Definition of a Supercar

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

carnut

Active Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2007
Messages
702
Location
Somerset/Dorset borders
Car
SL400 & audi A1
Reading my copy of Evo this morning an article on Lotus Evora mentions that there is an official definition of a Supercar based on its acceleration; the "supercar" then comes into a special dispensation for exhaust noise etc

Does anyone know just what this acceleration time is?:)

and if so what Mercs are then "Supercars"?
 
The definition of a supercar is one I can't afford....

If it were based on acceleration, every chipped Subarh, Imrezza and Evo would technically be a supercar...

Not to mention the garage frankensteins....such as my friends 1985 Ford Capri 2.8i Special sporting a 6 litre chevy with supercharger, and nitrous, and an MOT....I went it once....an event that will never be repeated:crazy:
 
If it were based on acceleration, every chipped Subarh, Imrezza and Evo would technically be a supercar...

And some stock Caterhams etc.

The Caterham R500 lapped the Top Gear track faster than:

Bugatti Veyron
Pagani Zonda F
Maserati MC12
Ferrari Enzo
Ferrari Scuderia
Lamborghini LP640
Porsche Carerra GT
Koenigsegg CCX
Ascari KZ1

etc.
 
If it was on a poster on a black background in the 80s, usually with an attractive lady in a bikini, its a supercar.


Ade
 
Id say supercars are CL65 and SL65's etc.

Hypercars are lambo's
 
Its a Poster you put on your wall as a kid as the car YOU want when big

Mine was a Lamborghini Countash LP5000QV

Its a car that makes you go WOW !! and probably one I can never afford... That to me is a supercar.
 
For me, a supercar is the likes of the Ferrari F430, Lamborhini Gallardo, Maserati Gran Turismo. They make me go WOW and i want, i want!

Then for my the likes of the Veyron, Murcialago and Enzo are 'hypercars'
 
Reading my copy of Evo this morning an article on Lotus Evora mentions that there is an official definition of a Supercar based on its acceleration; the "supercar" then comes into a special dispensation for exhaust noise etc

Does anyone know just what this acceleration time is?:)

and if so what Mercs are then "Supercars"?

I thought the only cars exempt from safety and emission regulations were those made in small volumes and nothing to do with their performance.
 
Id say supercars are CL65 and SL65's etc.

Hypercars are lambo's

no, I'd disagree. CL65's and SL65's are super cars, but they're not supercars. many people might say that the E55 and the M5 have been duking it out for years for the title of "worlds best car", but they're not supercars either

I don't think that a supercar can be defined by just such things as acceleration. they're defined by being fast (both top speed, and acceleration), expensive, rare, exotic styling and perhaps some level of impracticality. it doesn't need all of these, and some can change over time. a BMW M3 is probably faster than many supercars of 10 years ago and more, but an m3 isn't a supercar, and those old supercars still are.

lambo's (any) and ferrari's (any) are supercars. the top end porsches ones are, but not the baby ones. ascari's, and other exotica count. merc SLR is, others not. BMW M1 *might* count, but none of the others really do. Audi R8 is, no other audi counts.

Also, a whole car has to be a supercar, not just a variant, so no caterham counts. a caterham R500 may be incredibly quick and very impractical, but it doesn't have a high top speed, it's not expensive, it's not rare and it's not exotic.

I do struggle to define it, but I tend to know it when I see it.

for me, the word "hypercar" mostly came into existance with the veyron because it feels like a significant step over even a lambo. I'd say that anything which wants the tag hypercar needs to look at all of the supercar requirements and do them all *more*.

dave
 
i would expect there to be production limits for super cars to get exemptions from noise and crash/pedestrian safety regulations, thats how TVR got round it and why they never sold any in the US.
 
Supercar - can never afford one, when you can afford one you can never find one, when you find one one you wish you didnt, when you wish you didnt you find someone who will pay more for it than you did.

If it isnt a good investment then it really isnt all that super.
 
The definition of a supercar is one I can't afford....

If it were based on acceleration, every chipped Subarh, Imrezza and Evo would technically be a supercar...

Not to mention the garage frankensteins....such as my friends 1985 Ford Capri 2.8i Special sporting a 6 litre chevy with supercharger, and nitrous, and an MOT....I went it once....an event that will never be repeated:crazy:

If it went by acceleration, then my fathers previous car, Subaru Impreza WRX STi would be one, timed 0-60 sub 4 seconds..
 
Is a Maybach a "supercar"? You tell me.
Its an individuals definition only.
Somebody may very well call a Morris Marina a supercar. But they would have to live in a slum in Albania and earn less than 10p a day.
Would they be wrong?
Then again my definitive supercar is a Ferrari 246 Dino circa 1970.
If a supercar by definition a car you cant afford then Jeremy Clarkson etc....etc.....cannot think of any car as such.
Its a subject that has been pondered often and I have never heard a description that completely defines the term. And probably never will.
 
Supercar to me will always be something 2 seater, very low, wedge-shaped with a +£80k tag, normally European but never German
 
Supercar to me will always be something 2 seater, very low, wedge-shaped with a +£80k tag, normally European but never German

so you wouldn't count an audi R8 as a supercar? (not supposed to be sarcastic, genuine question).

I would think that a MacMerc SLR would be a supercar, but then some might say it's british :)
 
I wouldn't personally count the R8.
 
I started this thread to answer the " bar room" arguements above. Everyone has a subjective opinion on what makes a "supercar" but if there is an official( definitive) answer then we have a totaly new disagreement:devil:


PS for what its worth my definition is:

in the top 10 fastest cars and top 10 prices ( but what about the new GTR...trumps most!:eek: )

Looks like I will have to email EVO for more info on the article.
 
A supercar should be unnecessarily powerful, bid no thought whatsoever for practicality over aesthetics, cost irrelevant and have no valid reason for ownership other than being a toy.

If it doesn't comply with that lot...it isn't one. IMO
 
Completely agree with Mudster, apart from the aesthetics bit - have you seen the inside of a Countach? :crazy:

I'd add a certain nonchalant disregard to reliability which historically seems to be a given on such cars. As is the requirement to remove the entire engine to access simple service items. Also having a history of killing or maiming film/rock stars seems to add to kudos...

Statistically I'm sure a supercar can be defined in terms of production numbers, performance, cost parameters etc. A bit dry though isn't it.

Ade
 
If its got some **** with expensive sunglasses and shoes with a very small willy driving it, and you cant see out the back of it, its probably a supercar.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom