View Single Post
Old 10-27-2010, 08:17 PM
DesmoRob's Avatar
DesmoRob DesmoRob is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,151
Send a message via MSN to DesmoRob
Okay, so everyone has a slightly different idea of what a supercar is or should be, but nothing from what I've seen is THE right definition to go by.
For example, in Nissan's Canadian brochure they categorize all their models by truck, sedan, compact, sports car, and believe it or not supercar (can you guess which) and so on and so forth.
Would this forum give the title of "supercar" to the GT-R? I think not. Not unless of course we are in fact using "range topper" as the proper credentials, in which case you could consider cars like the ZR1 and GT2 supercars as well, which again most people (here) would probably reject.
"Supercar" and ESPECIALLY "SPORTScar" are both used very broadly and excessively. Its the same with various manufacturers tossing the 'GT' badge around like its going out of style. Example, you can find both the term "sportscar" and a 'GT' badge tacked to cars like the Tiburon and Celica, which are nothing but FWD sporty(ish) compact/hatchbacks, and by no means proper "sportscar(s)". Where does one honestly draw the line??
Before my A.D.D. kicks in, let me put it in plain english: this could be a never ending debate.
I myself was completely at home calling a 360 Modena (sorry I had to) a supercar, not because I wanted to give it that title, but because naturally I didn't think it was right to categorize a Ferrari as "sportscar", which is what people refer to their Golf GTis as.
If a "supercar" is in fact this outerwordly automotive being of supreme status, then it is not what Nissan (an actual car manufacturer who should technically have more credibility than us) would be refering to their GT-R (that I see way too many of) as. Unless of course they know they're out of place and are only trying to give their surgeon/lawyer target market something to write home about. Which is it?
Reply With Quote