Supercars besides the usual Ferraris, Lambos, Porsches etc?

[F1GTRUeno]

RSK21 said:

F1GTRUeno said:

Pray tell, if it only applies to the very top end of Porsche then what Maserati apart from the MC12 is considered a supercar?

Bora ?

Merak ?

Khamsin?

3500 ?

To name a few.

Who knew that Maserati had a history pre the 1990s ?

I did.

The Bora, Merak, Khamsin and 3500 could all be considered sportscars/grand tourers, they weren't out and out supercars. Especially if we're saying Porsches don't count apart from the absolute top end.

Nice of you to assume that people don't know history though. Well done you.

[Vitorio]

DRVR said:

Only reason I specified 2-seats is to avoid people throwing in cars with back seats. By the ring of it here I have the impression some may consider a BMW M3 a supercar for example. But the F1 still doesn't have a back seat. It could be a single-seater too. It is still exotic. It's a supercar for sure.

So its a car with a single front seat for the driver and a split rear seat, sort of a 1+2 then?

DRVR said:

By Ferrari like I mean cars like the 308, 355, 458, 488 etc. The F40 is the most unferrari of all Ferraris really. It looks more like the Ford GT in many ways than any other street Ferrari. I would put the F40 in the Le Mans design category actually.

The F40... the pinacle of Ferrari evolution starting with the 308... unferrari..

I dont even

[DRVR]

k-ink said:

Your original thread was edited after I posted. So deal with it

Under the new rules I'd choose:

Ultima
Noble M600
Radical turbo nutter b'stard

No. It was there from the beginning. I edited only to make it BOLD as I stated in my editing footnote.

[anonymous-user]

Vitorio said:

DRVR said:

By Ferrari like I mean cars like the 308, 355, 458, 488 etc. The F40 is the most unferrari of all Ferraris really. It looks more like the Ford GT in many ways than any other street Ferrari. I would put the F40 in the Le Mans design category actually.

The F40... the pinacle of Ferrari evolution starting with the 308... unferrari..

I dont even

I've been following both these threads with some bemusement, but somehow missed that particular gem: 'slack-jawed bewilderment' doesn't even come close to describing how I feel now.

[DRVR]

Kendrik said:

Err, condition 6

Err, exception granted to those who have earned it, as already explained. GT40 is a real track car with more merit than any new fancy start up carbon fiber wrapped, high-tech modern fancy toy.

[DRVR]

VF7 said:

Does anybody now Monteverdi? A swiss manufacturer in the 70s/80s. They invented (and built) the 5 door Range Rover and this is their middle engined two seater supercar:

The Monteverdi Hai 450:

Oh yes, beautiful indeed and exclusive for sure.

[DRVR]

Vitorio said:

The F40... the pinacle of Ferrari evolution starting with the 308... unferrari..

I dont even

Roll all you want. But which road going Ferrari looked like the F40 before it? Now there were a boat load which looked like the 308 or the front engine GT ones.

This was one of the points of the F40 actually. It was different. When the F40 came out, many magazines commented on the influence of the GT40 and other Le Mans cars, including racing Ferrari models. But no road going Ferrari looked like it before it. I was in love with the F40 when it came out. I had everything there was to have on it. From posters to magazines to scale models. It was my hero and dream car.

[Erudite geezer]

I proffer this Datsun below:

[Some Gump]

DRVR,

Given that you're pretty much riding roughshod over anyone that voices an opinion, would it not have been better to simply dictate a list of what you call supercars, and then educate us all with it? I admit that I'm as guilty as anyone here - thinking that the F40 was probably the most Ferrari Ferrari I've ever been in, and much more Ferrari-esque than a 412. It might be that I have an inaccurate view of what a Ferrari should be though: My favourite 3 series Ferrari is the 348, and everyone knows they're the ginger stepchild of that evolutionary line.

[Mave]

DRVR said:

Roll all you want. But which road going Ferrari looked like the F40 before it? Now there were a boat load which looked like the 308 or the front engine GT ones.

It looks pretty much like an evolution of the 280 GTO which itself looks like an evolution of the 328. Much more "in family" with the 80s pininfarina cars than some of the later Ferraris you've allowed in the list...

[DRVR]

Erudite geezer said:

I proffer this Datsun below:

That's a Datsun? Wow. Would never think.

[DRVR]

Mave said:

It looks pretty much like an evolution of the 280 GTO which itself looks like an evolution of the 328. Much more "in family" with the 80s pininfarina cars than some of the later Ferraris you've allowed in the list...

I'm sorry but if you think the F40 looks like an evolution of the 288 GTO (which I think is what you meant instead of 280) then I'm at a loss. And the 288 came before the 328 so it can't be an evolution of it by the way.

But besides the round tail lights, there is almost nothing 288 GTO in the F40. Different cockpit style, different side facias, different profile, different everything really.

[Mave]

DRVR said:

Mave said:

It looks pretty much like an evolution of the 280 GTO which itself looks like an evolution of the 328. Much more "in family" with the 80s pininfarina cars than some of the later Ferraris you've allowed in the list...

I'm sorry but if you think the F40 looks like an evolution of the 288 GTO (which I think is what you meant instead of 280) then I'm at a loss. And the 288 came before the 328 so it can't be an evolution of it by the way.

But besides the round tail lights, there is almost nothing 288 GTO in the F40. Different cockpit style, different side facias, different profile, different everything really.

If you think an MR2 is Ferrari like but an F40 isn't then these posts are utterly, utterly pointless. I'm out.

[DRVR]

Mave said:

If you think an MR2 is Ferrari like but an F40 isn't then these posts are utterly, utterly pointless. I'm out.

Way to avoid admitting the mistakes you made in the prior post with the 280(probably 288) being an evolution of the 328, which came after it. Just bale out and sweep it under the carpet. Well done. This is the proper way to have an intelligible conversation for sure.

The MR2 looks like many Ferraris. It was inspired by the V8 3 series. So it resembles the 308, 328, 348 and even the 355, because that resembles the prior ones. Like I said the F40 resembles no road Ferrari before it. This was the point of the F40. It was a racing Ferrari for the streets. It didn't resemble the 328 or the Testarossa which where it's contemporaries or any road going model which came before.

[AW111]

F1GTRUeno said:

I did.

The Bora, Merak, Khamsin and 3500 could all be considered sportscars/grand tourers, they weren't out and out supercars. Especially if we're saying Porsches don't count apart from the absolute top end.

Nice of you to assume that people don't know history though. Well done you.

I would say the Bora counts as a supercar - I agree about the others.

[Dusty964]

DRVR said:

I'm sorry but if you think the F40 looks like an evolution of the 288 GTO (which I think is what you meant instead of 280) then I'm at a loss. And the 288 came before the 328 so it can't be an evolution of it by the way.

But besides the round tail lights, there is almost nothing 288 GTO in the F40. Different cockpit style, different side facias, different profile, different everything really.

What about the 288 Evoluzione?
What about 'the 288 came before the 328....does that not work the same way as the jag xj220 coming before the Porsche GT1 but the Jag still being 'Porsche like'.

Not much to add apart from that I hope this thread carries on.
Its spectacularly entertaining.

[Vitorio]

DRVR said:

Now there were a boat load which looked like the 308 or the front engine GT ones.

Which Ferrari looked like a 308 before the 308? Its the first mid engined road Ferrari FFS

And this line of thinking also makes the 360, F50 and Enzo unFerrari, as they dont take their styling from previous models.

DRVR said:

I'm sorry but if you think the F40 looks like an evolution of the 288 GTO (which I think is what you meant instead of 280) then I'm at a loss. And the 288 came before the 328 so it can't be an evolution of it by the way.

But besides the round tail lights, there is almost nothing 288 GTO in the F40. Different cockpit style, different side facias, different profile, different everything really.

The lineage is 308GTB > 288GTO > 288GTO Evoluzione (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_288_GTO#Evoluzione) > F40, ive seen all these in the metal side by side in maranello, and the evolution couldnt be more clear.


And i wonder about the porsche line as well, since the very car everyone associates with Porsche doesnt fit your definition of supercar at all (it's 2+2 rear engined GT/sportscar)


Oh and

DRVR said:

Way to avoid admitting the mistakes you made in the prior post with the 280(probably 288) being an evolution of the 328, which came after it. Just bale out and sweep it under the carpet. Well done. This is the proper way to have an intelligible conversation for sure.

Intelligible conversation

[Tuvra]

Always loved these:-

[Mave]

DRVR said:

Mave said:

If you think an MR2 is Ferrari like but an F40 isn't then these posts are utterly, utterly pointless. I'm out.

Way to avoid admitting the mistakes you made in the prior post with the 280(probably 288) being an evolution of the 328, which came after it. Just bale out and sweep it under the carpet. Well done. This is the proper way to have an intelligible conversation for sure.

The MR2 looks like many Ferraris. It was inspired by the V8 3 series. So it resembles the 308, 328, 348 and even the 355, because that resembles the prior ones. Like I said the F40 resembles no road Ferrari before it. This was the point of the F40. It was a racing Ferrari for the streets. It didn't resemble the 328 or the Testarossa which where it's contemporaries or any road going model which came before.

Sheesh. Ya got me there. I hit 328 instead of 308. 2 pininfarina cars clearly part of the same family, but obviously different enough in your mindl to be pivotal to the discussion.

I bow down to your clearly superior knowledge that an MR2 is more Ferrari like than an F40. Even though it has a straight 4 rather than a V8. Trademark pininfarina straight edges everywhere. Completely different c pillar buttresses. But hey, if YOU say it looks like so many Ferraris then who am I to disagree? :-P

Edited by Mave on Tuesday 30th August 08:26

[DRVR]

Mave said:

Sheesh. Ya got me there. I hit 328 instead of 308. 2 pininfarina cars clearly part of the same family, but obviously different enough in your mindl to be pivotal to the discussion.

I bow down to your clearly superior knowledge that an MR2 is more Ferrari like than an F40. Even though it has a straight 4 rather than a V8. Trademark pininfarina straight edges everywhere. Completely different c pillar buttresses. But hey, if YOU say it looks like so many Ferraris then who am I to disagree? :-P

Edited by Mave on Tuesday 30th August 08:26

Stop being dense for the sake of supporting your points. You know very well I was talking style of the MR2 and not performance! What does it matter what engine it has?

As for having got you, I just got into the ridiculous party mood going on here. People are picking even on grammar mistakes and bringing up all sorts of things which has nothing to do with the topic, just to mess it up.

I wonder how many posting have actually driven a powerful middle-engine sports car let alone owned one. There seems to be a lot of "my favorite car is a supercar" going on here. But yet it doesn't seem people are speaking from actual experience of having these types of car. Not every middle-engine car is a supercar. Not every cool car is a supercar. If somebody has never driven them, then I can see why they might all be the same for them.

When I said the F40 was unferrari, I meant it was the most different of all Ferraris STYLE WISE when it came out. Obviously since then there are others which took styling ques from it. I thought I would not have to point out the obvious.

The F40 didn't follow any molds of road going Ferraris. And the tackled on aberration which was the Evoluzione was designed that way as a design exercise for the F40. They were already working on the F40. It's basically like they made a body kit for the 288 GTO to look like the F40. It was basically a proof of concept. They could as well have called it F38. They were already working towards that goal. It is more a prototype of the F40 using the 288 as a mule than a version of the 288 itself. This is why it was never really produced. They only made 5 of them. But the final design of the F40, again looked nothing like any road going Ferrari before it. The Evoluzione was basically a concept car.And the final F40 design is still different. It has flatter lines than the Evoluzione, because the Evoluzione, again, was a tackled on flatter lines body kit put on a more curved car. It looked awful. But considering the Evoluzione anything else other than a F40 prototype is not knowing the history of the car. It was the F40 fetus. Not really a 288 in itself. The 288 was just the mule.