know. I've never had the opportunity to find out, and likely never will. But if it was my million dollars, I think I might have asked to spend at least a few minutes with a sample of the car I was about to buy, so that I knew exactly what I was getting. Maybe had BC done so he would have decided it was not up to his standards, and not ordered one. Not every car is for everybody; no harm, no foul.
So yes, as Peloton says the delivery of this car was bungled a bit, and you could argue that the PR was a bit amiss. It's an unfortunate mix of unmet expectations, but I find it hard to see any deliberate wrongdoing on Koenigsegg's part in this case.
Given what little I know about automotive paint, the most likely source of the bubbling as pictured is contaminants on the base layer. Grease or in particular silicone residue will cause paint to lift in this manner. It's highly unlikely that heat of any natural temperature you will find on earth would cause paint bubbling. Such a flaw on any factory-delivered car is unacceptable, much less at this price point.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
The big issue here apparently was that the car was not certified to be U.S.-legal in the stated timeframe. As far as I can tell, this is the only real misstep on Koenigsegg's part. On the thread in question Jens acknowledged that this work is still ongoing.
Given the complexities of U.S. regulations, it's difficult enough even for a small manufacturer such as Ferrari to achieve certification, much less a builder of what amounts to a series of one-offs. The certification being undertaken for the MY2013 Agera series will apply to a whopping two cars. It's much easier for Bugatti or Lamborghini to accomplish this type of work, backed as they are by the resources of Volkswagen. Koenigsegg operates much more leanly because they have to in order to survive.
It's a lot easier for Bugatti to certify the 2013 Veyron because it's largely unchanged from the 2006 Veyron that first achieved compliance. For another example, Lamborghini will have had a much easier go at certifying the two U.S. Venenos and Ralph Lauren's lone U.S.-spec Reventon Roadster, as they can simply piggyback on the certifications of the Aventador and Murcielago upon which they are both respectively based.
Koenigsegg has not certified a car for U.S. sale since the CCX series of MY2008. There were 11 of those U.S.-spec cars built, not all of which ended up making it to these shores. That certification will be of little help for the Agera, since the engines are quite different. Add in the now mandatory stability control systems and it's a bit easier to understand why it's taking little Koenigsegg longer than expected to certify these two U.S.-spec cars.
For comparison, U.S. customers still await the first U.S.-legal Huyara, nearly a year and a half after its debut here, despite Pagani working directly with AMG for the Huayra's engines. It took Mosler two years to certify the 2004 MT900S, and that used and off-the-shelf GM LS6. So these things are hard for independent, boutique manufacturers.
Should Koenigsegg have known better? Maybe. Should BC have expected such? Possibly. But he was told it would be ready, and it wasn't. This certainly is an error in judgement on the part of Koenigsegg, but I'm not entirely sure it's worthy of the vitriol BC has expressed. To me, given all of the above, it should have been a foreseeable possibility.
Really, I'm not sure how much better Koenigsegg could have handled it. They took the car back from him, and then some. None of us are privy to the arrangement made there. But I've read the whole thread, and what really sets BC off is that Jens makes a statment regarding the Agera's U.S.-legal status. BC takes this as a break in the agreed-upon silence regarding the situation, but it was BC who sets the ball rolling on page 1.
A member asks why there are so many Koenigseggs for sale at the moment, in a thread that has nothing to do with the car in question. BC chimes in that "there are probably lots of reasons" and finishes it off with a little whistling smilie. If ever there was a post designed to deliberately elicit a repsonse under the veil of not saying anything, that was it. Everyone on the forum had followed the build of his car, and could clearly see that it no longer appears on his signature as an owned car. Questions about what happened were inevitable.
You can argue that Koenigsegg's reply overstepped the bounds of acceptability in this case, and I would hear that. Certainly Jens might have been better served by not saying BC was happy with the car if he was not. But I for one do not think that the attack that BC commences was warranted. As I read it his main issue is that the car was not ready when promised; but then he goes on and on about the quality of the build and how it drives and such. All of these things might very well be true, I don't know. I've never had the opportunity to find out, and likely never will. But if it was my million dollars, I think I might have asked to spend at least a few minutes with a sample of the car I was about to buy, so that I knew exactly what I was getting. Maybe had BC done so he would have decided it was not up to his standards, and not ordered one. Not every car is for everybody; no harm, no foul.
So yes, as Peloton says the delivery of this car was bungled a bit, and you could argue that the PR was a bit amiss. It's an unfortunate mix of unmet expectations, but I find it hard to see any deliberate wrongdoing on Koenigsegg's part in this case.
Last edited by mattjs33; May 29, 2013 at 11:51 AM.
May 29, 2013 | 12:06 PM
#185
Teamspeed Pro
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,266
From: St. Peters, MO (outside STL)
I'm going to preface these comments by saying I'm an unabashed Koenigsegg fan, a fact I have never hidden from.
Given what little I know about automotive paint, the most likely source of the bubbling as pictured is contaminants on the base layer. Grease or in particular silicone residue will cause paint to lift in this manner. It's highly unlikely that heat of any natural temperature you will find on earth would cause paint bubbling. Such a flaw on any factory-delivered car is unacceptable, much less at this price point.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
The big issue here apparently was that the car was not certified to be U.S.-legal in the stated timeframe. As far as I can tell, this is the only real misstep on Koenigsegg's part. On the thread in question Jens acknowledged that this work is still ongoing.
Given the complexities of U.S. regulations, it's difficult enough even for a small manufacturer such as Ferrari to achieve certification, much less a builder of what amounts to a series of one-offs. The certification being undertaken for the MY2013 Agera series will apply to a whopping two cars. It's much easier for Bugatti or Lamborghini to accomplish this type of work, backed as they are by the resources of Volkswagen. Koenigsegg operates much more leanly because they have to in order to survive.
It's a lot easier for Bugatti to certify the 2013 Veyron because it's largely unchanged from the 2006 Veyron that first achieved compliance. For another example, Lamborghini will have had a much easier go at certifying the two U.S. Venenos and Ralph Lauren's lone U.S.-spec Reventon Roadster, as they can simply piggyback on the certifications of the Aventador and Murcielago upon which they are both respectively based.
Koenigsegg has not certified a car for U.S. sale since the CCX series of MY2008. There were 11 of those U.S.-spec cars built, not all of which ended up making it to these shores. That certification will be of little help for the Agera, since the engines are quite different. Add in the now mandatory stability control systems and it's a bit easier to understand why it's taking little Koenigsegg longer than expected to certify these two U.S.-spec cars.
For comparison, U.S. customers still await the first U.S.-legal Huyara, nearly a year and a half after its debut here, despite Pagani working directly with AMG for the Huayra's engines. It took Mosler two years to certify the 2004 MT900S, and that used and off-the-shelf GM LS6. So these things are hard for independent, boutique manufacturers.
Should Koenigsegg have known better? Maybe. Should BC have expected such? Possibly. But he was told it would be ready, and it wasn't. This certainly is an error in judgement on the part of Koenigsegg, but I'm not entirely sure it's worthy of the vitriol BC has expressed. To me, given all of the above, it should have been a foreseeable possibility.
Really, I'm not sure how much better Koenigsegg could have handled it. They took the car back from him, and then some. None of us are privy to the arrangement made there. But I've read the whole thread, and what really sets BC off is that Jens makes a statment regarding the Agera's U.S.-legal status. BC takes this as a break in the agreed-upon silence regarding the situation, but it was BC who sets the ball rolling on page 1.
A member asks why there are so many Koenigseggs for sale at the moment, in a thread that has nothing to do with the car in question. BC chimes in that "there are probably lots of reasons" and finishes it off with a little whistling smilie. If ever there was a post designed to deliberately elicit a repsonse under the veil of not saying anything, that was it. Everyone on the forum had followed the build of his car, and could clearly see that it no longer appears on his signature as an owned car. Questions about what happened were inevitable.
You can argue that Koenigsegg's reply overstepped the bounds of acceptability in this case, and I would hear that. Certainly Jens might have been better served by not saying BC was happy with the car if he was not. But I for one do not think that the attack that BC commences was warranted. As I read it his main issue is that the car was not ready when promised; but then he goes on and on about the quality of the build and how it drives and such. All of these things might very well be true, I don't know. I've never had the opportunity to find out, and likely never will. But if it was my million dollars, I think I might have asked to spend at least a few minutes with a sample of the car I was about to buy, so that I knew exactly what I was getting. Maybe had BC done so he would have decided it was not up to his standards, and not ordered one. Not every car is for everybody; no harm, no foul.
So yes, as Peloton says the delivery of this car was bungled a bit, and you could argue that the PR was a bit amiss. It's an unfortunate mix of unmet expectations, but I find it hard to see any deliberate wrongdoing on Koenigsegg's part in this case.
Given what little I know about automotive paint, the most likely source of the bubbling as pictured is contaminants on the base layer. Grease or in particular silicone residue will cause paint to lift in this manner. It's highly unlikely that heat of any natural temperature you will find on earth would cause paint bubbling. Such a flaw on any factory-delivered car is unacceptable, much less at this price point.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
The big issue here apparently was that the car was not certified to be U.S.-legal in the stated timeframe. As far as I can tell, this is the only real misstep on Koenigsegg's part. On the thread in question Jens acknowledged that this work is still ongoing.
Given the complexities of U.S. regulations, it's difficult enough even for a small manufacturer such as Ferrari to achieve certification, much less a builder of what amounts to a series of one-offs. The certification being undertaken for the MY2013 Agera series will apply to a whopping two cars. It's much easier for Bugatti or Lamborghini to accomplish this type of work, backed as they are by the resources of Volkswagen. Koenigsegg operates much more leanly because they have to in order to survive.
It's a lot easier for Bugatti to certify the 2013 Veyron because it's largely unchanged from the 2006 Veyron that first achieved compliance. For another example, Lamborghini will have had a much easier go at certifying the two U.S. Venenos and Ralph Lauren's lone U.S.-spec Reventon Roadster, as they can simply piggyback on the certifications of the Aventador and Murcielago upon which they are both respectively based.
Koenigsegg has not certified a car for U.S. sale since the CCX series of MY2008. There were 11 of those U.S.-spec cars built, not all of which ended up making it to these shores. That certification will be of little help for the Agera, since the engines are quite different. Add in the now mandatory stability control systems and it's a bit easier to understand why it's taking little Koenigsegg longer than expected to certify these two U.S.-spec cars.
For comparison, U.S. customers still await the first U.S.-legal Huyara, nearly a year and a half after its debut here, despite Pagani working directly with AMG for the Huayra's engines. It took Mosler two years to certify the 2004 MT900S, and that used and off-the-shelf GM LS6. So these things are hard for independent, boutique manufacturers.
Should Koenigsegg have known better? Maybe. Should BC have expected such? Possibly. But he was told it would be ready, and it wasn't. This certainly is an error in judgement on the part of Koenigsegg, but I'm not entirely sure it's worthy of the vitriol BC has expressed. To me, given all of the above, it should have been a foreseeable possibility.
Really, I'm not sure how much better Koenigsegg could have handled it. They took the car back from him, and then some. None of us are privy to the arrangement made there. But I've read the whole thread, and what really sets BC off is that Jens makes a statment regarding the Agera's U.S.-legal status. BC takes this as a break in the agreed-upon silence regarding the situation, but it was BC who sets the ball rolling on page 1.
A member asks why there are so many Koenigseggs for sale at the moment, in a thread that has nothing to do with the car in question. BC chimes in that "there are probably lots of reasons" and finishes it off with a little whistling smilie. If ever there was a post designed to deliberately elicit a repsonse under the veil of not saying anything, that was it. Everyone on the forum had followed the build of his car, and could clearly see that it no longer appears on his signature as an owned car. Questions about what happened were inevitable.
You can argue that Koenigsegg's reply overstepped the bounds of acceptability in this case, and I would hear that. Certainly Jens might have been better served by not saying BC was happy with the car if he was not. But I for one do not think that the attack that BC commences was warranted. As I read it his main issue is that the car was not ready when promised; but then he goes on and on about the quality of the build and how it drives and such. All of these things might very well be true, I don't know. I've never had the opportunity to find out, and likely never will. But if it was my million dollars, I think I might have asked to spend at least a few minutes with a sample of the car I was about to buy, so that I knew exactly what I was getting. Maybe had BC done so he would have decided it was not up to his standards, and not ordered one. Not every car is for everybody; no harm, no foul.
So yes, as Peloton says the delivery of this car was bungled a bit, and you could argue that the PR was a bit amiss. It's an unfortunate mix of unmet expectations, but I find it hard to see any deliberate wrongdoing on Koenigsegg's part in this case.
May 29, 2013 | 12:06 PM
#186
McLaren Fanatic
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,578
From: California, USA
Oh no... rationale thought and reasoned evaluation from Matt - I am not sure the two halfwits will be able to deal with that.
I agree that Koenigsegg didn't set out with any plans to ruin this but they failed to manage expectations (you don't blame the customer for changing their mind), failed to deliver the product as scheduled (and were nowhere near making that possible) and finally when it did arrive there were quality issues. That's three strikes - and on the exchange that sparked the drama (whether BC baited them or not is of little concern to me) they chose to be dishonest with their response by first suggesting he was a satisfied customer. Playing all of us for fools - if there is one thing I do not like it is being lied to.
>8^)
ER
I agree that Koenigsegg didn't set out with any plans to ruin this but they failed to manage expectations (you don't blame the customer for changing their mind), failed to deliver the product as scheduled (and were nowhere near making that possible) and finally when it did arrive there were quality issues. That's three strikes - and on the exchange that sparked the drama (whether BC baited them or not is of little concern to me) they chose to be dishonest with their response by first suggesting he was a satisfied customer. Playing all of us for fools - if there is one thing I do not like it is being lied to.
>8^)
ER
May 29, 2013 | 02:11 PM
#187
Teamspeed Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 51
Originally Posted by mattjs33
Given what little I know about automotive paint, the most likely source of the bubbling as pictured is contaminants on the base layer. Grease or in particular silicone residue will cause paint to lift in this manner. It's highly unlikely that heat of any natural temperature you will find on earth would cause paint bubbling. Such a flaw on any factory-delivered car is unacceptable, much less at this price point.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
But these things happen, particularly in the case of hand-applied paint jobs. Humans are fallible. As the story is told, the car was already behind schedule and was being rushed for its appearance at Pebble Beach. If the flaw was spotted beforehand, it was probably decided there simply wasn't time to address it properly. If the representatives of Koenigsegg are to be believed (and I have no reason at this point not to), this area was refinished at Koenigsegg's expense shortly after the car's debut, as one would expect.
Blisters and wrinkles. Caused by moisture. Heat evaporates moisture.
Knowledge Base, Blistering The Causes and Prevention - HMG Paints Limited
Welcome to the Davis Paint Company - Filling Kansas City With Color Since 1921!
Those are some extremely half-assed google attempts but plain as day and should alleviate some of the paint confusing for you. At the least give you a proper starting point for your continued googling ventures.
Last edited by elhimiel; May 29, 2013 at 02:13 PM.
May 29, 2013 | 03:25 PM
#188
Teamspeed Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 527
I will have to correct you there. Silicone and grease causes fish-eyes. Very different from blisters and wrinkles FYI.
Blisters and wrinkles. Caused by moisture. Heat evaporates moisture.
Those are some extremely half-assed google attempts but plain as day and should alleviate some of the paint confusing for you. At the least give you a proper starting point for your continued googling ventures.
Blisters and wrinkles. Caused by moisture. Heat evaporates moisture.
Those are some extremely half-assed google attempts but plain as day and should alleviate some of the paint confusing for you. At the least give you a proper starting point for your continued googling ventures.
If you notice, I also said:
So as your impressive Googling skills have shown, heat would cause bubbling, provided moisture was present where it shouldn't be. But I am still techincally correct; if the paint were applied correctly, heat alone would not cause bubbling.
Besides which, what is the point in arguing what is the reason for the paint bubbling? I think you would agree that regardless of the source or whether you or I are correct in identifying it, it shouldn't have been there.
May 29, 2013 | 04:07 PM
#190
Teamspeed Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 436
Peloton, if you have searched any thread concerning Koenigsegg invariable you will have come across our two protagonists here. You will also have seen that I have been involved in a number of run-ins with these two guys as well. At the end of the day any reasonable conversation is impossible with these two on the subject of Eggs so I have just given up.
But to the subject of paint, I feel qualified to speak on this subject having sprayed a number of show winning cars over the last 25+ years. The bubbles in those photos could have been caused by a number of factors.
Judging by the position and the fact the car is carbon fibre I suspect an air bubble may have been trapped in the surface layer of the carbon fibre during layup. These can be easily missed. Once the paint is applied you would have no idea you had a problem, until the first time you roll the car out on a sunny day.
Now as this car is white again you may not notice an issue as the white paint will reflect the heat. But if left out side long enough on a hot day the car will eventually get hot enough to expand the air in the bubble which in turn will lift the paint as shown in the photos. It’s not an uncommon problem, I have seen similar on a number of cars I have painted.
The solution is to grind the paint down, then grind out the bubble in the CF, fill the hole and repaint.
But to the subject of paint, I feel qualified to speak on this subject having sprayed a number of show winning cars over the last 25+ years. The bubbles in those photos could have been caused by a number of factors.
Judging by the position and the fact the car is carbon fibre I suspect an air bubble may have been trapped in the surface layer of the carbon fibre during layup. These can be easily missed. Once the paint is applied you would have no idea you had a problem, until the first time you roll the car out on a sunny day.
Now as this car is white again you may not notice an issue as the white paint will reflect the heat. But if left out side long enough on a hot day the car will eventually get hot enough to expand the air in the bubble which in turn will lift the paint as shown in the photos. It’s not an uncommon problem, I have seen similar on a number of cars I have painted.
The solution is to grind the paint down, then grind out the bubble in the CF, fill the hole and repaint.