Might just be me but I don't consider the Callaway Sledgehammer a supercar at all, and here's why 1) It wasn't a production car by any sense, it was a tuner car. It was also a one-off. Someone could toss a jet engine in a Gremlin, hit 250mph and never drive it again - but so what? Would that make it a "supercar"??? 2) Its based on a Corvette. Most supercars are complete packages. The C4 Corvette is one of the worst spots cars out there from a chassis point of view. It's a notch above a Gen3 Camaro (with it's solid rear and horrible chassis) but not much. 3) They never built any of the damn things 4) The times it was claimed to have achieved were not official times. I know guys who have run well over 200mph but their "official" times are way lower due to the rules about doing it again in the reverse direction within a specified time. 20 or 30mph could have been knocked off were it an official time. 5) The car that went 254mph was pretty well setup to do just that. Even if they DID build any Sledgehammer Callaways, its not like you could find a stretch of road and zip it up to anywhere near 254mph. The car, as it was made (before modifications) would not be able to hit 254. I remember when the car hit the rags too, and as a teenager I was super impressed too, but getting older and realizing what it was really all about, the shine definitely faded. It was no more a supercar than the R&D Vette with the Falconer V12 was a supercar. It was just a big motor stuffed into a Corvette.
>>2) Its based on a Corvette. Most supercars are complete packages. The C4 Corvette is one of the worst spots cars out there from a chassis point of view. It's a notch above a Gen3 Camaro (with it's solid rear and horrible chassis) but not much.<< Please define chassis. I have owned a few C4s and raced two at Lime Rock. A C4 is not the ideal car for Lime Rock, but it performed quite admirably. I don't know of many other cars in its class from 1985-1989 that were as balanced. The interior materials were garbage and the build quality was not great, but those Z51 cars felt great on a track.
I've had a few, couple of early ones (86-89) and a couple of late ones (95-96). The problem was the chassis had a ton of flex, and there were compromises in the design to accomodate that. Instead of letting the suspension just do it's job, the suspension had to accomodate the sloppy chassis and also do it's normal suspension job. They don't make horrible race cars, but you'd definitely want to strengthen it before any sort of serious track duty IMO. The cars work decently well on smooth roads, but on bumps, fuggedaboutit.
>>I've had a few, couple of early ones (86-89) and a couple of late ones (95-96). The problem was the chassis had a ton of flex, and there were compromises in the design to accomodate that. Instead of letting the suspension just do it's job, the suspension had to accomodate the sloppy chassis and also do it's normal suspension job. They don't make horrible race cars, but you'd definitely want to strengthen it before any sort of serious track duty IMO. The cars work decently well on smooth roads, but on bumps, fuggedaboutit.<< Now I understand what you're saying. I agree with you.
Monte Carlo GTB a "concept car", but hey I bet there is one somewhere in the world for sale is that a 11K reline I spy! This is the car that got me to love cars, no sure why.. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
gotta give props to the ford rs200 but I have to say the brammo ultimas pretty much do it for me. I mean, imagine the testbed for the Mc F1 continued on for an extra 15 years... Then you add a 1500hp tt chevy block, a porsche g60, and you pretty much can make out your will when you plunk your deposit down.
Thank you! I have been racking my brain trying to remember the name of this thing. It definitely made a big impression on me at the '91 LA Auto Show.. kind of like an F40 on acid.
Ok, If we're talking one-offs like the Monte Carlo, Nissan 390 etc. How about the Yamaha OX-11 ? Mucho bad-asso Daur = A race car with a catalitic converter. I remember a 917 and F5000 with headlights put on the street. Whats next ? Top fuel dragster with bumperettes ?
one of the prettiest cars i ever saw was a pearl one with tan interior, but always thought a bit over priced for four bangers....
Sorry if a reup this old thread, but for me, with noubt, the Venturi 400 Gt and the fabulous Bugatti EB 110 are the most underrated supercars The Venturi was very fast...i remember her fighting against an F40 in an old 1992-93 Best Motoring's Tsukuba Circuit Battle.
Hell yeah but could anyone really call it a Supercar? The damn thing is practically a streetable LMPcar.
De tomaso pantera gts Italian design american v8 power This is babbest version of it http://hem.passagen.se/hemipanter/
Here are two cheap but badass ones; GT40 continuations. A 427ci V-8 (500 hp) plus 2300 lbs = McLaren F1 territory. Now the practical one. 996TT with X 50 option chipped to 600 HP. $70k Total. 750HP available at $25k greater cost . Cowabunga.
It would be in Enzo territory. There's not a single car out there that can match the Mclaren F1's unbeatable performance.
