What exactly do we think of when we talk about supercars? Accepted wisdom has it the term was coined by LJK Setright in response to the Lamborghini Muira and few would argue with that definition. And it's kind of stuck ever since, even if the exact parameters have never truly been nailed down.
Few would argue with this as a benchmark
Now, this isn't a springboard for another 'rules' rant like my recent ones about
exhausts
steering wheels
. But what do you think makes a supercar? You can't go by performance, given that the traditional boundaries of 400hp-plus and sub five seconds to 60 are now regularly nailed by everything from limos to SUVs. So what? A minimum cylinder count? A mid-mounted engine? 200mph-plus performance? A relative price compared with regular cars? Power to weight?
Now we've got hypercars too, the million-quid brigade currently represented by the Paganis, Bugattis, Koenigseggs and others and shortly to be joined by a new generation of hybrid-enhanced 'next-gen' monsters from Ferrari, McLaren and Porsche. What are the entry criteria here? A seven-figure pricetag? Production run of fewer than 500? Likelihood of being spotted in a chrome wrap, parked on a double yellow in Mayfair?
Still got funny headlights mind
I digress. Bringing it back to that original, Setright prescribed definition you've got Italian, lightweight, mid-mounted transverse engine and ... weird, overly decorative headlights. Yes, it seems
Alfa Romeo's wish
that its new mid-engined two-seater runabout (sorry, someone else's definition there...) be considered a true supercar may well be true. To be specific, it wants
the 4C
to be an "affordable supercar". But isn't that an oxymoron? Surely one of the key attributes of any true supercar is that it be outlandishly expensive compared with regular cars?
Sitting in the 4C it certainly ticks a lot of supercar boxes. It feels as small as those 70s pin-up wedges many of us had on our bedroom walls, which is a good start. The tiny, non-assisted steering wheel has the kind of low-speed heft you'd expect of such a car too while the exposed carbon fibre tub and aluminium kick plates are all very new-age supercar, likewise the TFT instrument cluster and paddleshifter gearbox. It's got the romance and heritage, including the made in Modena provenance.
Super enough to count as a supercar?
a real supercar
just four cylinders
though? Alfa Romeo certainly deserves credit for daring to say it can, perhaps sensing that 'true' supercars are descending into bloated self parody. Which brings us neatly to Clarkson pondering on prime-time telly whether or not the F12 is actually too powerful, a potentially significant indication the pendulum has begun to swing back from simple-minded faster, better, more willy waggling.
Certainly the 4C appears to reassert the driving experience as core, those looking for the kind of creature comforts 'full fat' supercars like a 458, R8 or SLS deliver likely to be distinctly nonplussed about the pared back feel. Or on-paper bragging rights. But as the performance of 'proper' supercars gets increasingly irrelevant to the kind of driving - road or track - that most owners can or want to do maybe it's time for the drivers among us to reclaim it, defined by our own terms. Are four cylinders enough though? Or can we embrace another measure like power to weight instead? Discuss...