Cheapest Supercar

[The Moose]

Wondering what th cheapest Supercar is. I guess that will mean different things to people as people tend to have different views of what a Supercar is. E.G. My neighbour thinks my 996 C2 daily beater is a Supercar!

So, what do you consider to be the cheapest Supercar?

[The Moose]

43034 said:

Very loose term of Supercar (more of a GT) but Maserati 3200 is cheap (to buy).

Always surprises me you can pick one up for under 5 figures.

I'd like to be able to drive it without having to have a low loader following me to pick it up

[The Moose]

ChemicalChaos said:

Does a Ferrari 328/348 count as a supercar supercar?

I don't know. Does it?

[The Moose]

mwstewart said:

Ferrari 360 or early Gallardos are the cheapest supercars I can think of.

I guess some people wouldn't call the Gallardo a supercar. I guess that's just it - everyone defines these things differently.

[The Moose]

mwstewart said:

The Moose said:

I guess some people wouldn't call the Gallardo a supercar. I guess that's just it - everyone defines these things differently.

I could understand that being said about an R8, but certainly not a Gallardo.

Why's that?

Not being argumentative - curious really!

[The Moose]

mwstewart said:

The Moose said:

Why's that?

Not being argumentative - curious really!

It doesn't have the theatre of its Italian brother. A fantastic car but very sanitised in comparison.

I must say, I know it's controversial, but I found the Gallardo sanitised to be honest.

[The Moose]

DonkeyApple said:

The Moose said:

mwstewart said:

The Moose said:

I guess some people wouldn't call the Gallardo a supercar. I guess that's just it - everyone defines these things differently.

I could understand that being said about an R8, but certainly not a Gallardo.

Why's that?

Not being argumentative - curious really!

It's obviously subjective but I think of cars like the Gallardo as being right on the divide.

They clearly have supercar looks and performance and I feel it is neither right nor wrong to argue either way but for my tuppence I do not view the standard Gallardo as a supercar yet I do some of the specials. It's a fine line.

The Gallardo to all intents and purposes mass produced, mostly by robots and is loaded with weight adding luxuries like electric seats etc bit is also an immensely practical car.

Take one of the specials, it is limited in numbers so has genuine rarity. You can't just phone up and have one bought and delivered same day. It has all the little luxuries stripped out so is more basic. It is less practical.

I also think that where someone lives has a strong bearing. For example, someone in Norfolk would probably consider an Allegro to be a supercar while someone living in central London who sees 911's and Gallardos all day long has long since stopped thinking they are anything special at all.

In my opinion, it is on the cusp. I do like the Spyder, again, however I'm not convinced it's entirely a supercar.

[The Moose]

g7jhp said:

Supercar

1. Exotic shape: Should have an exotic shape (I'd rule out saloons, hatchbacks and estates)
2. Marque - Should be from a know marque or challenger
3. Speed - Should have been quick/set benchmarks in it's day
4. Price - Expensive to buy and maintain

AC Cobra
Audi R8 (In two minds on the R8 as it's an Audi and easy to drive)
BMW M1, BMW i8
Bugatti Veyron
De Tomaso Pantera
Dodge Viper
Ferrari
Ford GT40
Honda NSX
Jaguar XJ220
Koenigsegg
Lambroghini
Lotus (Esprit)
Maserati
McLaren
Mercedes - SLR McLaren, SLS
Porsche - (911 turbo, 911 GT3. 911 GT2, 959, 917, 918)
Spyker

Sure I'd missed a few!

Coming back to the 911, is a turbo a supercar?

[The Moose]

walm said:

MKnight702 said:

Any saloon, hatchback or coupe, 2+2 or 4 seater is automatically excluded, sorry BMW M and Nissan GT-R fans. Quick point to point certainly (quicker than a Ferrari 328, but then so are most modern hot hatches) but in no way a supercar.

No Ferrari California or FF??
I think you have thrown the baby out with the bathwater.

To be fair, that could just be his take on the matter.

[The Moose]

The 959 which I do believe is a supercar (and is a bloody good car at that!) is only 6 cylinders and rear engined as opposed to mid engined.

What about the BMW i8 and it's 3 cylinder offering?

[The Moose]

DonkeyApple said:

TheHound said:

DonkeyApple said:

For example, someone in Norfolk would probably consider an Allegro to be a supercar while someone living in central London who sees 911's and Gallardos all day long has long since stopped thinking they are anything special at all.

Oy! stop bashing good ole Norfolk ... Although you probably are correct with your assumption.

fk me! You folk got the Internet?

Did you know they no longer have gas lamps either

[The Moose]

Not to be argumentative, but I'm not sure I'd call the E-Type a supercar - more a GT...

[The Moose]

Even Porsche models such as the GT3 RS etc?

[The Moose]

MKnight702 said:

May I suggest swapping number of doors for "1 + number of seats over 3" (so as not to punish the Mclaren F1)

If you wanted you could also add "number of other engine specs in range" to further devalue hot versions of boggo shopping cars.

But also potentially the Zonda?

[The Moose]

DonkeyApple said:

That actually raises another metric.

If it has to be advertised (excluding journo events) then it can never be a supercar.

So the R8 fails because of those epic adverts of it on the rolling road?

[The Moose]

So, to add to this, if you had a mythical £50k to spend, could you purchase a supercar?

If so, what would you buy?