Is the Boxer the original Supercar?

Lamborghini Miura started the whole mid-engined V12 wave, so it would be the original "super car" in the sense magazines often use.

But no one has ever defined "super car" in any meaningful way, so you could argue anything. Maybe 250 GTO, given its historical significance, race history, and prominence in elevating Ferrari's presence worldwide.

 

"Super-car" is a non-sense phrase. You can go back to the beginning of the automotive industry and pontificate that the Bugatti Royale or Type 57 Atlantic or the rear-engine V-16 Autounion is a super-car.

But since words and phrases are defined by their current, common usage, I would agree that the Lambo Miura is the original.

 

It is pretty clear that whatever defines "Supercar" was in existance before the BB. I don't think we can impose an exclusive modern definition on a device that has been around since the 19th Century.

Here are 2 votes from me.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

If the Muira was a supercar then the Boxer is.
Still many say the 288GTO was Ferrari's first modern Supercar.
I like the GTO a bunch. But its not 12 cylinders and it doesnt open up like the clamshells on the Boxer.
What the Boxer lacked IMO was a stronger tranny and lower gearing and a bit wider tires. Especially the 365BB.
My fave Ferrari supercar is the F-40 but the car is so impractical. Second fave is the carbed 512BB. Lucky me.
BTW there are 2500 or so Boxers of all variants and about 1000 F-40's.
I'm sure I'll be corrected

 

Pretty super to me. You have my vote. Boxers have the look, the engine and the presence to qualify as super car. Though, I suppose Lambo did it first.

 

The Boxer is certainly NOT the "original Supercar" or the first Ferrari supercar.
My personal pick for th first Ferrari supercar is the 365P "tre posti". But only two were made. My second pick would be the F-40.

One could make the case that the top-of-the-line Ferrari of any era is their "supercar".
This would include the Boxers, but shut out the TR with the 288.

But for me, some of the super in supercar gets lost in the 288. And forget the TR.

Unfortunately, the term "supercar" is over-used these days and I find myself stifling a yawn.

 

she's super to me! and much more affordable than most.....

 

Everything is relative.

 

Although I am a major lurker I had to chime in.


The Boxer was always my favorite as a kid. The sad part is that I absolutely lust over this car and have never even seen one in person!

When I was a kid if you would have asked me what the "super cars" were, the Boxer would have been the first one mentioned.

I would say that the "flag ship," or the highest performing car of a marque, that could seriously compete in a contest of performance (at the time), is a super car.

According to my definition the Boxer is definitely a Super Car.

 

Miura....and THAT's a real 'Duesie"

(btw, the origin of the phrase was all about that car!.....fantastic)

 

Not this discussion again...

I think it's fair to say that the Boxer was, at the time it was built, Ferrari's top of the line and hence on par with some of the limited production "super cars" built since-- with one exception: the Boxer's production was not really limited, or at least not limited to some specific number.

 

I too have a soft spot for the BBs, but I believe the mid-engined 12-cylinder 250 LM debuted about a decade before, IIRC. Like the Boxers, it was intended as a road-going GT car, though not many were built.

There will of course be different opinions on what was the original supercar, but for me, the Boxer was he first time I felt something akin to lust for a car. IMHO and whatnot.

 

I don’t think there is an answer to the supercar deal.
A Duisenberg or Stutz Bearcat certainly could be a supercar of their day, but a boxer will leave either in the dust. However, all the proclaimed modern supercars will leave a boxer in the dust.

During its time, the boxer was the company flagship car, was the fastest or almost fastest road car, and did share genes with the BBLM. Possibly, if the BBLM had been a more successful racer, the street boxer might be viewed in a more approving light despite its creature comforts like leather interior and regular windows that actually open and close.

Needless to say I really like my BB, but would love to own an F40 or a 288GTO, but that’s not going to happen anytime soon for me. Although, if anyone wants to give me one, I’ll certainly take it, and promise to take good care of it!
John

 

To be completely honest, if a BB and 288GTO were the same price, and likely to maintain that relationship, I'd rather have the BB. I'd say the same for the F40.

Partially, that's because I can fit more comfortably in the BB than in a 288GTO or (I'm guessing) an F40. Also, though, I think the BB would be more usable than either of those cars. Finally, I like the fact that the BB is less "boy racer" than the other two, although I realize that might feel otherwise.

 

Wasn't the Boxer part of the "normal" production run at the time?
I think the 288 and others mentioned, are just commonly called the
Ferrari "supercars" because they weren't the production flagship of the company
at the time but more "limited" with even more performance, and later with
add meanings ie. anniversaries.

 

Yes, but before the 288GTO, Ferrari didn't do any special runs, so there is nothing to compare to. The Boxer was the flagship at the time.

 

This is sarcastic...............but has some merit..........Any car that has a great bloodline, ie. Ferrari, Lamborgini, Bugatti, Maserati, Lotus or Porsche.etc. that makes ya smile and feel like you can conquer the world..........................is a supercar! Why debate it? I must say though the TR ALWAYS gets a crowd and I constantly get the comment, "Man I love that car, I had a poster on my bedroom wall!" Right? R-I-G-H-T!!

Kerry

 

I am so old that the poster on my wall is that of a Stutz Bearcat, and the dame sprawled on the hood is holding a parasol!

 

I dont think "normal" production runs are a factor with the Boxer as it was also hand built/formed which was "normal" at the time. So was the Miura. Were the Mclaren F1 or CGT on a "normal" production run in their respective factories ?

 

My initial thought was the Miura, but I quickly pushed it aside. IMHO, the Ferrari 166MM Barchetta was the very first "supercar". Prior the 166, most cars, and most racing cars, used a ladder frame not unlike the original horse carriage that preceded the Automobile. Yes, Lancia built a unit body car in the early 30's. Mercedes was building 4 wheel independent suspension long before 1946. Alfa (actually Ferrari) were building twin cam 4 valve racing engines in the 20's.

But the 166MM shocked the entire motor world. It didn't really break any new ground in any one area except the engine, but it brought many ideas into one design. It was the first car to incorporate the front fender into the main body, a design idea that won the car a place at the museum of art in Paris because it set the standard for the future. It was the first production car to use a billet crankshaft, a design that won the crankshaft a spot at the Smithsonian. But even greater were its achievements on race tracks. It didnt just break new ground there, it beat the pants off everything in the world until the world caught up. The 166 set a standard that every car maker in the world followed for the next 30 years. Every single sports car built after the 166, from MG's and Austin Healeys, to Fiat and Alfa Spyders, and the Corvette, have the 166 to honor as the leader in design.

The Duesie's, Stutz's, Packards and Auburns were great machines, but I dont see where they offered anything new as far as sporting, they were primarily luxurious. There was nothing luxurious about a 166MM.

 

Thaaaats Funny!
John