Cheapest Supercar
Discussion
McSam said:
urely hypercars are a subset of supercars and entirely eligible here?
Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
I like including height, now I think we're getting somewhere. But to be sure, we also need it to be very wide and menacing, so how about multiply by width^2 and divide by (height above 40 inches)^2?
But by accepting this subsect even exists it permits the marketing people to devalue the term 'supercar' and use it to sell cars that are very clearly not. As seen in this thread that BMW hatchbacks are being mooted as supercars. Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
I like including height, now I think we're getting somewhere. But to be sure, we also need it to be very wide and menacing, so how about multiply by width^2 and divide by (height above 40 inches)^2?
Edited by McSam on Thursday 26th March 10:12
Just like all minicabs are now 'executive' regardless of the levels of cum, vomit and blood swilling around inside, every hotel room is 'premier' regardless of levels of faecal waste smeared across every surface or every flat being sold is a 'luxury apartment' regardless of the dog on a rope neighbours and nightly gunfights outside, so the ghastly little nylon suited, handbag sporting, bearded sausage flautists of the marketing industry have coined the term hypercar to allow them to devalue the term supercar and sell generic, utility s
t boxes by the million to debt riddled, soppy minded, Peter Andre wannabes. Just saying.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Thursday 26th March 12:42
Nigel_O said:
I'm still of the opinion that there can never be a definition of supercar, whether simplistic or formulaic, for the simple reason that its relative.
If you're a teenager in a rusty old Punto Mk2 / Clio / Corsa B etc, then a ten year old Impreza or Golf R32 etc is a supercar and a twenty year old Ferrari F355 is an unachievable dream car.
If you're fortunate enough to own an F355, you've probably realised that its no longer the supercar that it was when it was launched and you're sick of being out-dragged by RS Focuses (Focii?) and GolfRs, so your definition of "supercar" is now up to 458, Huracan, R8 V10 Plus, etc
Back onto the original topic of "cheapest supercar" - perhaps we've hit on the answer - its an oxymoron - as soon as any car that was once regarded as "super" becomes affordable, its supercar status is automatically forfeited
A chart of Supercars by decade is what is req'd, mass vote for each and it's in or out.If you're a teenager in a rusty old Punto Mk2 / Clio / Corsa B etc, then a ten year old Impreza or Golf R32 etc is a supercar and a twenty year old Ferrari F355 is an unachievable dream car.
If you're fortunate enough to own an F355, you've probably realised that its no longer the supercar that it was when it was launched and you're sick of being out-dragged by RS Focuses (Focii?) and GolfRs, so your definition of "supercar" is now up to 458, Huracan, R8 V10 Plus, etc
Back onto the original topic of "cheapest supercar" - perhaps we've hit on the answer - its an oxymoron - as soon as any car that was once regarded as "super" becomes affordable, its supercar status is automatically forfeited
For example a Countach must always be in even it it get beat eventually by a Focus!
As per the original question I can't see past a Pantera or at a push a v8 Esprit as 4 cylinder ones just can't be a proper Supercar.
CO2000 said:
A chart of Supercars by decade is what is req'd, mass vote for each and it's in or out.
For example a Countach must always be in even it it get beat eventually by a Focus!
As per the original question I can't see past a Pantera or at a push a v8 Esprit as 4 cylinder ones just can't be a proper Supercar.
For me, the Patera and Esprit would definitely be supercars because of their 'poster' appeal. For example a Countach must always be in even it it get beat eventually by a Focus!
As per the original question I can't see past a Pantera or at a push a v8 Esprit as 4 cylinder ones just can't be a proper Supercar.
DonkeyApple said:
McSam said:
urely hypercars are a subset of supercars and entirely eligible here?
Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
But by accepting this subsect even exists it permits the marketing people to devalue the term 'supercar' and use it to sell cars that are very clearly not. As seen in this thread that BMW hatchbacks are being mooted as supercars. Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
Just like all minicabs are now 'executive' regardless of the levels of cum, vomit and blood swilling around inside, every hotel room is 'premier' regardless of levels of faecal waste smeared across every surface or every flat being sold is a 'luxury apartment' regardless of the dog on a rope neighbours and nightly gunfights outside, so the ghastly little nylon suited, handbag sporting, bearded sausage flautists of the marketing industry have coined the term hypercar to allow them to devalue the term supercar and sell generic, utility s
t boxes by the million to debt riddled, soppy minded, Peter Andre wannabes. Just saying.
So you propose that the very existence of the "hypercar" means that in fact, only these should be considered true supercars, and anything else becomes a bit limp-wristed by comparison?
It's quite amazing that the market has become so developed that we now have six hundred horsepower mid-engined Italian cars that just aren't really supercars by the modern yardstick
gavsdavs said:
Giggle - my bid for supercarness 
Toyota MR2 V6
[ Cylinders x Capacity x Exhausts ] / [ Driven Wheels x Doors x Wipers ]
[ 6 * 3.5 * 2 ] / [ 2 * 2 * 2 ] = 42/8 = 5.25
Mid engined - Check
Tries to kill you - Check
Chunks of hand built metal - check.
Zero nanny electronics (ABS/TC/ESP/etc) - check.
Agreed on the exhausts metric - most cars really only have one, regardless of vanity tips.
How about 'does not have a cooking version sibling' ??
Do we need to factor in turbo chargers and superchargers to the capacity bit? The F40 was only a 2.9, but that doesn't tell the whole story.Toyota MR2 V6
[ Cylinders x Capacity x Exhausts ] / [ Driven Wheels x Doors x Wipers ]
[ 6 * 3.5 * 2 ] / [ 2 * 2 * 2 ] = 42/8 = 5.25
Mid engined - Check
Tries to kill you - Check
Chunks of hand built metal - check.
Zero nanny electronics (ABS/TC/ESP/etc) - check.
Agreed on the exhausts metric - most cars really only have one, regardless of vanity tips.
How about 'does not have a cooking version sibling' ??
McSam said:
DonkeyApple said:
McSam said:
urely hypercars are a subset of supercars and entirely eligible here?
Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
But by accepting this subsect even exists it permits the marketing people to devalue the term 'supercar' and use it to sell cars that are very clearly not. As seen in this thread that BMW hatchbacks are being mooted as supercars. Something like a Carrera GT or a LaFerrari doesn't become not a supercar because it's an amazingly excessive supercar that has earnt a higher name!
Just like all minicabs are now 'executive' regardless of the levels of cum, vomit and blood swilling around inside, every hotel room is 'premier' regardless of levels of faecal waste smeared across every surface or every flat being sold is a 'luxury apartment' regardless of the dog on a rope neighbours and nightly gunfights outside, so the ghastly little nylon suited, handbag sporting, bearded sausage flautists of the marketing industry have coined the term hypercar to allow them to devalue the term supercar and sell generic, utility s
t boxes by the million to debt riddled, soppy minded, Peter Andre wannabes. Just saying.
So you propose that the very existence of the "hypercar" means that in fact, only these should be considered true supercars, and anything else becomes a bit limp-wristed by comparison?
It's quite amazing that the market has become so developed that we now have six hundred horsepower mid-engined Italian cars that just aren't really supercars by the modern yardstick
My personal view is that it has to make you stop and look at it for being a thing of beauty and craftsmanship, even taking into account that beauty is subjective. At the same time it can't be convenient. It has to be very low and a pain in the arse to go shopping with. Plus, exotically priced and limited in supply.
I don't think that the hypercar group is the supercar group. The supercar group expands beyond just Hypercars but by placing these giants back into the supercar catagory it makes it easier to kick the pretenders out at the bottom end as they suddenly stand out as being wrong.
I think you need to imagine a car next to a hypercar and ask yourself whether it is exotic enough, striking enough, desireable and sufficiently unavailable enough to sit next to a P1 or LA Ferrari etc.
Defining the top of the supercar range is easy but by moving these cars into their own bracket it muddies the waters at the bottom end where there are 100s of supercar slayers in terms of performance or even price but when put next to a top tier supercar are shown up as not being in the same league.
There was a guy that built a Model-T hot rod with a Jag V12.
!2 cylinders, 12 exhausts, no doors, no wipers (the screen folds).
So supercar, it's a divide by zero error.
[ Cylinders x Exhaust Pipes ] / [ Doors x Wipers ]
On the basis of the above, for me "Supercar" [over sports or GT], starts at 8.0 and goes up.
!2 cylinders, 12 exhausts, no doors, no wipers (the screen folds).
So supercar, it's a divide by zero error.
emicen said:
zedx19 said:
Define "Supercar".
The inherent supercarness of any car can be defined with one simple formula. Its the same formula that explained why your mate's Saxo was so much cooler than your dad's Montego estate:[ Cylinders x Exhaust Pipes ] / [ Doors x Wipers ]
| Vehicle | Cylinders | Exhausts | Doors | Wipers | Supercarness |
| Diablo | 12 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 24.0 |
| Gallardo | 8 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 8.0 |
| M135i | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 6.0 |
| M6 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5.3 |
| M5 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4.0 |
| DBS | 12 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4.0 |
| Golf R | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1.8 |
| Golf R 5dr | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1.1 |
On the basis of the above, for me "Supercar" [over sports or GT], starts at 8.0 and goes up.
DonkeyApple said:
We live in a world today where a cheap hatchback can deliver truly staggering performance so I feel the performance aspect isn't the crucial metric that it once was. Obviously the supercar has to have top performance but it's no longer a controlling/defining metric.
My personal view is that it has to make you stop and look at it for being a thing of beauty and craftsmanship, even taking into account that beauty is subjective. At the same time it can't be convenient. It has to be very low and a pain in the arse to go shopping with. Plus, exotically priced and limited in supply.
I don't think that the hypercar group is the supercar group. The supercar group expands beyond just Hypercars but by placing these giants back into the supercar catagory it makes it easier to kick the pretenders out at the bottom end as they suddenly stand out as being wrong.
I think you need to imagine a car next to a hypercar and ask yourself whether it is exotic enough, striking enough, desireable and sufficiently unavailable enough to sit next to a P1 or LA Ferrari etc.
Defining the top of the supercar range is easy but by moving these cars into their own bracket it muddies the waters at the bottom end where there are 100s of supercar slayers in terms of performance or even price but when put next to a top tier supercar are shown up as not being in the same league.
Completely agree with all points. Whether you'd consider it exotic and exciting when next to something truly top-tier is a good way to define it.My personal view is that it has to make you stop and look at it for being a thing of beauty and craftsmanship, even taking into account that beauty is subjective. At the same time it can't be convenient. It has to be very low and a pain in the arse to go shopping with. Plus, exotically priced and limited in supply.
I don't think that the hypercar group is the supercar group. The supercar group expands beyond just Hypercars but by placing these giants back into the supercar catagory it makes it easier to kick the pretenders out at the bottom end as they suddenly stand out as being wrong.
I think you need to imagine a car next to a hypercar and ask yourself whether it is exotic enough, striking enough, desireable and sufficiently unavailable enough to sit next to a P1 or LA Ferrari etc.
Defining the top of the supercar range is easy but by moving these cars into their own bracket it muddies the waters at the bottom end where there are 100s of supercar slayers in terms of performance or even price but when put next to a top tier supercar are shown up as not being in the same league.
mr_spock said:
There was a guy that built a Model-T hot rod with a Jag V12.
!2 cylinders, 12 exhausts, no doors, no wipers (the screen folds).
So supercar, it's a divide by zero error.
[ Cylinders x Exhaust Pipes ] / [ Doors x Wipers ]
On the basis of the above, for me "Supercar" [over sports or GT], starts at 8.0 and goes up.
Correct, its a hotrod, not a supercar.!2 cylinders, 12 exhausts, no doors, no wipers (the screen folds).
So supercar, it's a divide by zero error.
emicen said:
zedx19 said:
Define "Supercar".
The inherent supercarness of any car can be defined with one simple formula. Its the same formula that explained why your mate's Saxo was so much cooler than your dad's Montego estate:[ Cylinders x Exhaust Pipes ] / [ Doors x Wipers ]
| Vehicle | Cylinders | Exhausts | Doors | Wipers | Supercarness |
| Diablo | 12 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 24.0 |
| Gallardo | 8 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 8.0 |
| M135i | 6 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 6.0 |
| M6 | 8 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5.3 |
| M5 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4.0 |
| DBS | 12 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 4.0 |
| Golf R | 4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1.8 |
| Golf R 5dr | 4 | 4 | 5 | 3 | 1.1 |
On the basis of the above, for me "Supercar" [over sports or GT], starts at 8.0 and goes up.
gavsdavs said:
VladD said:
Do we need to factor in turbo chargers and superchargers to the capacity bit? The F40 was only a 2.9, but that doesn't tell the whole story.
Yep - ditto rotaries.However, Mazda 787b = racecar not supercar, RX7 = sports car not supercar. At this point I'm out of memorable rotaries and they dont have cylinders so they'd be out of the equation.
DonkeyApple said:
But by accepting this subsect even exists it permits the marketing people to devalue the term 'supercar' and use it to sell cars that are very clearly not. As seen in this thread that BMW hatchbacks are being mooted as supercars.
Just like all minicabs are now 'executive' regardless of the levels of cum, vomit and blood swilling around inside, every hotel room is 'premier' regardless of levels of faecal waste smeared across every surface or every flat being sold is a 'luxury apartment' regardless of the dog on a rope neighbours and nightly gunfights outside, so the ghastly little nylon suited, handbag sporting, bearded sausage flautists of the marketing industry have coined the term hypercar to allow them to devalue the term supercar and sell generic, utility st boxes by the million to debt riddled, soppy minded, Peter Andre wannabes.
Just saying.
Top rant - bang on.Just like all minicabs are now 'executive' regardless of the levels of cum, vomit and blood swilling around inside, every hotel room is 'premier' regardless of levels of faecal waste smeared across every surface or every flat being sold is a 'luxury apartment' regardless of the dog on a rope neighbours and nightly gunfights outside, so the ghastly little nylon suited, handbag sporting, bearded sausage flautists of the marketing industry have coined the term hypercar to allow them to devalue the term supercar and sell generic, utility s
t boxes by the million to debt riddled, soppy minded, Peter Andre wannabes. Just saying.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Thursday 26th March 12:42
TobyLaRohne said:
Bargain cheap offering is a Corvette C6 Z06
Handbuilt Engine from the racecar factory not the production line
7.0 V8
Able to stand toe to toe all day with any other supercar in its class
2 Door
2 Seats
7.0 sounds like the devil himself clearing his throat
Low enough to drive under car park barriers
The biggest negatives to discount it as a supercar is there is a low performance model with a chassis made of pig iron and not aluminium and it is too reliable for a supercar.
Corvette is probably the cheapest and most reliable entry into supercars. A C4 or early C5 can be had in 4 figures and I've seen C4 ZR1s for low five figures.Handbuilt Engine from the racecar factory not the production line
7.0 V8
Able to stand toe to toe all day with any other supercar in its class
2 Door
2 Seats
7.0 sounds like the devil himself clearing his throat
Low enough to drive under car park barriers
The biggest negatives to discount it as a supercar is there is a low performance model with a chassis made of pig iron and not aluminium and it is too reliable for a supercar.
What about this approach:
[Cylinders x (Capacity + Turbos/Superchargers)] / [Height x Doors x Wipers]
[Cylinders x (Capacity + Turbos/Superchargers)] / [Height x Doors x Wipers]
| Car | Cylinders | Capacity | Turbos/Superchargers | Height | Doors | Wipers | Supercarness |
| Veyron | 16 | 8 | 4 | 1.20 | 2 | 1 | 80 |
| Diablo | 12 | 6 | 0 | 1.10 | 2 | 1 | 33 |
| Carerra GT | 10 | 5,7 | 0 | 1.17 | 2 | 1 | 24 |
| Lexus LFA | 10 | 4,8 | 0 | 1.22 | 2 | 1 | 20 |
| Gallardo | 10 | 5 | 0 | 1.18 | 2 | 2 | 11 |
| DBS | 12 | 6 | 0 | 1.27 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| TVR Griffith | 8 | 5 | 0 | 1.20 | 2 | 2 | 8 |
| 996 GT2 | 6 | 3,6 | 2 | 1.30 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| M6 | 8 | 4,4 | 2 | 1.37 | 3 | 2 | 6 |
| M5 | 8 | 4,4 | 2 | 1.47 | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| 996 TT | 6 | 3,6 | 2 | 1.30 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| GTR [R35] | 6 | 3,8 | 2 | 1.37 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
| M135i | 6 | 3 | 2 | 1.42 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Lotus Elise | 4 | 1,8 | 0 | 1.20 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Mazda MX5 | 4 | 1,8 | 0 | 1.24 | 2 | 2 | 1,5 |
| Golf R | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1.45 | 3 | 3 | 0,9 |
| MINI Cooper S JCW [R56] | 4 | 1,6 | 1 | 1.41 | 3 | 3 | 0,8 |
| Golf R 5dr | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1.45 | 5 | 3 | 0,6 |
| Motorway Rep Express | 4 | 2 | 0 | 1.45 | 5 | 3 | 0,4 |
| Motorway Junior Rep | 4 | 1,6 | 0 | 1.45 | 5 | 3 | 0,3 |
Edited by 1000TCR on Friday 27th March 06:41
1000TCR said:
What about this approach:
[Cylinders x (Capacity + Turbos/Superchargers)] / [Height x Doors x Wipers]
Still doesn't even remotely work for classics. For example, the 300SL gives:[Cylinders x (Capacity + Turbos/Superchargers)] / [Height x Doors x Wipers]
(6*(3+0))/(1.3*2*2) = 3.4
And that was the fastest road car in the world at time of release; the thing even won Le Mans outright! It has far more claim to the name "supercar" than something like the Gallardo, let alone the M135i.
Any formula that's going to work needs some sort of scaling of top speed against the fastest other production car in the world at the time of release, IMO.
kambites said:
Still doesn't even remotely work for classics. For example, the 300SL gives...
If this thread were called "define supercar" you might have a point!As it is, I am fairly sure that debate as to whether a $1m+ car should be included or not in a challenge for the cheapest supercar is pretty academic.
That's why we don't have to worry about whether classic supercars are "supercars" or not. They ain't cheap!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff