What was the first 'hyper car'?
Discussion
P1H said:
This is entirely off topic and I know top speed isn't important, but can anyone explain why the P1 can't accelerate the way it does, handle the way it does, bake the way it does, but also crack 240mph?
I just feel that it should.....
Your post seems to read a little wrong. Im guessing its either limited,gearing or downforce related.I just feel that it should.....
P1H said:
This is entirely off topic and I know top speed isn't important, but can anyone explain why the P1 can't accelerate the way it does, handle the way it does, bake the way it does, but also crack 240mph?
I just feel that it should.....
It was never made for top speed, not to say that could not be, but was not the goal set out for the P1..I just feel that it should.....
007 VXR said:
It was never made for top speed, not to say that could not be, but was not the goal set out for the P1..
Absolutely and the other factors above are relevant. I just feel like as an era defining car it should do everything better, not 9/10 (or any other arbitrary proportion) things better than it's ageing predecessor.
Edit: spelling
kambites said:
It was also the first car mentioned by name in that video posted above, so it probably wins. 
Sadly the 60's 'don't count' though as the OP only wanted modern hyper cars 
Regardless I'm going to stick with my choice of the old Ford. It ticks every Hypercar box IMO, and it appears a few others agree so its not just me being a fool for a change
The clue is in the word 'hype'. There is no definitive answer; it's like asking who the first celeb was or the first superstar .The question really should be when was the term first used and by whom and in relation to what.And if the answer is the EB110 for example why can't it retrospectively be applied to the Royale, which makes the Veyron look a masterpiece of understatement and taste.
An interesting thread. I have a slightly skewed view on what makes a hypercar rather than a sportscar. I think that the hypercar element actually only applies to those exclusive models that "cost" the builder more to make than they could ever possibly recover through sales. It's the makers mark being left for generations to see how good they could actually make the car almost without restriction. Whilst it is somewhat suicidal for a business to sell a product for less than it costs to build it shows that they are either a ballsy enough operation to put out a loss leader for marketing purposes or fabulously well off and have the ability to showcase their skills despite there not being a market at the right level. Either way maximum respect to them for doing it as these cars wouldn't exist without their efforts.
On the basis of the above I would think that the Mclaren F1 and Veyron certainly fit into that bracket. Not sure what else?
On the basis of the above I would think that the Mclaren F1 and Veyron certainly fit into that bracket. Not sure what else?
DanielSan said:
Ford GT40 surely? First road car to hit 200mph.
Was it? It doesn't get a mention in Wiki's fastest production cars article - it goes from the 959 at 195mph (1986) to the F40 at 202 (1987).It was nevr used because at the time the term supercar still meant something but, in a historical context, the Countach was the first "F*** me, look at that" car - poster car, performance car, ultimate car. That's the one for me that signalled the bridge from the 60s cars to what I see as a hypercar compared to its peers.
LuS1fer said:
It was nevr used because at the time the term supercar still meant something but, in a historical context, the Countach was the first "F*** me, look at that" car - poster car, performance car, ultimate car. That's the one for me that signalled the bridge from the 60s cars to what I see as a hypercar compared to its peers.
Er, don't you mean the Miura?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff