Best Supercar

[2ndclasscitizen]

MOTOR bought the F40 v 430 article and ran it, I thought it was quite good as well. One odd fact I took from that though was the 430's bottoming out problem, I've never heard/seen/read that mentioned in articles or reviews

[Markie Boy]

Matra et Alpine cmon? The f1 has actual boot space (WTF wat supercar has bootspace), soft suspension for daily driving and an engine that u can actually drive at slow speeds all day long. A proper supercar should not have any bootspace besides the seat next to you, the suspension should be set hard and its should be bad for the engine to drive at slow speeds.

P.S. dont take all those comments to technical.

[Markie Boy]

You are stuck in the 80s mate! Or is it the 70s? People were willing to cope with "temperamental" cars in those days. Today the market is much more demanding. Personally, I still like the F40 the best just like you do, but supercars now are just in another level compared to the beasts they were 20 years ago.

I think supercar buyers of the world are hyperrich people that wouldn't cope with an impractical, "crazy" car. They'll sell the bastard if they ever get a problem. Thus manufactureres are having to raise their game in performance, quality and practicality. There was recently an excellent article in EVO in which they compared old school exotics to new school base entry cars for supercar manufacturers (F40 VS F430, elise vs esprit and another pair which I don't remember). Excellent reading on the subject I have to say.

Yeh well thats the whole point of supercars there meant to be out there and not have all the daily driving luxuries. They shouldnt have a computer fixing you up through a corner it should be the driver doing it all to make it a rewarding experience for the driver. If u brought a supercar that is constantly being controled by a computer u might as well go by some fancy computer and put rubber wheels on it.

Also i did go a little bit over the top before when i was hanging shit on the macca. Yes it is a master piece and esepically since it came out 15yrs ago or something like that. But i just cant see the big reward from driving the car? Is the reward there because it can drive like a comfortable cruiser and then u can take it out ot a track and go ape shit in it? Supercars shouldnt have any sense of normal driving it should just be the big engine behind u, some racing seats and u driving it.

Everyone that probaly reads my stuff or bullshit to your opinions doesnt agree with me but a supercar should be just a supercar and nothing else not a daily driving cruiser with actual boot space and this doesnt mean that the zonda, ccr, enzo or the others are NOT real supercars they just all have the sense that a computer is doing small parts of the driving or most of it for you.

To sum all this shit up i rekon every supercar should just have a big red OFF button on the dash which turns off those pussie comps off inside the car...

[Markie Boy]

I like the Carrera GT and Zonda F a lot, but the best...I'll have to say the Bugatti. It pushed the boundries of acceleration and top speed further than any other supercar. It is an engineering masterpiece.

Yeh what he said.....

[Matra et Alpine]

But i just cant see the big reward from driving the car? Is the reward there because it can drive like a comfortable cruiser and then u can take it out ot a track and go ape shit in it? Supercars shouldnt have any sense of normal driving it should just be the big engine behind u, some racing seats and u driving it.

You confuse supercar and racecar
I dont' undesrtand the issue that a supercar behaves the way a driver WANTS it to for the need at teh time.
SO one that IS a pussycat around town AND a roaring demon on twisties and a winner on track with just a suspension damping adjustment is the epitome of a supercar.
It reads as if you confuse the driver experience and the car.
IF a car can do the track side stuff AND have a boot then so what.
If it wins on the "fun factor" so what ?

To sum all this shit up i rekon every supercar should just have a big red OFF button on the dash which turns off those pussie comps off inside the car...

Which most of them have the option for you to do.
and at it's limit you could always remove the fuse if you REALLY want to crash your "NOT supercar" off backwards at a corner with no traction control

[Matra et Alpine]

Yeh what he said.....

seems at odds with what you said makes a supercar

The Bugatti has all teh goxmos to contrl teh suspension and aero. SO much you have to stop, open a flap, press a button to be able to go top speed. If you brake or slow down significantly then seemingly it all swithces back to "slow speed" mode.

Soudns like the OPPOSITE of what you were saying before !!!

You confused ? we are

[MrKipling]

I can kind of see where he's coming from - he's just taking the opinion a bit too far!

The strange thing is that I always thought a supercar was a car built to the very best standard available in that day. Just look at the Miura, the F40, the F1, the EB110, The Enzo and the Veyron (I would say the the six era defining supercars) and you can pick one aspect, central to the car's purpose or intent, that stands out as a major advance for that era of motor cars. The lack of practicality, reliability and usability 'back in the day' was simply because the technology didn't exist to allow the integration of creature comforts (be they air-con, the ability for a high performance engine to function below its limit or whatever) into the brief for a 'super sports car'. Tha McLaren is the exception in that sense, simply because they were, for all intents and purposes, operating outside any kind of market forces or corporate brief.

The fact that supercars now work on a daily basis, are practical and easy to drive, is simply because they've got much much better at building them (you can thank Honda's NSX for that). I've driven a 355 a 360 and an F430 (all of which you could consider 'post modern' Ferrari supercars) and regardless of the fact that the 355 has no traction control, no boot and is a bit of a pig at low speeds, the 430 is a much more fun car to drive, in some ways because it is easy.

Give me Murcielago over a Countach anyday - I'm afraid there is nothing fun about a car that's a nightmare to drive!

[Markie Boy]

You confuse supercar and racecar
I dont' undesrtand the issue that a supercar behaves the way a driver WANTS it to for the need at teh time.
SO one that IS a pussycat around town AND a roaring demon on twisties and a winner on track with just a suspension damping adjustment is the epitome of a supercar.
It reads as if you confuse the driver experience and the car.
IF a car can do the track side stuff AND have a boot then so what.
If it wins on the "fun factor" so what ?

Which most of them have the option for you to do.
and at it's limit you could always remove the fuse if you REALLY want to crash your "NOT supercar" off backwards at a corner with no traction control

good suggestion ill try it when i make my millions

[Markie Boy]

I can kind of see where he's coming from - he's just taking the opinion a bit too far!

The strange thing is that I always thought a supercar was a car built to the very best standard available in that day. Just look at the Miura, the F40, the F1, the EB110, The Enzo and the Veyron (I would say the the six era defining supercars) and you can pick one aspect, central to the car's purpose or intent, that stands out as a major advance for that era of motor cars. The lack of practicality, reliability and usability 'back in the day' was simply because the technology didn't exist to allow the integration of creature comforts (be they air-con, the ability for a high performance engine to function below its limit or whatever) into the brief for a 'super sports car'. Tha McLaren is the exception in that sense, simply because they were, for all intents and purposes, operating outside any kind of market forces or corporate brief.

The fact that supercars now work on a daily basis, are practical and easy to drive, is simply because they've got much much better at building them (you can thank Honda's NSX for that). I've driven a 355 a 360 and an F430 (all of which you could consider 'post modern' Ferrari supercars) and regardless of the fact that the 355 has no traction control, no boot and is a bit of a pig at low speeds, the 430 is a much more fun car to drive, in some ways because it is easy.

Give me Murcielago over a Countach anyday - I'm afraid there is nothing fun about a car that's a nightmare to drive!

yeh i did take it to far lol

and yeh well the old skool lambos where shiteboxes anyway they only sounded nice.

[Markie Boy]

MOTOR bought the F40 v 430 article and ran it, I thought it was quite good as well. One odd fact I took from that though was the 430's bottoming out problem, I've never heard/seen/read that mentioned in articles or reviews

Yeh thats because it doesnt have any problems. But i can pick out one problem with it and its the styling of the car they could of gone with any shape and they go all conservative on that part.