What is a "supercar" ...... funny!

Guys, what's your assessment on Mercedes build quality the last few years? I've heard it's quite poor for German standards.

 

I think the term "supercar" is useless -- no one applies it the same way. Yeah, you could argue these four are "supercars", but performance standards change every model year, so even the regular production cars now (F430, 599) would stack up well against a 288 GTO.

My proposed definition:

"An expensive dorm-room poster car with a big wing and/or weird doors, whose main purpose is to get chicks."

 

Nope, I'd say they're Super-Duper-Hypercars, or SDH's.

 

I would also argue that the TR was a supercar when it was introduced in the early 80's. Does that status go away with age simply because newer cars can go faster? Not really. It is like a Professor Emeritus title, it stays for life.

 

The TR was never s supercar IMO.

 

what about the SLR McLaren, or would that be classified as a Grand Tourer..........?

 

Don't forget the 250 GTO, am I right???

 

Many sources disagree...

http://dhost.info/thesupercars/supercars/ferrari/testarossa/85testarossa.html
"The Ferrari Testarossa leaped to center stage of the automotive world in 1984 and remained there for 11 years as the world's fastest
regular production car. It was the definition of "supercar" in its era, the innovative benchmark against which all contemporary sports cars
were measured. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.autozine.org/Classiccar/html/Ferrari/Testarossa.html
"If you are old enough, you may miss the "supercar good old days" running from 1960s to 1980s. In that era, every supercar had to look
sensational and inspire imagination like reading science fictions. The trend was started by Lamborghini Miura in 1960s and elevated to a
higher level in 1970s by Lamborghini Countach. In 1980s, it was Ferrari Testarossa that set every car enthusiast on fire. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ferrarisupercar.com/ferrari_testarossa.htm
"The Ferrari Testarossa was manufactured into the automotive world in 1984 and has held the spotlight through 1996. The Ferrari Testarossa
is considered the "supercar" in its era. Styled and designed for most of the Ferrari models stemmed from the Testarossa."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In recent memory, one year - 1984 - stands out as a landmark in Ferrari progress. In the space of a few months, two of the greatest road
cars ever to emerge from Maranello were launched to the public. One was the 288 GTO, the other the Testarossa, a supercar in quite
different vein with a similarly exotic specification"

"In tune with its time, the Testarossa blends sophistication with awesome power. Beautiful, charismatic and exhilaratingly fast, it is the
epitome of today's supercar"

"Charismatic, fast, beautiful and .... not quite perfect .... it is everything that a supercar should be"

From "Supercars: Ferrari Testarossa" by Mark Hughes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

etcetera, etcetera, etcetra...

 

Your minority opinion.

Proves the point. Absolutely, the TR was almost universally considered a "supercar", as was the Countach.

Now, there are modern AMG Mercedes that would destroy the TR and Countach. So, are those "supercars"?

 

A supercar is a term used for any car that appears on a poster on any given pre-teen boys bedroom wall.

308, Testarossa, Countach, 911Turbo as well as any of the Zondas etc today are all supercars.
It has less to do with real performance and more to do with how the public perceive the cars.

AMG Mercs are not supercar, but will outperform any of the cars I mentioned above. Go figure.

All IMHO of course

 

I still disagree, the TR was an exotic sports car. Not a supercar. The F40 and F50 were the Ferrari supercars of that era....

 

I guess we can agree to disagree. The TR was the fastest production car in the world when it was introduced. The F40 didn't come until 3 years later. F40/F50 supercars, you betcha. But so was the TR.

 

Not knocking the TR in anyway.....but I stand by what I said.

 

Huh? Thats like saying Batman was never a superhero. How many truly exotic production cars really existed in 1984? To me a supercar is a regular production car, not limited like the F-50, F-40, 959, Zonda, etc., etc.. Anyone could build a one off machine that would blow the rest of the pack into the weeds. And that being the case, I would nominate the Koenig Testarossa. With a turbo compound and intercooled engine (blown, AND turboed) making power above 800 HP and a top speed to nearly 230 mph, Massive brakes, lower profile tires, widened and lowered suspension, I cant think of anything back in the mid 80's that would have touched it. And I still dont consider it a supercar.

 

Not for nothing, but Batman was just an uber-wealthy playboy who happened to have a genius engineer living with him who would cook his breakfast.

 

That makes him a superhero in MY book.

 

Supercar:

High performance cars _built for the purpose of driving_ thrills that are capable of keeping up with most cars on the road
F430, GT-R, Z06++


Hypercar:

Flagships built with the purpose of demonstrating power, engineering and technology - the elite of their era.
Veyron, Carrera GT, Enzo, Zonda F, LP640++




...in my book.

 

To be a super car a car must meet two criteria.

It must fly, and, it must be able to wear its underwear on the outside without looking ridiculous.

Being perceived as meeting these criteria may be a transitory state.
What is cool in one period may be ridiculous in another. As what is seen as flying for a car also has shifted radically over the last 30 years.

M-B could never create a car that meets the second criteria. Certainly not intentionally.

 

Alfred? Yeah. Alfred was awesome.