RE: 200mph, 545hp per tonne Ginetta unveiled

[Robert-nszl1]

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

I have a slightly different analogy to disagree with this point. When I go to a restaurant, I go for the food, and atmosphere of the place. It can be cheap, it can be expensive, but there will be something about the food and experience that makes it worthwhile, but in either instance I don't care what the chef looks like.

When it comes to (in my case) girlfriend, it's great if she can cook, but other things come into play (I'll let you use your imaginations!). But if I'm blunt, she needs to be good looking (to my eyes at least!) .

When it comes to cars, if it is just for racing it doesn't particularly matter what it looks like. It can be banger racing (cheap street food ), ot F1 (Michelin starred). But my road car needs to be able to do other things, and if its going to be long term, it needs to look good.

This Ginetta clearly wants to trade off its race heritage. I'm sure it will be a great chef in other words (it certainly better be, as they are charging Michelin starred prices). But I don't want to take it home to meet my friends, let alone have bedroom activities with it! Indeed looking at this thread nobody does, except for a very small number. It's nice to think every person can find someone that will love them, and perhaps there are a handful of people that will overlook the looks of this thing and actually buy it. They will no doubt spend a lot of time explaining to people how well it cooks.....

[RacerMike]

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

Because absolutely every car sale ever involved marketing of some description. People buy the idea of a brand/looks of a car/lifestyle/perceived image. Whether they admit it or not.

Do any of the things you mention also really make it a great car? Who knows? But cars are complicated things that are rarely bought for entirely objective reasons.

The items you’ve listed are the perfect PistonHeads car. But here lies proof that if you made the perfect PistonHeads car, no one would buy it. They just think they would when they pick apart everything else (but secretly buy an auto 135i because it had a great PCP deal they couldn’t ignore)

[DumDum]

That is one ugly ugly car.
Be amazed if they sell any, I mean, why would you?

[Evo]

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

It could transport itself at 88mph and fly, it's still far too ugly and a shame for a company that has otherwise produced beautiful cars.

[housen]

Evo said:

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

It could transport itself at 88mph and fly, it's still far too ugly and a shame for a company that has otherwise produced beautiful cars.

all those things u mentioned sound cool

what else do i get for my 400k ?

[kbee540]

Dear McLaren,

I have in the recent past been quite disparaging about the design and detailing of your products; having heaped scorn on pretty much everything you've made since the MP4-12C. However, thanks to your friends at Ginetta I now understand the true meaning of 'fugly' and realise that levelling that criticism at your latest offerings is quite incorrect. By comparison, your Senna offering which I had previously considered a real dogs dinner, finds itself on a similar plane as the Venus de Milo, Racquel Welch, and maybe even the E-Type. I hereby retract and recant all negative remarks concerning your vehicle designs. I humbly apologise.

Kbee


Dear Ginettta,

WTF?

Kbee

[KingNothing]

FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS!!!???

[Esceptico]

I am assuming that all of the posters above could not afford this car. I suspect it is aimed at people that own many cars and have £400k to spend on another. That is a pretty small customer base. It would be interesting to hear from someone actually in that target market as to their views.

Would I have the Ginetta instead of (say) an F40? Never. Would I have the Ginetta in addition to an F40? I would certainly consider it if the driving experience was good enough.

[housen]

Esceptico said:

I am assuming that all of the posters above could not afford this car. I suspect it is aimed at people that own many cars and have £400k to spend on another. That is a pretty small customer base. It would be interesting to hear from someone actually in that target market as to their views.

Would I have the Ginetta instead of (say) an F40? Never. Would I have the Ginetta in addition to an F40? I would certainly consider it if the driving experience was good enough.

i guess yeah if you owned every car in the world and this was the last one and you still had 100mm in the bank ....why not

but joking aside i agree with you it would be nice to hear a target market persons opinion

but i do also think petrol heads do think like the average millionaire in terms of cars, as in if one of us won the lottery we would know exactly what and how to start their own car collection .

[coppice]

Like most people on here ownership of this car as an alternative , or addition to an F40 remains for me in the realms of lottery fantasy. My own F40 is , tragically, in 1/18 scale but FWIW I do not covet a model of the Ginetta to keep the Ferrari company . For the very obvious reason - there are gorgeous cars (Miura, 250GTO ) , pretty cars(Ginetta G4, Elise) sui generis cars (DS ) and jolie laid cars(2CV, Ferrari Breadvan). Then there's cars styled by Stevie Wonder...

[ZX10R NIN]

The thing is the person that buys a 400k Ferrari won't drive it & it will never see the track, this car is aimed at people that want a toy (a Caterham etc won't get a look in) so something handbuilt that's made in small numbers that crushes track work with the bonus of being road legal & some talking (engine looks handling & discussing Ginettas Racing competitiveness) points & pedigree, all factor to make this a worthy car.

[Todd Bonzalez]

sege said:

This is the world today.
Ginetta announce a serious new superdupercar and 99% of the reaction is if people like how it looks or not.
No comments on the fact that the engine is developed in house? wondering who they have partnered with?
No comments on the 375kg of downforce @ 100mpg and what cars that is comparable to?
No comments on it being N/A?
No comments on it eschewing electronic power steering?
No comments on the claim that you will be able to steer it on the throttle without electronic aids?

You're not car fans. You're a bunch of tarts.

That is an LS

[Robert-nszl1]

Esceptico said:

I am assuming that all of the posters above could not afford this car. I suspect it is aimed at people that own many cars and have £400k to spend on another. That is a pretty small customer base. It would be interesting to hear from someone actually in that target market as to their views.

Would I have the Ginetta instead of (say) an F40? Never. Would I have the Ginetta in addition to an F40? I would certainly consider it if the driving experience was good enough.

Leaving the looks aside for a moment, I think about it in a different way. I'm shortly going to be in the market for a £150-200k fun car. Assuming I don't go classic, and recognising I'm tall (6'4) which probably discounts Lambos, this leaves roughly Porsche, Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, Audi (at a push), Honda (NSX) or one of the smaller specialists. I tend not to buy new, but would consider it if it really was the right car. If this car was £200k, in that context would I consider it? I just don't see it. My problem is that this clearly isn't a road car, despite it having phone connectivity and a big boot. The sequential gearbox, the focus on downforce, the ability to balance the car on the throttle, even the lack of power steering all point to it basically being a track a car. And then there is the engine....a low budget 'developed it themselves' engine feels to me like the car might spend a lot of time stationary! There is a reason some manufacturers use crate engines, and even the big boys share engines across platforms, and that's because they cost a lot to develop. As a road car, the engine needs to be as driveable in towns as it is on the odd track day. Ferrari, Porsche and the like have spent years refining this. So this is a track car then? Well except they've decided to compromise it with a boot and radio!

No doubt many will say I'm not the target market, but I have friends who are collectors, and I can't think of a single one that ignores looks completely. And they have cars for racing / track work, and then road cars. This looks to be a dogs dinner in every sense.

The reality is it doesn't matter what this car costs, it appears to be neither one thing nor another.

[cookie1600]

To be fair, what Ginetta have done here is create an automotive Susan Boyle.

It may be absolutely brilliant when you close your eyes, but if you do that then you're going to crash.

[housen]

cookie1600 said:

To be fair, what Ginetta have done here is create an automotive Susan Boyle.

It may be absolutely brilliant when you close your eyes, but if you do that then you're going to crash.

so what your saying is


Susan Boyle .....would you ?

[cookie1600]

housen said:

Susan Boyle .....would you ?

Through headphones, possibly. With my body parts? Sorry, no.

[lufbramatt]

Can't help but think the camouflaging effect of photographing a silver car on a foggy day was done on purpose.

[housen]

Dulon Dave said:

Macboy said:

Good God. I keep scrolling back to look at it again. It's like a mouth ulcer that you find with your tongue - you have to keep prodding it despite knowing it will hurt. It's so wilfully ugly. Like the kind of car Will.I.Am would commission from West Coast Customs just to upset people who thought his first car was laughable. Never has the phrase "KILL IT WITH FIRE" been more appropriate.

Lol

thats it!!!!!!!!!!


WILL.iam is the 12 car buyer ....only he would be mad enough

[andrewcliffe]

Buy one and take it to Mansory or Khan. How much worse could they make it look?

[KP328]

Good for Ginetta having the brass neck selling it for £400k and good for them if someone is daft enough to pay all that money for it.