RE: Driven: Noble M600 (Production Version)
Discussion
Colvette said:
Corvette Z06 - 505bhp, 0-60 3.8 seconds, circa £50k ($40k-ish second hand)
Corvette ZR1 - 658bhp (IIRC), 0-60 3.2 seconds, circa £80k.
Both include all kinda of driving aids, air-con, cruise, sat-nav, HUD.
So I'd have a choice of 1 M600, or 2 ZR1's and enough money to holiday in fine style for the next 10 years?
Decisions, decisions...
You could extend this argument to all of the established European supercar marques.Corvette ZR1 - 658bhp (IIRC), 0-60 3.2 seconds, circa £80k.
Both include all kinda of driving aids, air-con, cruise, sat-nav, HUD.
So I'd have a choice of 1 M600, or 2 ZR1's and enough money to holiday in fine style for the next 10 years?
Decisions, decisions...
Shame they dont make them RHD.... maybe this is what Noble is charging the extra £120k for ;-)
I really wanted to hate this car, because Lee Noble seemed to get dumped and it was way way more expensive than what they delivered before.
However, having looked at the F458 Italia and it's silly bling headlights and it's electronics that save all the rich folk but not from the rear catching fire, I do think this is a great antidote to that TREND.
Looking at the above, if you turned up with the above to a PH meet will not get sand kicked in your face
On Friday we should have Noble Street Parties.
It's Britsh Royality.
Andy
However, having looked at the F458 Italia and it's silly bling headlights and it's electronics that save all the rich folk but not from the rear catching fire, I do think this is a great antidote to that TREND.
Looking at the above, if you turned up with the above to a PH meet will not get sand kicked in your face
On Friday we should have Noble Street Parties.
It's Britsh Royality.
Andy
jamie g said:
It's £200k because it is exclusive, hand built, using quality materials and components. If they could sell 500 a year they'd be half the price.
But if they sold 500 a year, then you'd have the EU government nannies kicking in that it needs ABS, airbags, and a lot of other useless crap that would only make it heavier and slower...Much as I'd love to see something like this succeed - it's hard to see it happening...
Small-volume supercars need a hook - Zonda did it through making a car with a particular style (the interior is arguably "hooker's handbag" but it's still a style!) and they seem to be doing OK. Koenigsegg - I'm not really sure what their hook is OTHER than the fact they make insanely powerful cars.
Noble tho - their background is making fine-handling trackday cars with Ford engines hidden in the back - I suspect they were a home for former Esprit owners for a while - and for 1/3rd the price of a Ferrari, so suddenly making a car which is MORE than a Ferrari - erm...
I've always assumed the money for small volume supercars mostly comes from the middle-east - anything they can nail gold foil and swarovski crystals to - but this doesn't fit that bill at all so...
GL to em - they're gonna need it.
Small-volume supercars need a hook - Zonda did it through making a car with a particular style (the interior is arguably "hooker's handbag" but it's still a style!) and they seem to be doing OK. Koenigsegg - I'm not really sure what their hook is OTHER than the fact they make insanely powerful cars.
Noble tho - their background is making fine-handling trackday cars with Ford engines hidden in the back - I suspect they were a home for former Esprit owners for a while - and for 1/3rd the price of a Ferrari, so suddenly making a car which is MORE than a Ferrari - erm...
I've always assumed the money for small volume supercars mostly comes from the middle-east - anything they can nail gold foil and swarovski crystals to - but this doesn't fit that bill at all so...
GL to em - they're gonna need it.
This production version with a complete body made of carbon fibre saves 50kg over the prototype (which presumably was GRP or Aluminium??). I would love to know what the cost attributed to this Weight saving actually is?
Would it be a better value car if it weight 50kg more but cost £50k Less??
Or is there a structural rigidity gain for the Carbon Fibre body on this car as well?
Anyone know........
Would it be a better value car if it weight 50kg more but cost £50k Less??
Or is there a structural rigidity gain for the Carbon Fibre body on this car as well?
Anyone know........
SimonV8ster said:
I like the write up but does anybody think the photos in the article are a bit poor ? Not much point taking pictures in night time and the article goes on about the interior and then you don't actually see it ?
Was that interior shot of the Noble? I had assumed that because there was a very prominent mass produced, naff and awful plastic stalk that I was looking at a heavily barried Saxo?If that was the Noble then why would the company think they could use something like that in a car aimed at a Market which does not expect or accept it?
The same Steve Sutcliffe has a column in Autocar this week (the same one with the Noble review) where he talks about Ferrari not wanting to produce anything other than their highest spec with a carbon fibre chassis. They point out about the necessity to X-ray the chassis for even a minor bump. The point he was making was to question the McLaren, concluding that their no-cost warranty might sort the problem. What about the Noble?!
Is anyone going to miss the .02 secs (or whatever) the 50Kg saved with a carbon fibre chassis?
To me, as much as I like the idea of top flight british sports cars, Noble's approach is what annoys me most about the UK car industry of late. Too expensive, instantly going for the 'look past the styling/ built in a shed/ parts bin/ etc. aspects, just look at the speed/ handling/ etc.'. Sorry, but for this price you need a package not a sales gimmick.
McLaren, in my opinion, have got it right (from a business point of view) - good (non offensive) styling, excellent build/ engineering, well priced, and even more importantly you cannot escape the fact that they have 'a plan'. Noble have marginalised themselves straight away by emphasising something minor that most drivers wont experience (high end performance) and unforgivably ignored something as important as basic looks!
The clocks ticking, goodwill will only carry them so far. They seem to be following Marcos' business model...
McLaren's going to give them a kicking.
Is anyone going to miss the .02 secs (or whatever) the 50Kg saved with a carbon fibre chassis?
To me, as much as I like the idea of top flight british sports cars, Noble's approach is what annoys me most about the UK car industry of late. Too expensive, instantly going for the 'look past the styling/ built in a shed/ parts bin/ etc. aspects, just look at the speed/ handling/ etc.'. Sorry, but for this price you need a package not a sales gimmick.
McLaren, in my opinion, have got it right (from a business point of view) - good (non offensive) styling, excellent build/ engineering, well priced, and even more importantly you cannot escape the fact that they have 'a plan'. Noble have marginalised themselves straight away by emphasising something minor that most drivers wont experience (high end performance) and unforgivably ignored something as important as basic looks!
The clocks ticking, goodwill will only carry them so far. They seem to be following Marcos' business model...
McLaren's going to give them a kicking.
kambites said:
The chassis isn't carbon fibre.
And they aren't really looking to compete with the Mclaren. They're only aiming to sell 30 a year, does anyone seriously think they'll struggle to do that?
Time will tell, I don't think they'll last 3 years without some drastic changes to their business plan (not that I know the detail but they need a cheaper/ better looking car for 'volume' sales).And they aren't really looking to compete with the Mclaren. They're only aiming to sell 30 a year, does anyone seriously think they'll struggle to do that?
fatbutt said:
The same Steve Sutcliffe has a column in Autocar this week (the same one with the Noble review) where he talks about Ferrari not wanting to produce anything other than their highest spec with a carbon fibre chassis. They point out about the necessity to X-ray the chassis for even a minor bump. The point he was making was to question the McLaren, concluding that their no-cost warranty might sort the problem. What about the Noble?!
Is anyone going to miss the .02 secs (or whatever) the 50Kg saved with a carbon fibre chassis?
To me, as much as I like the idea of top flight british sports cars, Noble's approach is what annoys me most about the UK car industry of late. Too expensive, instantly going for the 'look past the styling/ built in a shed/ parts bin/ etc. aspects, just look at the speed/ handling/ etc.'. Sorry, but for this price you need a package not a sales gimmick.
McLaren, in my opinion, have got it right (from a business point of view) - good (non offensive) styling, excellent build/ engineering, well priced, and even more importantly you cannot escape the fact that they have 'a plan'. Noble have marginalised themselves straight away by emphasising something minor that most drivers wont experience (high end performance) and unforgivably ignored something as important as basic looks!
The clocks ticking, goodwill will only carry them so far. They seem to be following Marcos' business model...
McLaren's going to give them a kicking.
It would be difficult to argue with you. Is anyone going to miss the .02 secs (or whatever) the 50Kg saved with a carbon fibre chassis?
To me, as much as I like the idea of top flight british sports cars, Noble's approach is what annoys me most about the UK car industry of late. Too expensive, instantly going for the 'look past the styling/ built in a shed/ parts bin/ etc. aspects, just look at the speed/ handling/ etc.'. Sorry, but for this price you need a package not a sales gimmick.
McLaren, in my opinion, have got it right (from a business point of view) - good (non offensive) styling, excellent build/ engineering, well priced, and even more importantly you cannot escape the fact that they have 'a plan'. Noble have marginalised themselves straight away by emphasising something minor that most drivers wont experience (high end performance) and unforgivably ignored something as important as basic looks!
The clocks ticking, goodwill will only carry them so far. They seem to be following Marcos' business model...
McLaren's going to give them a kicking.
My own view is the car is over priced by 100k. The again it could be argued wtf do I know as I won't be blowing 200k on a car regardless.
Edited by Johnboy Mac on Monday 25th April 18:10
Scuffers said:
I am still to be convinced that this is anything special (as in £200K special) when the McLaren/Ferrari/etc are all cheaper and arguably more compedant.
What is this compedant you speak of?If I was in a financial position to purchase one, I would certainly consider one.
I don't think they're overpriced and would be extremely surprised if they didnt sell.
Edited by gareth.e on Monday 25th April 18:19
Colvette said:
Corvette Z06 - 505bhp, 0-60 3.8 seconds, circa £50k ($40k-ish second hand)
Corvette ZR1 - 658bhp (IIRC), 0-60 3.2 seconds, circa £80k.
Both include all kinda of driving aids, air-con, cruise, sat-nav, HUD.
So I'd have a choice of 1 M600, or 2 ZR1's and enough money to holiday in fine style for the next 10 years?
Decisions, decisions...
Or you could buy a £2000 motorbike for 1% of the amount and get to 60mph in under 3 seconds... Corvette ZR1 - 658bhp (IIRC), 0-60 3.2 seconds, circa £80k.
Both include all kinda of driving aids, air-con, cruise, sat-nav, HUD.
So I'd have a choice of 1 M600, or 2 ZR1's and enough money to holiday in fine style for the next 10 years?
Decisions, decisions...
and then you could "holiday in fine style for the next 40 years.."
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff