Your definition of "Best"

[taz_rocks_miami]

We always seem to be starting threads about "What's the best....?" The answers are so varied at times. Makes me wonder what a car needs to have or do to be called "best"? What criteria do you use to consider a car better than another?

[CdocZ]

mostly acceleration and top speed vs. the cars price, i dont really care to much about reliability

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by CdocZ

mostly acceleration and top speed vs. the cars price, i dont really care to much about reliability

See this is going to be one of THOSE threads

mostly handling and overal performance to get round a track, road or stage the fastest.

With a bit of fun thrown in

[junaman]

The fastest sround a track or a slalom... Safety is also an important issue

[SlickHolden]

I think a car must look good first then handle and have good features, + Speed and sound

[fpv_gtho]

How it looks, what figures it has, how it goes, how it handles, what it costs

[SPHFerrari]

how it looks, how fast it does tracks and its handling, straight line speed and acceleration, comparatively low price. basically it has to have everything to be the best, or at least be better than the others in all categories.

[dydzi]

only appearance and handling for me
it doesnt have to be cheap, safe or practical

[VtecMini]

Maybe I've misinterpreted the question, but I genuinely don't understand anybodys answers. The way my little mind sees it, it's all about how good it is at the job it's intended for. So for people mentioning top speeds, handling and track pace, is this really everything you'd look for? If I were in the position where I were to have to choose a big german luxobarge, i.e. (Audi A8, MB S, BMW 7 and maybe VW Phaeton) I'm reasonably sure they'd be the last things on my agenda. I'd be far more interested in how smoothly it wafts me to my destination, or how comfortable I felt in it. If however I were looking for something to transport the kids in, I'd be more interested in storage space, practicality, comfort and running costs. Now if I were after a "toy" for the weekends, I would obviously be looking towards the best handling/acceleration/top speed.

The only thing I can think of that covers just about anything is perhaps aesthetics. But even then, I'd far sooner by a good car which happens to be a little bland on the outside than a crap one that looks great. I guess if I were looking for something in the commercial market, then I wouldn't even worry about aesthetic qualitys.

So my point being, it's all down to what you would expect to get out of the car. The best car in my opinion is one which best excels in the areas one would normally associate with the particular vehicle.

[Sweeney921]

My definition of the best car in the world is summed up by the Ultima GTR

Quick
Fast
Grippy
Loud
Powerful
form follows function

[PerfAdv]

Looks, build quality, speed, handling, and comfort. Looks and build quality are a must for all top contenders. The other three depend on the purpose of the car.

In a LWS sportscar the priority is handling then speed then comfort
In a sportsedan: speed>handling>comfort
In a Luxury sedan: comfort>speed>handling
In a GT sportscar: speed>handling>comfort
In a supercar: speed>handling>comfort; speed and handling at a much higher level and comfort is limited by a design excelling at the other two.

What constitutes and factors into looks, build quality, speed, handling, and comfort can be discussed further.....

[PerfAdv]

Looks:

The most subjective criterion. Really its what someone likes. But general rules of aesthetics should follow. Most aesthetically pleasing shapes are well proportioned. Well proportioned? Leonardo DaVinci(? almost certain but could have been one of the other Reinaissance greats) described beauty in a face as proportions dividing the face into thirds, top of the head to the eyebrows, eyebrows to upperlip, and upperlip to chin. He said the principle of all aesthetics is based on this principle of thirds.

Now its your interpretation of overall design and the surface excitement auto designers incorporate to determine if its beautiful. The Enzo for example is not immediatly pleasing to all people. Yet its not supposed to be pretty. A closeup of the flared nostrils of a horse sucking in air or the outreached talons of an eagle best describe the look of the Enzos nose. The look of speed. The taillights seem to look a blur, coming off the rear of the car. Again, speed.

In a Sedan these elements would look out of place. In a M5 the bigger than reg 5's front intakes portray a purposeful look. Changing the character of the car from nice sedan to performance machine. Not to everyone liking, aesthetically.

A few cars considered aesthetically:
330Ci - aesthetically perfect but almost boring.
240Z - aesthetically off but portrays performance and machismo.
350Z - less easthetically pleasing than original but still portrays performance and machismo.
BMW 7(current) - modern look of competence and masculinity. Not aesthetically pleasing enough.
E-type - exaggerated proportions but portray style and speed well, fits overall character of car and maker.
Pontiac Aztec - Why its not supposed to a beautiful, its a multi-purpose vehicle! Yes, but it didn't have to be ugly either. The scale is bad, the ripple in the surfaces is bad, the profile is awkward.
Hummer H2 - fits design theme of strength and intimidation. C'mon thats why U SUV junkies like them, admit it.

I digress. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

[taz_rocks_miami]

Interesting, most who have answered only seem to care about overall performance and looks, only a couple of mentions about build quality and safety. Why aren't these two last factors important? Reliability also has been left out...HMMM?

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by taz_rocks_miami

Interesting, most who have answered only seem to care about overall performance and looks, only a couple of mentions about build quality and safety. Why aren't these two last factors important? Reliability also has been left out...HMMM?

Because for me "best" car isn't any of those.

The family wagon has all those attributes, but see, THAT is not my 'best'

Personal preferences rule

[taz_rocks_miami]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

Because for me "best" car isn't any of those.

The family wagon has all those attributes, but see, THAT is not my 'best'

Personal preferences rule

I see your point Peter, but can't performance cars be well built, reliable and safe as well as fast?