What's your favorite type of car?

[Ingolstadt]

Four door supercars rule.

[AMGtech55]

where is the Super Car catagory for the Veyrons, F1s, Zondas?

[NicFromLA]

where is the Super Car catagory for the Veyrons, F1s, Zondas?

Zonda and F1 I'd classify as sports cars, though the cost of an F1 and an Elise are very different, the principle is the same. Veyron could be sports or GT; it has the drivability of a GT car, but the ride of a sports car.

[nota]

Very good points indeed nota.

I personally think it's not just one of the attributes which make a supercar. It's probably a combination of them. So if a car is only fast or showy or rare it's not necessarily a supercar. For instance consider Evo IX FQ-400. Massively fast and not exactly common yet I don't think it could be considered a supercars.

There are many other examples of that, such as the Nissan GT-R your Valiant Charger or our beloved Lotus Carlton. All are very fast indeed but are they supercars? Similarly I finally don't think turbocharged 911s are supercars (I said maybe in my original post).

Sorry for misquoting you Ferrer and thank you, and Henk, very much for indulging me in this discussion. With that out of the way ..

Automotive terminology has evolved and morphed over the years, and sometimes not in a good way. Take for example the genre of 'roadster' which used to describe a convertible bodystyle sans side-windows (until Miatas became trendy, and the term was downgraded into rubbish status) or the American bastardisations of 'coupe' and even the dreaded 'muscle car'

The first time I saw the printed word of 'supercar' was IIRC back in 1970. In probability this is that very clipping

For us the term was meant (in our part of the southern hemisphere) to categorise any type of road-car that was super fast, which in this case also encompassed our new (but subsequently banned) local Series-Production 'specials like GT-HO Phase IV et al, which were never allowed to be released for public sale (btw I'd love to know where the word 'supercar' first originated, and when .. Henk? .. anybody?)

But in other locales it seems that supercar represents something else entirely .. not merely exclusive speed but rather the more dubious distinction of 'speed with exclusivity' .. wherein the snob-value is at least as paramount as the performance quotient. Which leads inextricably to this mystical Subjectivity we've been discussing...

Possibly the definitive proof for a supercar is what we could call the "wow test". If a non car enthusiast sees it on the street and says wow! then most probably it's a supercar. If it doesn't then it probably isn't.

The Miura would pass the test, but would the Valiant Charger do?

The subjective wow! test (though well described and I know exactly what you mean )

Yes I still remember seeing a brand-new Espada Mk III cruising past, and thinking WOW
I also recall seeing my first of those beautiful and super-potent Bolwell Nagari coupes, to an entirely equal reaction from me.
And when I saw (and heard) those new GT-HOs burble by I knew they, like the Bolwell, were capable of ripping the balls off many a fancied euro. They just had that aura about them, backed up of course by a fantastic racing pedigree

But hang on! Subjectively those GT-HOs were simply an evolved version of a crummy US 'compact' sedan, as are E49s.

And the supercar Bolwell .. could also be had as a KIT! Ever seen an Actual Supercar Kitcar before? (click pic)



You can guess where I'm heading to here don't you. I know you do!

From our discussion can we assume that, in the attributes that define supercars, these facets previously debated and quoted below are merely of minor import and significance - if at all

appearance
rarity
performance
handling
mechanical
structural

To paraphrase that trite real-estate dictum; when it comes to the crunch it seems (to me) that supercars were predominantly and still are ALL about ONE thing

subjectivity
subjectivity
subjectivity

Conclusive Subjectivity (((sigh))) now there's a concept to wrap your mind up

________________

And for my final rant on what is and isn't a supercar, if I may quote you again ..

Possibly the definitive proof for a supercar is what we could call the "wow test". If a non car enthusiast sees it on the street and says wow! then most probably it's a supercar. If it doesn't then it probably isn't.

Honest words there Ferrer. And perhaps this is indeed the prime test

But like me do you similarly cringe in suspecting that the absolute ultimate defining judgement towards Man's finest and most beloved expressions in road-going automotive art - the magnificent, the unmatchable, the superlative Supercar - hinges not from the cognescetti (spl?) among us - but from an entirely superficial glancing opinion from a semi-detached rabble of bloody rank-amatuer non-experts !!! And maybe too most principally relating to perceived snobbery? And, it must be said, most typically from the voices of pimply-faced teenage boys most impressed by technobabble, but whom are often yet to guide the wheel of any thing above a Sony Playstation

Pathetic isn't it? Proverbially, from the mouths of babes ..... Oh my ..

And before I go, in personal opinion of styling (which is subjective personified) I personally consider the 1969 Mustang Sportsroof to be among the finest and most beautiful shapes ever penned and bought into reality, for me a genuine top ten. The proverbial glorious celebration of rolling sculpture - thank you Ford!

I certainly go wow! when I see one, even today (click pic)



And to the snobs among us, I reckon if you flipped those Ford badges off off this car and it had (hypothetically) carried an exotic 'name' brand - instead of the common Blue Oval - that it would be similarly regarded my many. But could a humble Mustang ever be rightly considered to be .. a supercar?!?!

I'm sure you remember that one-off unique-bodied Jensen Interceptor FF AWD re-bodied proto which did the record 0-100-0 test run, including in wet conditions. A great achievement both technically, and in styling too (akin to Monteverdi 375 imo) and one intended for production if funds were available. To my mind - and I think you'd agree - this Jensen could stand as an absolute supercar by ANY picky definition, even if it did use an 'off the shelf' propriatry Hemi motor

To those who opine and deem that something with such banal roots as (gasp!) a Mustang could ever qualify for supercar status .. well .. click then enlarge and read my attachment of the Mustang

Like that Jensen it is ..

A large 4-seater automatic fastback coupe with a proprietry US (big-block) performance V8.
Styled by designers of high international repute.
Features an extraordinary and then-unique level of mechanical engineering, and from the same company as who created the FF.
Crikey mate it's even been performance-enhanced by none other than a fair dinkum F1 champion Formula 1 designer/constructor/driver.

Yet I'd bet my last razoo there are naysayer enthusiast judges among us (and even amid) who decry "preposterous!" that this low-based tarted up Ford could ever be considered to be one of those bona fide thoopercars

What do you and others reckon? Is it, or isn't it?

[Kitdy]

What do you and others reckon? Is it, or isn't it?

The Jensen or the Mustang?

Supercar Origin

[nota]

Either one would be fine

Thanks for the link. So the first 'supercar' dates back to the 1920 eh? I bet those ones were mid-engined! (or at least mid-front)

[SlickHolden]

Fav type of car..

I like a car that is subtle on the outside that doesn't say HEY! LOOK AT ME LOOK AT MEEEEEEEE!, Sorry Kath and Kim joke.

Not to Leary on the outside but still have nice subtle big wheels, Then go inside and have a decant interia but again not on the sporty side to much just a nice classy interia, Then Suspension i do like cars on the lower side, But a car that can blend smooth ish ride handling but then turn into a road hugging machine at the flick of a switch.
Power needs to be smooth at lower speeds cant rock the boat on noise levels and idling in car.
But when you wont power like a high performance car i wont that power big and plenty of Torque..

This is my Fav car type.. It blends Luxury with high performance and plenty of safety features. The kind of car that doesn't need to go fast but can when you feel like it.

HSV E-Series Senator.

[clutch-monkey]

^ lol @ PI shot.

[Ferrer]

Fair point well made, nota.

But (and you know there was a but coming ) while you go with your '69 Ford I'll go with my '67 Ford.



And here the discussion kind of starts again. Which is more of a supercar? Yours or mine? We can discuss which is fatser, which drives better, which is more exclusive or whatever.

But at the end of the day as we've been saying all comes down to opinion. And opinion is subjective by nature. My personal opinion is that the GT40 MkIII is a supercar and the Mustang isn't.

However I'd like to stress that making that distinction doesn't mean I prefer the GT40 to the Mustang. For me it's just a classification, just like some cars are saloons and some are hatchbacks, it's not a hint of how good or bad a car is.

The problem is that most people associate super with better and therefore if a car isn't granted supercar status it's seen if it's been downgraded somehow. I disagree strongly with that. For isntance I don't think the Valiant Charger is a supercar (in the "tradtional" sense of the term) but in my eyes that doesn't make any less great. In fact, perhaps, the fact that it was able to beat "traditional" supercars while not being one is all part of the appeal. Isn't it?