Why are Porsche not seen as super cars ?

Why are Porsche not seen as super cars ?

Author
Discussion

ZeusF

Original Poster:

377 posts

123 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
My background is Porsche and I remember as a kid always wanting to own one and then at 28(ish) I got myself a 996t cab and was blown away by it. The feeling I had when I bought that car was immense and one that I've never reached again.
It drove fantastically and was super quick whilst sticking to the road like shiatsu to a blanket.

It looked stunning, drove superbly and was as quick as almost anything else on the road so my question is this:

Why is it that Porsche cars are not seen as super cars ?
They are better all round than Lamborghini and Ferrari so I just can't understand.

TobyLaRohne

5,713 posts

206 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
ZeusF said:
Why is it that Porsche cars are not seen as super cars ?
They are better all round than Lamborghini and Ferrari so I just can't understand.
You clarified it yourself, supercars are compromised, Porsches generally are not, (918 excepted)

grumbledoak

31,532 posts

233 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
They are somewhat lacking in exclusivity too. Not much "Wow" factor when you can barely throw a rock without hitting one. hehe

toohuge

3,434 posts

216 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
I think price and design have to come into it too.....

When we look at the Italian counter parts, these are usually styled and designed and finished for that matter in a very particular way, obviously not designed for everyday use, but beautiful none the less. I think this has something to do with it and then the price AND availability of said cars is a huge factor.

Until the Ferrari 360 and Lamborghini Gallardo (probably Murcielago too) these cars were relatively difficult to get hold of, had massive running costs and questionable reliability. The price was also a big deal too, the base Ferrari or Lamborghini is usually the cost of a top spec 911t, now the price gap is enormous.

The Carrera GT is a super car, it is rare, very expensive and has some of the shortfalls mentioned above.
Chris

Carl_Docklands

12,160 posts

262 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all

It's cost, almost three times as many f458 in uk than gen 2 turbo.

MGJohn

10,203 posts

183 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Twelve or eight cylinders are "better" than six. Plus silly place to put an engine and bloke down the road has one so does a relative.

Whichever way you measure it, they are the most successful manufacturer of "sports" cars though.

Callughan

6,312 posts

192 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Some of their models are some are not.

s2000db

1,155 posts

153 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Don't worry mate it was all going swimmingly, until the supposed 'supercar's' meets venue was mentioned....

Chigwell, Essex! roflroflrofl

Klippie

3,122 posts

145 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Super car or not I'd rather have one that not have one.

ZeusF

Original Poster:

377 posts

123 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Klippie said:
Super car or not I'd rather have one that not have one.
Amen,
Ive owned Ferrari and Lamborghini but the 911 was the one that I will remember until the day I die.

AndrewIC

559 posts

168 months

Friday 1st August 2014
quotequote all
Perhaps it's a German thing, if you think back, they haven't ever really made a supercar apart from the Carrera GT and 959 (which some people would say never was one even though performance wise it certainly was).

From memory the SLR was mainly a McLaren effort.

Xpuffin

9,209 posts

205 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
The defining part of a supercar is the position of its engine.
If it's not in the middle then it's either a GT or an........erm.


ZeusF

Original Poster:

377 posts

123 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
The defining part of a supercar is the engine in the rear, the stability to handle the power and the looks to make it striking.

Porsche are the best IMO but as above, it has to be down to the fact that there are so many around. I would guess that anyone who actually drives one and then the equivalent will be unable to argue against it.
There are not many cars you can buy, drive to the shops for the local newspaper and milk, drive back home and make a coffee then back in the car to your local track and blast the car for a few hours on a RWYB day and then drive back home.

Rockster

1,508 posts

160 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
Except for the Carrera GT and the new 918 the other models do not qualify as super cars. The bar has been raised substantially above their performance level.

This doesn't mean the rest of the Porsche models are slugs.

My 03 Turbo back in its heyday was quite close to a super car and its performance even today is very impressive.

davek_964

8,807 posts

175 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
ZeusF said:
The defining part of a supercar is the engine in the rear, the stability to handle the power and the looks to make it striking.

Porsche are the best IMO but as above, it has to be down to the fact that there are so many around. I would guess that anyone who actually drives one and then the equivalent will be unable to argue against it.

I own one, and I'm afraid I would argue against it. I've been very happy with my 996 turbo - but supercar? No.

Engine and stability do not make a supercar. If they did, Nissan GTR would be counted and maybe even some of the BMW Ms. For me, they are very (very) quick, but supercar? No.

Looks do play a big part I'd say - but then, I'd say that counts against most Porsche. The 911s have a very defined classic shape, and they all look like sports cars (Cayenne aside) but they do not look like supercars. They are too ordinary and too common. Carrera GT is a super car.

Porsche make very capable cars, but they are not generally supercars in most peoples opinions. I also think your earlier comment that they are "better in every way" is a tad subjective. My 996 turbo is better at some things than my 360 - but on a sunny day, and a twisty road - the turbo stays on my driveway.

alexisn

248 posts

135 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
How do you define a 'supercar'? Rarity, price or does it have to be Italian? If so I would rather have a super Porsche

mollytherocker

14,366 posts

209 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
The problem with a lot of supercars is that they have a small window of operation. Ie, they are amazing at very high speed on a wide road but useless as a road car most of the time. A Diablo for example. An F1 car is probably the ultimate example of a very specific and tiny window of operation.

All cars are a compromise between a multitude of factors, even more extreme models like the GT3. The more you steer towards a high speed track use design, the more you compromise low speed usability. Of course, technology has helped widen this window over the years.

The 911 Turbo has blurred the lines between road car and supercar for 40 years and probably has the ultimate mix of supercar and every day usability.

bigunit00

890 posts

147 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
davek_964 said:
I own one, and I'm afraid I would argue against it. I've been very happy with my 996 turbo - but supercar? No.

Engine and stability do not make a supercar. If they did, Nissan GTR would be counted and maybe even some of the BMW Ms. For me, they are very (very) quick, but supercar? No.

Looks do play a big part I'd say - but then, I'd say that counts against most Porsche. The 911s have a very defined classic shape, and they all look like sports cars (Cayenne aside) but they do not look like supercars. They are too ordinary and too common. Carrera GT is a super car.

Porsche make very capable cars, but they are not generally supercars in most peoples opinions. I also think your earlier comment that they are "better in every way" is a tad subjective. My 996 turbo is better at some things than my 360 - but on a sunny day, and a twisty road - the turbo stays on my driveway.
I thought you had a nice 348. Did you change to a 360? Which do you prefer?

jackal

11,248 posts

282 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
ZeusF said:
My background is Porsche and I remember as a kid always wanting to own one and then at 28(ish) I got myself a 996t cab and was blown away by it. The feeling I had when I bought that car was immense and one that I've never reached again.
It drove fantastically and was super quick whilst sticking to the road like shiatsu to a blanket.

It looked stunning, drove superbly and was as quick as almost anything else on the road so my question is this:

Why is it that Porsche cars are not seen as super cars ?
They are better all round than Lamborghini and Ferrari so I just can't understand.
Thank the Lord they are not supercars.

I want other folk to think that I like driving, not that I am looking for attention and compensating for a banal and colourless personality. I also don't sell fork lift trucks out of some warehouse in huddersfield either.

Joking aside though, the whole supercar thing has become increasingly more naff and embarassing in the last decade IMO. The culture that surrounds them, the whole knightsbridge thing, all those rap videos, the fact that a lot of them are designed in really poor taste and are so big and chock full of technology. If supercars were ever cool and classy they certainly aren't any more .... like a lot of things that money buys I guess.

av185

18,502 posts

127 months

Saturday 2nd August 2014
quotequote all
It will be interesting to see Porsches planned 2017 988 quad turbo flat eight which is tipped as a direct competitor to the 650S and 458 facelift but with even more usability. Having been lucky enough to inspect both the 918 and Hurracan at Geneva, the 918 as a Hypercar appeared eminently more usable than the Lamborghini so practical Porsche supercars could well be increasingly 'common'.....thumbup